Inhibition of eukaryotic translation elongation by the antitumor natural product Mycalamide B

Mycalamide B (MycB) is a marine sponge-derived natural product with potent antitumor activity. Although it has been shown to inhibit protein synthesis, the molecular mechanism of action by MycB remains incompletely understood. We verified the inhibition of translation elongation by in vitro HCV IRES dual luciferase assays, ribosome assembly, and in vivo [(35)S]methinione labeling experiments. Similar to cycloheximide (CHX), MycB inhibits translation elongation through blockade of eEF2-mediated translocation without affecting the eEF1A-mediated loading of tRNA onto the ribosome, AUG recognition, or dipeptide synthesis. Using chemical footprinting, we identified the MycB binding site proximal to the C3993 28S rRNA residue on the large ribosomal subunit. However, there are also subtle, but significant differences in the detailed mechanisms of action of MycB and CHX. First, MycB arrests the ribosome on the mRNA one codon ahead of CHX. Second, MycB specifically blocked tRNA binding to the E-site of the large ribosomal subunit. Moreover, they display different polysome profiles in vivo. Together, these observations shed new light on the mechanism of inhibition of translation elongation by MycB.     

Changing ideas about eukaryotic origins

The origin of eukaryotic cells is one of the most fascinating challenges in biology, and has inspired decades of controversy and debate. Recent work has led to major upheavals in our understanding of eukaryotic origins and has catalysed new debates about the roles of endosymbiosis and gene flow across the tree of life. Improved methods of phylogenetic analysis support scenarios in which the host cell for the mitochondrial endosymbiont was a member of the Archaea, and new technologies for sampling the genomes of environmental prokaryotes have allowed investigators to home in on closer relatives of founding symbiotic partners. The inference and interpretation of phylogenetic trees from genomic data remains at the centre of many of these debates, and there is increasing recognition that trees built using inadequate methods can prove misleading, whether describing the relationship of eukaryotes to other cells or the root of the universal tree. New statistical approaches show promise for addressing these questions but they come with their own computational challenges. The papers in this theme issue discuss recent progress on the origin of eukaryotic cells and genomes, highlight some of the ongoing debates, and suggest possible routes to future progress.     

Identification of compounds that decrease the fidelity of start codon recognition by the eukaryotic translational machinery

Translation initiation in eukaryotes involves more than a dozen protein factors. Alterations in six factors have been found to reduce the fidelity of start codon recognition by the ribosomal preinitiation complex in yeast, a phenotype referred to as Sui(-). No small molecules are known that affect the fidelity of start codon recognition. Such compounds would be useful tools for probing the molecular mechanics of translation initiation and its regulation. To find compounds with this effect, we set up a high-throughput screen using a dual luciferase assay in S. cerevisiae. Screening of over 55,000 compounds revealed two structurally related molecules that decrease the fidelity of start codon selection by approximately twofold in the dual luciferase assay. This effect was confirmed using additional in vivo assays that monitor translation from non-AUG start codons. Both compounds increase translation of a natural upstream open reading frame previously shown to initiate translation at a UUG. The compounds were also found to exacerbate increased use of UUG as a start codon (Sui(-) phenotype) conferred by haploinsufficiency of wild-type eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF) 1, or by mutation in eIF1. Furthermore, the effects of the compounds are suppressed by overexpressing eIF1, which is known to restore the fidelity of start codon selection in strains harboring Sui(-) mutations in various other initiation factors. Together, these data strongly suggest that the compounds affect the translational machinery itself to reduce the accuracy of selecting AUG as the start codon.     

