GW182 proteins cause PABP dissociation from silenced miRNA targets in the absence of deadenylation

GW182 family proteins interact with Argonaute proteins and are required for the translational repression, deadenylation and decay of miRNA targets. To elicit these effects, GW182 proteins interact with poly(A)‐binding protein (PABP) and the CCR4–NOT deadenylase complex. Although the mechanism of miRNA target deadenylation is relatively well understood, how GW182 proteins repress translation is not known. Here, we demonstrate that GW182 proteins decrease the association of eIF4E, eIF4G and PABP with miRNA targets. eIF4E association is restored in cells in which miRNA targets are deadenylated, but decapping is inhibited. In these cells, eIF4G binding is not restored, indicating that eIF4G dissociates as a consequence of deadenylation. In contrast, PABP dissociates from silenced targets in the absence of deadenylation. PABP dissociation requires the interaction of GW182 proteins with the CCR4–NOT complex. Accordingly, NOT1 and POP2 cause dissociation of PABP from bound mRNAs in the absence of deadenylation. Our findings indicate that the recruitment of the CCR4–NOT complex by GW182 proteins releases PABP from the mRNA poly(A) tail, thereby disrupting mRNA circularization and facilitating translational repression and deadenylation.     

Importance of the C-terminal domain of the human GW182 protein TNRC6C for translational repression

Proteins of the GW182 family play an important role in the execution of microRNA repression in metazoa. They interact directly with Argonaute proteins, components of microRNPs, and also form part of P-bodies, structures implicated in translational repression and mRNA degradation. Recent results demonstrated that Drosophila GW182 has the potential to both repress translation and accelerate mRNA deadenylation and decay. In contrast to a single GW182 protein in Drosophila, the three GW182 paralogs TNRC6A, TNRC6B, and TNRC6C are encoded in mammalian genomes. In this study, we provide evidence that TNRC6C, like TNRC6A and TNRC6B, is important for efficient miRNA repression. We further demonstrate that tethering of each of the human TNRC6 proteins to a reporter mRNA has a dramatic inhibitory effect on protein synthesis. The repression is due to a combination of effects on the mRNA level and mRNA translation. Through deletion and mutagenesis, we identified the C-terminal part of TNRC6C encompassing the RRM RNA-binding motif as a key effector domain mediating protein synthesis repression by TNRC6C.     

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.     

A C-terminal silencing domain in GW182 is essential for miRNA function

Proteins of the GW182 family are essential for miRNA-mediated gene silencing in animal cells; they interact with Argonaute proteins (AGOs) and are required for both the translational repression and mRNA degradation mediated by miRNAs. To gain insight into the role of the GW182–AGO1 interaction in silencing, we generated protein mutants that do not interact and tested them in complementation assays. We show that silencing of miRNA targets requires the N-terminal domain of GW182, which interacts with AGO1 through multiple glycine–tryptophan (GW)-repeats. Indeed, a GW182 mutant that does not interact with AGO1 cannot rescue silencing in cells depleted of endogenous GW182. Conversely, silencing is impaired by mutations in AGO1 that strongly reduce the interaction with GW182 but not with miRNAs. We further show that a GW182 mutant that does not localize to P-bodies but interacts with AGO1 rescues silencing in GW182-depleted cells, even though in these cells, AGO1 also fails to localize to P-bodies. Finally, we show that in addition to the N-terminal AGO1-binding domain, the middle and C-terminal regions of GW182 (referred to as the bipartite silencing domain) are essential for silencing. Together our results indicate that miRNA silencing in animal cells is mediated by AGO1 in complex with GW182, and that P-body localization is not required for silencing.     

The C-terminal domains of human TNRC6A,TNRC6B,and TNRC6C silence bound transcripts independently of Argonaute proteins

Proteins of the GW182 family are essential components of the miRNA pathway in animal cells. Vertebrate genomes encode three GW182 paralogs (TNRC6A, TNRC6B, and TNRC6C), which may be functionally redundant. Here, we show that the N-terminal GW-repeat-containing regions of all three TNRC6s interact with the four human Argonaute proteins (AGO1–AGO4). We also show that TNRC6A, TNRC6B, and TNRC6C silence the expression of bound mRNAs. This activity is mediated by their C-terminal silencing domains, and thus, is independent of the interaction with AGO1–AGO4. Silencing by TNRC6A, TNRC6B, and TNRC6C is effected by changes in protein expression and mRNA stability that can, in part, be attributed to deadenylation. Our findings indicate that TNRC6A, TNRC6B, and TNRC6C are recruited to miRNA targets through an interaction between their N-terminal domain and an Argonaute protein; the TNRC6s then promote translational repression and/or degradation of miRNA targets through a C-terminal silencing domain.     

