CAF1 plays an important role in mRNA deadenylation separate from its contact to CCR4

The CAF1 protein is a component of the CCR4–NOT deadenylase complex. While yeast CAF1 displays deadenylase activity, this activity is not required for its deadenylation function in vivo, and CCR4 is the primary deadenylase in the complex. In order to identify CAF1-specific functional regions required for deadenylation in vivo, we targeted for mutagenesis six regions of CAF1 that are specifically conserved among CAF1 orthologs. Defects in residues 213–215, found to be a site required for binding CCR4, reduced the rate of deadenylation to a lesser extent and resulted in in vivo phenotypes that were less severe than did defects in other regions of CAF1 that displayed greater contact to CCR4. These results imply that CAF1, while affecting deadenylation through its contact to CCR4, has functions in deadenylation separate from its contact to CCR4. Synthetic lethalities of caf1Δ, but not that of ccr4Δ, with defects in DHH1 or PAB1, both of which are involved in translation, further supports a role of CAF1 separate from that of CCR4. Importantly, other mutations in PAB1 that reduced translation, while not affecting deadenylation by themselves or when combined with ccr4Δ, severely blocked deadenylation when coupled with a caf1 deletion. These results indicate that both CAF1 and factors involved in translation are required for deadenylation.     

Xenopus CAF1 requires NOT1-mediated interaction with 4E-T to repress translation in vivo

RNA-regulatory factors bound to 3′ UTRs control translation and stability. Repression often is associated with poly(A) removal. The deadenylase CAF1 is a core component of the CCR4–NOT complex. Our prior studies established that CAF1 represses translation independent of deadenylation. We sought the mechanism of its deadenylation-independent repression in Xenopus oocytes. Our data reveal a chain of interacting proteins that links CAF1 to CCR4–NOT and to Xp54 and 4E-T. Association of CAF1 with NOT1, the major subunit of CCR4–NOT, is required for repression by CAF1 tethered to a reporter mRNA. Affinity purification-mass spectrometry and coimmunoprecipitation revealed that at least five members of the CCR4–NOT complex were recruited by CAF1. The recruitment of these proteins required NOT1, as did the ability of tethered CAF1 to repress translation. In turn, NOT1 was needed to recruit Xp54 and 4E-T. We examined the role of 4E-T in repression using mutations that disrupted either eIF4E-dependent or -independent mechanisms. Expression of a 4E-T truncation that still bound eIF4E alleviated repression by tethered CAF1, NOT1, and Xp54. In contrast, a mutant 4E-T that failed to bind eIF4E did not. Repression of global translation was affected only by the eIF4E-dependent mechanism. Reporters bearing IRES elements revealed that repression via tethered CAF1 and Xp54 is cap- and eIF4E-independent, but requires one or more of eIF4A, eIF4B, and eIF4G. We propose that RNA-binding proteins, and perhaps miRNAs, repress translation through an analogous chain of interactions that begin with the 3′ UTR-bound repressor and end with the noncanonical activity of 4E-T.     

Human DDX6 effects miRNA-mediated gene silencing via direct binding to CNOT1

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) play critical roles in a variety of biological processes through widespread effects on protein synthesis. Upon association with the miRNA-induced silencing complex (miRISC), miRNAs repress target mRNA translation and accelerate mRNA decay. Degradation of the mRNA is initiated by shortening of the poly(A) tail by the CCR4–NOT deadenylase complex followed by the removal of the 5′ cap structure and exonucleolytic decay of the mRNA. Here, we report a direct interaction between the large scaffolding subunit of CCR4–NOT, CNOT1, with the translational repressor and decapping activator protein, DDX6. DDX6 binds to a conserved CNOT1 subdomain in a manner resembling the interaction of the translation initiation factor eIF4A with eIF4G. Importantly, mutations that disrupt the DDX6–CNOT1 interaction impair miRISC-mediated gene silencing in human cells. Thus, CNOT1 facilitates recruitment of DDX6 to miRNA-targeted mRNAs, placing DDX6 as a downstream effector in the miRNA silencing pathway.     

The interactions of GW182 proteins with PABP and deadenylases are required for both translational repression and degradation of miRNA targets

Animal miRNAs silence the expression of mRNA targets through translational repression, deadenylation and subsequent mRNA degradation. Silencing requires association of miRNAs with an Argonaute protein and a GW182 family protein. In turn, GW182 proteins interact with poly(A)-binding protein (PABP) and the PAN2–PAN3 and CCR4–NOT deadenylase complexes. These interactions are required for the deadenylation and decay of miRNA targets. Recent studies have indicated that miRNAs repress translation before inducing target deadenylation and decay; however, whether translational repression and deadenylation are coupled or represent independent repressive mechanisms is unclear. Another remaining question is whether translational repression also requires GW182 proteins to interact with both PABP and deadenylases. To address these questions, we characterized the interaction of Drosophila melanogaster GW182 with deadenylases and defined the minimal requirements for a functional GW182 protein. Functional assays in D. melanogaster and human cells indicate that miRNA-mediated translational repression and degradation are mechanistically linked and are triggered through the interactions of GW182 proteins with PABP and deadenylases.     

