Analysis of Free Energy Signals Arising from Nucleotide Hybridization Between rRNA and mRNA Sequences during Translation in Eubacteria

A decoding algorithm is tested that mechanistically models the progressive alignments that arise as the mRNA moves past the rRNA tail during translation elongation. Each of these alignments provides an opportunity for hybridization between the single-stranded, -terminal nucleotides of the 16S rRNA and the spatially accessible window of mRNA sequence, from which a free energy value can be calculated. Using this algorithm we show that a periodic, energetic pattern of frequency 1/3 is revealed. This periodic signal exists in the majority of coding regions of eubacterial genes, but not in the non-coding regions encoding the 16S and 23S rRNAs. Signal analysis reveals that the population of coding regions of each bacterial species has a mean phase that is correlated in a statistically significant way with species () content. These results suggest that the periodic signal could function as a synchronization signal for the maintenance of reading frame and that codon usage provides a mechanism for manipulation of signal phase.[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32]     

Splitting the BLOSUM Score into Numbers of Biological Significance

Mathematical tools developed in the context of Shannon information theory were used to analyze the meaning of the BLOSUM score, which was split into three components termed as the BLOSUM spectrum (or BLOSpectrum). These relate respectively to the sequence convergence (the stochastic similarity of the two protein sequences), to the background frequency divergence (typicality of the amino acid probability distribution in each sequence), and to the target frequency divergence (compliance of the amino acid variations between the two sequences to the protein model implicit in the BLOCKS database). This treatment sharpens the protein sequence comparison, providing a rationale for the biological significance of the obtained score, and helps to identify weakly related sequences. Moreover, the BLOSpectrum can guide the choice of the most appropriate scoring matrix, tailoring it to the evolutionary divergence associated with the two sequences, or indicate if a compositionally adjusted matrix could perform better.[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]     

Proinsulin and the Genetics of Diabetes Mellitus

Insulin plays a central role in the regulation of vertebrate metabolism. The hormone, the post-translational product of a single-chain precursor, is a globular protein containing two chains, A (21 residues) and B (30 residues). Recent advances in human genetics have identified dominant mutations in the insulin gene causing permanent neonatal-onset DM² (1–4). The mutations are predicted to block folding of the precursor in the ER of pancreatic β-cells. Although expression of the wild-type allele would in other circumstances be sufficient to maintain homeostasis, studies of a corresponding mouse model (5–7) suggest that the misfolded variant perturbs wild-type biosynthesis (8, 9). Impaired β-cell secretion is associated with ER stress, distorted organelle architecture, and cell death (10). These findings have renewed interest in insulin biosynthesis (11–13) and the structural basis of disulfide pairing (14–19). Protein evolution is constrained not only by structure and function but also by susceptibility to toxic misfolding.Insulin plays a central role in the regulation of vertebrate metabolism. The hormone, the post-translational product of a single-chain precursor, is a globular protein containing two chains, A (21 residues) and B (30 residues). Recent advances in human genetics have identified dominant mutations in the insulin gene causing permanent neonatal-onset DM² (1–4). The mutations are predicted to block folding of the precursor in the ER of pancreatic β-cells. Although expression of the wild-type allele would in other circumstances be sufficient to maintain homeostasis, studies of a corresponding mouse model (5–7) suggest that the misfolded variant perturbs wild-type biosynthesis (8, 9). Impaired β-cell secretion is associated with ER stress, distorted organelle architecture, and cell death (10). These findings have renewed interest in insulin biosynthesis (11–13) and the structural basis of disulfide pairing (14–19). Protein evolution is constrained not only by structure and function but also by susceptibility to toxic misfolding.     

