Cryo-EM structure of the archaeal 50S ribosomal subunit in complex with initiation factor 6 and implications for ribosome evolution

Translation of mRNA into proteins by the ribosome is universally conserved in all cellular life. The composition and complexity of the translation machinery differ markedly between the three domains of life. Organisms from the domain Archaea show an intermediate level of complexity, sharing several additional components of the translation machinery with eukaryotes that are absent in bacteria. One of these translation factors is initiation factor 6 (IF6), which associates with the large ribosomal subunit. We have reconstructed the 50S ribosomal subunit from the archaeon Methanothermobacter thermautotrophicus in complex with archaeal IF6 at 6.6?? resolution using cryo-electron microscopy (EM). The structure provides detailed architectural insights into the 50S ribosomal subunit from a methanogenic archaeon through identification of the rRNA expansion segments and ribosomal proteins that are shared between this archaeal ribosome and eukaryotic ribosomes but are mostly absent in bacteria and in some archaeal lineages. Furthermore, the structure reveals that, in spite of highly divergent evolutionary trajectories of the ribosomal particle and the acquisition of novel functions of IF6 in eukaryotes, the molecular binding of IF6 on the ribosome is conserved between eukaryotes and archaea. The structure also provides a snapshot of the reductive evolution of the archaeal ribosome and offers new insights into the evolution of the translation system in archaea.     

Archaeal translation initiation factor aIF2 can substitute for eukaryotic eIF2 in ribosomal scanning during mammalian 48S complex formation

Heterotrimeric translation initiation factor (IF) a/eIF2 (archaeal/eukaryotic IF 2) is present in both Eukarya and Archaea. Despite strong structural similarity between a/eIF2 orthologs from the two domains of life, their functional relationship is obscure. Here, we show that aIF2 from Sulfolobus solfataricus can substitute for its mammalian counterpart in the reconstitution of eukaryotic 48S initiation complexes from purified components. aIF2 is able to correctly place the initiator Met-tRNA_i into the P-site of the 40S ribosomal subunit and accompany the entire set of eukaryotic translation IFs in the process of cap-dependent scanning and AUG codon selection. However, it seems to be unable to participate in the following step of ribosomal subunit joining. In accordance with this, aIF2 inhibits rather than stimulates protein synthesis in mammalian cell-free system. The ability of recombinant aIF2 protein to direct ribosomal scanning suggests that some archaeal mRNAs may utilize this mechanism during translation initiation.     

The archaeal origins of the eukaryotic translational system

Among the 78 eukaryotic ribosomal proteins, eleven are specific to Eukarya, 33 are common only to Archaea and Eukarya and 34 are homologous (at least in part) to those of both Bacteria and Archaea. Several other translational proteins are common only to Eukarya and Archaea (e.g., IF2a, SRP19, etc.), whereas others are shared by the three phyla (e.g., EFTu/EF1A and SRP54). Although this and other analyses strongly support an archaeal origin for a substantial fraction of the eukaryotic translational machinery, especially the ribosomal proteins, there have been numerous unique and ubiquitous additions to the eukaryotic translational system besides the 11 unique eukaryotic ribosomal proteins. These include peptide additions to most of the 67 archaeal homolog proteins, rRNA insertions, the 5.8S RNA and the Alu extension to the SRP RNA. Our comparative analysis of these and other eukaryotic features among the three different cellular phylodomains supports the idea that an archaeal translational system was most likely incorporated by means of endosymbiosis into a host cell that was neither bacterial nor archaeal in any modern sense. Phylogenetic analyses provide support for the timing of this acquisition coinciding with an ancient bottleneck in prokaryotic diversity.     

Structural insights on the translation initiation complex: ghosts of a universal initiation complex

All living organisms utilize ribosomes to translate messenger RNA into proteins. Initiation of translation, the process of bringing together mRNA, initiator transfer RNA, and the ribosome, is therefore of critical importance to all living things. Two protein factors, IF1 (a/eIF1A) and IF2 (a/eIF5B), are conserved among all three kingdoms of life and have been called universal initiation factors (Roll-Mecak et al., 2001). Recent X-ray, NMR and cryo-EM structures of the universal factors, alone and in complex with eubacterial ribosomes, point to the structural homology among the initiation factors and initiation complexes. Taken together with genomic and functional evidence, the structural studies allow us to predict some features of eukaryotic and archaeal initiation complexes. Although initiation of translation in eukaryotes and archaea requires more initiation factors than in eubacteria we propose the existence of a common denominator initiation complex with structural and functional homology across all kingdoms of life.     

