![[Feedback]](/icons/banner/feedbackACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[For Subscribers]](/icons/banner/subscriberACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Archive]](/icons/banner/archiveACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Search]](/icons/banner/searchACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/banner/tocACT.gif){kind=icon}
|
|
|
|
|
||
Vol. 18, Issue 7, 2592-2602, July 2007
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721-0106
Submitted December 26, 2006;
Revised April 9, 2007;
Accepted April 19, 2007
Monitoring Editor: Thomas Fox
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
). Decapping is a key step of this process, because it precedes and permits the degradation of the body of the mRNA and represents the site of multiple control inputs.
The processes of mRNA decapping and translation are mechanistically intertwined and seem to compete with each other, at least in yeast (for review, see Coller and Parker, 2004). For example, decreasing translation initiation by a variety of means increases the rate of mRNA decapping (LaGrandeur and Parker, 1999; Muhlrad and Parker, 1999; Schwartz and Parker, 1999). Conversely, an inhibition of translation elongation leads to a significant decrease in the rate of decapping (Beelman and Parker, 1994). Moreover, coimmunoprecipitation experiments suggested that before decapping, an mRNA exits translation and then assembles into a translationally repressed messenger ribonucleoprotein (mRNP) complex (Tharun and Parker, 2001).
Additional evidence for a discrete population of nontranslating mRNPs has been that nontranslating mRNAs, and the decapping machinery, accumulate in discrete cytoplasmic foci, called P-bodies (also referred as GW182 or Dcp bodies) (Ingelfinger et al., 2002; Lykke-Andersen, 2002; Sheth and Parker, 2003; Cougot et al., 2004). P-bodies have now been observed in yeast, insect cells, nematodes, and mammalian cells, and they contain various proteins involved in mRNA decay, including the decapping enzyme (Dcp1p/Dcp2p); activators of decapping Dhh1p, Pat1p, Lsm1–7p, and Edc3p; and the exonuclease Xrn1p (for review, see Anderson and Kedersha, 2006; Eulalio et al., 2007; Parker and Sheth, 2007). Moreover, P-bodies have been suggested to be functionally involved in mRNA decapping (Sheth and Parker, 2003; Cougot et al., 2004), nonsense-mediated decay (Unterholzner and Izaurralde, 2004; Sheth and Parker, 2006), mRNA storage (Brengues et al., 2005; Bhattacharyya et al., 2006), general translation repression (Holmes et al., 2004; Coller and Parker, 2005), microRNA-mediated repression (Jakymiw et al., 2005; Liu et al., 2005; Pillai et al., 2005), and possibly viral packaging (Beliakova-Bethell et al., 2006). The existence of P-bodies as a discrete cytoplasmic compartment containing untranslating mRNAs suggests that understanding the movement of eukaryotic mRNAs between different cytoplasmic compartments will be important in understanding the control of mRNA translation and degradation.
Nontranslating mRNAs can also accumulate in another cytoplasmic structure termed a stress granule (SG). SGs are formed in response to stress that leads to the phosphorylation of eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF)2
(Kedersha et al., 1999), but they also can form in response to defects in eIF4A or eIF4G function (Dang et al., 2006; Mazroui et al., 2006). Stress granules have not yet been described in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, although they have been described in Schizosaccharomyces pombe (Dunand-Sauthier et al., 2002). Stress granules contain most of the 48S preinitiation complex [e.g., eIF3, eIF4E, eIF4G, and poly(A) binding protein], the RNA binding proteins TIA-1 and TIAR, and poly(A)+ RNA (for review, see Anderson and Kedersha, 2006). Stress granules and P-bodies seem to interact with each other (Kedersha et al., 2005; Wilczynska et al., 2005), although the diversity of different mRNP types and the mechanisms that mediate transitions between stress granules, P-bodies, and polysome-bound mRNAs remain to be established.
The poly(A) tail of mRNA has an important role in mRNA degradation and translation. Removal of the poly(A) tail generally precedes degradation of the mRNA and when deadenylation is inhibited, mRNA are stabilized (Decker and Parker, 1993; Tucker et al., 2001). The poly(A) binding protein 1 (Pab1p) is highly conserved in eukaryotes and its function is essential for viability (Sachs et al., 1987). Pab1p interacts with the translation initiation factors eIF4E and eIF4G, and thereby it is thought to stimulate translation (Jacobson and Peltz, 1996; Tarun and Sachs, 1996; Wells et al., 1998; Gray et al., 2000). Pab1p also plays a role in translation termination via its interaction with eukaryotic release factor 3 (eRF3), suggesting that Pab1p participates in translation in multiple ways (Cosson et al., 2002). Pab1p also participates in the control of mRNA degradation by impeding mRNA decapping until deadenylation is completed (Caponigro and Parker, 1995). An important and unresolved issue is whether the poly(A) tail and the associated poly(A) binding protein Pab1p affect the distribution of mRNAs between P-bodies and polysomes.
