Heat Shock-Induced Accumulation of Translation Elongation and Termination Factors Precedes Assembly of Stress Granules in S. cerevisiae

In response to severe environmental stresses eukaryotic cells shut down translation and accumulate components of the translational machinery in stress granules (SGs). Since they contain mainly mRNA, translation initiation factors and 40S ribosomal subunits, they have been referred to as dominant accumulations of stalled translation preinitiation complexes. Here we present evidence that the robust heat shock-induced SGs of S. cerevisiae also contain translation elongation factors eEF3 (Yef3p) and eEF1Bγ2 (Tef4p) as well as translation termination factors eRF1 (Sup45p) and eRF3 (Sup35p). Despite the presence of the yeast prion protein Sup35 in heat shock-induced SGs, we found out that its prion-like domain is not involved in the SGs assembly. Factors eEF3, eEF1Bγ2 and eRF1 were accumulated and co-localized with Dcp2 foci even upon a milder heat shock at 42°C independently of P-bodies scaffolding proteins. We also show that eEF3 accumulations at 42°C determine sites of the genuine SGs assembly at 46°C. We suggest that identification of translation elongation and termination factors in SGs might help to understand the mechanism of the eIF2α factor phosphorylation-independent repression of translation and SGs assembly.     

Translation Initiation Factors eIF3 and HCR1 Control Translation Termination and Stop Codon Read-Through in Yeast Cells

Translation is divided into initiation, elongation, termination and ribosome recycling. Earlier work implicated several eukaryotic initiation factors (eIFs) in ribosomal recycling in vitro. Here, we uncover roles for HCR1 and eIF3 in translation termination in vivo. A substantial proportion of eIF3, HCR1 and eukaryotic release factor 3 (eRF3) but not eIF5 (a well-defined “initiation-specific” binding partner of eIF3) specifically co-sediments with 80S couples isolated from RNase-treated heavy polysomes in an eRF1-dependent manner, indicating the presence of eIF3 and HCR1 on terminating ribosomes. eIF3 and HCR1 also occur in ribosome- and RNA-free complexes with both eRFs and the recycling factor ABCE1/RLI1. Several eIF3 mutations reduce rates of stop codon read-through and genetically interact with mutant eRFs. In contrast, a slow growing deletion of hcr1 increases read-through and accumulates eRF3 in heavy polysomes in a manner suppressible by overexpressed ABCE1/RLI1. Based on these and other findings we propose that upon stop codon recognition, HCR1 promotes eRF3·GDP ejection from the post-termination complexes to allow binding of its interacting partner ABCE1/RLI1. Furthermore, the fact that high dosage of ABCE1/RLI1 fully suppresses the slow growth phenotype of hcr1Δ as well as its termination but not initiation defects implies that the termination function of HCR1 is more critical for optimal proliferation than its function in translation initiation. Based on these and other observations we suggest that the assignment of HCR1 as a bona fide eIF3 subunit should be reconsidered. Together our work characterizes novel roles of eIF3 and HCR1 in stop codon recognition, defining a communication bridge between the initiation and termination/recycling phases of translation.     

Exp5 exports eEF1A via tRNA from nuclei and synergizes with other transport pathways to confine translation to the cytoplasm

Importin beta-type transport receptors mediate the vast majority of transport pathways between cell nucleus and cytoplasm. We identify here the translation elongation factor 1A (eEF1A) as the predominant nuclear export substrate of RanBP21/exportin 5 (Exp5). This cargo-exportin interaction is rather un usual in that eEF1A binds the exportin not directly, but instead via aminoacylated tRNAs. Exp5 thus represents the second directly RNA-binding exportin and mediates tRNA export in parallel with exportin-t. It was suggested recently that 10-15% of the cellular translation would occur in the nucleus. Our data rule out such a scenario and instead suggest that nuclear translation is actively suppressed by the nuclear export machinery. We found that the vast majority of translation initiation factors (eIF2, eIF2B, eIF3, eIF4A1, eIF5 and eIF5B), all three elongation factors (eEF1A, eEF1B and eEF2) and the termination factor eRF1 are strictly excluded from nuclei. Besides Exp5 and importin 13, CRM1 and as yet unidentified exportins also contribute to the depletion of translation factors from nuclei.     

