Translational control by the poly(A) binding protein: a check for mRNA integrity

The eukaryotic mRNA 3' poly(A) tail and the 5' cap cooperate to synergistically enhance translation. This interaction is mediated by a ribonucleoprotein network that contains, at a minimum, the poly(A) binding protein (PABP), the capbinding protein eIF4E and a scaffolding protein, eIF4G. eIF4G, in turn, contains binding sites for eIF4A and eIF3, a 40S ribosome-associated initiation factor. The combined cooperative interactions within this "closed loop" mRNP among other effects enhance the affinity of eIF4E for the 5' cap by lowering its dissociation rate and, ultimately, facilitate the formation of 48S and 80S ribosome initiation complexes. The PABP-poly(A) interaction also stimulates initiation driven by picomavirus' internal ribosomal entry sites (IRESs), a process that requires eIF4G but not eIF4E. PABP, therefore, should be considered a canonical initiation factor, integral to initiation complex formation. Poly(A)-mediated translation is subjected to regulation by the PABP-interacting proteins Paip1 and Paip2. Paip1 acts as a translational enhancer. In contrast, Paip2 strongly inhibits translation by promoting dissociation of PABP from poly(A) and by competing with eIF4G for binding to PABP.     

Bruno acts as a dual repressor of oskar translation, promoting mRNA oligomerization and formation of silencing particles

Prior to reaching the posterior pole of the Drosophila oocyte, oskar mRNA is translationally silenced by Bruno binding to BREs in the 3' untranslated region. The eIF4E binding protein Cup interacts with Bruno and inhibits oskar translation. Validating current models, we directly demonstrate the mechanism proposed for Cup-mediated repression: inhibition of small ribosomal subunit recruitment to oskar mRNA. However, 43S complex recruitment remains inhibited in the absence of functional Cup, uncovering a second Bruno-dependent silencing mechanism. This mechanism involves mRNA oligomerization and formation of large (50S-80S) silencing particles that cannot be accessed by ribosomes. Bruno-dependent mRNA oligomerization into silencing particles emerges as a mode of translational control that may be particularly suited to coupling with mRNA transport.     

Translational control by the poly(A) binding protein: A check for mRNA integrity

The eukaryotic mRNA 3′ poly(A) tail and the 5′ cap cooperate to synergistically enhance translation. This interaction is mediated by a ribonucleoprotein network that contains, at a minimum, the poly(A) binding protein (PABP), the cap-binding protein eIF4E, and a scaffolding protein, eIF4G. eIF4G, in turn, contains binding sites for eIF4A and eIF3, a 40S ribosome-associated initiation factor. The combined cooperative interactions within this “closed loop” mRNA among other effects enhance the affinity of eIF4E for the 5′ cap, by lowering its dissociation rate and, ultimately, facilitate the formation of 48S and 80S ribosome initiation complexes. The PABP-poly(A) interaction also stimulates initiation driven by picornavirus’ internal ribosomal entry sites (IRESs), a process that requires eIF4G but not eIF4E. PABP, therefore, should be considered a canonical initiation factor, integral to the formation of the initiation complex. Poly(A)-mediated translation is subjected to regulation by the PABP-interacting proteins Paip1 and Paip2. Paip1 acts as a translational enhancer. In contrast, Paip2 strongly inhibits translation by promoting dissociation of PABP from poly(A) and by competing with eIF4G for binding to PABP. Published in Russian in Molekulyarnaya Biologiya, 2006, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 684–693. The article is published in the original.     

IRES-induced conformational changes in the ribosome and the mechanism of translation initiation by internal ribosomal entry