In this work, we examine the contribution of the poly(A) tail in controlling the movement of mRNA entering or exiting P-bodies. Our results indicate that poly(A)+ mRNAs can be present in P-bodies under certain conditions. Moreover, the poly(A) binding protein Pab1p is also found in P-bodies in the same conditions. Strains lacking Pab1p show increased P-bodies, suggesting that Pab1p functions directly or indirectly to promote the exit of mRNAs from P-bodies. In addition to Pab1p, the translation initiation factors eIF4E and eIF4G2 can be observed in P-bodies. This suggests the existence of an mRNP complex in P-bodies containing poly(A)+ mRNAs, Pab1p, eIF4E, and eIF4G2, yet lacking other translation initiation components. These results argue that polyadenylated mRNAs can enter P-bodies, and an mRNP complex including poly(A)+ mRNA, Pab1p, eIF4E, and eIF4G2 may represent a transition state during the process of mRNAs exchanging between P-bodies and translation.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
). All the constructions were confirmed to be full length and functional (Sheth and Parker, 2003; data not shown). Strains were grown on either standard yeast extract/peptone medium (YP) or synthetic complete medium (SC) supplemented with appropriate amino acids and 2% dextrose (Glu) as carbon source. Strains were grown at 30°C except for temperature-sensitive mutants, which were grown at 23°C and shifted for 1 h at 37 or 39°C to inactivate the mutant allele. For stationary phase (SP) experiments, cells were grown four days in YPGlu or first grown for one day in SCGlu and then three more days in YPGlu to reach stationary phase. For the strain expressing MFA2pG reporter mRNA under the control of the Tet-Off promoter (pRP1192), transcription was blocked by using doxycycline (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) at a final concentration of 2 µg/ml. Yeast strains were transformed by standard techniques, and plasmids were maintained by growth in selective media.
|
Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) of Poly(A)+ RNA
The subcellular distribution of poly(A)+ RNA was examined by in situ hybridization by using a digoxigenin-conjugated oligo(dT) probe and indirect immunofluorescence microscopy as described previously (Marfatia et al., 2003) with the following modifications. Cells were fixed with 4% Formalin solution for 15 min at room temperature. Oligo(dT)50 (MWG Biotech, High Point, NC) was 3' end labeled with digoxigenin (Roche Applied Science), and rhodamine-conjugated anti-digoxigenin antibody (1:200 dilution; Roche Applied Science, Indianapolis, IN) was used to visualize poly(A)+ RNA in cells grown to mid-log phase.
Plasmids
The URA3 and TRP1 PAB1-GFP plasmids pRP1362 and pRP1363 were created by PCR amplification (oRP1319: 5'-CTGTATGAAGCCACAAAGCATCTAGATCAATCATG-3'; oRP1320: 5'-CTAGCGGATCTGCCTCTAGAGGTGTGGT-3') from yRP2191 (PAB1-GFP) and ligation (XbaI) into pRP1304 (TRP1) or pRP1305 (URA3).
Polysome Analysis
Polysome analyses were performed as a modification of the protocol described previously (Kuhn et al., 2001). Cell lysates were prepared from 200 ml of exponential growth culture (0.3 OD600). Cycloheximide (CYH) was added at the time of harvest to a final concentration of 100 µg/ml in the presence of ice. Cells were centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 5 min at 4°C, washed in 20 ml of lysis buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH,8, 140 mM KCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 0.5 mM dithiothreitol, 1% Triton X-100, 0.1 mg/ml CYH, and 1 mg/ml heparin), and frozen in liquid nitrogen. The pellet was resuspended in 400 µl of lysis buffer. A 400-µl volume of glass beads was added, and the cell suspension was vortexed at full speed for 2 min followed by incubation on ice for 2 min, for a total of three times. Excess cells debris and glass beads were removed by centrifugation for 2 min at 4000 rpm at 4°C. Approximately 20 A254 units were loaded on a 15–50% sucrose gradient suspended in lysis buffer lacking Triton X-100. Samples were separated using a Beckman SW41 rotor at 4°C for 2.5 h at 39,000 rpm and collected, while using A254 value to monitor the fractionation.
RNA Analysis
RNA was extracted from polysome fractions (900 µl) by vortexing for 2 min at maximum speed in the presence of an equal volume of phenol/CHCl3/LET (LET: 100 mM LiCl, 25 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8, and 20 mM EDTA). The aqueous phase was extracted with an equal volume of CHCl3, and RNA was recovered by precipitation with 2 volumes of 100% ethanol (EtOH) and 1/10 volume of 3 M sodium acetate, pH 5.2. Pellets were washed in 75% EtOH and resuspended in diethyl pyrocarbonate-treated H2O. RNA was separated by agarose gel electrophoresis and transferred to nylon membrane (Whatman Schleicher and Schuell, Keene, NH). RNA was detected using radiolabeled oligonucleotide probes directed against the MFA2pG mRNA reporter (oRP140) and RPL41A mRNA (oRP1249: 5'-TTAGAGTTATTTACTCATAATCCGC-3'). mRNAs were quantified by PhosphorImager analysis (Typhoon 9410; GE Healthcare, Little Chalfont, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
; Ashe et al., 2000). This raises two possibilities with regard to the function of the poly(A) during glucose deprivation. First, polyadenylated mRNAs might be resistant to translation repression under these conditions and only deadenylated mRNAs are translationally repressed and targeted to P-bodies. Alternatively, translation repression could function on both adenylated and deadenylated mRNAs. To distinguish between these two possibilities, we used sucrose gradients to separate the translating and untranslating populations of mRNAs, and then we examined the poly(A) lengths of reporter mRNAs before and after glucose deprivation.