A novel role of the mammalian GSPT/eRF3 associating with poly(A)-binding protein in Cap/Poly(A)-dependent translation

The mammalian GSPT, which consists of amino-terminal (N) and carboxyl-terminal (C) domains, functions as the eukaryotic releasing factor 3 (eRF3) by interacting with eRF1 in translation termination. This function requires only the C-domain that is homologous to the elongation factor (EF) 1alpha, while the N-domain interacts with polyadenylate-binding protein (PABP), which binds the poly(A) tail of mRNA and associates with the eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF) 4G. Here we describe a novel role of GSPT in translation. We first determined an amino acid sequence required for the PABP interaction in the N-domain. Inhibition of this interaction significantly attenuated translation of capped/poly(A)-tailed mRNA not only in an in vitro translation system but also in living cells. There was a PABP-dependent linkage between the termination factor complex eRF1-GSPT and the initiation factor eIF4G associating with 5' cap through eIF4E. Although the inhibition of the GSPT-PABP interaction did not affect the de novo formation of an 80 S ribosomal initiation complex, it appears to suppress the subsequent recycle of ribosome. These results indicate that GSPT/eRF3 plays an important role in translation cycle through the interaction with PABP, in addition to mediating the termination with eRF1.     

eIF3j facilitates loading of release factors into the ribosome

eIF3j is one of the eukaryotic translation factors originally reported as the labile subunit of the eukaryotic translation initiation factor eIF3. The yeast homolog of this protein, Hcr1, has been implicated in stringent AUG recognition as well as in controlling translation termination and stop codon readthrough. Using a reconstituted mammalian in vitro translation system, we showed that the human protein eIF3j is also important for translation termination. We showed that eIF3j stimulates peptidyl-tRNA hydrolysis induced by a complex of eukaryotic release factors, eRF1-eRF3. Moreover, in combination with the initiation factor eIF3, which also stimulates peptide release, eIF3j activity in translation termination increases. We found that eIF3j interacts with the pre-termination ribosomal complex, and eRF3 destabilises this interaction. In the solution, these proteins bind to each other and to other participants of translation termination, eRF1 and PABP, in the presence of GTP. Using a toe-printing assay, we determined the stage at which eIF3j functions – binding of release factors to the A-site of the ribosome before GTP hydrolysis. Based on these data, we assumed that human eIF3j is involved in the regulation of translation termination by loading release factors into the ribosome.     

An in vivo control map for the eukaryotic mRNA translation machinery

Rate control analysis defines the in vivo control map governing yeast protein synthesis and generates an extensively parameterized digital model of the translation pathway. Among other non‐intuitive outcomes, translation demonstrates a high degree of functional modularity and comprises a non‐stoichiometric combination of proteins manifesting functional convergence on a shared maximal translation rate. In exponentially growing cells, polypeptide elongation (eEF1A, eEF2, and eEF3) exerts the strongest control. The two other strong control points are recruitment of mRNA and tRNA_i to the 40S ribosomal subunit (eIF4F and eIF2) and termination (eRF1; Dbp5). In contrast, factors that are found to promote mRNA scanning efficiency on a longer than‐average 5′untranslated region (eIF1, eIF1A, Ded1, eIF2B, eIF3, and eIF5) exceed the levels required for maximal control. This is expected to allow the cell to minimize scanning transition times, particularly for longer 5′UTRs. The analysis reveals these and other collective adaptations of control shared across the factors, as well as features that reflect functional modularity and system robustness. Remarkably, gene duplication is implicated in the fine control of cellular protein synthesis.     

