Analysis of Free Energy Signals Arising from Nucleotide Hybridization Between rRNA and mRNA Sequences during Translation in Eubacteria

A decoding algorithm is tested that mechanistically models the progressive alignments that arise as the mRNA moves past the rRNA tail during translation elongation. Each of these alignments provides an opportunity for hybridization between the single-stranded, -terminal nucleotides of the 16S rRNA and the spatially accessible window of mRNA sequence, from which a free energy value can be calculated. Using this algorithm we show that a periodic, energetic pattern of frequency 1/3 is revealed. This periodic signal exists in the majority of coding regions of eubacterial genes, but not in the non-coding regions encoding the 16S and 23S rRNAs. Signal analysis reveals that the population of coding regions of each bacterial species has a mean phase that is correlated in a statistically significant way with species () content. These results suggest that the periodic signal could function as a synchronization signal for the maintenance of reading frame and that codon usage provides a mechanism for manipulation of signal phase.[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32]     

Algorithms for Finding Small Attractors in Boolean Networks

A Boolean network is a model used to study the interactions between different genes in genetic regulatory networks. In this paper, we present several algorithms using gene ordering and feedback vertex sets to identify singleton attractors and small attractors in Boolean networks. We analyze the average case time complexities of some of the proposed algorithms. For instance, it is shown that the outdegree-based ordering algorithm for finding singleton attractors works in time for , which is much faster than the naive time algorithm, where is the number of genes and is the maximum indegree. We performed extensive computational experiments on these algorithms, which resulted in good agreement with theoretical results. In contrast, we give a simple and complete proof for showing that finding an attractor with the shortest period is NP-hard.[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32]     

Enhanced Virus Clearance by Early Inducible Lymphocytic Choriomeningitis Virus-Neutralizing Antibodies in Immunoglobulin-Transgenic Mice

Following infection of mice with lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), virus-neutralizing antibodies appear late, after 30 to 60 days. Such neutralizing antibodies play an important role in protection against reinfection. To analyze whether a neutralizing antibody response which developed earlier could contribute to LCMV clearance during the acute phase of infection, we generated transgenic mice expressing LCMV-neutralizing antibodies. Transgenic mice expressing the immunoglobulin μ heavy chain of the LCMV-neutralizing monoclonal antibody KL25 (H25 transgenic mice) mounted LCMV-neutralizing immunoglobulin M (IgM) serum titers within 8 days after infection. This early inducible LCMV-neutralizing antibody response significantly improved the host’s capacity to clear the infection and did not cause an enhancement of disease after intracerebral (i.c.) LCMV infection. In contrast, mice which had been passively administered LCMV-neutralizing antibodies and transgenic mice exhibiting spontaneous LCMV-neutralizing IgM serum titers (HL25 transgenic mice expressing the immunoglobulin μ heavy and the κ light chain) showed an enhancement of disease after i.c. LCMV infection. Thus, early-inducible LCMV-neutralizing antibodies can contribute to viral clearance in the acute phase of the infection and do not cause antibody-dependent enhancement of disease.Against many cytopathic viruses such as poliovirus, influenza virus, rabies virus, and vesicular stomatitis virus, protective virus-neutralizing antibodies are generated early, within 1 week after infection (3, 31, 36, 44, 49). In contrast, several noncytopathic viruses (e.g., human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis viruses B and C in humans or lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus [LCMV] in mice) elicit poor and delayed virus-neutralizing antibody responses (1, 7, 20, 24, 27, 35, 45, 48).In the mouse, the natural host of LCMV, the acute LCMV infection is predominantly controlled by cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) in an obligatory perforin-dependent manner (13, 18, 28, 50). In addition to the CTL response, LCMV-specific antibodies are generated. Early after infection (by day 8), a strong antibody response specific for the internal viral nucleoprotein (NP) is mounted (7, 19, 23, 28). These early LCMV NP-specific antibodies exhibit no virus-neutralizing capacity (7, 10). Results from studies of B-cell-depleted mice and B-cell-deficient mice implied that the early LCMV NP-specific antibodies are not involved in the clearance of LCMV (8, 11, 12, 40). Late after infection (between days 30 and day 60), LCMV-neutralizing antibodies develop (7, 19, 22, 28, 33); these antibodies are directed against the surface glycoprotein (GP) of LCMV (9, 10). LCMV-neutralizing antibodies have an important function in protection against reinfection (4, 6, 38, 41, 47).In some viral infections, subprotective virus-neutralizing antibody titers can enhance disease rather than promote host recovery (i.e., exhibit antibody-dependent enhancement of disease [ADE] [14, 15, 21, 46]). For example, neutralizing antibodies are involved in the resolution of a primary dengue virus infection and in the protection against reinfection. However, if subprotective neutralizing antibody titers are present at the time of reinfection, a severe form of the disease (dengue hemorrhagic fever/dengue shock syndrome [15, 21]), which might be caused by Fc receptor-mediated uptake of virus-antibody complexes leading to an enhanced infection of monocytes (15, 16, 25, 39), can develop. Similarly, an enhancement of disease after intracerebral (i.c.) LCMV infection was observed in mice which had been treated with virus-neutralizing antibodies before the virus challenge (6). ADE in LCMV-infected mice was either due to an enhanced infection of monocytes by Fc receptor-mediated uptake of antibody-virus complexes or due to CTL-mediated immunopathology caused by an imbalanced virus spread and CTL response.To analyze whether LCMV-neutralizing antibodies generated early after infection improve the host’s capacity to clear the virus or enhance immunopathological disease, immunoglobulin (Ig)-transgenic mice expressing LCMV-neutralizing IgM antibodies were generated. After LCMV infection of transgenic mice expressing the Ig heavy chain (H25 transgenic mice), LCMV-neutralizing serum antibodies were mounted within 8 days, which significantly improved the host’s capacity to eliminate LCMV. H25 transgenic mice did not show any signs of ADE after i.c. LCMV infection.Transgenic mice expressing the Ig heavy and light chains (HL25 transgenic mice) exhibited spontaneous LCMV-neutralizing serum antibodies and confirmed the protective role of preexisting LCMV-neutralizing antibodies, even though the neutralizing serum antibodies were of the IgM isotype. Similar to mice which had been treated with LCMV-neutralizing antibodies, HL25 transgenic mice developed an enhanced disease after i.c. LCMV infection, which indicated that ADE was due to an imbalance between virus spread and CTL response. Thus, the early-inducible LCMV-neutralizing antibody response significantly enhanced clearance of the acute infection without any risk of causing ADE.     

