The Silencing Domain of GW182 Interacts with PABPC1 To Promote Translational Repression and Degradation of MicroRNA Targets and Is Required for Target Release

GW182 family proteins are essential in animal cells for microRNA (miRNA)-mediated gene silencing, yet the molecular mechanism that allows GW182 to promote translational repression and mRNA decay remains largely unknown. Previous studies showed that while the GW182 N-terminal domain interacts with Argonaute proteins, translational repression and degradation of miRNA targets are promoted by a bipartite silencing domain comprising the GW182 middle and C-terminal regions. Here we show that the GW182 C-terminal region is required for GW182 to release silenced mRNPs; moreover, GW182 dissociates from miRNA targets at a step of silencing downstream of deadenylation, indicating that GW182 is required to initiate but not to maintain silencing. In addition, we show that the GW182 bipartite silencing domain competes with eukaryotic initiation factor 4G for binding to PABPC1. The GW182-PABPC1 interaction is also required for miRNA target degradation; accordingly, we observed that PABPC1 associates with components of the CCR4-NOT deadenylase complex. Finally, we show that PABPC1 overexpression suppresses the silencing of miRNA targets. We propose a model in which the GW182 silencing domain promotes translational repression, at least in part, by interfering with mRNA circularization and also recruits the deadenylase complex through the interaction with PABPC1.In multicellular eukaryotes, the regulation of gene expression by microRNAs (miRNAs) is critical for biological processes as diverse as cell differentiation and proliferation, apoptosis, metabolism, and development (4). To exert a regulatory function, miRNAs associate with Argonaute proteins to form RNA-induced silencing complexes, which repress translation and trigger the degradation of target mRNAs (4, 10, 16). The extent to which translational repression and degradation contribute to silencing depends on the specific target-miRNA combination; some targets are regulated predominantly at the translational level, whereas others can be regulated mainly at the mRNA level (3). A large-scale proteomic analysis performed in parallel with measurements of mRNA levels showed that for the vast majority of miRNA targets, silencing correlates with changes at both the protein and mRNA levels (1, 27).In animal cells, the degradation of miRNA targets is initiated by deadenylation and decapping, which are followed by the exonucleolytic decay of the mRNA body (2, 3, 9, 11, 12, 17, 19, 24, 30, 31). miRNA-dependent mRNA degradation requires a variety of proteins: an Argonaute and a GW182 protein, the CCR4-NOT deadenylase complex, the decapping enzyme DCP2, and several decapping activators including DCP1, Ge-1, HPat, EDC3, and Me31B (also known as RCK/p54) (3, 6, 9, 12, 19). Several studies previously demonstrated that miRNAs trigger deadenylation and decapping even when the mRNA target is not translated (9, 12, 19, 24, 30, 31), indicating that mRNA decay is not merely a consequence of a primary effect of miRNAs on translation but rather is an independent mechanism by which miRNAs silence gene expression.Although how miRNAs trigger mRNA degradation is well established, the mechanisms driving the inhibition of translation are unclear. Multiple mechanisms have been proposed: the displacement of eukaryotic initiation factor 4E (eIF4E) from the mRNA cap structure, interference with the function of the eIF4F complex, a block of 60S ribosomal subunit joining, or an inhibition of translation elongation (4, 10, 16). Regardless of the precise mechanism, the translational repression of miRNA targets also requires GW182 family proteins (11, 13).GW182 proteins are essential components of the miRNA pathway in animal cells, as their depletion suppresses miRNA-mediated gene silencing (reviewed in references 8 and 13). Recent studies have revealed that the silencing activity of these proteins resides predominantly in a bipartite silencing domain containing the middle and C-terminal regions (14, 22, 33). The precise molecular function of the GW182 silencing domain is not fully understood, yet it is known that the domain is not required for GW182 proteins to interact with Argonaute proteins or to localize to P bodies (3, 14, 22). Furthermore, when the silencing domains of GW182 proteins are artificially tethered to mRNAs, their expression is silenced; therefore, tethering bypasses the requirement for Argonaute proteins and miRNAs (5, 22, 33). These observations suggest that the silencing domains of GW182 proteins exhibit intrinsic silencing activity and therefore likely play a role at the effector step of silencing (13, 14, 22, 33).Here we investigate what role the Drosophila melanogaster GW182 silencing domain plays in the miRNA pathway. Overall, our results reveal that the very C-terminal region of this domain is required for the release of GW182 from silenced mRNPs. Indeed, we unexpectedly found that we could detect D. melanogaster GW182 bound to miRNA targets only in cells depleted of components of the deadenylase complex. These results suggest that GW182 dissociates from Argonaute-1 (AGO1) and miRNA targets at a step of silencing downstream of deadenylation. In contrast, GW182 mutants lacking the C-terminal region remain stably bound to miRNA targets, even in wild-type cells, indicating that this region plays a role in the dissociation of GW182 from effector complexes. We further show that the bipartite silencing domain of GW182 interacts with PABPC1 and interferes with the binding of PABPC1 to eIF4G. The interaction of GW182 with PABPC1 is also required for the degradation of miRNA targets, most likely because the interaction facilitates the recruitment of the CCR4-NOT deadenylase complex. Accordingly, overexpressing PABPC1 suppresses the silencing of miRNA targets. Our findings uncover an unexpected role for PABPC1 in the miRNA pathway.     