In vitro reconstitution of eukaryotic translation reveals cooperativity between release factors eRF1 and eRF3

Eukaryotic translation termination is triggered by peptide release factors eRF1 and eRF3. Whereas eRF1 recognizes all three termination codons and induces hydrolysis of peptidyl tRNA, eRF3's function remains obscure. Here, we reconstituted all steps of eukaryotic translation in vitro using purified ribosomal subunits; initiation, elongation, and termination factors; and aminoacyl tRNAs. This allowed us to investigate termination using pretermination complexes assembled on mRNA encoding a tetrapeptide and to propose a model for translation termination that accounts for the cooperative action of eRF1 and eRF3 in ensuring fast release of nascent polypeptide. In this model, binding of eRF1, eRF3, and GTP to pretermination complexes first induces a structural rearrangement that is manifested as a 2 nucleotide forward shift of the toeprint attributed to pretermination complexes that leads to GTP hydrolysis followed by rapid hydrolysis of peptidyl tRNA. Cooperativity between eRF1 and eRF3 required the eRF3 binding C-terminal domain of eRF1.     

The iron–sulphur protein RNase L inhibitor functions in translation termination

The iron–sulphur (Fe–S)‐containing RNase L inhibitor (Rli1) is involved in ribosomal subunit maturation, transport of both ribosomal subunits to the cytoplasm, and translation initiation through interaction with the eukaryotic initiation factor 3 (eIF3) complex. Here, we present a new function for Rli1 in translation termination. Through co‐immunoprecipitation experiments, we show that Rli1 interacts physically with the translation termination factors eukaryotic release factor 1 (eRF1)/Sup45 and eRF3/Sup35 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetic interactions were uncovered between a strain depleted for Rli1 and sup35‐21 or sup45‐2. Furthermore, we show that downregulation of RLI1 expression leads to defects in the recognition of a stop codon, as seen in mutants of other termination factors. By contrast, RLI1 overexpression partly suppresses the read‐through defects in sup45‐2. Interestingly, we find that although the Fe–S cluster is not required for the interaction of Rli1 with eRF1 or its other interacting partner, Hcr1, from the initiation complex eIF3, it is required for its activity in translation termination; an Fe–S cluster mutant of RLI1 cannot suppress the read‐through defects of sup45‐2.     

The plant translational apparatus

Protein synthesis in both eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells is a complex process requiring a large number of macromolecules: initiation factors, elongation factors, termination factors, ribosomes, mRNA, amino-acylsynthetases and tRNAs. This review focuses on our current knowledge of protein synthesis in higher plants.Abbreviations eIF eukaryotic initiation factor - eEF eukaryotic elongation factor - EST expressed sequence tag - eRF eukaryotic release factor - GUS -glucoronidase - HCR heme-controlled repressor - PKR double-stranded - RNA activated protein kinase - SDS-PAGE sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis     

Solution structure of human initiation factor eIF2alpha reveals homology to the elongation factor eEF1B

The GTP-bound form of the trimeric eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2 (eIF2) transfers aminoacylated initiator methionyl tRNA onto the 40S ribosome. We have solved with solution NMR the structure of the alpha subunit of human eIF2 (heIF2alpha). The protein consists of two domains that are mobile relative to each other. The N-terminal domain has an S1-type oligonucleotide/oligosaccharide binding-fold subdomain and an alpha-helical subdomain. The C-terminal domain adopts an alphabeta-fold very similar to the C-terminal domain of elongation factor (eEF) 1Balpha, the guanine-nucleotide exchange factor for eEF1A. The structural and functional similarities found between eIF2alpha/eIF2gamma and eEF1Balpha/eEF1A suggest a model for the interaction of eIF2alpha with eIF2gamma, and eIF2 with Met-tRNAiMet. It further indicates a previously unrecognized evolutionary lineage of eIF2alpha/gamma from the functionally related elongation factor eEF1Balpha/eEF1A complex.     

Translation Elongation Factor 1A Mutants with Altered Actin Bundling Activity Show Reduced Aminoacyl-tRNA Binding and Alter Initiation via eIF2α Phosphorylation

Apart from its canonical function in translation elongation, eukaryotic translation elongation factor 1A (eEF1A) has been shown to interact with the actin cytoskeleton. Amino acid substitutions in eEF1A that reduce its ability to bind and bundle actin in vitro cause improper actin organization in vivo and reduce total translation. Initial in vivo analysis indicated the reduced translation was through initiation. The mutant strains exhibit increased levels of phosphorylated initiation factor 2α (eIF2α) dependent on the presence of the general control nonderepressible 2 (Gcn2p) protein kinase. Gcn2p causes down-regulation of total protein synthesis at initiation in response to increases in deacylated tRNA levels in the cell. Increased levels of eIF2α phosphorylation are not due to a general reduction in translation elongation as eEF2 and eEF3 mutants do not exhibit this effect. Deletion of GCN2 from the eEF1A actin bundling mutant strains revealed a second defect in translation. The eEF1A actin-bundling proteins exhibit changes in their elongation activity at the level of aminoacyl-tRNA binding in vitro. These findings implicate eEF1A in a feedback mechanism for regulating translation at initiation.     