DafA cycles between the DnaK chaperone system and translational machinery

DafA is encoded by the dnaK operon of Thermus thermophilus and mediates the formation of a highly stable complex between the chaperone DnaK and its co-chaperone DnaJ under normal growth conditions. DafA(Tth) contains 87 amino acid residues and is the only member of the DnaK(Tth) chaperone system for which no corresponding protein has yet been identified in other organisms and whose particular function has remained elusive. Here, we show directly that the DnaK(Tth)-DnaJ(Tth)-DafA(Tth) complex cannot represent the active chaperone species since DafA(Tth) inhibits renaturation of firefly luciferase by suppressing substrate association. Since DafA(Tth) must be released before the substrate proteins can bind we hypothesized that free DafA(Tth) might have regulatory functions connected to the heat shock response. Here, we present evidence that supports this hypothesis. We identified the 70S ribosome as binding target of free DafA(Tth). Our results show that the association of DafA(Tth) and 70S ribosomes does not require the participation of DnaK(Tth) or DnaJ(Tth). On the contrary, the assembly of DnaK(Tth)-DnaJ(Tth)-DafA(Tth) and ribosome-DafA(Tth) complexes seems to be competitive. These findings strongly suggest the involvement of DafA(Tth) in regulatory processes occurring at a translational level, which could represent a new mechanism of heat shock response as an adaptation to elevated temperature.     

Eukaryotic origins

The origin of the eukaryotes is a fundamental scientific question that for over 30 years has generated a spirited debate between the competing Archaea (or three domains) tree and the eocyte tree. As eukaryotes ourselves, humans have a personal interest in our origins. Eukaryotes contain their defining organelle, the nucleus, after which they are named. They have a complex evolutionary history, over time acquiring multiple organelles, including mitochondria, chloroplasts, smooth and rough endoplasmic reticula, and other organelles all of which may hint at their origins. It is the evolutionary history of the nucleus and their other organelles that have intrigued molecular evolutionists, myself included, for the past 30 years and which continues to hold our interest as increasingly compelling evidence favours the eocyte tree. As with any orthodoxy, it takes time to embrace new concepts and techniques.     

Interface of the interaction of the middle domain of human translation termination factor eRF1 with eukaryotic ribosomes

Translation termination in eukaryotes is governed by the interaction of two, class 1 and class 2, polypeptide chain release factors with the ribosome. The middle (M) domain of the class 1 factor eRF1 contains the strictly conserved GGQ motif and is involved in hydrolysis of the peptidyl-tRNA ester bond in the peptidyl transferase center of the large ribosome subunit. Heteronuclear NMR spectroscopy was used to map the interaction interface of the M domain of human eRF1 with eukaryotic ribosomes. The protein was found to specifically interact with the 60S subunit, since no interaction was detected with the 40S subunit. The amino acid residues forming the interface mostly belong to long helix α1 of the M domain. Some residues adjacent to α1 and belonging to strand β5 and short helices α2 and α3 are also involved in the protein-ribosome contact. The functionally inactive G183A mutant interacted with the ribosome far more weakly as compared with the wild-type eRF1. The interaction interfaces of the two proteins were nonidentical. It was concluded that long helix α1 is functionally important and that the conformational flexibility of the GGQ loop is essential for the tight protein-ribosome contact.     

The origins of larval forms: what the data indicate,and what they don't

What is a larva, if it is not what survives of an ancestor's adult, compressed into a transient pre‐reproductive phase, as suggested by Haeckel's largely disreputed model of evolution by recapitulation? A recently published article hypothesizes that larva and adult of holometabolous insects are developmental expressions of two different genomes coexisting in the same animal as a result of an ancient hybridization event between an onychophoran and a primitive insect with eventless post‐embryonic development. More likely, however, larvae originated from late embryonic or early post‐embryonic stages of ancestors with direct development. Evolutionary novelties would thus be intercalary rather than terminal, with respect to the ancestor's ontogenetic schedule. This scenario, supported by current research on holometabolous insects and marine invertebrates with complex life cycles, offers a serious alternative to the traditional scenario (‘what is early in ontogeny is also early in phylogeny’) underlying the current perception of the evolution of genetic regulatory networks.     