Analysis of the Viral Elements Required in the Nuclear Import of HIV-1 DNA

HIV-1 possesses an exquisite ability to infect cells independently from their cycling status by undergoing an active phase of nuclear import through the nuclear pore. This property has been ascribed to the presence of karyophilic elements present in viral nucleoprotein complexes, such as the matrix protein (MA); Vpr; the integrase (IN); and a cis-acting structure present in the newly synthesized DNA, the DNA flap. However, their role in nuclear import remains controversial at best. In the present study, we carried out a comprehensive analysis of the role of these elements in nuclear import in a comparison between several primary cell types, including stimulated lymphocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells. We show that despite the fact that none of these elements is absolutely required for nuclear import, disruption of the central polypurine tract-central termination sequence (cPPT-CTS) clearly affects the kinetics of viral DNA entry into the nucleus. This effect is independent of the cell cycle status of the target cells and is observed in cycling as well as in nondividing primary cells, suggesting that nuclear import of viral DNA may occur similarly under both conditions. Nonetheless, this study indicates that other components are utilized along with the cPPT-CTS for an efficient entry of viral DNA into the nucleus.Lentiviruses display an exquisite ability to infect dividing and nondividing cells alike that is unequalled among Retroviridae. This property is thought to be due to the particular behavior or composition of the viral nucleoprotein complexes (NPCs) that are liberated into the cytoplasm of target cells upon virus-to-cell membrane fusion and that allow lentiviruses to traverse an intact nuclear membrane (17, 28, 29, 39, 52, 55, 67, 79). In the case of the human immunodeficiency type I virus (HIV-1), several studies over the years identified viral components of such structures with intrinsic karyophilic properties and thus perfect candidates for mediation of the passage of viral DNA (vDNA) through the nuclear pore: the matrix protein (MA); Vpr; the integrase (IN); and a three-stranded DNA flap, a structure present in neo-synthesized viral DNA, specified by the central polypurine tract-central termination sequence (cPPT-CTS). It is clear that these elements may mediate nuclear import directly or via the recruitment of the host''s proteins, and indeed, several cellular proteins have been found to influence HIV-1 infection during nuclear import, like the karyopherin α2 Rch1 (38); importin 7 (3, 30, 93); the transportin SR-2 (13, 20); or the nucleoporins Nup98 (27), Nup358/RANBP2, and Nup153 (13, 56).More recently, the capsid protein (CA), the main structural component of viral nucleoprotein complexes at least upon their cytoplasmic entry, has also been suggested to be involved in nuclear import or in postnuclear entry steps (14, 25, 74, 90, 92). Whether this is due to a role for CA in the shaping of viral nucleoprotein complexes or to a direct interaction between CA and proteins involved in nuclear import remains at present unknown.Despite a large number of reports, no single viral or cellular element has been described as absolutely necessary or sufficient to mediate lentiviral nuclear import, and important controversies as to the experimental evidences linking these elements to this step exist. For example, MA was among the first viral protein of HIV-1 described to be involved in nuclear import, and 2 transferable nuclear localization signals (NLSs) have been described to occur at its N and C termini (40). However, despite the fact that early studies indicated that the mutation of these NLSs perturbed HIV-1 nuclear import and infection specifically in nondividing cells, such as macrophages (86), these findings failed to be confirmed in more-recent studies (23, 33, 34, 57, 65, 75).Similarly, Vpr has been implicated by several studies of the nuclear import of HIV-1 DNA (1, 10, 21, 43, 45, 47, 64, 69, 72, 73, 85). Vpr does not possess classical NLSs, yet it displays a transferable nucleophilic activity when fused to heterologous proteins (49-51, 53, 77, 81) and has been shown to line onto the nuclear envelope (32, 36, 47, 51, 58), where it can truly facilitate the passage of the viral genome into the nucleus. However, the role of Vpr in this step remains controversial, as in some instances Vpr is not even required for viral replication in nondividing cells (1, 59).Conflicting results concerning the role of IN during HIV-1 nuclear import also exist. Indeed, several transferable NLSs have been described to occur in the catalytic core and the C-terminal DNA binding domains of IN, but for some of these, initial reports of nuclear entry defects (2, 9, 22, 46, 71) were later shown to result from defects at steps other than nuclear import (60, 62, 70, 83). These reports do not exclude a role for the remaining NLSs in IN during nuclear import, and they do not exclude the possibility that IN may mediate this step by associating with components of the cellular nuclear import machinery, such as importin alpha and beta (41), importin 7 (3, 30, 93, 98), and, more recently, transportin-SR2 (20).The central DNA flap, a structure present in lentiviruses and in at least 1 yeast retroelement (44), but not in other orthoretroviruses, has also been involved in the nuclear import of viral DNA (4, 6, 7, 31, 78, 84, 95, 96), and more recently, it has been proposed to provide a signal for viral nucleoprotein complexes uncoating in the proximity of the nuclear pore, with the consequence of providing a signal for import (8). However, various studies showed an absence or weakness of nuclear entry defects in viruses devoid of the DNA flap (24, 26, 44, 61).Overall, the importance of viral factors in HIV-1 nuclear import is still unclear. The discrepancies concerning the role of MA, IN, Vpr, and cPPT-CTS in HIV-1 nuclear import could in part be explained by their possible redundancy. To date, only one comprehensive study analyzed the role of these four viral potentially karyophilic elements together (91). This study showed that an HIV-1 chimera where these elements were either deleted or replaced by their murine leukemia virus (MLV) counterparts was, in spite of an important infectivity defect, still able to infect cycling and cell cycle-arrested cell lines to similar efficiencies. If this result indicated that the examined viral elements of HIV-1 were dispensable for the cell cycle independence of HIV, as infections proceeded equally in cycling and arrested cells, they did not prove that they were not required in nuclear import, because chimeras displayed a severe infectivity defect that precluded their comparison with the wild type (WT).Nuclear import and cell cycle independence may not be as simply linked as previously thought. On the one hand, there has been no formal demonstration that the passage through the nuclear pore, and thus nuclear import, is restricted to nondividing cells, and for what we know, this passage may be an obligatory step in HIV infection in all cells, irrespective of their cycling status. In support of this possibility, certain mutations in viral elements of HIV affect nuclear import in dividing as well as in nondividing cells (4, 6, 7, 31, 84, 95). On the other hand, cell cycle-independent infection may be a complex phenomenon that is made possible not only by the ability of viral DNA to traverse the nuclear membrane but also by its ability to cope with pre- and postnuclear entry events, as suggested by the phenotypes of certain CA mutants (74, 92).Given that the cellular environment plays an important role during the early steps of viral infection, we chose to analyze the role of the four karyophilic viral elements of HIV-1 during infection either alone or combined in a wide comparison between cells highly susceptible to infection and more-restrictive primary cell targets of HIV-1 in vivo, such as primary blood lymphocytes (PBLs), monocyte-derived macrophages (MDM), and dendritic cells (DCs).In this study, we show that an HIV-1-derived virus in which the 2 NLSs of MA are mutated and the IN, Vpr, and cPPT-CTS elements are removed displays no detectable nuclear import defect in HeLa cells independently of their cycling status. However, this mutant virus is partially impaired for nuclear entry in primary cells and more specifically in DCs and PBLs. We found that this partial defect is specified by the cPPT-CTS, while the 3 remaining elements seem to play no role in nuclear import. Thus, our study indicates that the central DNA flap specifies the most important role among the viral elements involved thus far in nuclear import. However, it also clearly indicates that the role played by the central DNA flap is not absolute and that its importance varies depending on the cell type, independently from the dividing status of the cell.     