All translation elongation factors and the e, f, and h subunits of translation initiation factor 3 are encoded by 5'-terminal oligopyrimidine (TOP) mRNAs

Terminal oligopyrimidine (TOP) mRNAs (encoded by the TOP genes) are identified by a sequence of 6–12 pyrimidines at the 5′ end and by a growth-associated translational regulation. All vertebrate genes for the 80 ribosomal proteins and some other genes involved, directly or indirectly, in translation, are TOP genes. Among the numerous translation factors, only eEF1A and eEF2 are known to be encoded by TOP genes, most of the others having not been analyzed. Here, we report a systematic analysis of the human genes for translation factors. Our results show that: (1) all five elongation factors are encoded by TOP genes; and (2) among the initiation and termination factors analyzed, only eIF3e, eIF3f, and eIF3h exhibit the characteristics of TOP genes. Interestingly, these three polypeptides have been recently shown to constitute a specific subgroup among eIF3 subunits. In fact, eIF3e, eIF3f, and eIF3h are the part of the functional core of eIF3 that is not conserved in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. It has been hypothesized that they are regulatory subunits, and the fact that they are encoded by TOP genes may be relevant for their function.     

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.     

Protein synthesis meets ABC ATPases: new roles for Rli1/ABCE1

The essential NTPase Rli1/ABCE1 has been implicated in translation initiation, ribosome biogenesis, and human immunodeficiency virus capsid assembly. Two recent papers by the Krebber and Pestova groups —the former published in this issue of EMBO reports— suggest new important roles of Rli1/ABCE1 in translation termination and ribosome recycling in eukaryotes.EMBO Rep (2010) 11: 3 214–219. doi:10.1038/embor.2009.272The essential, conserved NTPase Rli1/ABCE1—a member of the ABC (ATP-binding cassette) superfamily of ATPases—has been implicated in translation initiation, ribosome biogenesis and human immunodeficiency virus capsid assembly. Two recent papers by the Krebber and Pestova groups—the former published in this issue of EMBO reports—suggest new important roles of Rli1/ABCE1 in translation termination and ribosome recycling in eukaryotes (Khoshnevis et al, 2010; Pisarev et al, 2010).Two recent papers […] suggest new important roles of Rli1/ABCE1 in translation termination and ribosome recycling in eukaryotesProtein synthesis is divided into four phases—initiation, elongation, termination and ribosome recycling—which are catalysed by several translation factors. The fundamental reactions of protein synthesis, such as mRNA decoding, peptide bond formation and tRNA translocation, follow the same basic principles in prokaryotes and eukaryotes. However, some steps are quite different and require a larger set of factors in eukaryotes. The best-studied example of eukaryotic complexity is the initiation of protein synthesis. In prokaryotes, initiation is catalysed by only three factors—IF1, IF2 and IF3—whereas in mammals it requires at least 13. Two recent papers shed new light on termination and ribosome recycling in the yeast and mammalian systems, suggesting that these two steps are also different in eukaryotes and prokaryotes (Khoshnevis et al, 2010; Pisarev et al, 2010).…new [research] on termination and ribosome recycling in the yeast and mammalian systems [suggests] that these two steps are also different in eukaryotes and prokaryotesIn prokaryotes, translation termination is promoted by three release factors: RF1, RF2 and RF3. RF1 and RF2 recognize the three stop codons and catalyse the hydrolysis of the peptidyl-tRNA. RF3, a GTP-binding protein that is not essential in bacteria, does not participate in peptide release but, at the expense of GTP hydrolysis, promotes the dissociation of RF1 and RF2, thereby accelerating their turnover (Kisselev et al, 2003). To free the ribosome for initiation on another mRNA (a process known as recycling), the post-termination ribosome is disassembled in a step that requires ribosome recycling factor (RRF) and one of the elongation factors, the GTPase EF-G. Together, these factors promote the dissociation of the post-termination complex into subunits. The subsequent dissociation of tRNA and mRNA from the small ribosomal subunit is promoted by initiation factors, in particular IF3 (Peske et al, 2005).In eukaryotes, translation termination is mediated by only two factors: eRF1 recognizes all three termination codons and triggers the hydrolysis of peptidyl-tRNA, whereas eRF3 accelerates the process in a GTP-dependent manner (Fig 1; Alkalaeva et al, 2006). Unlike prokaryotic RF1 or RF2—which have no measurable affinity for RF3—eRF1 binds tightly to eRF3, and it is probably the complex of the two proteins that enters the ribosome. The mechanism of guanine nucleotide exchange on eRF3 is also different from that on prokaryotic RF3, suggesting that termination in eukaryotes and prokaryotes differs in almost every detail except, probably, the mechanism of peptidyl-tRNA hydrolysis itself. Nevertheless, the identification of an additional factor that facilitates termination was unexpected. In this issue of EMBO reports, Khoshnevis and colleagues use the power of yeast genetics to show that a protein named Rli1 (RNase L inhibitor 1) interacts physically with the termination factors eRF1 (known as Sup45 in yeast) and, to a lesser extent, eRF3 (Sup35; Khoshnevis et al, 2010). The downregulation of Rli1 expression increases stop codon read-through in a dual reporter system, indicating a lower efficiency of termination. Conversely, upregulation of Rli1 partly suppresses the increased read-through caused by certain mutations of eRF1. Although the mechanism by which Rli1 affects translation termination is not understood, the results of the Krebber lab provide strong evidence that Rli1 mediates the function of eRF1 and eRF3 in vivo (Fig 1).