The molecular basis of coupling between poly(A)-tail length and translational efficiency.
PABPC1
Xenopus oocytes
chromosomes
gene expression
human
mouse
poly(A) tail
regulation of mRNA stability
regulation of translation
terminal uridylation
xenopus
Journal
eLife
ISSN: 2050-084X
Titre abrégé: Elife
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101579614
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 07 2021
02 07 2021
Historique:
received:
13
01
2021
accepted:
21
05
2021
entrez:
2
7
2021
pubmed:
3
7
2021
medline:
9
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In animal oocytes and early embryos, mRNA poly(A)-tail length strongly influences translational efficiency (TE), but later in development this coupling between tail length and TE disappears. Here, we elucidate how this coupling is first established and why it disappears. Overexpressing cytoplasmic poly(A)-binding protein (PABPC) in Cells are microscopic biological factories that are constantly creating new proteins. To do so, a cell must first convert its master genetic blueprint, the DNA, into strands of messenger RNA or mRNA. These strands are subsequently translated to make proteins. Cells have two ways to adjust the number of proteins they generate so they do not produce too many or too few: by changing how many mRNA molecules are available for translation, and by regulating how efficiently they translate these mRNA molecules into proteins. In animals, both unfertilized eggs and early-stage embryos lack the ability to create or destroy mRNAs, and consequently cannot adjust the number of mRNA molecules available for translation. These cells can therefore only regulate how efficiently each mRNA is translated. They do this by changing the length of the so-called poly(A) tail at the end of each mRNA molecule, which is made up of a long stretch of repeating adenosine nucleotides. The mRNAs with longer poly(A) tails are translated more efficiently than those with shorter poly(A) tails. However, this difference disappears in older embryos, when both long and short poly(A) tails are translated with equal efficiency, and it is largely unknown why. To find out more, Xiang and Bartel studied frog eggs, and discovered that artificially raising levels of a protein that binds poly(A) tails, also known as PABPC, improved the translation of short-tailed mRNAs to create a situation in which both short- and long-tailed mRNAs were translated with near-equal efficiency. This suggested that short- and long-tailed mRNAs compete for limited amounts of the translation-enhancing PABPC, and that long-tailed mRNAs are better at it than short-tailed mRNAs. Further investigation revealed that eggs also had to establish the right conditions for PABPC to enhance translation and had to protect mRNAs not associated with PABPC from being destroyed before they could be translated. Overall, Xiang and Bartel found that in eggs and early embryos, PABPC and poly(A) tails enhanced the translation of mRNAs but did not influence their stability, whereas later in development, they enhanced mRNA stability but not translation. This research provides new insights into how protein production is controlled at different stages of animal development, from unfertilized eggs to older embryos. Understanding how this process is regulated during normal development is crucial for gaining insights into how it can become dysfunctional and cause disease. These findings may therefore have important implications for research into areas such as infertility, reproductive medicine and rare genetic diseases.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