Function and ribosomal localization of aIF6, a translational regulator shared by archaea and eukarya

The translation factor IF6 is shared by the Archaea and the Eukarya, but is not found in Bacteria. The properties of eukaryal IF6 (eIF6) have been extensively studied, but remain somewhat elusive. eIF6 behaves as a ribosome-anti-association factor and is involved in miRNA-mediated gene silencing; however, it also seems to participate in ribosome synthesis and export. Here we have determined the function and ribosomal localization of the archaeal (Sulfolobus solfataricus) IF6 homologue (aIF6). We find that aIF6 binds specifically to the 50S ribosomal subunits, hindering the formation of 70S ribosomes and strongly inhibiting translation. aIF6 is uniformly expressed along the cell cycle, but it is upregulated following both cold- and heat shock. The aIF6 ribosomal binding site lies in the middle of the 30-S interacting surface of the 50S subunit, including a number of critical RNA and protein determinants involved in subunit association. The data suggest that the IF6 protein evolved in the archaeal–eukaryal lineage to modulate translational efficiency under unfavourable environmental conditions, perhaps acquiring additional functions during eukaryotic evolution.     

GTPases and the origin of the ribosome

Background  

This paper is an attempt to trace the evolution of the ribosome through the evolution of the universal P-loop GTPases that are involved with the ribosome in translation and with the attachment of the ribosome to the membrane. The GTPases involved in translation in Bacteria/Archaea are the elongation factors EFTu/EF1, the initiation factors IF2/aeIF5b + aeIF2, and the elongation factors EFG/EF2. All of these GTPases also contain the OB fold also found in the non GTPase IF1 involved in initiation. The GTPase involved in the signal recognition particle in most Bacteria and Archaea is SRP54.     

Structural and functional domains of E coli initiation factor IF2.

Initiation of translation in prokaryotes requires the participation of at least three soluble proteins: the initiation factors IF1, IF2 and IF3. Initiation factor 2, which is one of the largest proteins involved in translation (97.3 kDa) has been shown to stimulate in vitro the binding of fMet-tRNA(fMet) to the 30S ribosomal subunit. After formation of 70S translation initiation complex, IF2 is believed to participate in GTP hydrolysis, thereby promoting its own release. Here we review evidence which indicates the functional importance of the different structural domains of IF2, emphasizing new information obtained by in vivo experiments.     

Functional analysis of the translation factor aIF2/5B in the thermophilic archaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus

The protein IF2/eIF5B is one of the few translation initiation factors shared by all three primary domains of life (bacteria, archaea, eukarya). Despite its phylogenetic conservation, the factor is known to present marked functional divergences in the bacteria and the eukarya. In this work, the function in translation of the archaeal homologue (aIF2/5B) has been analysed in detail for the first time using a variety of in vitro assays. The results revealed that the protein is a ribosome-dependent GTPase which strongly stimulates the binding of initiator tRNA to the ribosomes even in the absence of other factors. In agreement with this finding, aIF2/5B enhances the translation of both leadered and leaderless mRNAs when expressed in a cell-free protein-synthesizing system. Moreover, the degree of functional conservation of the IF2-like factors in the archaeal and bacterial lineages was investigated by analysing the behaviour of 'chimeric' proteins produced by swapping domains between the Sulfolobus solfataricus aIF2/5B factor and the IF2 protein of the thermophilic bacterium Bacillus stearothermophilus. Beside evidencing similarities and differences between the archaeal and bacterial factors, these experiments have provided insight into the common role played by the IF2/5B proteins in all extant cells.     

Production and epitope characterization of mAbs specific for translation factor IF1

Initiation of protein synthesis in bacteria relies on the presence of three translation initiation factors, of which translation initiation factor IF1 is the smallest having a molecular weight of only 8.2 kDa. In addition to its function in this highly dynamic process, the essential IF1 protein also functions as an RNA chaperone. Despite extensive research, the exact function of IF1 in translation initiation has not yet been determined, and the research in the function of the factor has in some areas been impeded by the lack of monoclonal antibodies specific for this protein. Several attempts to induce immune response in mice with wild-type IF1 for the production of antibodies have failed. We have now succeeded in producing monoclonal antibodies specific for IF1 by applying a new immunization strategy involving an antigen combination of IF1 coupled to glutathione S-transferase (GST) and a recombinant dimer of IF1. This resulted in the generation of 6 IgG, 2 IgM, and 1 IgA anti-IF1 antibodies, which can be used in ELISA screening and Western immunoblots. We also provide a mapping of the functional epitopes of the generated anti-IF1 monoclonal antibodies by screening the antibodies for binding to IF1 proteins mutated at single amino acid positions.     