Sip1, a Novel RS Domain-Containing Protein Essential for Pre-mRNA Splicing

Previous studies have shown that protein-protein interactions among splicing factors may play an important role in pre-mRNA splicing. We report here identification and functional characterization of a new splicing factor, Sip1 (SC35-interacting protein 1). Sip1 was initially identified by virtue of its interaction with SC35, a splicing factor of the SR family. Sip1 interacts with not only several SR proteins but also with U1-70K and U2AF65, proteins associated with 5′ and 3′ splice sites, respectively. The predicted Sip1 sequence contains an arginine-serine-rich (RS) domain but does not have any known RNA-binding motifs, indicating that it is not a member of the SR family. Sip1 also contains a region with weak sequence similarity to the Drosophila splicing regulator suppressor of white apricot (SWAP). An essential role for Sip1 in pre-mRNA splicing was suggested by the observation that anti-Sip1 antibodies depleted splicing activity from HeLa nuclear extract. Purified recombinant Sip1 protein, but not other RS domain-containing proteins such as SC35, ASF/SF2, and U2AF65, restored the splicing activity of the Sip1-immunodepleted extract. Addition of U2AF65 protein further enhanced the splicing reconstitution by the Sip1 protein. Deficiency in the formation of both A and B splicing complexes in the Sip1-depleted nuclear extract indicates an important role of Sip1 in spliceosome assembly. Together, these results demonstrate that Sip1 is a novel RS domain-containing protein required for pre-mRNA splicing and that the functional role of Sip1 in splicing is distinct from those of known RS domain-containing splicing factors.Pre-mRNA splicing takes place in spliceosomes, the large RNA-protein complexes containing pre-mRNA, U1, U2, U4/6, and U5 small nuclear ribonucleoprotein particles (snRNPs), and a large number of accessory protein factors (for reviews, see references 21, 22, 37, 44, and 48). It is increasingly clear that the protein factors are important for pre-mRNA splicing and that studies of these factors are essential for further understanding of molecular mechanisms of pre-mRNA splicing.Most mammalian splicing factors have been identified by biochemical fractionation and purification (3, 15, 19, 31–36, 45, 69–71, 73), by using antibodies recognizing splicing factors (8, 9, 16, 17, 61, 66, 67, 74), and by sequence homology (25, 52, 74).Splicing factors containing arginine-serine-rich (RS) domains have emerged as important players in pre-mRNA splicing. These include members of the SR family, both subunits of U2 auxiliary factor (U2AF), and the U1 snRNP protein U1-70K (for reviews, see references 18, 41, and 59). Drosophila alternative splicing regulators transformer (Tra), transformer 2 (Tra2), and suppressor of white apricot (SWAP) also contain RS domains (20, 40, 42). RS domains in these proteins play important roles in pre-mRNA splicing (7, 71, 75), in nuclear localization of these splicing proteins (23, 40), and in protein-RNA interactions (56, 60, 64). Previous studies by us and others have demonstrated that one mechanism whereby SR proteins function in splicing is to mediate specific protein-protein interactions among spliceosomal components and between general splicing factors and alternative splicing regulators (1, 1a, 6, 10, 27, 63, 74, 77). Such protein-protein interactions may play critical roles in splice site recognition and association (for reviews, see references 4, 18, 37, 41, 47 and 59). Specific interactions among the splicing factors also suggest that it is possible to identify new splicing factors by their interactions with known splicing factors.Here we report identification of a new splicing factor, Sip1, by its interaction with the essential splicing factor SC35. The predicted Sip1 protein sequence contains an RS domain and a region with sequence similarity to the Drosophila splicing regulator, SWAP. We have expressed and purified recombinant Sip1 protein and raised polyclonal antibodies against the recombinant Sip1 protein. The anti-Sip1 antibodies specifically recognize a protein migrating at a molecular mass of approximately 210 kDa in HeLa nuclear extract. The anti-Sip1 antibodies sufficiently deplete Sip1 protein from the nuclear extract, and the Sip1-depleted extract is inactive in pre-mRNA splicing. Addition of recombinant Sip1 protein can partially restore splicing activity to the Sip1-depleted nuclear extract, indicating an essential role of Sip1 in pre-mRNA splicing. Other RS domain-containing proteins, including SC35, ASF/SF2, and U2AF65, cannot substitute for Sip1 in reconstituting splicing activity of the Sip1-depleted nuclear extract. However, addition of U2AF65 further increases splicing activity of Sip1-reconstituted nuclear extract, suggesting that there may be a functional interaction between Sip1 and U2AF65 in nuclear extract.     