Cells are microscopic biological factories that are constantly creating new proteins. To do so, a cell must first convert its master genetic blueprint, the DNA, into strands of messenger RNA or mRNA. These strands are subsequently translated to make proteins. Cells have two ways to adjust the number of proteins they generate so they do not produce too many or too few: by changing how many mRNA molecules are available for translation, and by regulating how efficiently they translate these mRNA molecules into proteins. In animals, both unfertilized eggs and early-stage embryos lack the ability to create or destroy mRNAs, and consequently cannot adjust the number of mRNA molecules available for translation. These cells can therefore only regulate how efficiently each mRNA is translated. They do this by changing the length of the so-called poly(A) tail at the end of each mRNA molecule, which is made up of a long stretch of repeating adenosine nucleotides. The mRNAs with longer poly(A) tails are translated more efficiently than those with shorter poly(A) tails. However, this difference disappears in older embryos, when both long and short poly(A) tails are translated with equal efficiency, and it is largely unknown why. To find out more, Xiang and Bartel studied frog eggs, and discovered that artificially raising levels of a protein that binds poly(A) tails, also known as PABPC, improved the translation of short-tailed mRNAs to create a situation in which both short- and long-tailed mRNAs were translated with near-equal efficiency. This suggested that short- and long-tailed mRNAs compete for limited amounts of the translation-enhancing PABPC, and that long-tailed mRNAs are better at it than short-tailed mRNAs. Further investigation revealed that eggs also had to establish the right conditions for PABPC to enhance translation and had to protect mRNAs not associated with PABPC from being destroyed before they could be translated. Overall, Xiang and Bartel found that in eggs and early embryos, PABPC and poly(A) tails enhanced the translation of mRNAs but did not influence their stability, whereas later in development, they enhanced mRNA stability but not translation. This research provides new insights into how protein production is controlled at different stages of animal development, from unfertilized eggs to older embryos. Understanding how this process is regulated during normal development is crucial for gaining insights into how it can become dysfunctional and cause disease. These findings may therefore have important implications for research into areas such as infertility, reproductive medicine and rare genetic diseases.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34213414
doi: 10.7554/eLife.66493
pii: 66493
pmc: PMC8253595
doi:
pii:
Substances chimiques
Poly(A)-Binding Proteins
0
RNA, Messenger
0
Xenopus Proteins
0
Poly A
24937-83-5
Banques de données
GEO
['GSE166544']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : R35 GM118135
Pays : United States
Organisme : Howard Hughes Medical Institute
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2021, Xiang and Bartel.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
KX, DB No competing interests declared
Références
Nature. 2014 Apr 3;508(7494):66-71
pubmed: 24476825
EMBO J. 1996 Feb 15;15(4):900-9
pubmed: 8631310
Science. 2005 May 6;308(5723):833-8
pubmed: 15774722
Genes Dev. 2016 Jul 15;30(14):1671-82
pubmed: 27445395
Mol Cell Biol. 2005 Mar;25(5):2060-71
pubmed: 15713657
Elife. 2016 Jul 30;5:
pubmed: 27474798
Mol Cell. 2014 Mar 20;53(6):1031-1043
pubmed: 24631284
Genes Dev. 2001 Mar 15;15(6):774-88
pubmed: 11274061
Mol Syst Biol. 2011 Nov 08;7:548
pubmed: 22068331
Genome Biol. 2015 Jan 05;16:10
pubmed: 25650959
Genome Biol. 2017 Oct 31;18(1):211
pubmed: 29089021
EMBO J. 2011 Jan 19;30(2):302-16
pubmed: 21139564
Mol Cell Biol. 1998 Oct;18(10):6152-63
pubmed: 9742132
Methods. 2019 Jul 15;164-165:73-80
pubmed: 31026591
Dev Biol. 1974 Sep;40(1):90-101
pubmed: 4472028
Cell. 2019 May 30;177(6):1619-1631.e21
pubmed: 31104843
Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 1999 Jun;63(2):446-56
pubmed: 10357857
Science. 1994 Dec 23;266(5193):1996-9
pubmed: 7801127
Science. 2012 Apr 13;336(6078):233-7
pubmed: 22422859
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 May 10;108(19):7844-9
pubmed: 21518916
Cell. 2008 Nov 14;135(4):738-48
pubmed: 19013281
Curr Biol. 2000 Sep 21;10(18):1147-50
pubmed: 10996799
Curr Biol. 2014 Jul 7;24(13):1467-1475
pubmed: 24954049
PLoS Genet. 2017 Dec 1;13(12):e1007117
pubmed: 29194454
Biol Reprod. 2013 Jan 10;88(1):11
pubmed: 23136299
Nature. 2016 Jun 15;534(7608):558-61
pubmed: 27309803