Printor, a Novel TorsinA-interacting Protein Implicated in Dystonia Pathogenesis

Early onset generalized dystonia (DYT1) is an autosomal dominant neurological disorder caused by deletion of a single glutamate residue (torsinA ΔE) in the C-terminal region of the AAA⁺ (ATPases associated with a variety of cellular activities) protein torsinA. The pathogenic mechanism by which torsinA ΔE mutation leads to dystonia remains unknown. Here we report the identification and characterization of a 628-amino acid novel protein, printor, that interacts with torsinA. Printor co-distributes with torsinA in multiple brain regions and co-localizes with torsinA in the endoplasmic reticulum. Interestingly, printor selectively binds to the ATP-free form but not to the ATP-bound form of torsinA, supporting a role for printor as a cofactor rather than a substrate of torsinA. The interaction of printor with torsinA is completely abolished by the dystonia-associated torsinA ΔE mutation. Our findings suggest that printor is a new component of the DYT1 pathogenic pathway and provide a potential molecular target for therapeutic intervention in dystonia.Early onset generalized torsion dystonia (DYT1) is the most common and severe form of hereditary dystonia, a movement disorder characterized by involuntary movements and sustained muscle spasms (1). This autosomal dominant disease has childhood onset and its dystonic symptoms are thought to result from neuronal dysfunction rather than neurodegeneration (2, 3). Most DYT1 cases are caused by deletion of a single glutamate residue at positions 302 or 303 (torsinA ΔE) of the 332-amino acid protein torsinA (4). In addition, a different torsinA mutation that deletes amino acids Phe³²³–Tyr³²⁸ (torsinA Δ323–328) was identified in a single family with dystonia (5), although the pathogenic significance of this torsinA mutation is unclear because these patients contain a concomitant mutation in another dystonia-related protein, ϵ-sarcoglycan (6). Recently, genetic association studies have implicated polymorphisms in the torsinA gene as a genetic risk factor in the development of adult-onset idiopathic dystonia (7, 8).TorsinA contains an N-terminal endoplasmic reticulum (ER)³ signal sequence and a 20-amino acid hydrophobic region followed by a conserved AAA⁺ (ATPases associated with a variety of cellular activities) domain (9, 10). Because members of the AAA⁺ family are known to facilitate conformational changes in target proteins (11, 12), it has been proposed that torsinA may function as a molecular chaperone (13, 14). TorsinA is widely expressed in brain and multiple other tissues (15) and is primarily associated with the ER and nuclear envelope (NE) compartments in cells (16–20). TorsinA is believed to mainly reside in the lumen of the ER and NE (17–19) and has been shown to bind lamina-associated polypeptide 1 (LAP1) (21), lumenal domain-like LAP1 (LULL1) (21), and nesprins (22). In addition, recent evidence indicates that a significant pool of torsinA exhibits a topology in which the AAA⁺ domain faces the cytoplasm (20). In support of this topology, torsinA is found in the cytoplasm, neuronal processes, and synaptic terminals (2, 3, 15, 23–26) and has been shown to bind cytosolic proteins snapin (27) and kinesin light chain 1 (20). TorsinA has been proposed to play a role in several cellular processes, including dopaminergic neurotransmission (28–31), NE organization and dynamics (17, 22, 32), and protein trafficking (27, 33). However, the precise biological function of torsinA and its regulation remain unknown.To gain insights into torsinA function, we performed yeast two-hybrid screens to search for torsinA-interacting proteins in the brain. We report here the isolation and characterization of a novel protein named printor (protein interactor of torsinA) that interacts selectively with wild-type (WT) torsinA but not the dystonia-associated torsinA ΔE mutant. Our data suggest that printor may serve as a cofactor of torsinA and provide a new molecular target for understanding and treating dystonia.     