The Silencing Domain of GW182 Interacts with PABPC1 To Promote Translational Repression and Degradation of MicroRNA Targets and Is Required for Target Release

GW182 family proteins are essential in animal cells for microRNA (miRNA)-mediated gene silencing, yet the molecular mechanism that allows GW182 to promote translational repression and mRNA decay remains largely unknown. Previous studies showed that while the GW182 N-terminal domain interacts with Argonaute proteins, translational repression and degradation of miRNA targets are promoted by a bipartite silencing domain comprising the GW182 middle and C-terminal regions. Here we show that the GW182 C-terminal region is required for GW182 to release silenced mRNPs; moreover, GW182 dissociates from miRNA targets at a step of silencing downstream of deadenylation, indicating that GW182 is required to initiate but not to maintain silencing. In addition, we show that the GW182 bipartite silencing domain competes with eukaryotic initiation factor 4G for binding to PABPC1. The GW182-PABPC1 interaction is also required for miRNA target degradation; accordingly, we observed that PABPC1 associates with components of the CCR4-NOT deadenylase complex. Finally, we show that PABPC1 overexpression suppresses the silencing of miRNA targets. We propose a model in which the GW182 silencing domain promotes translational repression, at least in part, by interfering with mRNA circularization and also recruits the deadenylase complex through the interaction with PABPC1.In multicellular eukaryotes, the regulation of gene expression by microRNAs (miRNAs) is critical for biological processes as diverse as cell differentiation and proliferation, apoptosis, metabolism, and development (4). To exert a regulatory function, miRNAs associate with Argonaute proteins to form RNA-induced silencing complexes, which repress translation and trigger the degradation of target mRNAs (4, 10, 16). The extent to which translational repression and degradation contribute to silencing depends on the specific target-miRNA combination; some targets are regulated predominantly at the translational level, whereas others can be regulated mainly at the mRNA level (3). A large-scale proteomic analysis performed in parallel with measurements of mRNA levels showed that for the vast majority of miRNA targets, silencing correlates with changes at both the protein and mRNA levels (1, 27).In animal cells, the degradation of miRNA targets is initiated by deadenylation and decapping, which are followed by the exonucleolytic decay of the mRNA body (2, 3, 9, 11, 12, 17, 19, 24, 30, 31). miRNA-dependent mRNA degradation requires a variety of proteins: an Argonaute and a GW182 protein, the CCR4-NOT deadenylase complex, the decapping enzyme DCP2, and several decapping activators including DCP1, Ge-1, HPat, EDC3, and Me31B (also known as RCK/p54) (3, 6, 9, 12, 19). Several studies previously demonstrated that miRNAs trigger deadenylation and decapping even when the mRNA target is not translated (9, 12, 19, 24, 30, 31), indicating that mRNA decay is not merely a consequence of a primary effect of miRNAs on translation but rather is an independent mechanism by which miRNAs silence gene expression.Although how miRNAs trigger mRNA degradation is well established, the mechanisms driving the inhibition of translation are unclear. Multiple mechanisms have been proposed: the displacement of eukaryotic initiation factor 4E (eIF4E) from the mRNA cap structure, interference with the function of the eIF4F complex, a block of 60S ribosomal subunit joining, or an inhibition of translation elongation (4, 10, 16). Regardless of the precise mechanism, the translational repression of miRNA targets also requires GW182 family proteins (11, 13).GW182 proteins are essential components of the miRNA pathway in animal cells, as their depletion suppresses miRNA-mediated gene silencing (reviewed in references 8 and 13). Recent studies have revealed that the silencing activity of these proteins resides predominantly in a bipartite silencing domain containing the middle and C-terminal regions (14, 22, 33). The precise molecular function of the GW182 silencing domain is not fully understood, yet it is known that the domain is not required for GW182 proteins to interact with Argonaute proteins or to localize to P bodies (3, 14, 22). Furthermore, when the silencing domains of GW182 proteins are artificially tethered to mRNAs, their expression is silenced; therefore, tethering bypasses the requirement for Argonaute proteins and miRNAs (5, 22, 33). These observations suggest that the silencing domains of GW182 proteins exhibit intrinsic silencing activity and therefore likely play a role at the effector step of silencing (13, 14, 22, 33).Here we investigate what role the Drosophila melanogaster GW182 silencing domain plays in the miRNA pathway. Overall, our results reveal that the very C-terminal region of this domain is required for the release of GW182 from silenced mRNPs. Indeed, we unexpectedly found that we could detect D. melanogaster GW182 bound to miRNA targets only in cells depleted of components of the deadenylase complex. These results suggest that GW182 dissociates from Argonaute-1 (AGO1) and miRNA targets at a step of silencing downstream of deadenylation. In contrast, GW182 mutants lacking the C-terminal region remain stably bound to miRNA targets, even in wild-type cells, indicating that this region plays a role in the dissociation of GW182 from effector complexes. We further show that the bipartite silencing domain of GW182 interacts with PABPC1 and interferes with the binding of PABPC1 to eIF4G. The interaction of GW182 with PABPC1 is also required for the degradation of miRNA targets, most likely because the interaction facilitates the recruitment of the CCR4-NOT deadenylase complex. Accordingly, overexpressing PABPC1 suppresses the silencing of miRNA targets. Our findings uncover an unexpected role for PABPC1 in the miRNA pathway.     

