PPR polyadenylation factor defines mitochondrial mRNA identity and stability in trypanosomes

In Trypanosoma brucei, most mitochondrial mRNAs undergo internal changes by RNA editing and 3′ end modifications. The temporally separated and functionally distinct modifications are manifested by adenylation prior to editing, and by post‐editing extension of a short A‐tail into a long A/U‐heteropolymer. The A‐tail stabilizes partially and fully edited mRNAs, while the A/U‐tail enables mRNA binding to the ribosome. Here, we identify an essential pentatricopeptide repeat‐containing RNA binding protein, kinetoplast polyadenylation factor 3 (KPAF3), and demonstrate its role in protecting pre‐mRNA against degradation by the processome. We show that KPAF3 recruits KPAP1 poly(A) polymerase to the 3′ terminus, thus leading to pre‐mRNA stabilization, or decay depending on the occurrence and extent of editing. In vitro, KPAF3 stimulates KPAP1 activity and inhibits mRNA uridylation by RET1 TUTase. Our findings indicate that KPAF3 selectively directs pre‐mRNA toward adenylation rather than uridylation, which is a default post‐trimming modification characteristic of ribosomal and guide RNAs. As a quality control mechanism, KPAF3 binding ensures that mRNAs entering the editing pathway are adenylated and, therefore, competent for post‐editing A/U‐tailing and translational activation.     

Scanning for a unified model for translational repression by microRNAs

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) silence target mRNAs by inhibiting translation and subsequently initiating mRNA decay. The mechanism by which miRNAs silence translation is still poorly understood, with a number of competing models proposed. In this issue of The EMBO Journal, Kuzuo?lu‐Öztürk et al ( 2016 ) investigated miRNA silencing in human and insect cells. Their data support a model whereby miRNAs inhibit translation initiation. However, in contrast to several recent reports, their data suggest that translational inhibition is independent of 43S ribosomal subunit scanning, eIF4A translation factor activity, and 5′UTR secondary structure.     

Structured RNA upstream of insect cap distal iron responsive elements enhances iron regulatory protein-mediated control of translation

Iron regulatory protein (IRP) blocks ribosomal assembly by binding to an iron responsive element (IRE) located proximal (<60 nts) to the mRNA cap, thereby repressing translation. Constructs with IREs located 60–100 nts from the cap permit ribosomal assembly but the ribosomes pause at IRE/IRP complexes resulting in partial repression of translation. However, insect ferritin mRNAs have cap-distal IREs located 90–156 nts from the cap. Because iron can be toxic, it seems unlikely that insects would be unable to fully regulate ferritin synthesis at the level of translation. Calpodes ferritin consists of two subunits, S and G. In vitro translation of Calpodes ferritin and IRP1 from fat body mRNA yields only G subunits suggesting that IRP1 more efficiently represses translation of the S subunit than the G. When repression is removed by the addition of IRE competitor RNA, the synthesis of both subunits is greatly increased. S and G ferritin mRNAs have identical IREs in similar far cap-distal positions. While both ferritin mRNAs are predicted to have stem-loops between the IRE and the RNA cap, in general insect S mRNAs have more cap-proximal RNA structure than G mRNAs. Therefore, we examined the effect of upstream secondary structure on ribosomal assembly onto S ferritin mRNA constructs using sucrose gradient analysis of translation initiation complexes. We found no evidence for ribosomal assembly on wild type Calpodes S ferritin mRNA in the presence of IRP1 while constructs lacking the wild type secondary structure showed ribosomal pausing. Constructs with wild type secondary structure preceded by an unstructured upstream leader assemble ribosomes in the presence or absence of IRP1. Sequence and RNA folding analyses of other insect ferritins with cap-distal IREs failed to identify any common sequences or IRE-like structures that might bind to IRP1 with lower affinity or to another RNA binding protein. We propose that stem-loops upstream from the IRE act like pleats that shorten the effective distance between the IRE and cap and allow full translational repression by IRP1. In this way some cap-distal IREs may function like cap-proximal ones.     

Deficiency in mTORC1‐controlled C/EBPβ‐mRNA translation improves metabolic health in mice

The mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) is a central regulator of physiological adaptations in response to changes in nutrient supply. Major downstream targets of mTORC1 signalling are the mRNA translation regulators p70 ribosomal protein S6 kinase 1 (S6K1p70) and the 4E‐binding proteins (4E‐BPs). However, little is known about vertebrate mRNAs that are specifically controlled by mTORC1 signalling and are engaged in regulating mTORC1‐associated physiology. Here, we show that translation of the CCAAT/enhancer binding protein beta (C/EBPβ) mRNA into the C/EBPβ‐LIP isoform is suppressed in response to mTORC1 inhibition either through pharmacological treatment or through calorie restriction. Our data indicate that the function of 4E‐BPs is required for suppression of LIP. Intriguingly, mice lacking the cis‐regulatory upstream open reading frame (uORF) in the C/EBPβ‐mRNA, which is required for mTORC1‐stimulated translation into C/EBPβ‐LIP, display an improved metabolic phenotype with features also found under calorie restriction. Thus, our data suggest that translational adjustment of C/EBPβ‐isoform expression is one of the key processes that direct metabolic adaptation in response to changes in mTORC1 activity.     