PTIP Regulates 53BP1 and SMC1 at the DNA Damage Sites

Although PTIP is implicated in the DNA damage response, through interactions with 53BP1, the function of PTIP in the DNA damage response remain elusive. Here, we show that RNF8 controls DNA damage-induced nuclear foci formation of PTIP, which in turn regulates 53BP1 localization to the DNA damage sites. In addition, SMC1, a substrate of ATM, could not be phosphorylated at the DNA damage sites in the absence of PTIP. The PTIP-dependent pathway is important for DNA double strand breaks repair and DNA damage-induced intra-S phase checkpoint activation. Taken together, these results suggest that the role of PTIP in the DNA damage response is downstream of RNF8 and upstream of 53BP1. Thus, PTIP regulates 53BP1-dependent signaling pathway following DNA damage.The DNA damage response pathways are signal transduction pathways with DNA damage sensors, mediators, and effectors, which are essential for maintaining genomic stability (1–3). Following DNA double strand breaks, histone H2AX at the DNA damage sites is rapidly phosphorylated by ATM/ATR/DNAPK (4–10), a family homologous to phosphoinositide 3-kinases (11, 12). Subsequently, phospho-H2AX (γH2AX) provides the platform for accumulation of a larger group of DNA damage response factors, such as MDC1, BRCA1, 53BP1, and the MRE11·RAD50·NBS1 complex (13, 14), at the DNA damage sites. Translocalization of these proteins to the DNA double strand breaks (DSBs)³ facilitates DNA damage checkpoint activation and enhances the efficiency of DNA damage repair (14, 15).Recently, PTIP (Pax2 transactivation domain-interacting protein, or Paxip) has been identified as a DNA damage response protein and is required for cell survival when exposed to ionizing radiation (IR) (1, 16–18). PTIP is a 1069-amino acid nuclear protein and has been originally identified in a yeast two-hybrid screening as a partner of Pax2 (19). Genetic deletion of the PTIP gene in mice leads to early embryonic lethality at embryonic day 8.5, suggesting that PTIP is essential for early embryonic development (20). Structurally, PTIP contains six tandem BRCT (BRCA1 carboxyl-terminal) domains (16–18, 21). The BRCT domain is a phospho-group binding domain that mediates protein-protein interactions (17, 22, 23). Interestingly, the BRCT domain has been found in a large number of proteins involved in the cellular response to DNA damages, such as BRCA1, MDC1, and 53BP1 (7, 24–29). Like other BRCT domain-containing proteins, upon exposure to IR, PTIP forms nuclear foci at the DSBs, which is dependent on its BRCT domains (16–18). By protein affinity purification, PTIP has been found in two large complexes. One includes the histone H3K4 methyltransferase ALR and its associated cofactors, the other contains DNA damage response proteins, including 53BP1 and SMC1 (30, 31). Further experiments have revealed that DNA damage enhances the interaction between PTIP and 53BP1 (18, 31).To elucidate the DNA damage response pathways, we have examined the upstream and downstream partners of PTIP. Here, we report that PTIP is downstream of RNF8 and upstream of 53BP1 in response to DNA damage. Moreover, PTIP and 53BP1 are required for the phospho-ATM association with the chromatin, which phosphorylates SMC1 at the DSBs. This PTIP-dependent pathway is involved in DSBs repair.