In Vitro Reconstitution of Eukaryotic Translation Reveals Cooperativity between Release Factors eRF1 and eRF3

SummaryEukaryotic translation termination is triggered by peptide release factors eRF1 and eRF3. Whereas eRF1 recognizes all three termination codons and induces hydrolysis of peptidyl tRNA, eRF3's function remains obscure. Here, we reconstituted all steps of eukaryotic translation in vitro using purified ribosomal subunits; initiation, elongation, and termination factors; and aminoacyl tRNAs. This allowed us to investigate termination using pretermination complexes assembled on mRNA encoding a tetrapeptide and to propose a model for translation termination that accounts for the cooperative action of eRF1 and eRF3 in ensuring fast release of nascent polypeptide. In this model, binding of eRF1, eRF3, and GTP to pretermination complexes first induces a structural rearrangement that is manifested as a 2 nucleotide forward shift of the toeprint attributed to pretermination complexes that leads to GTP hydrolysis followed by rapid hydrolysis of peptidyl tRNA. Cooperativity between eRF1 and eRF3 required the eRF3 binding C-terminal domain of eRF1

PABP enhances release factor recruitment and stop codon recognition during translation termination

Poly(A)-binding protein (PABP) is a major component of the messenger RNA–protein complex. PABP is able to bind the poly(A) tail of mRNA, as well as translation initiation factor 4G and eukaryotic release factor 3a (eRF3a). PABP has been found to stimulate translation initiation and to inhibit nonsense-mediated mRNA decay. Using a reconstituted mammalian in vitro translation system, we show that PABP directly stimulates translation termination. PABP increases the efficiency of translation termination by recruitment of eRF3a and eRF1 to the ribosome. PABP's function in translation termination depends on its C-terminal domain and its interaction with the N-terminus of eRF3a. Interestingly, we discover that full-length eRF3a exerts a different mode of function compared to its truncated form eRF3c, which lacks the N-terminal domain. Pre-association of eRF3a, but not of eRF3c, with pre-termination complexes (preTCs) significantly increases the efficiency of peptidyl–tRNA hydrolysis by eRF1. This implicates new, additional interactions of full-length eRF3a with the ribosomal preTC. Based on our findings, we suggest that PABP enhances the productive binding of the eRF1–eRF3 complex to the ribosome, via interactions with the N-terminal domain of eRF3a which itself has an active role in translation termination

A single amino acid change of translation termination factor eRF1 switches between bipotent and omnipotent stop-codon specificity†

In eukaryotes a single class-1 translation termination factor eRF1 decodes the three stop codons: UAA, UAG and UGA. Some ciliates, like Euplotes, have a variant code, and here eRF1s exhibit UAR-only specificity, whereas UGA is reassigned as a sense codon. Since eukaryote eRF1 stop-codon recognition is associated with its N-terminal domain, structural features should exist in the N domain of ciliate eRF1s that restrict their stop-codon specificity. Using an in vitro reconstituted eukaryotic translation system we demonstrate here that a chimeric eRF1 composed of the N domain of Euplotes aediculatus eRF1 fused to the MC domains of human eRF1 exhibits UAR-only specificity. Functional analysis of eRF1 chimeras constructed by swapping Euplotes N domain sequences with the cognate regions from human eRF1 as well as site-directed mutagenesis of human eRF1 highlighted the crucial role of the alanine residue in position 70 of E. aediculatus eRF1 in restricting UGA decoding. Switching the UAR-only specificity of E. aediculatus eRF1 to omnipotent mode is due to a single point mutation. Furthermore, we examined the influence of eRF3 on the ability of chimeric and mutant eRF1s to induce peptide release in response to different stop codons

Structure of a human cap-dependent 48S translation pre-initiation complex

Eukaryotic translation initiation is tightly regulated, requiring a set of conserved initiation factors (eIFs). Translation of a capped mRNA depends on the trimeric eIF4F complex and eIF4B to load the mRNA onto the 43S pre-initiation complex comprising 40S and initiation factors 1, 1A, 2, 3 and 5 as well as initiator-tRNA. Binding of the mRNA is followed by mRNA scanning in the 48S pre-initiation complex, until a start codon is recognised. Here, we use a reconstituted system to prepare human 48S complexes assembled on capped mRNA in the presence of eIF4B and eIF4F. The highly purified h-48S complexes are used for cross-linking/mass spectrometry, revealing the protein interaction network in this complex. We report the electron cryo-microscopy structure of the h-48S complex at 6.3 Å resolution. While the majority of eIF4B and eIF4F appear to be flexible with respect to the ribosome, additional density is detected at the entrance of the 40S mRNA channel which we attribute to the RNA-recognition motif of eIF4B. The eight core subunits of eIF3 are bound at the 40S solvent-exposed side, as well as the subunits eIF3d, eIF3b and eIF3i. elF2 and initiator-tRNA bound to the start codon are present at the 40S intersubunit side. This cryo-EM structure represents a molecular snap-shot revealing the h-48S complex following start codon recognition