…the identification [in eukaryotes] of an additional factor that facilitates termination was unexpectedOpen in a separate windowFigure 1New roles of Rli1/ABCE1 in translation termination and ribosome recycling in eukaryotes. During termination, translating ribosomes contain peptidyl-tRNA (peptide is shown in dark blue and tRNA in dark red) in the P site and expose a stop codon in the A site. The stop codon is recognized by termination factor eRF1, which enters the ribosome together with eRF3-GTP. After GTP hydrolysis, catalysed by eRF3, the peptide is released from the peptidyl-tRNA with the help of eRF1. The point at which Rli1/ABCE1 binds to the ribosome is unknown, but the order shown is consistent with the effect of the factor on both termination and recycling. After NTP hydrolysis by Rli1/ABCE1, the 60S subunit and factors dissociate from the 40S subunit. Finally, tRNA and mRNA are released from the 40S subunit with the help of initiation factors (not shown). ABCE1, ATP-binding cassette, sub-family E member 1; eRF, eukaryotic release factor; Rli1, RNase L inhibitor 1.Surprisingly, modulating the efficiency of termination seems not to be the only function of Rli1 in translation. In a parallel study, Pestova and co-workers show that in higher eukaryotes, the homologue of Rli1—ABCE1—strongly enhances ribosome recycling (Pisarev et al, 2010). Eukaryotes lack a homologue of bacterial RRF and thus have to use other factors to disassemble the post-termination ribosome. Ribosome recycling can be brought about to some extent by eIF3, eIF1 and eIF1A (Pisarev et al, 2007), which is reminiscent of the IF3/IF1-mediated slow ribosome recycling that seems to occur in some conditions in bacterial systems. In eukaryotes, the initiation-factor-driven recycling operates only in a narrow range of low Mg²⁺ concentrations, probably because the affinity of the subunits to one another increases steeply with Mg²⁺ (Pisarev et al, 2010). By contrast, ABCE1 seems to catalyse efficient subunit dissociation in various conditions. To bind to the ribosome, ABCE1 requires the presence of eRF1, which is thought to induce a conformational change of the ribosome that unmasks the binding site for ABCE1. Subunit dissociation requires NTP (ATP, GTP, CTP or UTP) hydrolysis by ABCE1 (Fig 1). Subsequently, the dissociation of mRNA and tRNA from the small ribosomal subunit is promoted by initiation factors, which also inhibit the spontaneous reassociation of the subunits. Thus, the sequence of events during ribosome recycling in the eukaryotic system is remarkably similar to that in prokaryotes, and ABCE1 and eRF1 (possibly together with eRF3) seem to act as genuine ribosome recycling factors, similar to bacterial RRF/EF-G, despite the lack of any similarity in sequence or structure.Rli1/ABCE1 is a member of the ABC ATPases and comprises four structural domains (Karcher et al, 2008). Two nucleotide-binding domains (1 and 2) are connected by a hinge and arranged in a head-to-tail orientation. In contrast to other ABC enzymes, ABCE1 has an amino-terminal iron–sulphur (Fe–S) cluster domain, which is located in close proximity to, and presumably interacts with the nucleotide-binding loop of domain 1. Thus, there is a potential link between Fe–S domain function and NTP-induced conformational control of the ABC tandem cassette. Interestingly, although Khosnevis and colleagues map the eRF1 binding site on the second, carboxy-terminal ATPase domain, the Fe–S cluster is required for the function of Rli1/ABCE1 in termination and recycling (Khoshnevis et al, 2010). One might speculate that NTP hydrolysis is coupled to splitting the ribosome into subunits, in analogy to the prokaryotic recycling factors RRF/EF-G that couple the free energy of GTP hydrolysis and phosphate release into subunit dissociation (Savelsbergh et al, 2009). Kinetic experiments measuring single-round rates of subunit dissociation and NTP hydrolysis would be required to establish the existence and nature of such coupling.Another intriguing question is the role of the Fe–S cluster in Rli1/ABCE1. Fe–S protein biogenesis is the only known function of mitochondria that is indispensable for the viability of yeast cells (Lill, 2009). As yeast mitochondria do not contain essential Fe–S proteins, the essential character of the mitochondrial Fe–S protein assembly machinery could be attributed to its role in the maturation of extra-mitochondrial Fe–S proteins, such as Rli1/ABCE1, which is essential in all organisms tested.Another interesting finding by the Krebber group is that Rli1 can bind to Hcr1 (known as eIF3j in higher eukaryotes; Khoshnevis et al, 2010). Hcr1/eIF3j is an RNA-binding subunit of initiation factor eIF3, which is involved in initiation and required for Rli1/ABCE1-independent ribosome recycling. The fact that Rli1/ABCE1 binds to both eRF1 and Hcr1/eIF3j might indicate a functional or regulatory link between the termination, recycling and initiation machineries eukaryotes. It is unclear why eukaryotes require termination and recycling machinery that is so different from that of prokaryotes. One possibility is that Rli1/ABCE1, in contrast to its prokaryotic counterparts, not only acts in termination and recycling but also provides a platform for the recruitment of initiation factors to the ribosome, thereby acting as an additional checkpoint for translational control. Thus, the results of the Krebber and Pestova labs open a new, exciting avenue of research on eukaryotic protein synthesis.     