Translation of the genomes of several positive-sense RNA viruses follows end-independent initiation on an internal ribosomal entry site (IRES) in the viral mRNA. There are four major IRES groups, and despite major differences in the mechanisms that they use, one unifying characteristic is that each mechanism involves essential non-canonical interactions of the IRES with components of the canonical translational apparatus. Thus the ～ 200nt.-long Type 4 IRESs (epitomized by Cricket paralysis virus) bind directly to the intersubunit space on the ribosomal 40S subunit, followed by joining to a 60S subunit to form active ribosomes by a factor-independent mechanism. The ～ 300nt.-long type 3 IRESs (epitomized by Hepatitis C virus) binds independently to eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF) 3, and to the solvent-accessible surface and E-site of the 40S subunit: addition of eIF2-GTP/initiator tRNA is sufficient to form a 48S complex that can join a 60S subunit in an eIF5/eIF5B-mediated reaction to form an active ribosome. Recent cryo-electron microscopy and biochemical analyses have revealed a second general characteristic of the mechanisms of initiation on Type 3 and Type 4 IRESs. Both classes of IRES induce similar conformational changes in the ribosome that influence entry, positioning and fixation of mRNA in the ribosomal decoding channel. HCV-like IRESs also stabilize binding of initiator tRNA in the peptidyl (P) site of the 40S subunit, whereas Type 4 IRESs induce changes in the ribosome that likely promote subsequent steps in the translation process, including subunit joining and elongation.     

Common conformational changes induced in type 2 picornavirus IRESs by cognate trans-acting factors

Type 2 internal ribosomal entry sites (IRESs) of encephalomyocarditis virus (EMCV), foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) and other picornaviruses comprise five major domains H-L. Initiation of translation on these IRESs begins with specific binding of the central domain of initiation factor, eIF4G to the J-K domains, which is stimulated by eIF4A. eIF4G/eIF4A then restructure the region of ribosomal attachment on the IRES and promote recruitment of ribosomal 43S pre-initiation complexes. In addition to canonical translation factors, type 2 IRESs also require IRES trans-acting factors (ITAFs) that are hypothesized to stabilize the optimal IRES conformation that supports efficient ribosomal recruitment: the EMCV IRES is stimulated by pyrimidine tract binding protein (PTB), whereas the FMDV IRES requires PTB and ITAF(45). To test this hypothesis, we assessed the effect of ITAFs on the conformations of EMCV and FMDV IRESs by comparing their influence on hydroxyl radical cleavage of these IRESs from the central domain of eIF4G. The observed changes in cleavage patterns suggest that cognate ITAFs promote similar conformational changes that are consistent with adoption by the IRESs of comparable, more compact structures, in which domain J undergoes local conformational changes and is brought into closer proximity to the base of domain I.     

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.     

Use of the novel technique of analytical ultracentrifugation with fluorescence detection system identifies a 77S monosomal translation complex

A fundamental problem in proteomics is the identification of protein complexes and their components. We have used analytical ultracentrifugation with a fluorescence detection system (AU-FDS) to precisely and rapidly identify translation complexes in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Following a one-step affinity purification of either poly(A)-binding protein (PAB1) or the large ribosomal subunit protein RPL25A in conjunction with GFP-tagged yeast proteins/RNAs, we have detected a 77S translation complex that contains the 80S ribosome, mRNA, and components of the closed-loop structure, eIF4E, eIF4G, and PAB1. This 77S structure, not readily observed previously, is consistent with the monosomal translation complex. The 77S complex abundance decreased with translational defects and following the stress of glucose deprivation that causes translational stoppage. By quantitating the abundance of the 77S complex in response to different stress conditions that block translation initiation, we observed that the stress of glucose deprivation affected translation initiation primarily by operating through a pathway involving the mRNA cap binding protein eIF4E whereas amino acid deprivation, as previously known, acted through the 43S complex. High salt conditions (1M KCl) and robust heat shock acted at other steps. The presumed sites of translational blockage caused by these stresses coincided with the types of stress granules, if any, which are subsequently formed.     

Initiation on the divergent Type I cadicivirus IRES: factor requirements and interactions with the translation apparatus

Cadicivirus (CDV) is unique amongst picornaviruses in having a dicistronic genome with internal ribosomal entry sites (IRESs) preceding both open reading frames. Here, we investigated initiation on the 5′-terminal IRES. We report that the 982-nt long 5′UTR comprises 12 domains (d1-d12), five of which (d8-d12, nts 341–950) constitute a divergent Type I IRES. It comprises central elements (the apex of d10, d11 and the following polypyrimidine tract) that are homologous to corresponding elements in canonical Type 1 IRESs, and non-canonical flanking domains (d8, d9 and d12). In vitro reconstitution revealed that as with canonical Type I IRESs, 48S complex formation requires eukaryotic initiation factors (eIFs) 1, 1A, 2, 3, 4A, 4B and 4G, and the poly(C) binding protein 2 (PCBP2), and starts with specific binding of eIF4G/eIF4A to d11. However, in contrast to canonical Type I IRESs, subsequent recruitment of 43S ribosomal complexes does not require direct interaction of their eIF3 constituent with the IRES-bound eIF4G. On the other hand, the CDV IRES forms a 40S/eIF3/IRES ternary complex, with multiple points of contact. These additional interactions with translational components could potentially stimulate recruitment of the 43S complex and alleviate the necessity for direct eIF4G/eIF3 interaction.     