Aurora Kinase A Is Not Involved in CPEB1 Phosphorylation and cyclin B1 mRNA Polyadenylation during Meiotic Maturation of Porcine Oocytes

Regulation of mRNA translation by cytoplasmic polyadenylation is known to be important for oocyte maturation and further development. This process is generally controlled by phosphorylation of cytoplasmic polyadenylation element binding protein 1 (CPEB1). The aim of this study is to determine the role of Aurora kinase A in CPEB1 phosphorylation and the consequent CPEB1-dependent polyadenylation of maternal mRNAs during mammalian oocyte meiosis. For this purpose, we specifically inhibited Aurora kinase A with MLN8237 during meiotic maturation of porcine oocytes. Using poly(A)-test PCR method, we monitored the effect of Aurora kinase A inhibition on poly(A)-tail extension of long and short cyclin B1 encoding mRNAs as markers of CPEB1-dependent cytoplasmic polyadenylation. Our results show that inhibition of Aurora kinase A activity impairs neither cyclin B1 mRNA polyadenylation nor its translation and that Aurora kinase A is unlikely to be involved in CPEB1 activating phosphorylation.     

Autoregulation of Musashi1 mRNA translation during Xenopus oocyte maturation

The mRNA translational control protein, Musashi, plays a critical role in cell fate determination through sequence‐specific interactions with select target mRNAs. In proliferating stem cells, Musashi exerts repression of target mRNAs to promote cell cycle progression. During stem cell differentiation, Musashi target mRNAs are de‐repressed and translated. Recently, we have reported an obligatory requirement for Musashi to direct translational activation of target mRNAs during Xenopus oocyte meiotic cell cycle progression. Despite the importance of Musashi in cell cycle regulation, only a few target mRNAs have been fully characterized. In this study, we report the identification and characterization of a new Musashi target mRNA in Xenopus oocytes. We demonstrate that progesterone‐stimulated translational activation of the Xenopus Musashi1 mRNA is regulated through a functional Musashi binding element (MBE) in the Musashi1 mRNA 3′ untranslated region (3′ UTR). Mutational disruption of the MBE prevented translational activation of Musashi1 mRNA and its interaction with Musashi protein. Further, elimination of Musashi function through microinjection of inhibitory antisense oligonucleotides prevented progesterone‐induced polyadenylation and translation of the endogenous Musashi1 mRNA. Thus, Xenopus Musashi proteins regulate translation of the Musashi1 mRNA during oocyte maturation. Our results indicate that the hierarchy of sequential and dependent mRNA translational control programs involved in directing progression through meiosis are reinforced by an intricate series of nested, positive feedback loops, including Musashi mRNA translational autoregulation. These autoregulatory positive feedback loops serve to amplify a weak initiating signal into a robust commitment for the oocyte to progress through the cell cycle and become competent for fertilization.Mol. Reprod. Dev. 79: 553‐563, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Translation inhibition from a distance: The small RNA SgrS silences a ribosomal protein S1-dependent enhancer

Many bacterial small RNAs (sRNAs) efficiently inhibit translation of target mRNAs by forming a duplex that sequesters the Shine-Dalgarno (SD) sequence or start codon and prevents formation of the translation initiation complex. There are a growing number of examples of sRNA–mRNA binding interactions distant from the SD region, but how these mediate translational regulation remains unclear. Our previous work in Escherichia coli and Salmonella identified a mechanism of translational repression of manY mRNA by the sRNA SgrS through a binding interaction upstream of the manY SD. Here, we report that SgrS forms a duplex with a uridine-rich translation-enhancing element in the manY 5ʹ untranslated region. Notably, we show that the enhancer is ribosome-dependent and that the small ribosomal subunit protein S1 interacts with the enhancer to promote translation of manY. In collaboration with the chaperone protein Hfq, SgrS interferes with the interaction between the translation enhancer and ribosomal protein S1 to repress translation of manY mRNA. Since bacterial translation is often modulated by enhancer-like elements upstream of the SD, sRNA-mediated enhancer silencing could be a common mode of gene regulation.     

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.     

