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.     

Computational analysis of RNA editing sites in plant mitochondrial genomes reveals similar information content and a sporadic distribution of editing sites

A computational analysis of RNA editing sites was performedon protein-coding sequences of plant mitochondrial genomes fromArabidopsis thaliana, Beta vulgaris, Brassica napus, and Oryzasativa. The distribution of nucleotides around edited and uneditedcytidines was compared in 41 nucleotide segments and included1481 edited cytidines and 21,390 unedited cytidines in the 4genomes. The distribution of nucleotides was examined in 1,2, and 3 nucleotide windows by comparison of nucleotide frequencyratios and relative entropy. The relative entropy analyses indicatethat information is encoded in the nucleotide sequences in the5 prime flank (–18 to –14, –13 to –10,–6 to –4, –2/–1) and the immediate 3prime flanking nucleotide (+1), and these regions may be importantin editing site recognition. The relative entropy was largewhen 2 or 3 nucleotide windows were analyzed, suggesting thatseveral contiguous nucleotides may be involved in editing siterecognition. RNA editing sites were frequently preceded by 2pyrimidines or AU and followed by a guanidine (HYCG) in themonocot and dicot mitochondrial genomes, and rarely precededby 2 purines. Analysis of chloroplast editing sites from a dicot,Nicotiana tabacum, and a monocot, Zea mays, revealed a similardistribution of nucleotides around editing sites (HYCA). Thesimilarity of this motif around editing sites in monocots anddicots in both mitochondria and chloroplasts suggests that amechanistic basis for this motif exists that is common in thesedifferent organelle and phylogenetic systems. The preferredsequence distribution around RNA editing sites may have an importantimpact on the acquisition of editing sites in evolution becausethe immediate sequence context of a cytidine residue may rendera cytidine editable or uneditable, and consequently determinewhether a T to C mutation at a specific position may be correctedby RNA editing. The distribution of editing sites in many protein-codingsequences is shown to be non-random with editing sites clusteredin groups separated by regions with no editing sites. The sporadicdistribution of editing sites could result from a mechanismof editing site loss by gene conversion utilizing edited sequenceinformation, possibly through an edited cDNA intermediate.     

Stable native RIP9 complexes associate with C‐to‐U RNA editing activity,PPRs, RIPs,OZ1, ORRM1 and ISE2

The mitochondrial and chloroplast mRNAs of the majority of land plants are modified through cytidine to uridine (C‐to‐U) RNA editing. Previously, forward and reverse genetic screens demonstrated a requirement for pentatricopeptide repeat (PPR) proteins for RNA editing. Moreover, chloroplast editing factors OZ1, RIP2, RIP9 and ORRM1 were identified in co‐immunoprecipitation (co‐IP) experiments, albeit the minimal complex sufficient for editing activity was never deduced. The current study focuses on isolated, intact complexes that are capable of editing distinct sites. Peak editing activity for four sites was discovered in size‐exclusion chromatography (SEC) fractions ≥ 670 kDa, while fractions estimated to be approximately 413 kDa exhibited the greatest ability to convert a substrate containing the editing site rps14 C80. RNA content peaked in the ≥ 670 kDa fraction. Treatment of active chloroplast extracts with RNase A abolished the relationship of editing activity with high‐MW fractions, suggesting a structural RNA component in native complexes. By immunoblotting, RIP9, OTP86, OZ1 and ORRM1 were shown to be present in active gel filtration fractions, though OZ1 and ORRM1 were mainly found in low‐MW inactive fractions. Active editing factor complexes were affinity‐purified using anti‐RIP9 antibodies, and orthologs to putative Arabidopsis thaliana RNA editing factor PPR proteins, RIP2, RIP9, RIP1, OZ1, ORRM1 and ISE2 were identified via mass spectrometry. Western blots from co‐IP studies revealed the mutual association of OTP86 and OZ1 with native RIP9 complexes. Thus, RIP9 complexes were discovered to be highly associated with C‐to‐U RNA editing activity and other editing factors indicative of their critical role in vascular plant editosomes.