Insights into the Mechanism of Ribosomal Incorporation of Mammalian L13a Protein during Ribosome Biogenesis

In contrast to prokaryotes, the precise mechanism of incorporation of ribosomal proteins into ribosomes in eukaryotes is not well understood. For the majority of eukaryotic ribosomal proteins, residues critical for rRNA binding, a key step in the hierarchical assembly of ribosomes, have not been well defined. In this study, we used the mammalian ribosomal protein L13a as a model to investigate the mechanism(s) underlying eukaryotic ribosomal protein incorporation into ribosomes. This work identified the arginine residue at position 68 of L13a as being essential for L13a binding to rRNA and incorporation into ribosomes. We also demonstrated that incorporation of L13a takes place during maturation of the 90S preribosome in the nucleolus, but that translocation of L13a into the nucleolus is not sufficient for its incorporation into ribosomes. Incorporation of L13a into the 90S preribosome was required for rRNA methylation within the 90S complex. However, mutations abolishing ribosomal incorporation of L13a did not affect its ability to be phosphorylated or its extraribosomal function in GAIT element-mediated translational silencing. These results provide new insights into the mechanism of ribosomal incorporation of L13a and will be useful in guiding future studies aimed at fully deciphering mammalian ribosome biogenesis.     

Enhancement of IRES-mediated translation of the c-myc and BiP mRNAs by the poly(A) tail is independent of intact eIF4G and PABP

The poly(A) tail at the 3' end of mRNAs enhances 5' cap-dependent translation initiation. We show that it also enhances IRES-directed translation of two cellular mRNAs in vitro and in vivo. The underlying mechanisms, however, differ fundamentally. In contrast to cap-dependent translation, IRES-driven translation continues to be enhanced by the poly(A) tail following proteolytic cleavage of eIF4G. Moreover, the poly(A) tail stimulates IRES-mediated translation even in the presence of PAIP2 or following effective depletion of the poly(A) binding protein (PABP) from HeLa cell extracts. The PABP-eIF4G bridging complex that is critical for cap-dependent translation is thus dispensable for the enhancement of the IRESs by the poly(A) tail. The polyadenylated mRNA translation from cellular IRESs is also profoundly sensitive to eIF4A activity in vitro. These mechanistic and molecular distinctions implicate the potential for a new layer of translational control mechanisms.     

Tristetraprolin Recruits Eukaryotic Initiation Factor 4E2 To Repress Translation of AU-Rich Element-Containing mRNAs

Tristetraprolin (TTP) regulates the expression of AU-rich element-containing mRNAs through promoting the degradation and repressing the translation of target mRNA. While the mechanism for promoting target mRNA degradation has been extensively studied, the mechanism underlying translational repression is not well established. Here, we show that TTP recruits eukaryotic initiation factor 4E2 (eIF4E2) to repress target mRNA translation. TTP interacted with eIF4E2 but not with eIF4E. Overexpression of eIF4E2 enhanced TTP-mediated translational repression, and downregulation of endogenous eIF4E2 or overexpression of a truncation mutant of eIF4E2 impaired TTP-mediated translational repression. Overexpression of an eIF4E2 mutant that lost the cap-binding activity also impaired TTP''s activity, suggesting that the cap-binding activity of eIF4E2 is important in TTP-mediated translational repression. We further show that TTP promoted eIF4E2 binding to target mRNA. These results imply that TTP recruits eIF4E2 to compete with eIF4E to repress the translation of target mRNA. This notion is supported by the finding that downregulation of endogenous eIF4E2 increased the production of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) protein without affecting the mRNA levels in THP-1 cells. Collectively, these results uncover a novel mechanism by which TTP represses target mRNA translation.     