The origins of eukaryotic gene structure

Most of the phenotypic diversity that we perceive in the natural world is directly attributable to the peculiar structure of the eukaryotic gene, which harbors numerous embellishments relative to the situation in prokaryotes. The most profound changes include introns that must be spliced out of precursor mRNAs, transcribed but untranslated leader and trailer sequences (untranslated regions), modular regulatory elements that drive patterns of gene expression, and expansive intergenic regions that harbor additional diffuse control mechanisms. Explaining the origins of these features is difficult because they each impose an intrinsic disadvantage by increasing the genic mutation rate to defective alleles. To address these issues, a general hypothesis for the emergence of eukaryotic gene structure is provided here. Extensive information on absolute population sizes, recombination rates, and mutation rates strongly supports the view that eukaryotes have reduced genetic effective population sizes relative to prokaryotes, with especially extreme reductions being the rule in multicellular lineages. The resultant increase in the power of random genetic drift appears to be sufficient to overwhelm the weak mutational disadvantages associated with most novel aspects of the eukaryotic gene, supporting the idea that most such changes are simple outcomes of semi-neutral processes rather than direct products of natural selection. However, by establishing an essentially permanent change in the population-genetic environment permissive to the genome-wide repatterning of gene structure, the eukaryotic condition also promoted a reliable resource from which natural selection could secondarily build novel forms of organismal complexity. Under this hypothesis, arguments based on molecular, cellular, and/or physiological constraints are insufficient to explain the disparities in gene, genomic, and phenotypic complexity between prokaryotes and eukaryotes.     

Transitional forms between the three domains of life and evolutionary implications

The question as to the origin and relationship between the three domains of life is lodged in a phylogenetic impasse. The dominant paradigm is to see the three domains as separated. However, the recently characterized bacterial species have suggested continuity between the three domains. Here, we review the evidence in support of this hypothesis and evaluate the implications for and against the models of the origin of the three domains of life. The existence of intermediate steps between the three domains discards the need for fusion to explain eukaryogenesis and suggests that the last universal common ancestor was complex. We propose a scenario in which the ancestor of the current bacterial Planctomycetes, Verrucomicrobiae and Chlamydiae superphylum was related to the last archaeal and eukaryotic common ancestor, thus providing a way out of the phylogenetic impasse.     

Structure of a eukaryotic cytoplasmic pre‐40S ribosomal subunit

Final maturation of eukaryotic ribosomes occurs in the cytoplasm and requires the sequential removal of associated assembly factors and processing of the immature 20S pre‐RNA. Using cryo‐electron microscopy (cryo‐EM), we have determined the structure of a yeast cytoplasmic pre‐40S particle in complex with Enp1, Ltv1, Rio2, Tsr1, and Pno1 assembly factors poised to initiate final maturation. The structure reveals that the pre‐rRNA adopts a highly distorted conformation of its 3′ major and 3′ minor domains stabilized by the binding of the assembly factors. This observation is consistent with a mechanism that involves concerted release of the assembly factors orchestrated by the folding of the rRNA in the head of the pre‐40S subunit during the final stages of maturation. Our results provide a structural framework for the coordination of the final maturation events that drive a pre‐40S particle toward the mature form capable of engaging in translation.     

Crystal Structure of the Yeast Ribosomal Protein rpS3 in Complex with Its Chaperone Yar1

Eukaryotic ribosome assembly involves a plethora of factors, which ensure that a correctly folded ribosome contains all ribosomal protein components. Among these assembly factors, Yar1 has recently emerged as a molecular chaperone for ribosomal protein rpS3 of the small ribosomal subunit (40S) in yeast. In complex with its chaperone, rpS3 is imported into the nucleus and protected from aggregation. How rpS3 and other ribosomal proteins are initially sequestered and subsequently integrated into pre-ribosomal particles is currently poorly understood. Here, we present the crystal structure of yeast rpS3 in complex with its chaperone Yar1 at 2.8 Å resolution. The crystal structure rationalizes how Yar1 can protect rpS3 from aggregation while facilitating nuclear import and suggests a mechanism for a stepwise exchange of molecular partners that ribosomal proteins interact with during ribosome assembly.     