Human Pumilio Proteins Recruit Multiple Deadenylases to Efficiently Repress Messenger RNAs

PUF proteins are a conserved family of eukaryotic RNA-binding proteins that regulate specific mRNAs: they control many processes including stem cell proliferation, fertility, and memory formation. PUFs repress protein expression from their target mRNAs but the mechanism by which they do so remains unclear, especially for humans. Humans possess two PUF proteins, PUM1 and PUM2, which exhibit similar RNA binding specificities. Here we report new insights into their regulatory activities and mechanisms of action. We developed functional assays to measure sequence-specific repression by PUM1 and PUM2. Both robustly inhibit translation and promote mRNA degradation. Purified PUM complexes were found to contain subunits of the CCR4-NOT (CNOT) complex, which contains multiple enzymes that catalyze mRNA deadenylation. PUMs interact with the CNOT deadenylase subunits in vitro. We used three approaches to determine the importance of deadenylases for PUM repression. First, dominant-negative mutants of CNOT7 and CNOT8 reduced PUM repression. Second, RNA interference depletion of the deadenylases alleviated PUM repression. Third, the poly(A) tail was necessary for maximal PUM repression. These findings demonstrate a conserved mechanism of PUF-mediated repression via direct recruitment of the CCR4-POP2-NOT deadenylase leading to translational inhibition and mRNA degradation. A second, deadenylation independent mechanism was revealed by the finding that PUMs repress an mRNA that lacks a poly(A) tail. Thus, human PUMs are repressors capable of deadenylation-dependent and -independent modes of repression.     

The Caenorhabditis elegans GW182 protein AIN-1 interacts with PAB-1 and subunits of the PAN2-PAN3 and CCR4-NOT deadenylase complexes

GW182 family proteins are essential for miRNA-mediated gene silencing in animal cells. They are recruited to miRNA targets via interactions with Argonaute proteins and then promote translational repression and degradation of the miRNA targets. The human and Drosophila melanogaster GW182 proteins share a similar domain organization and interact with PABPC1 as well as with subunits of the PAN2-PAN3 and CCR4-NOT deadenylase complexes. The homologous proteins in Caenorhabditis elegans, AIN-1 and AIN-2, lack most of the domains present in the vertebrate and insect proteins, raising the question as to how AIN-1 and AIN-2 contribute to silencing. Here, we show that both AIN-1 and AIN-2 interact with Argonaute proteins through GW repeats in the middle region of the AIN proteins. However, only AIN-1 interacts with C. elegans and D. melanogaster PABPC1, PAN3, NOT1 and NOT2, suggesting that AIN-1 and AIN-2 are functionally distinct. Our findings reveal a surprising evolutionary plasticity of the GW182 protein interaction network and demonstrate that binding to PABPC1 and deadenylase complexes has been maintained throughout evolution, highlighting the significance of these interactions for silencing.     

HPat a Decapping Activator Interacting with the miRNA Effector Complex

Animal miRNAs commonly mediate mRNA degradation and/or translational repression by binding to their target mRNAs. Key factors for miRNA-mediated mRNA degradation are the components of the miRNA effector complex (AGO1 and GW182) and the general mRNA degradation machinery (deadenylation and decapping enzymes). The CCR4-NOT1 complex required for the deadenylation of target mRNAs is directly recruited to the miRNA effector complex. However, it is unclear whether the following decapping step is only a consequence of deadenylation occurring independent of the miRNA effector complex or e.g. decapping activators can get recruited to the miRNA effector complex. In this study we performed split-affinity purifications in Drosophila cells and provide evidence for the interaction of the decapping activator HPat with the miRNA effector complex. Furthermore, in knockdown analysis of various mRNA degradation factors we demonstrate the importance of NOT1 for this interaction. This suggests that deadenylation and/or the recruitment of NOT1 protein precedes the association of HPat with the miRNA effector complex. Since HPat couples deadenylation and decapping, the recruitment of HPat to the miRNA effector complex provides a mechanism to commit the mRNA target for degradation.     

