Identification of small non-coding RNAs from mitochondria and chloroplasts

Small non-protein-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) have been identified in a wide spectrum of organisms ranging from bacteria to humans. In eukarya, systematic searches for ncRNAs have so far been restricted to the nuclear or cytosolic compartments of cells. Whether or not small stable non-coding RNA species also exist in cell organelles, in addition to tRNAs or ribosomal RNAs, is unknown. We have thus generated cDNA libraries from size-selected mammalian mitochondrial RNA and plant chloroplast RNA and searched for small ncRNA species in these two types of DNA-containing cell organelles. In total, we have identified 18 novel candidates for organellar ncRNAs in these two cellular compartments and confirmed expression of six of them by northern blot analysis or RNase A protection assays. Most candidate ncRNA genes map to intergenic regions of the organellar genomes. As found previously in bacteria, the presumptive ancestors of present-day chloroplasts and mitochondria, we also observed examples of antisense ncRNAs that potentially could target organelle-encoded mRNAs. The structural features of the identified ncRNAs as well as their possible cellular functions are discussed. The absence from our libraries of abundant small RNA species that are not encoded by the organellar genomes suggests that the import of RNAs into cell organelles is of very limited significance or does not occur at all.     

Sequence complementarity between human noncoding RNAs and SARS-CoV-2 genes: What are the implications for human health?

ObjectivesTo investigate in silico the presence of nucleotide sequence complementarity between the RNA genome of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome CoronaVirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and human non-coding (nc)RNA genes.MethodsThe FASTA sequence (NC_045512.2) of each of the 11 SARS-CoV-2 isolate Wuhan-Hu-1 genes was retrieved from NCBI.nlm.nih.gov/gene and the Ensembl.org library interrogated for any base-pair match with human ncRNA genes. SARS-CoV-2 gene-matched human ncRNAs were screened for functional activity using bioinformatic analysis. Finally, associations between identified ncRNAs and human diseases were searched in GWAS databases.ResultsA total of 252 matches were found between the nucleotide sequence of SARS-CoV-2 genes and human ncRNAs. With the exception of two small nuclear RNAs, all of them were long non-coding (lnc)RNAs expressed mainly in testis and central nervous system under physiological conditions. The percentage of alignment ranged from 91.30% to 100% with a mean nucleotide alignment length of 17.5 ± 2.4. Thirty-three (13.09%) of them contained predicted R-loop forming sequences, but none of these intersected the complementary sequences of SARS-CoV-2. However, in 31 cases matches fell on ncRNA regulatory sites, whose adjacent coding genes are mostly involved in cancer, immunological and neurological pathways. Similarly, several polymorphic variants of detected non-coding genes have been associated with neuropsychiatric and proliferative disorders.ConclusionThis pivotal in silico study shows that SARS-CoV-2 genes have Watson-Crick nucleotide complementarity to human ncRNA sequences, potentially disrupting ncRNA epigenetic control of target genes. It remains to be elucidated whether this could result in the development of human disease in the long term.     

Identification of novel non-coding RNAs as potential antisense regulators in the archaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus

By generating a specialized cDNA library from the archaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus, we have identified 57 novel small non-coding RNA (ncRNA) candidates and confirmed their expression by Northern blot analysis. The majority was found to belong to one of two classes, either antisense or antisense-box RNAs, where the latter only exhibit partial complementarity to RNA targets. The most prominent group of antisense RNAs is transcribed in the opposite orientation to the transposase genes, encoded by insertion elements (transposons). Thus, these antisense RNAs may regulate transposition of insertion elements by inhibiting expression of the transposase mRNA. Surprisingly, the class of antisense RNAs also contained RNAs complementary to tRNAs or sRNAs (small-nucleolar-like RNAs). For the antisense-box ncRNAs, the majority could be assigned to the class of C/D sRNAs, which specify 2'-O-methylation sites on rRNAs or tRNAs. Five C/D sRNAs of this group are predicted to target methylation at six sites in 13 different tRNAs, thus pointing to the widespread role of these sRNA species in tRNA modification in Archaea. Another group of antisense-box RNAs, lacking typical C/D sRNA motifs, was predicted to target the 3'-untranslated regions of certain mRNAs. Furthermore, one of the ncRNAs that does not show antisense elements is transcribed from a repeat unit of a cluster of small regularly spaced repeats in S. solfataricus which is potentially involved in replicon partitioning. In conclusion, this is the first report of stably expressed antisense RNAs in an archaeal species and it raises the prospect that antisense-based mechanisms are also used widely in Archaea to regulate gene expression.