The eukaryotic polypeptide chain releasing factor (eRF3/GSPT) carrying the translation termination signal to the 3'-Poly(A) tail of mRNA. Direct association of erf3/GSPT with polyadenylate-binding protein.

The mammalian GTP-binding protein GSPT, whose carboxyl-terminal sequence is homologous to the eukaryotic elongation factor EF1alpha, binds to the polypeptide chain releasing factor eRF1 to function as eRF3 in the translation termination. The amino-terminal domain of GSPT was, however, not required for the binding. Search for other GSPT-binding proteins in yeast two-hybrid screening system resulted in the identification of a cDNA encoding polyadenylate-binding protein (PABP), whose amino terminus is associating with the poly(A) tail of mRNAs presumably for their stabilization. The interaction appeared to be mediated through the carboxyl-terminal domain of PABP and the amino-terminal region of GSPT. Interestingly, multimerization of PABP with poly(A), which is ascribed to the action of its carboxyl-terminal domain, was completely inhibited by the interaction with the amino-terminal domain of GSPT. These results indicate that GSPT/eRF3 may play important roles not only in the termination of protein synthesis but also in the regulation of mRNA stability. Thus, the present study is the first report showing that GSPT/eRF3 carries the translation termination signal to 3'-poly(A) tail ubiquitously present in eukaryotic mRNAs.     