The GW/WG repeats of Drosophila GW182 function as effector motifs for miRNA-mediated repression

The control of messenger RNA (mRNA) function by micro RNAs (miRNAs) in animal cells requires the GW182 protein. GW182 is recruited to the miRNA repression complex via interaction with Argonaute protein, and functions downstream to repress protein synthesis. Interaction with Argonaute is mediated by GW/WG repeats, which are conserved in many Argonaute-binding proteins involved in RNA interference and miRNA silencing, from fission yeast to mammals. GW182 contains at least three effector domains that function to repress target mRNA. Here, we analyze the functions of the N-terminal GW182 domain in repression and Argonaute1 binding, using tethering and immunoprecipitation assays in Drosophila cultured cells. We demonstrate that its function in repression requires intact GW/WG repeats, but does not involve interaction with the Argonaute1 protein, and is independent of the mRNA polyadenylation status. These results demonstrate a novel role for the GW/WG repeats as effector motifs in miRNA-mediated repression.     

microRNA-Mediated Messenger RNA Deadenylation Contributes to Translational Repression in Mammalian Cells

Animal microRNAs (miRNAs) typically regulate gene expression by binding to partially complementary target sites in the 3′ untranslated region (UTR) of messenger RNA (mRNA) reducing its translation and stability. They also commonly induce shortening of the mRNA 3′ poly(A) tail, which contributes to their mRNA decay promoting function. The relationship between miRNA-mediated deadenylation and translational repression has been less clear. Using transfection of reporter constructs carrying three imperfectly matching let-7 target sites in the 3′ UTR into mammalian cells we observe rapid target mRNA deadenylation that precedes measureable translational repression by endogenous let-7 miRNA. Depleting cells of the argonaute co-factors RCK or TNRC6A can impair let-7-mediated repression despite ongoing mRNA deadenylation, indicating that deadenylation alone is not sufficient to effect full repression. Nevertheless, the magnitude of translational repression by let-7 is diminished when the target reporter lacks a poly(A) tail. Employing an antisense strategy to block deadenylation of target mRNA with poly(A) tail also partially impairs translational repression. On the one hand, these experiments confirm that tail removal by deadenylation is not strictly required for translational repression. On the other hand they show directly that deadenylation can augment miRNA-mediated translational repression in mammalian cells beyond stimulating mRNA decay. Taken together with published work, these results suggest a dual role of deadenylation in miRNA function: it contributes to translational repression as well as mRNA decay and is thus critically involved in establishing the quantitatively appropriate physiological response to miRNAs.     

Deadenylation is a widespread effect of miRNA regulation

miRNAs silence gene expression by repressing translation and/or by promoting mRNA decay. In animal cells, degradation of partially complementary miRNA targets occurs via deadenylation by the CAF1-CCR4-NOT1 deadenylase complex, followed by decapping and subsequent exonucleolytic digestion. To determine how generally miRNAs trigger deadenylation, we compared mRNA expression profiles in D. melanogaster cells depleted of AGO1, CAF1, or NOT1. We show that ~60% of AGO1 targets are regulated by CAF1 and/or NOT1, indicating that deadenylation is a widespread effect of miRNA regulation. However, neither a poly(A) tail nor mRNA circularization are required for silencing, because mRNAs whose 3′ ends are generated by a self-cleaving ribozyme are also silenced in vivo. We show further that miRNAs trigger mRNA degradation, even when binding by 40S ribosomal subunits is inhibited in cis. These results indicate that miRNAs promote mRNA decay by altering mRNP composition and/or conformation, rather than by directly interfering with the binding and function of ribosomal subunits.     

PUF protein-mediated deadenylation is catalyzed by Ccr4p

PUF proteins control gene expression by binding to the 3'-untranslated regions of specific mRNAs and triggering mRNA decay or translational repression. Here we focus on the mechanism of PUF-mediated regulation. The yeast PUF protein, Mpt5p, regulates HO mRNA and stimulates removal of its poly(A) tail (i.e. deadenylation). Mpt5p repression in vivo is dependent on POP2, a component of the cytoplasmic Ccr4p-Pop2p-Not complex that deadenylates mRNAs. In this study, we elucidate the individual roles of the Ccr4p and Pop2p deadenylases in Mpt5p-regulated deadenylation. Both in vivo and in vitro, Pop2p and Ccr4p proteins are required for Mpt5p-regulated deadenylation of HO. However, the requirements for the two proteins differ dramatically: the enzymatic activity of Ccr4p is essential, whereas that of Pop2p is dispensable. We conclude that Pop2p is a bridge through which the PUF protein recruits the Ccr4p enzyme to the target mRNA, thereby stimulating deadenylation. Our data suggest that PUF proteins may enhance mRNA degradation and repress expression by both deadenylation-dependent and -independent mechanisms, using the same Pop2p bridge to recruit a multifunctional Pop2p complex to the mRNA.