Dynamics of Ribosomal Protein S1 on a Bacterial Ribosome with Cross-Linking and Mass Spectrometry

Ribosomal protein S1 has been shown to be a significant effector of prokaryotic translation. The protein is in fact capable of efficiently initiating translation, regardless of the presence of a Shine-Dalgarno sequence in mRNA. Structural insights into this process have remained elusive, as S1 is recalcitrant to traditional techniques of structural analysis, such as x-ray crystallography. Through the application of protein cross-linking and high resolution mass spectrometry, we have detailed the ribosomal binding site of S1 and have observed evidence of its dynamics. Our results support a previous hypothesis that S1 acts as the mRNA catching arm of the prokaryotic ribosome. We also demonstrate that in solution the major domains of the 30S subunit are remarkably flexible, capable of moving 30–50Å with respect to one another.Initiation of translation is often the rate-limiting step of protein biosynthesis (1). In prokaryotes, this process is widely recognized to be directed by the Shine-Dalgarno (S.D.)¹ sequence of mRNA and its complementation with the 3′ end of 16S rRNA (2). However, binding of the S.D. sequence to the ribosome is not obligatory for initiation. Ribosomal protein S1, widely conserved in prokaryotes, (3) has been shown to efficiently initiate translation, regardless of the presence of an S.D. sequence (4, 5).S1 is a strikingly atyptical ribosomal protein, being both the largest (61 kDa) and the most acidic (pI 4.7) (6). The protein is composed of six homologous repeats each forming beta barrel domains (3) that in solution comprise a highly elongated structure spanning up to ca. 230 Å (7). This length is comparable to the diameter of the ribosome itself. In addition to these anomalous characteristics, S1 is also one of only two ribosomal proteins that has been attributed functional significance (6). Ribosomal protein S1, for instance, has no apparent role in the assembly of the ribosome, (2) yet is critical for translation in E. coli (8, 9). The functional significance of S1 is related to its most pronounced characteristic, the ability to simultaneously bind mRNA and the ribosome. Analysis of fragments produced by limited proteolysis and chemical cleavage of S1 has shown that an N-terminal fragment of S1 (residues 1–193) binds the ribosome (10) but not RNA (11). Likewise, a C-terminal fragment (res 172–557) binds RNA (12, 13) but not the ribosome (6, 10). By nature of this bi-functional structure, S1 enhances the E. coli ribosome''s affinity for RNA ∼5000 fold (14) and can directly mediate initiation of translation by binding the 5′ UTR of mRNA (4, 5). These observations have led to the hypothesis that S1 acts as a catching arm for the prokaryotic ribosome, working to bring mRNA to the proximity of the ribosome and thereby facilitate initiation (6).Unfortunately, structural analyses capturing how S1 is able to function in this manner remain elusive. A high-resolution crystal structure of ribosome bound S1, or even free S1, does not exist, because S1 is recalcitrant to crystallography (6). Preparation of ribosomes for x-ray crystallography actually involves the deliberate removal of ribosomal protein S1 as a means to improve the reproducibility of crystallization and the quality of the ribosome crystals formed (15–17). The structure and interactions of the protein have nevertheless intrigued structural biologists for decades. However, studies completed to date have failed to convincingly demonstrate the interaction between S1 and the rest of the 30S subunit, because they were incapable of localizing the individual S1 domains (16, 18–20).We have studied the binding of S1 to the 30S subunit by combining cross-linking with mass spectrometry. Chemical cross-linking has long been appreciated as a technique to probe protein-protein interactions (21, 22). With the advent of modern mass spectrometers, it can be very effectively employed to confidently identify the exact residues involved in linkages (23–28). In most cross-linking analyses, protein residues are targeted for covalent modification with a molecule that contains two reactive groups separated by a spacer arm of known length. Only protein residues closer than the length of the spacer arm are capable of being linked. Identification of cross-linked residues thereby provides distance constraints for structural modeling. In this work, the novel amidinating protein cross-linker, DEST (diethyl suberthioimidate), was employed (29, 30). This amine reactive reagent, unlike commercially available reagents, preserves the native basicity of the residues it modifies while being effective at physiological pH. Use of the reagent is unlikely to perturb protein structure and the modifications it imparts are compatible with ionization for mass spectrometry. We have additionally shown that the cross-links it forms can be efficiently enriched from other components of proteolytic digests using strong cation exchange (SCX) chromatography, (30) and that DEST cross-linking of ribosomes yields structural information in excellent agreement with x-ray crystallography (29). Although DEST is an 11Å spacer arm cross-linker, it links alpha carbons up to 24Å apart because of the length and flexibility of lysine side chains. Nevertheless, this is sufficient resolution to approximate the binding positions of the 10kDa domains of S1. Furthermore, multiple cross-linking of a single domain significantly enhances the resolution with which it can be localized.Here, through the application of protein cross-linking and high resolution mass spectrometry, we show that S1 binds to the 30S subunit near the anti-S.D. motif of the 16S rRNA, demonstrate that it is highly elongated even when bound to the ribosome, and provide evidence that its C-terminal mRNA binding region is remarkably dynamic. Our results thus indicate S1 is structurally poised, as previously hypothesized, (6) to act as the mRNA catching arm of the prokaryotic ribosome.     