Cellular energy status modulates translational control mechanisms in ischemic-reperfused rat hearts

Mechanisms regulating ischemia and reperfusion (I/R)-induced changes in mRNA translation in the heart are poorly defined, as are the factors that initiate these changes. Because cellular energy status affects mRNA translation under physiological conditions, it is plausible that I/R-induced changes in translation may in part be a result of altered cellular energy status. Therefore, the purpose of the studies described herein was to compare the effects of I/R with those of altered energy substrate availability on biomarkers of mRNA translation in the heart. Isolated adult rat hearts were perfused with glucose or a combination of glucose plus palmitate, and effects of I/R on various biomarkers of translation were subsequently analyzed. When compared with hearts perfused with glucose plus palmitate, hearts perfused with glucose alone exhibited increased phosphorylation of eukaryotic elongation factor (eEF)2, the alpha-subunit of eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF)2, and AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK), and these hearts also exhibited enhanced association of eIF4E with eIF4E binding protein (4E-BP)1. Regardless of the energy substrate composition of the buffer, phosphorylation of eEF2 and AMPK was greater than control values after ischemia. Phosphorylation of eIF2alpha and eIF4E and the association of eIF4E with 4E-BP1 were also greater than control values after ischemia but only in hearts perfused with glucose plus palmitate. Reperfusion reversed the ischemia-induced increase in eEF2 phosphorylation in hearts perfused with glucose and reversed ischemia-induced changes in eIF4E, eEF2, and AMPK phosphorylation in hearts perfused with glucose plus palmitate. Because many ischemia-induced changes in mRNA translation are mimicked by the removal of a metabolic substrate under normal perfusion conditions, the results suggest that cellular energy status represents an important modulator of I/R-induced changes in mRNA translation.     

Avian reovirus influences phosphorylation of several factors involved in host protein translation including eukaryotic translation elongation factor 2 (eEF2) in Vero cells

Viral infection usually influences cellular protein synthesis either actively or passively via modification of various translation initiation factors. Here we demonstrated that infection with avian reovirus (ARV) interfered with cellular protein synthesis. This study demonstrated for the first time that ARV influenced the phosphorylation of translation initiation factors including eIF4E and eIF-4G. Interestingly, ARV also induced phosphorylation of eukaryotic translation elongation factor (eEF2) in a time- and dose-dependent manner. Inhibition of mTOR by rapamycin notably increased the level of phosphorylated eEF2 in infected cells. However, rapamycin did not show any negative effects on ARV replication, suggesting that phosphorylation of eEF2 in infected cells did not reduce ARV propagation. These results demonstrated for the first time that ARV promotes phosphorylation of eEF2 which in turn influenced host protein production not simply by modulating the function of translation initiation factors but also by regulating elongation factor eEF2.     

Novel function of the eukaryotic polypeptide-chain releasing factor 3 (eRF3/GSPT) in the mRNA degradation pathway

The mammalian GTP-binding protein GSPT, whose carboxy-terminal sequence is homologous to the eukaryotic elongation factor EF1alpha, binds to the polypeptide chain releasing factor eRF1 to function as eRF3 in translation termination. However, the amino-terminal domain of GSPT, which contains a prion-like sequence, is not required for the binding. Instead, the amino-terminal domain is capable of binding to the carboxy-terminal domain of polyadenylate-binding protein (PABP), whose amino terminus is associating with the poly(A) tail of mRNAs, presumably for their stabilization. Interestingly, multimerization of PABP with poly(A), which is ascribed to the action of its carboxy-terminal domain, was completely inhibited by the interaction with the amino-terminal domain of GSPT. This may facilitate shortening of the poly(A) tail of mRNAs by an RNase. Thus, GSPT/eRF3 appears to function not only as a stimulator of eRF1 in the translation termination but also as an initiator of the mRNA degradation machinery. Further physiological and cell biological approaches will be necessary to show whether our current in vitro findings on GSPT/eRF3 indeed reflect its bifunctional properties in living cells.