Bicaudal-C associates with a Trailer Hitch/Me31B complex and is required for efficient Gurken secretion

Bicaudal-C (Bic-C) is a multiple KH-domain RNA-binding protein required for Drosophila oogenesis and, maternally, for embryonic patterning. In early oogenesis, Bic-C negatively regulates target mRNAs, including Bic-C, by recruiting the CCR4 deadenylase through a direct association with its NOT3 subunit. Here, we identify a novel function for Bic-C in secretion of the TGF-α homolog Gurken (Grk). In Bic-C mutant egg chambers, Grk is sequestered within actin-coated structures during mid-oogenesis. As a consequence, Egfr signalling is not efficiently activated in the dorsal-anterior follicle cells. This phenotype is strikingly similar to that of trailer hitch (tral) mutants. Consistent with the idea that Bic-C and Tral act together in Grk secretion, Bic-C co-localizes with Tral within cytoplasmic granules, and can be co-purified with multiple protein components of a Tral mRNP complex. Taken together, our results implicate translational regulation by Bic-C and Tral in the secretory pathway.     

Distinct modes of recruitment of the CCR4–NOT complex by Drosophila and vertebrate Nanos

Nanos proteins repress the expression of target mRNAs by recruiting effector complexes through non‐conserved N‐terminal regions. In vertebrates, Nanos proteins interact with the NOT1 subunit of the CCR4–NOT effector complex through a NOT1 interacting motif (NIM), which is absent in Nanos orthologs from several invertebrate species. Therefore, it has remained unclear whether the Nanos repressive mechanism is conserved and whether it also involves direct interactions with the CCR4–NOT deadenylase complex in invertebrates. Here, we identify an effector domain (NED) that is necessary for the Drosophila melanogaster (Dm) Nanos to repress mRNA targets. The NED recruits the CCR4–NOT complex through multiple and redundant binding sites, including a central region that interacts with the NOT module, which comprises the C‐terminal domains of NOT1–3. The crystal structure of the NED central region bound to the NOT module reveals an unanticipated bipartite binding interface that contacts NOT1 and NOT3 and is distinct from the NIM of vertebrate Nanos. Thus, despite the absence of sequence conservation, the N‐terminal regions of Nanos proteins recruit CCR4–NOT to assemble analogous repressive complexes.     

Systematic mutagenesis of the leucine-rich repeat (LRR) domain of CCR4 reveals specific sites for binding to CAF1 and a separate critical role for the LRR in CCR4 deadenylase activity

CCR4, a poly(A) deadenylase of the exonuclease III family, is a component of the multiprotein CCR4-NOT complex of Saccharomyces cerevisiae that is involved in mRNA degradation. CCR4, unlike all other exonuclease III family members, contains a leucine-rich repeat (LRR) motif through which it makes contact to CAF1 and other factors. The LRR residues important in contacting CAF1 were identified by constructing 29 CCR4 mutations encompassing a majority (47 of 81) of residues interstitial to the conserved structural residues. Two-hybrid and immunoprecipitation data revealed that physical contact between CAF1 and the LRR is blocked by mutation of just two alpha-helix/beta-helix strand loop residues linking the first and second repeats. In contrast, CAF16, a potential ligand of CCR4, was abrogated in its binding to the LRR by mutations in the N terminus of the second beta-strand. The LRR domain was also found to contact the deadenylase domain of CCR4, and deletion of the LRR region completely inhibited CCR4 enzymatic activity. Mutations throughout the beta-sheet surface of the LRR, including those that did not specifically interfere with contacts to CAF1 or CAF16, significantly reduced CCR4 deadenylase activity. These results indicate that the CCR4-LRR, in addition to binding to CAF1, plays an essential role in the CCR4 deadenylation of mRNA.     

miRISC and the CCR4–NOT complex silence mRNA targets independently of 43S ribosomal scanning

miRNAs associate with Argonaute (AGO) proteins to silence the expression of mRNA targets by inhibiting translation and promoting deadenylation, decapping, and mRNA degradation. A current model for silencing suggests that AGOs mediate these effects through the sequential recruitment of GW182 proteins, the CCR4–NOT deadenylase complex and the translational repressor and decapping activator DDX6. An alternative model posits that AGOs repress translation by interfering with eIF4A function during 43S ribosomal scanning and that this mechanism is independent of GW182 and the CCR4–NOT complex in Drosophila melanogaster. Here, we show that miRNAs, AGOs, GW182, the CCR4–NOT complex, and DDX6/Me31B repress and degrade polyadenylated mRNA targets that are translated via scanning‐independent mechanisms in both human and Dm cells. This and additional observations indicate a common mechanism used by these proteins and miRNAs to mediate silencing. This mechanism does not require eIF4A function during ribosomal scanning.     

Crystal structure of the human CNOT6L nuclease domain reveals strict poly(A) substrate specificity

CCR4, an evolutionarily conserved member of the CCR4–NOT complex, is the main cytoplasmic deadenylase. It contains a C‐terminal nuclease domain with homology to the endonuclease‐exonuclease‐phosphatase (EEP) family of enzymes. We have determined the high‐resolution three‐dimensional structure of the nuclease domain of CNOT6L, a human homologue of CCR4, by X‐ray crystallography using the single‐wavelength anomalous dispersion method. This first structure of a deadenylase belonging to the EEP family adopts a complete α/β sandwich fold typical of hydrolases with highly conserved active site residues similar to APE1. The active site of CNOT6L should recognize the RNA substrate through its negatively charged surface. In vitro deadenylase assays confirm the critical active site residues and show that the nuclease domain of CNOT6L exhibits full Mg²⁺‐dependent deadenylase activity with strict poly(A) RNA substrate specificity. To understand the structural basis for poly(A) RNA substrate binding, crystal structures of the CNOT6L nuclease domain have also been determined in complex with AMP and poly(A) DNA. The resulting structures suggest a molecular deadenylase mechanism involving a pentacovalent phosphate transition.