Cultivation of Fastidious Bacteria by Viability Staining and Micromanipulation in a Soil Substrate Membrane System

Soil substrate membrane systems allow for microcultivation of fastidious soil bacteria as mixed microbial communities. We isolated established microcolonies from these membranes by using fluorescence viability staining and micromanipulation. This approach facilitated the recovery of diverse, novel isolates, including the recalcitrant bacterium Leifsonia xyli, a plant pathogen that has never been isolated outside the host.The majority of bacterial species have never been recovered in the laboratory (1, 14, 19, 24). In the last decade, novel cultivation approaches have successfully been used to recover “unculturables” from a diverse range of divisions (23, 25, 29). Most strategies have targeted marine environments (4, 23, 25, 32), but soil offers the potential for the investigation of vast numbers of undescribed species (20, 29). Rapid advances have been made toward culturing soil bacteria by reformulating and diluting traditional media, extending incubation times, and using alternative gelling agents (8, 21, 29).The soil substrate membrane system (SSMS) is a diffusion chamber approach that uses extracts from the soil of interest as the growth substrate, thereby mimicking the environment under investigation (12). The SSMS enriches for slow-growing oligophiles, a proportion of which are subsequently capable of growing on complex media (23, 25, 27, 30, 32). However, the SSMS results in mixed microbial communities, with the consequent difficulty in isolation of individual microcolonies for further characterization (10).Micromanipulation has been widely used for the isolation of specific cell morphotypes for downstream applications in molecular diagnostics or proteomics (5, 15). This simple technology offers the opportunity to select established microcolonies of a specific morphotype from the SSMS when combined with fluorescence visualization (3, 11). Here, we have combined the SSMS, fluorescence viability staining, and advanced micromanipulation for targeted isolation of viable, microcolony-forming soil bacteria.