Role of p70S6K1-mediated Phosphorylation of eIF4B and PDCD4 Proteins in the Regulation of Protein Synthesis

Modulation of mRNA binding to the 40 S ribosomal subunit during translation initiation controls not only global rates of protein synthesis but also regulates the pattern of protein expression by allowing for selective inclusion, or exclusion, of mRNAs encoding particular proteins from polysomes. The mRNA binding step is modulated by signaling through a protein kinase known as the mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1). mTORC1 directly phosphorylates the translational repressors eIF4E binding proteins (4E-BP) 1 and 2, releasing them from the mRNA cap binding protein eIF4E, thereby promoting assembly of the eIF4E·eIF4G complex. mTORC1 also phosphorylates the 70-kDa ribosomal protein S6 kinase 1 (p70S6K1), which subsequently phosphorylates eIF4B, and programmed cell death 4 (PDCD4), which sequesters eIF4A from the eIF4E·eIF4G complex, resulting in repressed translation of mRNAs with highly structured 5′-untranslated regions. In the present study, we compared the role of the 4E-BPs in the regulation of global rates of protein synthesis to that of eIF4B and PDCD4. We found that maintenance of eIF4E interaction with eIF4G was not by itself sufficient to sustain global rates of protein synthesis in the absence of mTORC1 signaling to p70S6K1; phosphorylation of both eIF4B and PDCD4 was additionally required. We also found that the interaction of eIF4E with eIF4G was maintained in the liver of fasted rats as well as in serum-deprived mouse embryo fibroblasts lacking both 4E-BP1 and 4E-BP2, suggesting that the interaction of eIF4G with eIF4E is controlled primarily through the 4E-BPs.     

Specific domains in yeast translation initiation factor eIF4G strongly bias RNA unwinding activity of the eIF4F complex toward duplexes with 5'-overhangs

During eukaryotic translation initiation, the 43 S ribosomal pre-initiation complex is recruited to the 5'-end of an mRNA through its interaction with the 7-methylguanosine cap, and it subsequently scans along the mRNA to locate the start codon. Both mRNA recruitment and scanning require the removal of secondary structure within the mRNA. Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4A is an essential component of the translational machinery thought to participate in the clearing of secondary structural elements in the 5'-untranslated regions of mRNAs. eIF4A is part of the 5'-7-methylguanosine cap-binding complex, eIF4F, along with eIF4E, the cap-binding protein, and the scaffolding protein eIF4G. Here, we show that Saccharomyces cerevisiae eIF4F has a strong preference for unwinding an RNA duplex with a single-stranded 5'-overhang versus the same duplex with a 3'-overhang or without an overhang. In contrast, eIF4A on its own has little RNA substrate specificity. Using a series of deletion constructs of eIF4G, we demonstrate that its three previously elucidated RNA binding domains work together to provide eIF4F with its 5'-end specificity, both by promoting unwinding of substrates with 5'-overhangs and inhibiting unwinding of substrates with 3'-overhangs. Our data suggest that the RNA binding domains of eIF4G provide the S. cerevisiae eIF4F complex with a second mechanism, in addition to the eIF4E-cap interaction, for directing the binding of pre-initiation complexes to the 5'-ends of mRNAs and for biasing scanning in the 5' to 3' direction.     

miRNA repression of translation in?vitro takes place during 43S ribosomal scanning

microRNAs (miRNAs) regulate gene expression at multiple levels by repressing translation, stimulating deadenylation and inducing the premature decay of target messenger RNAs (mRNAs). Although the mechanism by which miRNAs repress translation has been widely studied, the precise step targeted and the molecular insights of such repression are still evasive. Here, we have used our newly designed in vitro system, which allows to study miRNA effect on translation independently of deadenylation. By using specific inhibitors of various stages of protein synthesis, we first show that miRNAs target exclusively the early steps of translation with no effect on 60S ribosomal subunit joining, elongation or termination. Then, by using viral proteases and IRES-driven mRNA constructs, we found that translational inhibition takes place during 43S ribosomal scanning and requires both the poly(A) binding protein and eIF4G independently from their physical interaction.