Immature small ribosomal subunits can engage in translation initiation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

It is generally assumed that, in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, immature 40S ribosomal subunits are not competent for translation initiation. Here, we show by different approaches that, in wild‐type conditions, a portion of pre‐40S particles (pre‐SSU) associate with translating ribosomal complexes. When cytoplasmic 20S pre‐rRNA processing is impaired, as in Rio1p‐ or Nob1p‐depleted cells, a large part of pre‐SSUs is associated with translating ribosomes complexes. Loading of pre‐40S particles onto mRNAs presumably uses the canonical pathway as translation‐initiation factors interact with 20S pre‐rRNA. However, translation initiation is not required for 40S ribosomal subunit maturation. We also provide evidence suggesting that cytoplasmic 20S pre‐rRNAs that associate with translating complexes are turned over by the no go decay (NGD) pathway, a process known to degrade mRNAs on which ribosomes are stalled. We propose that the cytoplasmic fate of 20S pre‐rRNA is determined by the balance between pre‐SSU processing kinetics and sensing of ribosome‐like particles loaded onto mRNAs by the NGD machinery, which acts as an ultimate ribosome quality check point.     

Escherichia coli Ribosomal Protein S1 Unfolds Structured mRNAs Onto the Ribosome for Active Translation Initiation

Regulation of translation initiation is well appropriate to adapt cell growth in response to stress and environmental changes. Many bacterial mRNAs adopt structures in their 5′ untranslated regions that modulate the accessibility of the 30S ribosomal subunit. Structured mRNAs interact with the 30S in a two-step process where the docking of a folded mRNA precedes an accommodation step. Here, we used a combination of experimental approaches in vitro (kinetic of mRNA unfolding and binding experiments to analyze mRNA–protein or mRNA–ribosome complexes, toeprinting assays to follow the formation of ribosomal initiation complexes) and in vivo (genetic) to monitor the action of ribosomal protein S1 on the initiation of structured and regulated mRNAs. We demonstrate that r-protein S1 endows the 30S with an RNA chaperone activity that is essential for the docking and the unfolding of structured mRNAs, and for the correct positioning of the initiation codon inside the decoding channel. The first three OB-fold domains of S1 retain all its activities (mRNA and 30S binding, RNA melting activity) on the 30S subunit. S1 is not required for all mRNAs and acts differently on mRNAs according to the signals present at their 5′ ends. This work shows that S1 confers to the ribosome dynamic properties to initiate translation of a large set of mRNAs with diverse structural features.     

The yeast nuclear gene CBS1 is required for translation of mitochondrial mRNAs bearing the cob 5'' untranslated leader

Summary Mitochondrial translation of the cob mRNA to yield apocytochrome b is specifically dependent on the nuclear gene CBS1, while mitochondrial translation of the oxi2 mRNA to yield cytochrome oxidase subunit III (cox III) is specifically dependent on the nuclear gene PET494. Chimeric oxi2 mRNAs bearing the 5 leaders of other mitochondrial mRNAs, transcribed from rho ^- mitochondrial DNAs termed MSU494, are translated in pet494 mutants. In this study, we examined translation of coxIII from MSU494-encoded chimeric mRNAs in zygotes of defined nuclear and mitochondrial genotype. CoxIII was translated from a chimeric mRNA bearing the cob leader only when the zygotes contained a wild-type CBS1 gene. CoxIII translation from an mRNA bearing the 5 leader of the mitochondrial gene aap1 was not dependent on CBS1 activity. We conclude that the product of the nuclear gene CBS1, or something under its control, acts in the mitochondrion on the cob mRNA 5 leader to activate translation of downstream coding sequences.     

An Unusual Two-Step Control of CPEB Destruction by Pin1

Cytoplasmic polyadenylation is a conserved mechanism that controls mRNA translation and stability. A key protein that promotes polyadenylation-induced translation of mRNAs in maturing Xenopus oocytes is the cytoplasmic polyadenylation element binding protein (CPEB). During this meiotic transition, CPEB is subjected to phosphorylation-dependent ubiquitination and partial destruction, which is necessary for successive waves of polyadenylation of distinct mRNAs. Here we identify the peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase Pin1 as an important factor mediating CPEB destruction. Pin1 interacts with CPEB in an unusual manner in which it occurs prior to CPEB phosphorylation and prior to Pin1 activation by serine 71 dephosphorylation. Upon induction of maturation, CPEB becomes phosphorylated, which occurs simultaneously with Pin1 dephosphorylation. At this time, the CPEB-Pin1 interaction requires cdk1-catalyzed CPEB phosphorylation on S/T-P motifs. Subsequent CPEB ubiquitination and destruction are mediated by a conformational change induced by Pin1 isomerization of CPEB. Similar to M phase progression in maturing Xenopus oocytes, the destruction of CPEB during the mammalian cell cycle requires Pin1 as well. These data identify Pin1 as a new and essential factor regulating CPEB degradation.     