Algorithms for Finding Small Attractors in Boolean Networks

A Boolean network is a model used to study the interactions between different genes in genetic regulatory networks. In this paper, we present several algorithms using gene ordering and feedback vertex sets to identify singleton attractors and small attractors in Boolean networks. We analyze the average case time complexities of some of the proposed algorithms. For instance, it is shown that the outdegree-based ordering algorithm for finding singleton attractors works in time for , which is much faster than the naive time algorithm, where is the number of genes and is the maximum indegree. We performed extensive computational experiments on these algorithms, which resulted in good agreement with theoretical results. In contrast, we give a simple and complete proof for showing that finding an attractor with the shortest period is NP-hard.[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32]     

Printor, a Novel TorsinA-interacting Protein Implicated in Dystonia Pathogenesis

Early onset generalized dystonia (DYT1) is an autosomal dominant neurological disorder caused by deletion of a single glutamate residue (torsinA ΔE) in the C-terminal region of the AAA⁺ (ATPases associated with a variety of cellular activities) protein torsinA. The pathogenic mechanism by which torsinA ΔE mutation leads to dystonia remains unknown. Here we report the identification and characterization of a 628-amino acid novel protein, printor, that interacts with torsinA. Printor co-distributes with torsinA in multiple brain regions and co-localizes with torsinA in the endoplasmic reticulum. Interestingly, printor selectively binds to the ATP-free form but not to the ATP-bound form of torsinA, supporting a role for printor as a cofactor rather than a substrate of torsinA. The interaction of printor with torsinA is completely abolished by the dystonia-associated torsinA ΔE mutation. Our findings suggest that printor is a new component of the DYT1 pathogenic pathway and provide a potential molecular target for therapeutic intervention in dystonia.Early onset generalized torsion dystonia (DYT1) is the most common and severe form of hereditary dystonia, a movement disorder characterized by involuntary movements and sustained muscle spasms (1). This autosomal dominant disease has childhood onset and its dystonic symptoms are thought to result from neuronal dysfunction rather than neurodegeneration (2, 3). Most DYT1 cases are caused by deletion of a single glutamate residue at positions 302 or 303 (torsinA ΔE) of the 332-amino acid protein torsinA (4). In addition, a different torsinA mutation that deletes amino acids Phe³²³–Tyr³²⁸ (torsinA Δ323–328) was identified in a single family with dystonia (5), although the pathogenic significance of this torsinA mutation is unclear because these patients contain a concomitant mutation in another dystonia-related protein, ϵ-sarcoglycan (6). Recently, genetic association studies have implicated polymorphisms in the torsinA gene as a genetic risk factor in the development of adult-onset idiopathic dystonia (7, 8).TorsinA contains an N-terminal endoplasmic reticulum (ER)³ signal sequence and a 20-amino acid hydrophobic region followed by a conserved AAA⁺ (ATPases associated with a variety of cellular activities) domain (9, 10). Because members of the AAA⁺ family are known to facilitate conformational changes in target proteins (11, 12), it has been proposed that torsinA may function as a molecular chaperone (13, 14). TorsinA is widely expressed in brain and multiple other tissues (15) and is primarily associated with the ER and nuclear envelope (NE) compartments in cells (16–20). TorsinA is believed to mainly reside in the lumen of the ER and NE (17–19) and has been shown to bind lamina-associated polypeptide 1 (LAP1) (21), lumenal domain-like LAP1 (LULL1) (21), and nesprins (22). In addition, recent evidence indicates that a significant pool of torsinA exhibits a topology in which the AAA⁺ domain faces the cytoplasm (20). In support of this topology, torsinA is found in the cytoplasm, neuronal processes, and synaptic terminals (2, 3, 15, 23–26) and has been shown to bind cytosolic proteins snapin (27) and kinesin light chain 1 (20). TorsinA has been proposed to play a role in several cellular processes, including dopaminergic neurotransmission (28–31), NE organization and dynamics (17, 22, 32), and protein trafficking (27, 33). However, the precise biological function of torsinA and its regulation remain unknown.To gain insights into torsinA function, we performed yeast two-hybrid screens to search for torsinA-interacting proteins in the brain. We report here the isolation and characterization of a novel protein named printor (protein interactor of torsinA) that interacts selectively with wild-type (WT) torsinA but not the dystonia-associated torsinA ΔE mutant. Our data suggest that printor may serve as a cofactor of torsinA and provide a new molecular target for understanding and treating dystonia.     

A New in Vivo Cross-linking Mass Spectrometry Platform to Define Protein–Protein Interactions in Living Cells

