Jingwei Ni, Amy L Tien, Maurille J Fournier  Cell 

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Mahadeb Pal, Alfred S. Ponticelli, Donal S. Luse  Molecular Cell 
Advertisements

Ribosome Structure and Activity Are Altered in Cells Lacking snoRNPs that Form Pseudouridines in the Peptidyl Transferase Center  Thomas H. King, Ben.
Fabien Darfeuille, Cecilia Unoson, Jörg Vogel, E. Gerhart H. Wagner 
Mark M Metzstein, H.Robert Horvitz  Molecular Cell 
Mobility of Yeast Mitochondrial Group II Introns: Engineering a New Site Specificity and Retrohoming via Full Reverse Splicing  Robert Eskes, Jian Yang,
The RNA World of the Nucleolus: Two Major Families of Small RNAs Defined by Different Box Elements with Related Functions  Andrey G Balakin, Laurie Smith,
Volume 85, Issue 7, Pages (June 1996)
Volume 32, Issue 6, Pages (December 2008)
Modification of U6 Spliceosomal RNA Is Guided by Other Small RNAs
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages (May 2010)
LINEs Mobilize SINEs in the Eel through a Shared 3′ Sequence
Global Mapping of Human RNA-RNA Interactions
Sherif Abou Elela, Haller Igel, Manuel Ares  Cell 
Base-Pairing between Untranslated Regions Facilitates Translation of Uncapped, Nonpolyadenylated Viral RNA  Liang Guo, Edwards M. Allen, W.Allen Miller 
Laura Lancaster, Harry F. Noller  Molecular Cell 
Ahyeon Son, Jong-Eun Park, V. Narry Kim  Cell Reports 
IFN-γ Upregulates Expression of the Mouse Complement C1rA Gene in Keratinocytes via IFN-Regulatory Factor-1  Sung June Byun, Ik-Soo Jeon, Hyangkyu Lee,
Silencing in Yeast rDNA Chromatin
Targeted mRNA Degradation by Deadenylation-Independent Decapping
Dragony Fu, Kathleen Collins  Molecular Cell 
Volume 84, Issue 3, Pages (February 1996)
The Small RNA IstR Inhibits Synthesis of an SOS-Induced Toxic Peptide
Benjamin P Callen, Keith E Shearwin, J.Barry Egan  Molecular Cell 
Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages (April 2013)
Transcriptional Control of the Mouse Col7a1 Gene in Keratinocytes: Basal and Transforming Growth Factor-β Regulated Expression  Michael Naso, Jouni Uitto,
Gracjan Michlewski, Sonia Guil, Colin A. Semple, Javier F. Cáceres 
Trans-Splicing to Spliceosomal U2 snRNA Suggests Disruption of Branch Site-U2 Pairing during Pre-mRNA Splicing  Duncan J. Smith, Charles C. Query, Maria.
Interaction with PCNA Is Essential for Yeast DNA Polymerase η Function
Human Telomerase Activation Requires Two Independent Interactions between Telomerase RNA and Telomerase Reverse Transcriptase  James R. Mitchell, Kathleen.
Ribosomal Protein L3: Gatekeeper to the A Site
RRNA Modifications in an Intersubunit Bridge of the Ribosome Strongly Affect Both Ribosome Biogenesis and Activity  Xue-hai Liang, Qing Liu, Maurille.
Fabien Darfeuille, Cecilia Unoson, Jörg Vogel, E. Gerhart H. Wagner 
Volume 48, Issue 5, Pages (December 2012)
Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages (July 2005)
Zbigniew Dominski, Xiao-cui Yang, William F. Marzluff  Cell 
Girish C Shukla, Richard A Padgett  Molecular Cell 
Yeast Origins Establish a Strand Bias for Replicational Mutagenesis
Diabetes Mutations Delineate an Atypical POU Domain in HNF-1α
Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages (July 2005)
Phosphorylation of Serine 2 within the RNA Polymerase II C-Terminal Domain Couples Transcription and 3′ End Processing  Seong Hoon Ahn, Minkyu Kim, Stephen.
A Shared Surface of TBP Directs RNA Polymerase II and III Transcription via Association with Different TFIIB Family Members  Xuemei Zhao, Laura Schramm,
Xinyang Zhao, P.Shannon Pendergrast, Nouria Hernandez  Molecular Cell 
A Presenilin-1 Truncating Mutation Is Present in Two Cases with Autopsy-Confirmed Early-Onset Alzheimer Disease  Carolyn Tysoe, Joanne Whittaker, John.
The Divergent U12-Type Spliceosome Is Required for Pre-mRNA Splicing and Is Essential for Development in Drosophila  Leo R. Otake, Petra Scamborova, Carl.
Marc Spingola, Manuel Ares  Molecular Cell 
NanoRNAs Prime Transcription Initiation In Vivo
Frpo: A Novel Single-Stranded DNA Promoter for Transcription and for Primer RNA Synthesis of DNA Replication  Hisao Masai, Ken-ichi Arai  Cell  Volume.
Direct Visualization of Uridylate Deletion In Vitro Suggests a Mechanism for Kinetoplastid RNA Editing  Scott D Seiwert, Stefan Heidmann, Kenneth Stuart 
Volume 2, Issue 1, Pages (July 1998)
Volume 147, Issue 2, Pages (October 2011)
A Transcription-Independent Role for TFIIB in Gene Looping
Volume 7, Issue 6, Pages (December 1997)
Insights into Branch Nucleophile Positioning and Activation from an Orthogonal Pre- mRNA Splicing System in Yeast  Duncan J. Smith, Maria M. Konarska,
Volume 57, Issue 3, Pages (March 2000)
Patricia J. Hilleren, Roy Parker  Molecular Cell 
Transcriptional Control of SLC26A4 Is Involved in Pendred Syndrome and Nonsyndromic Enlargement of Vestibular Aqueduct (DFNB4)  Tao Yang, Hilmar Vidarsson,
RNase III-Mediated Silencing of a Glucose-Dependent Repressor in Yeast
TNF Regulates the In Vivo Occupancy of Both Distal and Proximal Regulatory Regions of the MCP-1/JE Gene  Dongsheng Ping, Peter L. Jones, Jeremy M. Boss 
Beyond Homing: Competition between Intron Endonucleases Confers a Selective Advantage on Flanking Genetic Markers  Heidi Goodrich-Blair, David A Shub 
Promoting in Tandem: The Promoter for Telomere Transposon HeT-A and Implications for the Evolution of Retroviral LTRs  O.N Danilevskaya, I.R Arkhipova,
Identification of TSIX, Encoding an RNA Antisense to Human XIST, Reveals Differences from its Murine Counterpart: Implications for X Inactivation  Barbara.
J.Russell Lipford, Stephen P Bell  Molecular Cell 
MicroRNA Binding Sites in Arabidopsis Class III HD-ZIP mRNAs Are Required for Methylation of the Template Chromosome  Ning Bao, Khar-Wai Lye, M.Kathryn.
Volume 16, Issue 1, Pages (January 2002)
Translation Initiation from the Ribosomal A Site or the P Site, Dependent on the Conformation of RNA Pseudoknot I in Dicistrovirus RNAs  Nobuhiko Kamoshita,
Transcriptional Termination Factors for RNA Polymerase II in Yeast
Rodney A King, Sarbani Banik-Maiti, Ding Jun Jin, Robert A Weisberg 
Volume 85, Issue 7, Pages (June 1996)
CRISPR Immunological Memory Requires a Host Factor for Specificity
Spb1p-Directed Formation of Gm2922 in the Ribosome Catalytic Center Occurs at a Late Processing Stage  Bruno Lapeyre, Suresh K. Purushothaman  Molecular.
Presentation transcript:

Small Nucleolar RNAs Direct Site-Specific Synthesis of Pseudouridine in Ribosomal RNA  Jingwei Ni, Amy L Tien, Maurille J Fournier  Cell  Volume 89, Issue 4, Pages 565-573 (May 1997) DOI: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80238-X

Figure 1 Small Nucleolar RNAs Are Required for Site-Specific Synthesis of ω in rRNA Formation of ω was examined by a reverse transcription primer extension assay following treatment of isolated total RNA with CMC (Bakin and Ofengand 1993; see Experimental Procedures). Results are shown for 3 strains, each depleted of a different snoRNA. Only the rRNA regions affected are shown. (A) snR8, primer complementary to 1010–1029 of LSU rRNA; (B) snR3, primer complementary to 2274–2293 of LSU rRNA; and (C) snR33, primer complementary to 1065–1084 of LSU rRNA. The following RNAs were used as templates. (A) T7, in vitro synthesized unmodified 25S rRNA fragment (939–1159); WT, RNA from wild-type strain YS602 with no snoRNA depletions; −snR8, RNA from a strain (YD8, see Experimental Procedures) containing a genomic snR8 disruption and no plasmid; +snR8, RNA from the snR8 disruption strain transformed with a plasmid-encoded wild-type snR8 allele; +snR8CUA, RNA from the snR8 disruption strain transformed with a plasmid-encoded snR8 allele in which the conserved ACA box (variant AUA in this case) was changed to CUA; this mutation was shown to disrupt the accumulation of ACA RNAs (Balakin et al. 1996present study, data not shown). For (B) and (C), the presence (+) or absence (−) of chromosomal or plasmid-encoded snR3 and snR33 genes is indicated by c-snR3, c-snR33, or p-snR3, p-snR33, respectively. For simplicity, (B) and (C) do not show the negative results obtained for the in vitro transcribed rRNA fragment, nor are the lanes from samples not treated with CMC shown, except for the undisrupted wild-type strain. For all panels, the nucleotide positions are determined by counting from the 3′ end of each primer. ω positions are identified next to the sequences (left), and the corresponding reverse transcript bands are indicated with arrows (right). Arrows marked with asterisks denote positions at which ω is lost following disruption of a specific snoRNA gene. CMC treatment is indicated by − (untreated) and + (treated). Sites of ω formation shown to depend on snoRNA are summarized in Table 1. Cell 1997 89, 565-573DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80238-X)

Figure 2 A Consensus Structure Motif Correlates snoRNA Sequences and Sites of ω Modification (A) Most ACA snoRNAs can be folded into a common secondary core structure (Balakin et al. 1996). The ACA box and an AGA trinucleotide found in most ACA snoRNAs are boxed, and the snoRNA determinants proposed to be involved in ω formation are contained in the shaded region. Segments labeled [A] and [B] are complementary to rRNA sequences flanking the site of modification. Conserved snoRNA helices are identified as domains I and II. (B) Sequence elements in the 3′ portion of the snoRNA can potentially base pair with rRNA sequences adjacent to a site of ω modification. The common snoRNA-rRNA motif includes: (1) regions of snoRNA:rRNA complementarity that flank the site of ω modification (domains A and B); (2) two snoRNA helical segments (domains I and II), one of which occurs between the elements complementary to rRNA (domain II); and (3) the ACA box, which defines the family of ACA snoRNAs. The ACA box occurs ∼15 nucleotides from a snoRNA base pair in domain II, which is opposite the site of ω formation. The consensus motif was developed from comparisons of hypothetical snoRNA folding patterns and searches for positionally conserved complementarities between snoRNAs and rRNA sites of ω modification. Motifs for individual snoRNAs experimentally linked to ω formation are shown in Figure 3. Cell 1997 89, 565-573DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80238-X)

