Andrey V. Pisarev

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

Eukaryotic translation termination is triggered by peptide release factors eRF1 and eRF3. Whereas eRF1 recognizes all three termination codons and induces hydrolysis of peptidyl tRNA, eRF3s 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.

The Role of ABCE1 in Eukaryotic Posttermination Ribosomal Recycling

After termination, eukaryotic 80S ribosomes remain associated with mRNA, P-site deacylated tRNA, and release factor eRF1 and must be recycled by dissociating these ligands and separating ribosomes into subunits. Although recycling of eukaryotic posttermination complexes (post-TCs) can be mediated by initiation factors eIF3, eIF1, and eIF1A (Pisarev et al., 2007), this energy-free mechanism can function only in a narrow range of low Mg(2+) concentrations. Here, we report that ABCE1, a conserved and essential member of the ATP-binding cassette (ABC) family of proteins, promotes eukaryotic ribosomal recycling over a wide range of Mg(2+) concentrations. ABCE1 dissociates post-TCs into free 60S subunits and mRNA- and tRNA-bound 40S subunits. It can hydrolyze ATP, GTP, UTP, and CTP. NTP hydrolysis by ABCE1 is stimulated by post-TCs and is required for its recycling activity. Importantly, ABCE1 dissociates only post-TCs obtained with eRF1/eRF3 (or eRF1 alone), but not post-TCs obtained with puromycin in eRF1s absence.

Recycling of Eukaryotic Posttermination Ribosomal Complexes

After translational termination, mRNA and P site deacylated tRNA remain associated with ribosomes in posttermination complexes (post-TCs), which must therefore be recycled by releasing mRNA and deacylated tRNA and by dissociating ribosomes into subunits. Recycling of bacterial post-TCs requires elongation factor EF-G and a ribosome recycling factor RRF. Eukaryotes do not encode a RRF homolog, and their mechanism of ribosomal recycling is unknown. We investigated eukaryotic recycling using post-TCs assembled on a model mRNA encoding a tetrapeptide followed by a UAA stop codon and report that initiation factors eIF3, eIF1, eIF1A, and eIF3j, a loosely associated subunit of eIF3, can promote recycling of eukaryotic post-TCs. eIF3 is the principal factor that promotes splitting of posttermination ribosomes into 60S subunits and tRNA- and mRNA-bound 40S subunits. Its activity is enhanced by eIFs 3j, 1, and 1A. eIF1 also mediates release of P site tRNA, whereas eIF3j ensures subsequent dissociation of mRNA.

Ribosomal position and contacts of mRNA in eukaryotic translation initiation complexes

The position of mRNA on 40S ribosomal subunits in eukaryotic initiation complexes was determined by UV crosslinking using mRNAs containing uniquely positioned 4‐thiouridines. Crosslinking of mRNA positions +11 to ribosomal protein (rp) rpS2(S5p) and rpS3(S3p), and +9–+11 and +8–+9 to h18 and h34 of 18S rRNA, respectively, indicated that mRNA enters the mRNA‐binding channel through the same layers of rRNA and proteins as in prokaryotes. Upstream of the P‐site, the proximity of positions −3/−4 to rpS5(S7p) and h23b, −6/−7 to rpS14(S11p), and −8–−11 to the 3′‐terminus of 18S rRNA (mRNA/rRNA elements forming the bacterial Shine–Dalgarno duplex) also resembles elements of the bacterial mRNA path. In addition to these striking parallels, differences between mRNA paths included the proximity in eukaryotic initiation complexes of positions +7/+8 to the central region of h28, +4/+5 to rpS15(S19p), and −6 and −7/−10 to eukaryote‐specific rpS26 and rpS28, respectively. Moreover, we previously determined that eukaryotic initiation factor2α (eIF2α) contacts position −3, and now report that eIF3 interacts with positions −8–−17, forming an extension of the mRNA‐binding channel that likely contributes to unique aspects of eukaryotic initiation.

Dissociation by Pelota, Hbs1 and ABCE1 of mammalian vacant 80S ribosomes and stalled elongation complexes.