Protein–protein interactions (PPIs) are fundamental to the structure and function of protein complexes. Resolving the physical contacts between proteins as they occur in cells is critical to uncovering the molecular details underlying various cellular activities. To advance the study of PPIs in living cells, we have developed a new in vivo cross-linking mass spectrometry platform that couples a novel membrane-permeable, enrichable, and MS-cleavable cross-linker with multistage tandem mass spectrometry. This strategy permits the effective capture, enrichment, and identification of in vivo cross-linked products from mammalian cells and thus enables the determination of protein interaction interfaces. The utility of the developed method has been demonstrated by profiling PPIs in mammalian cells at the proteome scale and the targeted protein complex level. Our work represents a general approach for studying in vivo PPIs and provides a solid foundation for future studies toward the complete mapping of PPI networks in living systems.Protein–protein interactions (PPIs)¹ play a key role in defining protein functions in biological systems. Aberrant PPIs can have drastic effects on biochemical activities essential to cell homeostasis, growth, and proliferation, and thereby lead to various human diseases (1). Consequently, PPI interfaces have been recognized as a new paradigm for drug development. Therefore, mapping PPIs and their interaction interfaces in living cells is critical not only for a comprehensive understanding of protein function and regulation, but also for describing the molecular mechanisms underlying human pathologies and identifying potential targets for better therapeutics.Several strategies exist for identifying and mapping PPIs, including yeast two-hybrid, protein microarray, and affinity purification mass spectrometry (AP-MS) (2–5). Thanks to new developments in sample preparation strategies, mass spectrometry technologies, and bioinformatics tools, AP-MS has become a powerful and preferred method for studying PPIs at the systems level (6–9). Unlike other approaches, AP-MS experiments allow the capture of protein interactions directly from their natural cellular environment, thus better retaining native protein structures and biologically relevant interactions. In addition, a broader scope of PPI networks can be obtained with greater sensitivity, accuracy, versatility, and speed. Despite the success of this very promising technique, AP-MS experiments can lead to the loss of weak/transient interactions and/or the reorganization of protein interactions during biochemical manipulation under native purification conditions. To circumvent these problems, in vivo chemical cross-linking has been successfully employed to stabilize protein interactions in native cells or tissues prior to cell lysis (10–16). The resulting covalent bonds formed between interacting partners allow affinity purification under stringent and fully denaturing conditions, consequently reducing nonspecific background while preserving stable and weak/transient interactions (12–16). Subsequent mass spectrometric analysis can reveal not only the identities of interacting proteins, but also cross-linked amino acid residues. The latter provides direct molecular evidence describing the physical contacts between and