As shown previously (Ashe et al., 2000; Brengues et al., 2005), glucose deprivation leads to a rapid loss of polysomes, and movement of the MFA2P-U1A reporter mRNA, as well as the endogenous RPL41A mRNA, from the polysome region of the gradient to the mRNP fractions (where P-body components run under these conditions). An important result was that the distribution of the poly(A) tail lengths on the MFA2P-U1A and RPL41A mRNAs were identical in the mRNP fraction and in the fractions associated with polysomes (Figure 1). This result indicates that both polyadenylated and oligoadenylated mRNAs are translationally repressed to the same extent. Moreover, because translation repression under these conditions requires components of P-bodies (Holmes et al., 2004; Coller and Parker, 2005), this result implies that poly(A)+ mRNAs as well as poly(A)– mRNAs are entering P-bodies.
|
|
5% of the cells with an average of one to two foci per cell (Figure 2A), which is similar to the number of P-bodies that survive the in situ procedure as assessed by monitoring Dcp2-GFP. Moreover, these poly(A)+ foci colocalized with the Dcp2p-GFP foci that remained after the in situ procedure (Figure 2B). This observation indicates that polyadenylated mRNA are present in P-bodies during glucose deprivation.
Pab1p Can Be Present in P-Bodies
The presence of poly(A)+ mRNA in P-bodies led us to determine whether the poly(A) binding protein Pab1p could also be observed in P-bodies. To do this, we followed the distribution of Pab1p-GFP before and after glucose depletion as well as in stationary phase, where P-bodies are large and contain mRNAs that can reenter translation once growth resumes (Brengues et al., 2005; Teixeira et al., 2005). We observed that after glucose depletion, a small amount of Pab1p localizes in small foci (Figure 3A), which colocalized with Dcp2-red fluorescent protein (RFP) (Figure 3B). It should be noted that although Dcp2p is robustly in P-bodies under these conditions, only a small percentage of the Pab1p was detected in P-bodies with the majority being diffuse in the cytoplasm. This suggests that Pab1p is associated with a smaller subset of mRNAs localized to P-bodies compared with Dcp2p.
|
To determine whether these Pab1p foci in stationary phase also colocalize with P-bodies, we examined their subcellular distribution relative to Dcp2p-RFP. We observed that the majority of Pab1p foci in stationary phase colocalized with P-bodies (Figure 3D), although in some cases the overlap was incomplete or the Pab1p-GFP foci was adjacent to the Dcp2p-RFP foci (Figure 3D). These results indicate that Pab1p foci in stationary phase colocalize with P-bodies similar to what we observed during glucose deprivation. However, the presence in stationary phase of some Pab1p foci that only partially overlap with Dcp2p suggests that these Pab1p foci may, at least in some cases, represent accumulations of mRNPs slightly different from those in P-bodies.
Pab1p Can Affect the Distribution of P-Bodies
Because Pab1p functions to enhance mRNA translation, the presence of Pab1p in P-bodies suggested that Pab1p might play a role in associating with mRNAs and in promoting their exit from P-bodies to allow entry into translation. To examine this possibility, we determined whether loss of Pab1p from cells altered P-bodies. Because the PAB1 gene is essential for cell viability, we examined pab1
strains that harbor a bypass suppressor of the pab1 deletion. First, we used the spb2 strain. The SPB2 gene encodes the Rpl46 subunit of the 60S ribosome, and its depletion suppresses the pab1 lethality by an unknown mechanism (Sachs and Davis, 1990). Using Dcp2p-GFP as a marker for P-bodies, comparison of the spb2 and the spb2pab1 strains revealed that the pab1 increased the number and size of P-bodies in cells during mid-log growth. Specifically, in the spb2 strain, Dcp2p-GFP is present in small foci in 10% of the cells (Figure 4). In contrast, in the double mutant spb2pab1, 50% of the cells contain either one big foci or multiple small foci of Dcp2p-GFP (Figure 4). These results argue that Pab1p normally functions to reduce the number of mRNAs found in P-bodies. However, this experiment has the caveat that the spb2 strain alone had an increased size of P-bodies compared with wild-type cells in mid-log growth, raising the possibility that the effect of the pab1 was specific to the spb2 strain.
|
strain, we also examined how the pab1 affected P-bodies using the pat1-2 allele (also referred to as mrt1-2, Hatfield et al., 1996), which is a nonsense mutation in the PAT1 gene that suppresses the lethality of the pab1 by an unknown mechanism (Hatfield et al., 1996; Bonnerot et al., 2000; Tharun et al., 2000). We observed that Dcp2p-GFP was not concentrated in foci in the pat1-2 strain (Figure 4). However, in the pat1-2pab1 strain, Dcp2-GFP concentrated in foci like in the spb2pab1 strain (Figure 4). Thus, the pab1 leads to an increase in P-bodies in both the spb2 and pat1-2 bypass suppressor strains. This suggests that Pab1p plays a direct or indirect role in shifting the equilibrium of mRNAs away from P-bodies and into translation (see Discussion).