Quantitative analysis of ribosome–mRNA complexes at different translation stages

Inhibition of primer extension by ribosome–mRNA complexes (toeprinting) is a proven and powerful technique for studying mechanisms of mRNA translation. Here we have assayed an advanced toeprinting approach that employs fluorescently labeled DNA primers, followed by capillary electrophoresis utilizing standard instruments for sequencing and fragment analysis. We demonstrate that this improved technique is not merely fast and cost-effective, but also brings the primer extension inhibition method up to the next level. The electrophoretic pattern of the primer extension reaction can be characterized with a precision unattainable by the common toeprint analysis utilizing radioactive isotopes. This method allows us to detect and quantify stable ribosomal complexes at all stages of translation, including initiation, elongation and termination, generated during the complete translation process in both the in vitro reconstituted translation system and the cell lysate. We also point out the unique advantages of this new methodology, including the ability to assay sites of the ribosomal complex assembly on several mRNA species in the same reaction mixture

Optimal translational termination requires C4 lysyl hydroxylation of eRF1

Efficient stop codon recognition and peptidyl-tRNA hydrolysis are essential in order to terminate translational elongation and maintain protein sequence fidelity. Eukaryotic translational termination is mediated by a release factor complex that includes eukaryotic release factor 1 (eRF1) and eRF3. The N terminus of eRF1 contains highly conserved sequence motifs that couple stop codon recognition at the ribosomal A site to peptidyl-tRNA hydrolysis. We reveal that Jumonji domain-containing 4 (Jmjd4), a 2-oxoglutarate- and Fe(II)-dependent oxygenase, catalyzes carbon 4 (C4) lysyl hydroxylation of eRF1. This posttranslational modification takes place at an invariant lysine within the eRF1 NIKS motif and is required for optimal translational termination efficiency. These findings further highlight the role of 2-oxoglutarate/Fe(II) oxygenases in fundamental cellular processes and provide additional evidence that ensuring fidelity of protein translation is a major role of hydroxylation

Alu RNA regulates the cellular pool of active ribosomes by targeted delivery of SRP9/14 to 40S subunits

The human genome contains about 1.5 million Alu elements, which are transcribed into Alu RNAs by RNA polymerase III. Their expression is upregulated following stress and viral infection, and they associate with the SRP9/14 protein dimer in the cytoplasm forming Alu RNPs. Using cell-free translation, we have previously shown that Alu RNPs inhibit polysome formation. Here, we describe the mechanism of Alu RNP-mediated inhibition of translation initiation and demonstrate its effect on translation of cellular and viral RNAs. Both cap-dependent and IRES-mediated initiation is inhibited. Inhibition in- volves direct binding of SRP9/14 to 40S ribosomal subunits and requires Alu RNA as an assembly factor but its continuous association with 40S subunits is not required for inhibition. Binding of SRP9/14 to 40S prevents 48S complex formation by interfering with the recruitment of mRNA to 40S subunits. In cells, overexpression of Alu RNA decreases transla- tion of reporter mRNAs and this effect is alleviated with a mutation that reduces its affinity for SRP9/14. Alu RNPs also inhibit the translation of cellular mR- NAs resuming translation after stress and of viral mRNAs suggesting a role of Alu RNPs in adapting the translational output in response to stress and viral infection

Upstream open reading frames located in the leader of protein kinase Mζ mRNA regulate its translation

For protein synthesis that occurs locally in dendrites, the translational control mechanisms are much more important for neuronal functioning than the transcription levels. Here, we show that uORFs (upstream open reading frames) in the 5’ untranslated region (5’UTR) play a critical role in regulation of the translation of protein kinase Mζ (PKMζ). Elimination of these uORFs activates translation of the reporter protein in vitro and in primary cultures of rat hippocampal neurons. Using cell-free translation systems, we demonstrate that translational initiation complexes are formed only on uORFs. Further, we address the mechanism of translational repression of PKMζ translation, by uORFs. We observed an increase in translation of the reporter protein under the control of PKMζ leader in neuronal culture during nonspecific activation by picrotoxin. We also show that such a mechanism is similar to the mechanism seen in cell stress, as application of sodium arsenite to neuron cultures induced translation of mRNA carrying PKMζ 5’UTR similarly to picrotoxin activation. Therefore, we suppose that phosphorylation of eIF2a, like in cell stress, is a main regulator of PKMζ translation. Altogether, our findings considerably extend our understanding of the role of uORF in regulation of PKMζ translation in activated neurons, important at early stages of LTP