Hrp59, an hnRNP M protein in Chironomus and Drosophila, binds to exonic splicing enhancers and is required for expression of a subset of mRNAs

Here, we study an insect hnRNP M protein, referred to as Hrp59. Hrp59 is relatively abundant, has a modular domain organization containing three RNA-binding domains, is dynamically recruited to transcribed genes, and binds to premRNA cotranscriptionally. Using the Balbiani ring system of Chironomus, we show that Hrp59 accompanies the mRNA from the gene to the nuclear envelope, and is released from the mRNA at the nuclear pore. The association of Hrp59 with transcribed genes is not proportional to the amount of synthesized RNA, and in vivo Hrp59 binds preferentially to a subset of mRNAs, including its own mRNA. By coimmunoprecipitation of Hrp59–RNA complexes and microarray hybridization against Drosophila whole-genome arrays, we identify the preferred mRNA targets of Hrp59 in vivo and show that Hrp59 is required for the expression of these target mRNAs. We also show that Hrp59 binds preferentially to exonic splicing enhancers and our results provide new insights into the role of hnRNP M in splicing regulation

Many Labs 5:Testing pre-data collection peer review as an intervention to increase replicability

Replication studies in psychological science sometimes fail to reproduce prior findings. If these studies use methods that are unfaithful to the original study or ineffective in eliciting the phenomenon of interest, then a failure to replicate may be a failure of the protocol rather than a challenge to the original finding. Formal pre-data-collection peer review by experts may address shortcomings and increase replicability rates. We selected 10 replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (RP:P; Open Science Collaboration, 2015) for which the original authors had expressed concerns about the replication designs before data collection; only one of these studies had yielded a statistically significant effect (p < .05). Commenters suggested that lack of adherence to expert review and low-powered tests were the reasons that most of these RP:P studies failed to replicate the original effects. We revised the replication protocols and received formal peer review prior to conducting new replication studies. We administered the RP:P and revised protocols in multiple laboratories (median number of laboratories per original study = 6.5, range = 3?9; median total sample = 1,279.5, range = 276?3,512) for high-powered tests of each original finding with both protocols. Overall, following the preregistered analysis plan, we found that the revised protocols produced effect sizes similar to those of the RP:P protocols (?r = .002 or .014, depending on analytic approach). The median effect size for the revised protocols (r = .05) was similar to that of the RP:P protocols (r = .04) and the original RP:P replications (r = .11), and smaller than that of the original studies (r = .37). Analysis of the cumulative evidence across the original studies and the corresponding three replication attempts provided very precise estimates of the 10 tested effects and indicated that their effect sizes (median r = .07, range = .00?.15) were 78% smaller, on average, than the original effect sizes (median r = .37, range = .19?.50)

Direct Interaction with Nup153 Mediates Binding of Tpr to the Periphery of the Nuclear Pore Complex

Tpr is a 267-kDa protein forming coiled coil-dominated homodimers that locate at the nucleoplasmic side of the nuclear pore complex (NPC). The proteins that tether Tpr to this location are unknown. Moreover, the question whether Tpr itself might act as a scaffold onto which other NPC components need to be assembled has not been answered to date. To assess Tpr's role as an architectural element of the NPC, we have studied the sequential disassembly and reassembly of NPCs in mitotic cells, paralleled by studies of cells depleted of Tpr as a result of posttranscriptional tpr gene silencing by RNA interference (RNAi). NPC assembly and recruitment of several nucleoporins, including Nup50, Nup93, Nup96, Nup98, Nup107, and Nup153, in anaphase/early telophase is shown to precede NPC association of Tpr in late telophase. In accordance, cellular depletion of Tpr by RNAi does not forestall binding of these nucleoporins to the NPC. In a search for proteins that moor Tpr to the NPC, we have combined the RNAi approach with affinity-chromatography and yeast two-hybrid interaction studies, leading to the identification of nucleoporin Nup153 as the binding partner for Tpr. The specificity of this interaction is demonstrated by its sensitivity to Tpr amino acid substitution mutations that abolish Tpr's ability to adhere to the NPC and affect the direct binding of Tpr to Nup153. Accordingly, cellular depletion of Nup153 by RNAi is shown to result in mislocalization of Tpr to the nuclear interior. Nup153 deficiency also causes mislocalization of Nup50 but has no direct effect on NPC localization of the other nucleoporins studied in this investigation. In summary, these results render Tpr a protein only peripherally attached to the NPC that does not act as an essential scaffold for other nucleoporins