Translation Initiation Factors eIF4E, eIF4G1, and eI4G2 Can Be Seen in P-Bodies during Glucose Deprivation and Stationary Phase
The observation that Pab1p clearly accumulated in P-bodies during stationary phase, and to a small extent during glucose deprivation, suggested there might be other translation initiation factors present in P-bodies under these conditions. We have reported previously that many translation initiation factors do not accumulate in P-bodies during glucose deprivation (Brengues et al., 2005; Teixeira et al., 2005). However, we reexamined these experiments with greater awareness, because the Pab1p accumulation under glucose deprivation is not strong, and other factors with a similar localization pattern might have been missed. In addition, the robust accumulation of Pab1p in stationary phase provided an ideal way to increase any possible signal from initiation factors that might be associated with P-bodies.
We first followed the distribution of several translation factors during stationary phase, because it represents the condition where Pab1p is most easily visualized in P-bodies. Similar to what we had previously observed during glucose deprivation of mid-log cultures (Brengues et al., 2005), we observed a relatively homogenous cytoplasmic distribution of the GFP constructs for eIF1A, Tif35 (which did show some clumping), Prt1 (eIF3 subunit), Nip1 (eIF3 subunit), Rpg1 (eIF3 subunit), eIF4B, eIF5, eIF5B, and eIF4G1, and the expected nuclear localization for eIF6 (Figure 5A). However, we did observe that the cap binding protein eIF4E and its binding partner eIF4G2 were clearly in foci. The accumulation of eIF4G2 but not eIF4G1 may simply be due to the increased expression of eIF4G2 at high cell density compared with eIF4G1 expression (http://genome-www.stanford.edu/). Similar to our results with Pab1p in stationary phase, we observed that the eIF4E and eIF4G2 foci in stationary phase colocalize with the P-body marker Dcp2p, although in some cases the overlap is again not complete (Figure 5B). These results indicate that eIF4E and eIF4G2 foci in stationary phase generally colocalize with P-bodies.
|
|
and dcp2 strains, which are lacking the decapping enzyme, or an xrn1 strain, which is deficient in 5'-to-3' degradation of mRNAs after decapping. We observed that Pab1p was not present in P-bodies during mid-log growth in dcp1, dcp2 and xrn1 strains (Figure 7), despite these strains having large P-bodies as judged by other protein markers (Sheth and Parker, 2003; Teixeira and Parker, 2007). Moreover, Pab1p still accumulated in dcp1, dcp2, and xrn1 strains during glucose deprivation or stationary phase (Figure 7), indicating that these proteins are also not required for the accumulation of Pab1p in P-bodies. These results argue that Pab1p is not removed from P-bodies by degradation of its bound mRNA.
|
, pat1, sbp1, and dhh1 strains, all of which are deleted for proteins involved in the formation of P-bodies. We observed that Pab1p was not increased in P-bodies in lsm1, pat1, sbp1, and dhh1 strains during glucose deprivation in comparison with the wild-type (WT) strain (Figure 7). Indeed, the amount of Pab1p in these mutants strains in P-bodies was somewhat reduced compared with the wild-type strain, which could be explained by the partial reduction in translation repression seen in these strains in response to glucose deprivation (Holmes et al., 2004; Coller and Parker, 2005, Segal et al., 2006). In addition, the lsm1, pat1, dhh1, sbp1, strains all accumulated significant amounts of Pab1p in P-bodies in stationary phase (Figure 7), which indicates that the Lsm1p, Pat1p, Dhh1p, or Sbp1p are not required for Pab1p accumulation in P-bodies. These results are inconsistent with a model wherein Pab1p is removed by the action of any single specific protein during mRNAs being targeted to P-bodies.
Another possible explanation for Pab1p accumulation in P-bodies is that Pab1p could be part of an mRNP that poised to exit the P-body and enter translation. This would be consistent with Pab1p accumulating in P-bodies during glucose deprivation or stationary phase where translation is inhibited (Ashe et al., 2000; Brengues et al., 2005). Such an accumulation could be due to any defect in translation initiation or to a specific alteration induced by glucose deprivation or stationary phase. To examine this possibility further, we examined whether Pab1p accumulated in P-bodies when translation initiation was blocked in other manners. We observed that Pab1p was not detectable in P-bodies in response to osmotic stress (Figure 8A), despite the robust inhibition of translation initiation and increase in P-bodies seen under these conditions (Uesono and Toh-e, 2002; Teixeira et al., 2005). We also observed that inhibition of translation initiation by using temperature-sensitive alleles of eIF4E or Prt1p was not sufficient to lead to Pab1p accumulation in P-bodies, despite the clear accumulation of Dcp2p-GFP in P-bodies (Figure 8B). These results indicate that any defect in translation initiation is not sufficient to trigger Pab1p accumulation in P-bodies, and they suggest that the accumulation of Pab1p in P-bodies is due to an alteration in translational control triggered by glucose deprivation or stationary phase.