Predation between prokaryotes and the origin of eukaryotes

Accumulating data suggest that the eukaryotic cell originated from a merger of two prokaryotes, an archaeal host and a bacterial endosymbiont. However, since prokaryotes are unable to perform phagocytosis, the means by which the endosymbiont entered its host is an enigma. We suggest that a predatory or parasitic interaction between prokaryotes provides a reasonable explanation for this conundrum. According to the model presented here, the host in this interaction was an anaerobic archaeon with a periplasm‐like space. The predator was a small (facultative) aerobic α‐proteobacterium, which penetrated and replicated within the host periplasm, and later became the mitochondria. Plausible conditions under which this interaction took place and circumstances that may have led to the contemporary complex eukaryotic cell are discussed.     

Secretory traffic in the eukaryotic parasite Toxoplasma gondii: less is more

Name a single-celled eukaryote that boasts a small genome size, is easily cultivated in haploid form, for which a wide variety of molecular genetic tools are available, and that exhibits a simple, polarized secretory apparatus with a well-defined endoplasmic reticulum and Golgi that can serve as a model for understanding secretion. Got it? Now name a cell with all these attributes that contains at least a dozen distinct and morphologically well-defined intracellular organelles, including three distinct types of secretory vesicles and two endosymbiotic organelles. Not so sure anymore?     

Evolution of the eukaryotic translation termination system: origins of release factors

Accurate translation termination is essential for cell viability. In eukaryotes, this process is strictly maintained by two proteins, eukaryotic release factor 1 (eRF1), which recognizes all stop codons and hydrolyzes peptidyl-tRNA, and eukaryotic release factor 3 (eRF3), which is an elongation factor 1alpha (EF-1alpha) homolog stimulating eRF1 activity. To retrace the evolution of this core system, we cloned and sequenced the eRF3 genes from Trichomonas vaginalis (Parabasalia) and Giardia lamblia (Diplomonada), which are generally thought to be "early-diverging eukaryotes," as well as those from two ciliates (Oxytricha trifallax and Euplotes aediculatus). We also determined the sequence of the eRF1 gene for G. lamblia. Surprisingly, the G. lamblia eRF3 appears to have only one domain, corresponding to EF-1alpha, while other eRF3s (including the T. vaginalis protein) have an additional N-terminal domain, of 66-411 amino acids. Considering this novel eRF3 structure and our extensive phylogenetic analyses, we suggest that (1) the current translation termination system in eukaryotes evolved from the archaea-like version, (2) eRF3 was introduced into the system prior to the divergence of extant eukaryotes, including G. lamblia, and (3) G. lamblia might be the first eukaryotic branch among the organisms considered.     

The activities of eukaryotic replication origins in chromatin

DNA replication initiates at chromosomal positions called replication origins. This review will focus on the activity, regulation and roles of replication origins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. All eukaryotic cells, including S. cerevisiae, depend on the initiation (activity) of hundreds of replication origins during a single cell cycle for the duplication of their genomes. However, not all origins are identical. For example, there is a temporal order to origin activation with some origins firing early during the S-phase and some origins firing later. Recent studies provide evidence that posttranslational chromatin modifications, heterochromatin-binding proteins and nucleosome positioning can control the efficiency and/or timing of chromosomal origin activity in yeast. Many more origins exist than are necessary for efficient replication. The availability of excess replication origins leaves individual origins free to evolve distinct forms of regulation and/or roles in chromosomes beyond their fundamental role in DNA synthesis. We propose that some origins have acquired roles in controlling chromatin structure and/or gene expression. These roles are not linked obligatorily to replication origin activity per se, but instead exploit multi-subunit replication proteins with the potential to form context-dependent protein-protein interactions.