Translation initiation complex formation in the crenarchaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus

The function of initiation factors in and the sequence of events during translation initiation have been intensively studied in Bacteria and Eukaryotes, whereas in Archaea knowledge on these functions/processes is limited. By employing chemical probing, we show that translation initiation factor aIF1 of the model crenarchaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus binds to the same area on the ribosome as the bacterial and eukaryal orthologs. Fluorescence energy transfer assays (FRET) showed that aIF1, like its eukaryotic and bacterial orthologs, has a fidelity function in translation initiation complex formation, and that both aIF1 and aIF1A exert a synergistic effect in stimulating ribosomal association of the Met-tRNAi^Met binding factor a/eIF2. However, as in Eukaryotes their effect on a/eIF2 binding appears to be indirect. Moreover, FRET was used to analyze for the first time the sequence of events toward translation initiation complex formation in an archaeal model system. These studies suggested that a/eIF2-GTP binds first to the ribosome and then recruits Met-tRNAi^Met, which appears to comply with the operational mode of bacterial IF2, and deviates from the shuttle function of the eukaryotic counterpart eIF2. Thus, despite the resemblance of eIF2 and a/eIF2, recruitment of initiator tRNA to the ribosome is mechanistically different in Pro- and Eukaryotes.     

Identification of short 'eukaryotic' Okazaki fragments synthesized from a prokaryotic replication origin

Although archaeal genomes encode proteins similar to eukaryotic replication factors, the hyperthermophilic archaeon Pyrococcus abyssi replicates its circular chromosome at a high rate from a single origin (oriC) as in Bacteria. In further elucidating the mechanism of archaeal DNA replication, we have studied the elongation step of DNA replication in vivo. We have detected, in two main archaeal phyla, short RNA-primed replication intermediates whose structure and length are very similar to those of eukaryotic Okazaki fragments. Mapping of replication initiation points further showed that discontinuous DNA replication in P. abyssi starts at a well-defined site within the oriC recently identified in this hyperthermophile. Short Okazaki fragments and a high replication speed imply a very efficient turnover of Okazaki fragments in Archaea. Archaea therefore have a unique replication system showing mechanistic similarities to both Bacteria and Eukarya.     

Crystal structures of ribosome anti-association factor IF6

Ribosome anti-association factor eIF6 (originally named according to translation initiation terminology as eukaryotic initiation factor 6) binds to the large ribosomal subunit, thereby preventing inappropriate interactions with the small subunit during initiation of protein synthesis. We have determined the X-ray structures of two IF6 homologs, Methanococcus jannaschii archaeal aIF6 and Sacchromyces cerevisiae eIF6, revealing a phylogenetically conserved 25 kDa protein consisting of five quasi identical alpha/beta subdomains arrayed about a five-fold axis of pseudosymmetry. Yeast eIF6 prevents ribosomal subunit association. Comparative protein structure modeling with other known archaeal and eukaryotic homologs demonstrated the presence of two conserved surface regions, one or both of which may bind the large ribosomal subunit.     

The archaeal homolog of the Imp4 protein, a eukaryotic U3 snoRNP component

Homologs of the Imp4 protein, a component specific to the eukaryotic U3 snoRNP complex, have been found in all archaeal genomes. The archaeal and eukaryotic Imp4 proteins that are related to four other protein families, the Imp4-like, the SSF1 homologs and two sets of hypothetical proteins, are characterized by the Imp4 signature pattern. These findings, together with the presence of other snoRNPs homologs in Archaea, provide evidence for similar RNA processing and folding in Eukarya and Archaea.     

具有真细菌和真核生物融合特征的古生菌转录系统

古生菌是一类区别于真细菌和真核生物的第三域生命形式 ,转录是生物体遗传信息传递系统中的一个中心环节。近年来研究结果表明 ,古生菌的转录系统具有真细菌和真核生物的融合特征 :古生菌的基本转录装置包括RNA聚合酶、基本转录因子、启动子元件等与真核生物相似 ;而古生菌的转录调控机制却更加类似于真细菌 ,在古生菌中发现并鉴定了许多类似于真细菌的转录调控蛋白。另外古生菌还具有某些独特的转录调控方式     

Unusual pathways and enzymes of central carbohydrate metabolism in Archaea

Sugar-utilizing hyperthermophilic and halophilic Archaea degrade glucose and glucose polymers to acetate or to CO2 using O2, nitrate, sulfur or sulfate as electron acceptors. Comparative analyses of glycolytic pathways in these organisms indicate a variety of differences from the classical Emden-Meyerhof and Entner-Doudoroff pathways that are operative in Bacteria and Eukarya, respectively. The archaeal pathways are characterized by the presence of numerous novel enzymes and enzyme families that catalyze, for example, the phosphorylation of glucose and of fructose 6-phosphate, the isomerization of glucose 6-phosphate, the cleavage of fructose 1,6-bisphosphate, the oxidation of glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate and the conversion of acetyl-CoA to acetate. Recent major advances in deciphering the complexity of archaeal central carbohydrate metabolism were gained by combination of classical biochemical and genomic-based approaches.     