|
). Moreover, the different kinetics and specificity of Dcp2p and Pab1p accumulation in P-bodies suggests that the P-body mRNAs bound by Pab1p represent a subset of the transcripts in these structures that would rapidly reenter translation once growth was resumed. To test this possibility, we examined the rates at which Pab1p and Dcp2p exited P-bodies in stationary phase cells when fresh nutrients were provided. Strikingly, we observed that Pab1p was much more rapidly lost from P-bodies than Dcp2p after nutrient addition (Figure 9). This argues that Pab1p is associated with a specific subset of stored mRNAs within or near P-bodies in stationary phase cells and that these mRNAs preferentially exit the repressed state, and presumably reenter translation, after resumption of growth.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
The presence of poly(A)+ mRNAs in P-bodies suggests that the poly(A) tail will be a feature of mRNAs that affects whether mRNAs are decapped, stored, or return to translation once they enter a P-body. Specifically, because removal of the poly(A) tail is required before mRNAs can be decapped (Decker and Parker, 1993; Muhlrad et al., 1994, 1995), it is likely that any polyadenylated mRNA that enters a P-body will be resistant to decapping and could be recycled back into translation. Interestingly, the use of poly(A) as a marker for exiting P-bodies and returning to translation is analogous to the readenylation of stored maternal or neuronal mRNAs for their entry into translation (Richter, 1999). This similarity, and the common composition of P-bodies in yeast or somatic cells with maternal or neuronal RNA storage granules (Barbee et al., 2006), suggest that a common mechanism will be used for the exit of mRNAs from these granules to reenter translation.
An unresolved issue is how the poly(A) tail inhibits decapping and may promote mRNAs exiting from P-bodies and reentering translation. One possibility is that the interaction of Pab1p with the poly(A) tail might facilitate the assembly of other translation initiation factors and thereby promote the disassembly of the repression/decapping complex that accumulates in P-bodies. This possibility is supported by the fact that eIF4E and eIF4G2, which can interact with Pab1p, also can be observed within P-bodies. Alternatively, or in addition, the poly(A) tail might nucleate interactions that inhibit the decapping enzyme. Interestingly, the available evidence suggests that there might be two manners by which the poly(A) tail can inhibit decapping. One mechanism seems to require the poly(A) binding protein, because pab1 strains can decap some transcripts before deadenylation (Caponigro and Parker, 1995). However, several observations suggest there is likely to be a Pab1p-independent mechanism by which the poly(A) tail can inhibit decapping. First, in pab1 strains, the majority of the transcripts persist and undergo decay after deadenylation (Caponigro and Parker, 1995). Second, biochemical analyses suggest that poly(A) tails can inhibit decapping independently of Pab1p (Wilusz et al., 2001). Finally, the low abundance of Pab1p seen in P-bodies during glucose deprivation would imply an additional mechanism by which the poly(A) tail can inhibit decapping. Although currently unknown, additional proteins that bind poly(A) tail and that are present in P-bodies would be a good candidate for being part of this process.
Significance of eIF4E, eIF4G, and Pab1p in P-Bodies
Our results demonstrate that eIF4E, eIF4G1, eIF4G2, and Pab1p can all be detected to accumulate to some degree in P-bodies under glucose deprivation, and more strikingly in stationary phase for eIF4E, eIF4G2, and Pab1p. In principle, this accumulation could have been due to the formation of a stress granule particle, which then colocalizes with a P-body. However, this is unlikely because the classic stress granules described in more complex eukaryotes also contain other factors such as eIF3 (Anderson and Kedersha, 2006), which we do not observe in foci under glucose deprivation or stationary phase (Figure 5). Another formal possibility is that eIF4E, eIF4G2, and Pab1p are components of the basic translationally repressed mRNP that accumulates in P-bodies. However, this possibility is also unlikely because Pab1p is absent from P-bodies in dcp1 cells (Figure 7), or during osmotic stress (Figure 8A), and are only present at low levels in P-bodies during glucose deprivation (Figure 6). These latter observations argue that eIF4E, eIF4G2, and Pab1p are present on a subpopulation of mRNAs within P-bodies. Such a subpopulation could either be a specific class of transcripts, or it could be a certain percentage of all mRNAs within P-bodies that are trapped in an intermediate state of transition between polysomes and P-bodies.
The accumulation of Pab1p in P-bodies seems to be due to a specific alteration in the process of mRNAs exiting P-bodies and entering translation that is inhibited during glucose deprivation or stationary phase, leading to the accumulation of an mRNP intermediate between P-bodies and translation. This is based on the observations that Pab1p accumulates in P-bodies during glucose deprivation and stationary phase (Figure 3), but not when translation initiation is inhibited due to osmotic stress or defects in translation initiation factors (Figure 8). Moreover, because Pab1p rapidly dissociates from stationary phase P-bodies when growth resumes (Figure 9), we suggest that this process allows cells to accumulate a pool of mRNAs within P-bodies that are poised to reenter translation. Such a mechanism would provide a possible mechanism for rapidly restarting growth, and thus it may be an important aspect of stationary phase translational control.