within proteins (17). This information can be used for computational modeling to establish structural topologies of proteins and protein complexes (17–22), as well as for generating experimentally derived protein interaction network topology maps (23, 24). Thus, cross-linking mass spectrometry (XL-MS) strategies represent a powerful and emergent technology that possesses unparalleled capabilities for studying PPIs.Despite their great potential, current XL-MS studies that have aimed to identify cross-linked peptides have been mostly limited to in vitro cross-linking experiments, with few successfully identifying protein interaction interfaces in living cells (24, 25). This is largely because XL-MS studies remain challenging due to the inherent difficulty in the effective MS detection and accurate identification of cross-linked peptides, as well as in unambiguous assignment of cross-linked residues. In general, cross-linked products are heterogeneous and low in abundance relative to non-cross-linked products. In addition, their MS fragmentation is too complex to be interpreted using conventional database searching tools (17, 26). It is noted that almost all of the current in vivo PPI studies utilize formaldehyde cross-linking because of its membrane permeability and fast kinetics (10–16). However, in comparison to the most commonly used amine reactive NHS ester cross-linkers, identification of formaldehyde cross-linked peptides is even more challenging because of its promiscuous nonspecific reactivity and extremely short spacer length (27). Therefore, further developments in reagents and methods are urgently needed to enable simple MS detection and effective identification of in vivo cross-linked products, and thus allow the mapping of authentic protein contact sites as established in cells, especially for protein complexes.Various efforts have been made to address the limitations of XL-MS studies, resulting in new developments in bioinformatics tools for improved data interpretation (28–32) and new designs of cross-linking reagents for enhanced MS analysis of cross-linked peptides (24, 33–39). Among these approaches, the development of new cross-linking reagents holds great promise for mapping PPIs on the systems level. One class of cross-linking reagents containing an enrichment handle have been shown to allow selective isolation of cross-linked products from complex mixtures, boosting their detectability by MS (33–35, 40–42). A second class of cross-linkers containing MS-cleavable bonds have proven to be effective in facilitating the unambiguous identification of cross-linked peptides (36–39, 43, 44), as the resulting cross-linked products can be identified based on their characteristic and simplified fragmentation behavior during MS analysis. Therefore, an ideal cross-linking reagent would possess the combined features of both classes of cross-linkers. To advance the study of in vivo PPIs, we have developed a new XL-MS platform based on a novel membrane-permeable, enrichable, and MS-cleavable cross-linker, Azide-A-DSBSO (azide-tagged, acid-cleavable disuccinimidyl bis-sulfoxide), and multistage tandem mass spectrometry (MSⁿ). This new XL-MS strategy has been successfully employed to map in vivo PPIs from mammalian cells at both the proteome scale and the targeted protein complex level.