Translation initiation factor IF1 of Bacillus stearothermophilus and Thermus thermophilus substitute for Escherichia coli IF1 in vivo and in vitro without a direct IF1-IF2 interaction

Bacterial translation initiation factor IF1 is homologous to archaeal aIF1A and eukaryal eIF1A, which form a complex with their homologous IF2-like factors (aIF5B and eIF5B respectively) during initiation of protein synthesis. A similar IF1-IF2 interaction is assumed to occur in all bacteria and supported by cross-linking data and stabilization of the 30S-IF2 interaction by IF1. Here we compare Escherichia coli IF1 with thermophilic factors from Bacillus stearothermophilus and Thermus thermophilus. All three IF1s are structurally similar and functionally interchangeable in vivo and in vitro. However, the thermophilic factors do not stimulate ribosomal binding of IF2DeltaN, regardless of 30S subunits and IF2 origin. We conclude that an IF1-IF2 interaction is not universally conserved and is not essential for cell survival.     

An analysis of amino acid sequences surrounding archaeal glycoprotein sequons

Despite having provided the first example of a prokaryal glycoprotein, little is known of the rules governing the N-glycosylation process in Archaea. As in Eukarya and Bacteria, archaeal N-glycosylation takes place at the Asn residues of Asn-X-Ser/Thr sequons. Since not all sequons are utilized, it is clear that other factors, including the context in which a sequon exists, affect glycosylation efficiency. As yet, the contribution to N-glycosylation made by sequon-bordering residues and other related factors in Archaea remains unaddressed. In the following, the surroundings of Asn residues confirmed by experiment as modified were analyzed in an attempt to define sequence rules and requirements for archaeal N-glycosylation.     

Archaeal DNA replication and repair

Since the first archaeal genome was sequenced, much attention has been focused on the study of these unique microorganisms. We have learnt that although archaeal DNA metabolic processes (replication, recombination and repair) are more similar to the metabolic processes of Eukarya than those of Bacteria, Archaea are not simply 'mini Eukarya'. They are, in fact, a mosaic of the eukaryal and bacterial systems that also possess archaeal-specific features. Recent biochemical and structural studies of the proteins that participate in archaeal DNA replication and repair have increased our understanding of these processes.     

The archaellum: an old motility structure with a new name

Motility structures, called flagella, have been described in all three domains of life: Bacteria, Archaea and Eukarya. These structures are well studied in both Bacteria and Eukarya. However, already in eukaryotes there exists some confusion as to whether these structures should actually be called cilia. With increased studies conducted on organisms of the third domain of life, the Archaea, it has become clear that the archaeal flagellum only functionally appears similar to the bacterial flagellum, whereas it structurally resembles a bacterial type IV pilus. To resolve confusion due to unclear nomenclature, we propose renaming the archaeal flagellum as the 'archaellum'. This will make clear that the archaellum and the bacterial flagellum are two distinct structures that happen to both be used to enable microorganisms to swim.     

Genomics and early cellular evolution. The origin of the DNA world.

The sequencing of several genomes from each of the three domains of life (Archaea, Bacteria and Eukarya) has provided a huge amount of data that can be used to gain insight about early cellular evolution. Some features of the universal tree of life based on rRNA polygenies have been confirmed, such as the division of the cellular living world into three domains. The monophyly of each domain is supported by comparative genomics. However, the hyperthermophilic nature of the 'last universal common ancestor' (LUCA) is not confirmed. Comparative genomics has revealed that gene transfers have been (and still are) very frequent in genome evolution. Nevertheless, a core of informational genes appears more resistant to transfer, testifying for a close relationship between archaeal and eukaryal informational processes. This observation can be explained either by a common unique history between Archaea and Eukarya or by an atypical evolution of these systems in Bacteria. At the moment, comparative genomics still does not allow to choose between a simple LUCA, possibly with an RNA genome, or a complex LUCA, with a DNA genome and informational mechanisms similar to those of Archaea and Eukarya. Further comparative studies on informational mechanisms in the three domains should help to resolve this critical question. The role of viruses in the origin and evolution of DNA genomes also appears an area worth of active investigations. I suggest here that DNA and DNA replication mechanisms appeared first in the virus world before being transferred into cellular organisms.