A clear implication is that the same eIF4E, eIF4G, Pab1p-containing intermediate mRNP seen associated with P-bodies during glucose deprivation or in stationary phase is formed during the normal cycling of mRNAs between P-bodies and polysomes, but it is too transient to be detected. This model is consistent with the known functions of eIF4E, eIF4G2, and Pab1p in promoting translation initiation. Moreover, this could explain why cells lacking Pab1p show an increase in the number and size of P-bodies even during mid-log growth (Figure 4). Interestingly, earlier results suggest that there is an mRNP transition that occurs during mRNA decapping that includes loss of Pab1p, eIF4E, and eIF4G from the mRNA and an association of the decapping activator complex (Tharun and Parker, 2001). Given this, one anticipates that the distribution of mRNAs between polysomes and P-bodies will reflect a continual competition between different types of mRNP complexes. An important goal of future work will be to define the various mRNP complexes that occur in this process and the nature of transitions between them.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Address correspondence to: Roy Parker (rrparker{at}u.arizona.edu)
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Anderson, J. S., and Parker, R. (1998). The 3' to 5' degradation of yeast mRNAs is a general mechanism for mRNA turnover that requires the SKI2 DEVH box protein and 3' to 5' exonucleases of the exosome complex. EMBO J 17, 1497–1506.[CrossRef][Medline]
Anderson, P., and Kedersha, N. (2006). RNA granules. J. Cell Biol 172, 803–808.
Barbee, S. A. et al. (2006). Staufen and FMRP containing neuronal RNPs are structurally and functionally related to somatic P-bodies. Neuron 52, 997–1009.[CrossRef][Medline]
Beelman, C. A., and Parker, R. (1994). Differential effects of translational inhibition in cis and in trans on the decay of the unstable yeast MFA2 mRNA. J. Biol. Chem 269, 9687–9692.
Beelman, C. A., Stevens, A., Caponigro, G., LaGrandeur, T. E., Hatfield, L., Fortner, D. M., and Parker, R. (1996). An essential component of the decapping enzyme required for normal rates of mRNA turnover. Nature 382, 642–646.[CrossRef][Medline]
Beliakova-Bethell, N., Beckham, C., Giddings, T. H., Jr, Winey, M., Parker, R., and Sandmeyer, S. (2006). Virus-like particles of the Ty3 retrotransposon assemble in association with P-body components. RNA 12, 94–101.
Bhattacharyya, S. N., Habermacher, R., Martine, U., Closs, E. I., and Filipowicz, W. (2006). Relief of microRNA-mediated translational repression in human cells subjected to stress. Cell 125, 1111–1124.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bonnerot, C., Boeck, R., and Lapeyre, B. (2000). The two proteins Pat1p (Mrt1p) and Spb8p interact in vivo, are required for mRNA decay, and are functionally linked to Pab1p. Mol. Cell. Biol 20, 5939–5946.
Brengues, M., Teixeira, D., and Parker, R. (2005). Movement of eukaryotic mRNAs between polysomes and cytoplasmic processing bodies. Science 310, 486–489.
Caponigro, G., and Parker, R. (1995). Multiple functions for the poly(A)-binding protein in mRNA decapping and deadenylation in yeast. Genes Dev 9, 2421–2432.
Coller, J. M., Tucker, M., Sheth, U., Valencia-Sanchez, M. A., and Parker, R. (2001). The DEAD box helicase, Dhh1p, functions in mRNA decapping and interacts with both the decapping and deadenylase complexes. RNA 7, 1717–1727.[Abstract]
Coller, J., and Parker, R. (2004). Eukaryotic mRNA decapping. Annu. Rev. Biochem 73, 861–890.[CrossRef][Medline]
Coller, J., and Parker, R. (2005). General translational repression by activators of mRNA decapping. Cell 122, 875–886.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cosson, B., Couturier, A., Chabelskaya, S., Kiktev, D., Inge-Vechtomov, S., Philippe, M., and Zhouravleva, G. (2002). Poly(A)-binding protein acts in translation termination via eukaryotic release factor 3 interaction and does not influence [PSI(+)] propagation. Mol. Cell. Biol 22, 3301–3315.
Cougot, N., Babajko, S., and Séraphin, B. (2004). Cytoplasmic foci are sites of mRNA decay in human cells. J. Cell Biol 165, 31–40.
Dang, Y., Kedersha, N., Low, W. K., Romo, D., Gorospe, M., Kaufman, R., Anderson, P., and Liu, J. O. (2006). Eukaryotic initiation factor 2alpha-independent pathway of stress granule induction by the natural product pateamine A. J. Biol. Chem 281, 32870–33288.