Polyadenylation of Friend murine leukemia virus env‐mRNA is affected by its splicing

As splicing was previously found to be important for increasing Friend murine leukemia virus env‐mRNA stability and translation, we investigated whether splicing of env‐mRNA affected the poly(A) tail length using env expression vectors that yielded unspliced or spliced env‐mRNA. Incomplete polyadenylation was detected in a fraction of the unspliced env‐mRNA products in an env gene‐dependent manner, showing that splicing of Friend murine leukemia virus plays an important role in the efficiency of complete polyadenylation of env‐mRNA. These results suggested that the promotion of complete polyadenylation of env‐mRNA by splicing might partially explain up‐regulation of Env protein expression as a result of splicing.     

Control of Cell Survival and Proliferation by Mammalian Eukaryotic Initiation Factor 4B

Translation initiation plays an important role in cell growth, proliferation, and survival. The translation initiation factor eIF4B (eukaryotic initiation factor 4B) stimulates the RNA helicase activity of eIF4A in unwinding secondary structures in the 5′ untranslated region (5′UTR) of the mRNA in vitro. Here, we studied the effects of eIF4B depletion in cells using RNA interference (RNAi). In agreement with the role of eIF4B in translation initiation, its depletion resulted in inhibition of this step. Selective reduction of translation was observed for mRNAs harboring strong to moderate secondary structures in their 5′UTRs. These mRNAs encode proteins, which function in cell proliferation (Cdc25C, c-myc, and ODC [ornithine decarboxylase]) and survival (Bcl-2 and XIAP [X-linked inhibitor of apoptosis]). Furthermore, eIF4B silencing led to decreased proliferation rates, promoted caspase-dependent apoptosis, and further sensitized cells to camptothecin-induced cell death. These results demonstrate that eIF4B is required for cell proliferation and survival by regulating the translation of proliferative and prosurvival mRNAs.Targeting the translation initiation pathway is emerging as a potential therapy for inhibiting cancer cell growth (35, 38). Ribosome recruitment to the 5′ ends of eukaryotic mRNAs proceeds via translation initiation mechanisms that are dependent either on the 5′ cap structure (m⁷GpppN, where N is any nucleotide) or an internal ribosome entry site (IRES). The majority of translation initiation events in eukaryotes are mediated through cap-dependent translation whereby the 40S ribosomal subunit is recruited to the vicinity of the mRNA 5′ cap structure by the eukaryotic initiation factor 4F (eIF4F) complex. eIF4F is comprised of eIF4E (the cap-binding subunit), eIF4A (an RNA helicase), and eIF4G (a large scaffolding protein for eIF4E, eIF4A, and other initiation factors). Once assembled at the 5′ cap, the 40S ribosomal subunit in association with several initiation factors scans the 5′ untranslated region (5′UTR) of the mRNA until it encounters a start codon in a favorable context, followed by polypeptide synthesis (37).Early in vitro studies have shown that the initiation factor eIF4B acts to potentiate ribosome recruitment to the mRNA (3, 45). eIF4B stimulates translation of both capped and uncapped mRNAs in vitro (1, 36). This function is exerted through stimulation of the helicase activity of eIF4A (43), possibly through direct interactions with eIF4A (44) or with mRNA, the ribosome-associated eIF3, and 18S rRNA (28, 29, 44). Thus, eIF4B is thought to form auxiliary bridges between the mRNA and the 40S ribosomal subunit. Toeprinting studies using mammalian eIF4B underscored its importance in the assembly of the 48S initiation complex, especially on mRNAs harboring secondary structures in the 5′UTRs (11).In vivo studies of eIF4B are limited. Ectopic expression of eIF4B in cultured Drosophila melanogaster cells and in developing eye imaginal discs stimulated cell proliferation (16). Enhanced cell proliferation is most likely mediated by increased translation of a subset of mRNAs, since knockdown of Drosophila eIF4B by RNA interference (RNAi) caused a modest reduction in global translation but compromised the survival of insect cells grown under low serum conditions (16). Studies of eIF4B in mammalian cells yielded contradictory results. Transient overexpression of eIF4B stimulated translation initiation in a phosphorylation-dependent manner in some cells (18, 49) while inhibiting translation in others (30, 31, 41). These differences might be attributed to disparate levels of eIF4B overexpression.To address the physiological role of eIF4B in mRNA translation in the cell, RNAi knockdown of eIF4B was used here. We demonstrate that eIF4B is required for optimal translation. Importantly, the translation of mRNAs bearing structured 5′UTRs, such as the cell cycle regulators Cdc25C, c-myc, and ODC (ornithine decarboxylase), and the antiapoptotic factors Bcl-2 and XIAP (X-linked inhibitor of apoptosis), was reduced as a result of eIF4B silencing by RNAi. Furthermore, eIF4B silencing promoted caspase-dependent apoptosis. Thus, we show that mammalian eIF4B is required for cell proliferation and survival, whereby it acts by regulating the translation of a functionally related subset of mRNAs.