Figure 3 Structure Elements Conserved among Individual snoRNAs Required for ω Synthesis and the Corresponding rRNA Target Regions Motifs are shown for eight snoRNA–rRNA pairs. The RNAs are arranged schematically using the conserved ACA box as a common reference point. The snoRNA regions depicted occur in the 3′ portions of the molecules, as shown in Figure 2. In some cases, gaps have been inserted between complementary elements in the snoRNA to achieve simple alignments. Missing snoRNA segments are denoted as broken lines and gaps as solid lines. Conventional base pairing (including G–U) is denoted with vertical lines, and G–A pairs with small circles. The position of the ω affected by snoRNA depletion is shown for each snoRNA–rRNA pair. Note that the ω is always located either immediately adjacent to the domain A complementarity (Figure 2) or 1 nt away. Also the distance between the ω and ACA box is an almost constant 15 nt, counting to the base pair in snoRNA domain II, which is opposite the ω in this format; snoR8 is an exception, with a spacing estimated at ∼17 nt; however, the nucleotides underlined in snR8 could form a short stem structure and yield a shorter spacing. Cell 1997 89, 565-573DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80238-X)

Figure 4 Mutational Analysis of the snoRNA–rRNA Motif The importance of the complementarity between snoRNA and rRNA and the relative position of the ACA box were examined by altering yeast snR8. Only the central part of the motif is shown. The predicted snoRNA:rRNA interaction was impaired by substituting 2 nucleotides in the domain A element of snR8 (S1). The influence of the ACA box position was assessed by introducing a one nucleotide insertion (I1) or deletions of one or two nucleotides on either side of domain I (D1–D3). (A) wild-type snR8. (B) structure of the two-base S1 substitution in domain A. (C) insertion and deletion mutations (I1, D1–D3). The altered bases in the S1 substitution are shown in boldface lowercase letters. The I1 insertion is indicated above the wild-type sequence, and the deletions are shown as gaps (solid lines). Cell 1997 89, 565-573DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80238-X)

Figure 5 SnoRNA Mutations Affect Both Activity and Specificity of ω Synthesis The mutations described in Figure 4 were created in a plasmid-encoded SNR8 gene and the effects examined in a test strain (YD8) containing an inactive chromosomal SNR8 gene (see Experimental Procedures). Synthesis of ω was examined by the CMC-primer extension assay procedure. The snoRNA mutations are identified above each lane using the abbreviations defined in Figure 4. Data are shown for the rRNA regions, which normally contain ω modifications at positions 959, 966, 985, and 989. The sites of modification are indicated at the left and the corresponding reverse transcript bands by arrows at the right. A novel site of ω modification occurred with mutations D1 and D2, at position U986 (bold arrow). Control samples included RNA from the test strain (YD8, lane 1) and the same strain transformed with a plasmid containing a wild-type SNR8 gene (WT, lane 2). Negative data obtained with samples not treated with CMC have been omitted. Cell 1997 89, 565-573DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80238-X)

Figure 6 Posttranscriptional Synthesis of Pseudouridine Pseudouridine is formed from uridine by: (1) cleavage of the N1-C1′ glycosyl bond, (2) rotation of the base, and (3) reattachment through the C5 and C1′ carbons. Cell 1997 89, 565-573DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80238-X)

Figure 7 Five Clustered Pseudouridines in the Core of the Peptidyltransferase Center Are Nonessential The central core of the peptidyltransferase center is shown. In yeast this region contains six ωs. Sites of 2′-O-methylation (O2′m) are also noted. The modified trinucleotide UmGmω located at the bottom of the structure is conserved among all nucleocytoplasmic LSU rRNAs thus far examined. The five ωs circled are dispensable; all are conserved in yeast, Drosophila, mouse, and humans (Ofengand et al. 1995). ω2822, indicated in parentheses, is conserved in the same eukaryotes and also in E. coli, but not mitochondria. Cell 1997 89, 565-573DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80238-X)