Decker, C. J., and Parker, R. (1993). A turnover pathway for both stable and unstable mRNAs in yeast: evidence for a requirement for deadenylation. Genes Dev 7, 1632–1643.
Dunand-Sauthier, I., Walker, C., Wilkinson, C., Gordon, C., Crane, R., Norbury, C., and Humphrey, T. (2002). Sum1, a component of the fission yeast eIF3 translation initiation complex, is rapidly relocalized during environmental stress and interacts with components of the 26S proteasome. Mol. Biol. Cell 13, 1626–1640.
Dunckley, T., and Parker, R. (1999). The DCP2 protein is required for mRNA decapping in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and contains a functional MutT motif. EMBO J 18, 5411–5422.[CrossRef][Medline]
Eulalio, A., Behm-Ansmant, I., and Izaurralde, E. (2007). P bodies: at the crossroads of post-transcriptional pathways. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol 8, 9–22.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gray, N. K., Coller, J. M., Dickson, K. S., and Wickens, M. (2000). Multiple portions of poly(A)-binding protein stimulate translation in vivo. EMBO J 19, 4723–4733.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hatfield, L., Beelman, C. A., Stevens, A., and Parker, R. (1996). Mutations in trans-acting factors affecting mRNA decapping in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol 16, 5830–5838.[Abstract]
Holmes, L. E., Campbell, S. G., De Long, S. K., Sachs, A. B., and Ashe, M. P. (2004). Loss of translational control in yeast compromised for the major mRNA decay pathway. Mol. Cell. Biol 24, 2998–3010.
Huh, W. K., Falvo, J. V., Gerke, L. C., Carroll, A. S., Russell, W., Howson, R. W., Weissman, J. S., and O'Shea, E. K. (2003). Global analysis of protein localization in budding yeast. Nature 425, 686–691.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ingelfinger, D., Arndt-Jovin, D. J., Luhrmann, R., and Achsel, T. (2002). The human LSm1-7 proteins colocalize with the mRNA-degrading enzymes Dcp1/2 and Xrnl in distinct cytoplasmic foci. RNA 8, 1489–1501.[Abstract]
Jacobson, A., and Peltz, S. W. (1996). Interrelationships of the pathways of mRNA decay and translation in eukaryotic cells. Annu. Rev. Biochem 65, 693–739.[CrossRef][Medline]
Jakymiw, A., Lian, S., Eystathioy, T., Li, S., Satoh, M., Hamel, J. C., Fritzler, M. J., and Chan, E. K. (2005). Disruption of GW bodies impairs mammalian RNA interference. Nat. Cell Biol 7, 1267–1274.[Medline]
Kedersha, N. L., Gupta, M., Li, W., Miller, I., and Anderson, P. (1999). RNA-binding proteins TIA-1 and TIAR link the phosphorylation of eIF-2 to the assembly of mammalian stress granules. J. Cell Biol 147, 1431–1442.
Kedersha, N., Stoecklin, G., Ayodele, M., Yacono, P., Lykke-Andersen, J., Fritzler, M. J., Scheuner, D., Kaufman, R. J., Golan, D. E., and Anderson, P. (2005). Stress granules and processing bodies are dynamically linked sites of mRNP remodeling. J. Cell Biol 169, 871–884.
Kshirsagar, M., and Parker, R. (2004). Identification of Edc3p as an enhancer of mRNA decapping in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 166, 729–739.
Kuhn, K. N., DeRisi, J. L., Brown, P. O., and Sarnow, P. (2001). Global and specific translational regulation in the genomic response of Saccharomyces cerevisiae to a rapid transfer from a fermentable to a nonfermentable carbon source. Mol. Cell. Biol 21, 916–927.
LaGrandeur, T., and Parker, P. (1999). The cis acting sequences responsible for the differential decay of the unstable MFA2 and stable PGK1 transcripts in yeast include the context of the translational start codon. RNA 5, 420–433.[Abstract]
Liu, J., Rivas, F. V., Wohlschlegel, J., Yates, J. R., 3rd, Parker, R., and Hannon, G. J. (2005). A role for the P-body component GW182 in microRNA function. Nat. Cell Biol 7, 1261–1266.[Medline]
Longtine, M. S., Mckenzie, A., III, Demarini, D. J., Shah, N. G., Wach, A., Brachat, A., Philippsen, P., and Pringle, P. R. (1998). Additional modules for versatile and economical PCR-based gene deletion and modification in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 14, 953–961.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lykke-Andersen, J. (2002). Identification of a human decapping complex associated with hUpf proteins in nonsense-mediated decay. Mol. Cell. Biol 22, 8114–8121.
Marfatia, K. A., Crafton, E. B., Green, D. M., and Corbett, A. H. (2003). Domain analysis of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein, Nab2p. Dissecting the requirements for Nab2p-facilitated poly(A) RNA export. J. Biol. Chem 278, 6731–6740.
Mazroui, R., Sukarieh, R., Bordeleau, M. E., Kaufman, R. J., Northcote, P., Tanaka, J., Gallouzi, I., and Pelletier, J. (2006). Inhibition of ribosome recruitment induces stress granule formation independently of eukaryotic initiation factor 2alpha phosphorylation. Mol. Biol. Cell 17, 4212–4219.