Mol Cell. 2018 Jun 21;70(6):1081-1088.e5
pubmed: 29932901
J Biol Chem. 2004 Jan 9;279(2):1383-91
pubmed: 14583602
Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2008 Apr;9(4):337-44
pubmed: 18334997
Cell. 2016 Sep 22;167(1):233-247.e17
pubmed: 27662091
Genome Biol. 2014;15(12):550
pubmed: 25516281
J Struct Biol. 2010 Oct;172(1):34-44
pubmed: 20600952
Nature. 2010 Aug 12;466(7308):835-40
pubmed: 20703300
Mol Cell. 2009 Sep 24;35(6):868-80
pubmed: 19716330
Genome Biol. 2003;4(7):223
pubmed: 12844354
Wiley Interdiscip Rev RNA. 2011 May-Jun;2(3):348-61
pubmed: 21957022
Genes Dev. 2012 Nov 1;26(21):2392-407
pubmed: 23073843
Nature. 1995 Apr 6;374(6522):511-6
pubmed: 7700377
Biophys J. 2012 Mar 21;102(6):1427-34
pubmed: 22455926
Genes Dev. 1998 Oct 15;12(20):3226-35
pubmed: 9784497
Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2012 May 27;19(6):603-8
pubmed: 22635249
Elife. 2017 Jun 27;6:
pubmed: 28653618
Genes Dev. 1995 Oct 1;9(19):2421-32
pubmed: 7557393
J Mol Biol. 1996 Feb 16;256(1):20-30
pubmed: 8609610
Mol Cell Biol. 1989 Feb;9(2):659-70
pubmed: 2565532
Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2009 Jun;16(6):616-23
pubmed: 19430462
Mol Cell. 2018 Nov 15;72(4):727-738.e5
pubmed: 30415950
Curr Genet. 2017 Aug;63(4):613-620
pubmed: 28028558
Mol Cell Biol. 1999 Jul;19(7):4552-60
pubmed: 10373504
Genes Dev. 1993 Aug;7(8):1632-43
pubmed: 8393418
Cell. 1989 Sep 8;58(5):857-67
pubmed: 2673535
Nat Commun. 2013;4:2886
pubmed: 24301020
Wiley Interdiscip Rev RNA. 2014 Sep-Oct;5(5):601-22
pubmed: 24789627
Mol Cell. 2002 Jun;9(6):1273-83
pubmed: 12086624
Anal Biochem. 2013 Oct 1;441(1):18-20
pubmed: 23800830
Mol Cell. 2018 Jun 21;70(6):1089-1100.e8
pubmed: 29932902
Nature. 2017 Aug 17;548(7667):347-351
pubmed: 28792939
Mol Cell. 2016 May 5;62(3):462-471
pubmed: 27153541
Methods Mol Biol. 2012;941:83-98
pubmed: 23065555
Biol Cell. 2002 Sep;94(4-5):217-31
pubmed: 12489691
Cell. 2014 Dec 4;159(6):1365-76
pubmed: 25480299
Annu Rev Biochem. 2014;83:779-812
pubmed: 24499181
J Biol Chem. 2007 Jan 19;282(3):1695-708
pubmed: 17130132
Mol Cell. 1998 Jul;2(1):135-40
pubmed: 9702200
Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2020 Dec;27(12):1095-1104
pubmed: 32958947
Biochim Biophys Acta. 2004 May 25;1678(2-3):67-84
pubmed: 15157733
Sci Rep. 2017 Nov 15;7(1):15647
pubmed: 29142207
Mol Cell. 2017 Dec 21;68(6):1095-1107.e5
pubmed: 29272705
Genes Dev. 2005 Jan 1;19(1):104-13
pubmed: 15630022
Mol Cell. 2010 May 28;38(4):576-89
pubmed: 20513432
Biochem J. 2012 Feb 1;441(3):803-12
pubmed: 22004688
Mol Cell Biol. 2001 Aug;21(15):5200-13
pubmed: 11438674
Mol Cell. 2018 Apr 5;70(1):72-82.e7
pubmed: 29625039
Mol Cell Biol. 2002 Nov;22(22):7853-67
pubmed: 12391154
Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2011 Sep 01;3(9):a002758
pubmed: 21690213
Cell. 2014 Jul 17;158(2):397-411
pubmed: 25036634
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 02;10(3):e0121945
pubmed: 25835001
Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2012 Jun 05;19(6):577-85
pubmed: 22664985
Wiley Interdiscip Rev RNA. 2011 Mar-Apr;2(2):167-83
pubmed: 21957004
Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2011 Dec 01;3(12):
pubmed: 21768607
Mol Cell. 2010 Sep 24;39(6):950-62
pubmed: 20864040
Nature. 2008 Jun 26;453(7199):1276-80
pubmed: 18496529
Genes Dev. 1995 Dec 1;9(23):2997-3007
pubmed: 7498795
Cell Rep. 2016 Apr 5;15(1):210-218
pubmed: 27052166
Exp Cell Res. 1994 Apr;211(2):400-7
pubmed: 7908267
Am J Anat. 1987 Jan;178(1):1-10
pubmed: 3825959
Mol Cell Biol. 1994 Sep;14(9):5870-80
pubmed: 8065320
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Mar 14;103(11):4034-9
pubmed: 16495412
Biochem Soc Trans. 2014 Aug;42(4):1229-37
pubmed: 25110030
Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 2001;66:293-300
pubmed: 12762031
Elife. 2021 Jul 02;10:
pubmed: 34213414
Mol Cell. 2020 Feb 20;77(4):786-799.e10
pubmed: 31902669
Nucleic Acids Res. 2014 Sep;42(15):9880-91
pubmed: 25056316
Science. 2005 Dec 16;310(5755):1817-21
pubmed: 16308420
Nat Methods. 2009 Apr;6(4):275-7
pubmed: 19305406
Eur J Biochem. 1996 Apr 1;237(1):143-52
pubmed: 8620866
Dev Biol. 1980 Jun 15;77(2):431-48
pubmed: 6156874