Amino Acid Substitutions of Coiled-Coil Protein Tpr Abrogate Anchorage to the Nuclear Pore Complex but Not Parallel, In-Register Homodimerization

Tpr is a protein component of nuclear pore complex (NPC)-attached intranuclear filaments. Secondary structure predictions suggest a bipartite structure, with a large N-terminal domain dominated by heptad repeats (HRs) typical for coiled-coil–forming proteins. Proposed functions for Tpr have included roles as a homo- or heteropolymeric architectural element of the nuclear interior. To gain insight into Tpr's ultrastructural properties, we have studied recombinant Tpr segments by circular dichroism spectroscopy, chemical cross-linking, and rotary shadowing electron microscopy. We show that polypeptides of the N-terminal domain homodimerize in vitro and represent α-helical molecules of extended rod-like shape. With the use of a yeast two-hybrid approach, arrangement of the coiled-coil is found to be in parallel and in register. To clarify whether Tpr can self-assemble further into homopolymeric filaments, the full-length protein and deletion mutants were overexpressed in human cells and then analyzed by confocal immunofluorescence microscopy, cell fractionation, and immuno-electron microscopy. Surplus Tpr, which does not bind to the NPC, remains in a soluble state of ∼7.5 S and occasionally forms aggregates of entangled molecules but neither self-assembles into extended linear filaments nor stably binds to other intranuclear structures. Binding to the NPC is shown to depend on the integrity of individual HRs; amino acid substitutions within these HRs abrogate NPC binding and render the protein soluble but do not abolish Tpr's general ability to homodimerize. Possible contributions of Tpr to the structural organization of the nuclear periphery in somatic cells are discussed

Many Labs 5: Testing Pre-Data-Collection Peer Review as an Intervention to Increase Replicability

Replication studies in psychological science sometimes fail to reproduce prior findings. If these studies use methods that are unfaithful to the original study or ineffective in eliciting the phenomenon of interest, then a failure to replicate may be a failure of the protocol rather than a challenge to the original finding. Formal pre-data-collection peer review by experts may address shortcomings and increase replicability rates. We selected 10 replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (RP:P; Open Science Collaboration, 2015) for which the original authors had expressed concerns about the replication designs before data collection; only one of these studies had yielded a statistically significant effect (p &lt; .05). Commenters suggested that lack of adherence to expert review and low-powered tests were the reasons that most of these RP:P studies failed to replicate the original effects. We revised the replication protocols and received formal peer review prior to conducting new replication studies. We administered the RP:P and revised protocols in multiple laboratories (median number of laboratories per original study = 6.5, range = 3–9; median total sample = 1,279.5, range = 276–3,512) for high-powered tests of each original finding with both protocols. Overall, following the preregistered analysis plan, we found that the revised protocols produced effect sizes similar to those of the RP:P protocols (Δr = .002 or .014, depending on analytic approach). The median effect size for the revised protocols (r = .05) was similar to that of the RP:P protocols (r = .04) and the original RP:P replications (r = .11), and smaller than that of the original studies (r = .37). Analysis of the cumulative evidence across the original studies and the corresponding three replication attempts provided very precise estimates of the 10 tested effects and indicated that their effect sizes (median r = .07, range = .00–.15) were 78% smaller, on average, than the original effect sizes (median r = .37, range = .19–.50)