Muhlrad, D., Decker, C. J., and Parker, R. (1994). Deadenylation of the unstable mRNA encoded by the yeast MFA2 gene leads to decapping followed by 5'
3' digestion of the transcript. Genes Dev 8, 855–866.
Muhlrad, D., Decker, C. J., and Parker, R. (1995). Turnover mechanisms of the stable yeast PGK1 mRNA. Mol. Cell. Biol 15, 2145–2156.[Abstract]
Muhlrad, D., and Parker, R. (1999). Recognition of yeast mRNAs as "nonsense containing" leads to both inhibition of mRNA translation and mRNA degradation: implications for the control of mRNA decapping. Mol. Biol. Cell 10, 3971–3978.
Parker, R., and Sheth, U. (2007). P-bodies and the control of mRNA translation and degradation. Mol. Cell 25, 635–646.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pillai, R. S., Bhattacharyya, S. N., Artus, C. G., Zoller, T., Cougot, N., Basyuk, E., Bertrand, E., and Filipowicz, W. (2005). Inhibition of translational initiation by Let-7 MicroRNA in human cells. Science 309, 1573–1576.
Richter, J. D. (1999). Cytoplasmic polyadenylation in development and beyond. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev 63, 446–456.
Sachs, A. B., Davis, R. W., and Kornberg, R. D. (1987). A single domain of yeast poly(A)-binding protein is necessary and sufficient for RNA binding and cell viability. Mol. Cell. Biol 7, 3268–3276.
Sachs, A. D., and Davis, R. W. (1990). Translation initiation and ribosomal biogenesis: involvement of a putative rRNA helicase and RPL46. Science 247, 1077–1079.
Schwartz, D. C., and Parker, R. (1999). Mutations in translation initiation factors lead to increased rates of deadenylation and decapping of mRNAs in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol 19, 5247–5256.
Segal, S. P., Dunckley, T., and Parker, R. (2006). Sbp1p affects translational repression and decapping in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol 26, 5120–5130.
Sheth, U., and Parker, R. (2003). Decapping and decay of messenger RNA occur in cytoplasmic processing bodies. Science 300, 805–808.
Sheth, U., and Parker, R. (2006). Targeting of aberrant mRNAs to cytoplasmic processing bodies. Cell 125, 1095–1109.[CrossRef][Medline]
Tarun, S. Z., Jr, and Sachs, A. B. (1996). Association of the yeast poly(A) tail binding protein with translation initiation factor eIF-4G. EMBO J 15, 7168–7177.[Medline]
Teixeira, D., Sheth, U., Valencia-Sanchez, M. A., Brengues, M., and Parker, R. (2005). Processing bodies require RNA for assembly and contain nontranslating mRNAs. RNA 11, 371–382.
Teixeira, D., and Parker, R. (2007). Analysis of P-body assembly in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Biol. Cell 18, 2274–2287.
Tharun, S., He, W., Mayes, A. E., Lennertz, P., Jean, D., Beggs, J. D., and Parker, R. (2000). Yeast Sm-like proteins function in mRNA decapping and decay. Nature 404, 515–518.[CrossRef][Medline]
Tharun, S., and Parker, R. (2001). Targeting an mRNA for decapping: displacement of translation factors and association of the Lsm1p–7p complex on deadenylated yeast mRNAs. Mol. Cell 8, 1075–1083.[CrossRef][Medline]
Tucker, M., Valencia-Sanchez, M. A., Staples, R. R., Chen, J., Denis, C. L., and Parker, R. (2001). The transcription factor associated Ccr4 and Caf1 proteins are components of the major cytoplasmic mRNA deadenylase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Cell 104, 377–386.[CrossRef][Medline]
Uesono, Y., and Toh-e, A. (2002). Transient inhibition of translation initiation by osmotic stress. J. Biol. Chem 277, 13848–13855.
Unterholzner, L., and Izaurralde, E. (2004). SMG7 acts as a molecular link between mRNA surveillance and mRNA decay. Mol. Cell 16, 587–596.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wells, S. E., Hillner, P. E., Vale, R. D., and Sachs, A. B. (1998). Circularization of mRNA by eukaryotic translation initiation factors. Mol. Cell 2, 135–140.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wilczynska, A., Aigueperse, C., Kress, M., Dautry, F., and Weil, D. (2005). The translational regulator CPEB1 provides a link between dcp1 bodies and stress granules. J. Cell Sci 118, 981–992.
Wilusz, C. J., Gao, M., Jones, C. L., Wilusz, J., and Peltz, S. W. (2001). Poly(A)-binding proteins regulate both mRNA deadenylation and decapping in yeast cytoplasmic extracts. RNA 7, 1416–1424.[Abstract]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. R. Buchan, D. Muhlrad, and R. Parker P bodies promote stress granule assembly in Saccharomyces cerevisiae J. Cell Biol., November 3, 2008; 183(3): 441 - 455. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