No‐go decay (NGD) and non‐stop decay (NSD) are eukaryotic surveillance mechanisms that target mRNAs on which elongation complexes (ECs) are stalled by, for example, stable secondary structures (NGD) or due to the absence of a stop codon (NSD). Two interacting proteins Dom34(yeast)/Pelota(mammals) and Hbs1, which are paralogues of eRF1 and eRF3, are implicated in these processes. Dom34/Hbs1 were shown to promote dissociation of stalled ECs and release of intact peptidyl‐tRNA. Using an in vitro reconstitution approach, we investigated the activities of mammalian Pelota/Hbs1 and report that Pelota/Hbs1 also induced dissociation of ECs and release of peptidyl‐tRNA, but only in the presence of ABCE1. Whereas Pelota and ABCE1 were essential, Hbs1 had a stimulatory effect. Importantly, ABCE1/Pelota/Hbs1 dissociated ECs containing only a limited number of mRNA nucleotides downstream of the P‐site, which suggests that ABCE1/Pelota/Hbs1 would disassemble NSD complexes stalled at the 3′‐end, but not pre‐cleavage NGD complexes stalled in the middle of mRNA. ABCE1/Pelota/Hbs1 also dissociated vacant 80S ribosomes, which stimulated 48S complex formation, suggesting that Pelota/Hbs1 have an additional role outside of NGD.

eIF2‐dependent and eIF2‐independent modes of initiation on the CSFV IRES: a common role of domain II

Specific interactions of the classical swine fever virus internal ribosomal entry site (IRES) with 40S ribosomal subunits and eukaryotic translation initiation factor (eIF)3 enable 43S preinitiation complexes containing eIF3 and eIF2–GTP–Met‐tRNAMeti to bind directly to the initiation codon, yielding 48S initiation complexes. We report that eIF5B or eIF5B/eIF3 also promote Met‐tRNAMeti binding to IRES–40S complexes, forming 48S complexes that can assemble elongation‐competent ribosomes. Although 48S complexes assembled both by eIF2/eIF3‐ and eIF5B/eIF3‐mediated Met‐tRNAMeti recruitment were destabilized by eIF1, dissociation of 48S complexes formed with eIF2 could be out‐competed by efficient subunit joining. Deletion of IRES domain II, which is responsible for conformational changes induced in 40S subunits by IRES binding, eliminated the sensitivity of 48S complexes assembled by eIF2/eIF3‐ and eIF5B/eIF3‐mediated mechanisms to eIF1‐induced destabilization. However, 48S complexes formed by the eIF5B/eIF3‐mediated mechanism on the truncated IRES could not undergo efficient subunit joining, as reported previously for analogous complexes assembled with eIF2, indicating that domain II is essential for general conformational changes in 48S complexes, irrespective of how they were assembled, that are required for eIF5‐induced hydrolysis of eIF2‐bound GTP and/or subunit joining.

Structural insights into eRF3 and stop codon recognition by eRF1.

Eukaryotic translation termination is mediated by two interacting release factors, eRF1 and eRF3, which act cooperatively to ensure efficient stop codon recognition and fast polypeptide release. The crystal structures of human and Schizosaccharomyces pombe full-length eRF1 in complex with eRF3 lacking the GTPase domain revealed details of the interaction between these two factors and marked conformational changes in eRF1 that occur upon binding to eRF3, leading eRF1 to resemble a tRNA molecule. Small-angle X-ray scattering analysis of the eRF1/eRF3/GTP complex suggested that eRF1s M domain contacts eRF3s GTPase domain. Consistently, mutation of Arg192, which is predicted to come in close contact with the switch regions of eRF3, revealed its important role for eRF1s stimulatory effect on eRF3s GTPase activity. An ATP molecule used as a crystallization additive was bound in eRF1s putative decoding area. Mutational analysis of the ATP-binding site shed light on the mechanism of stop codon recognition by eRF1.

Kinetic Analysis of Interaction of Eukaryotic Release Factor 3 with Guanine Nucleotides

Eukaryotic translation termination is mediated by two release factors: eRF1 recognizes stop codons and triggers peptidyl-tRNA hydrolysis, whereas eRF3 accelerates this process in a GTP-dependent manner. Here we report kinetic analysis of guanine nucleotide binding to eRF3 performed by fluorescence stopped-flow technique using GTP/GDP derivatives carrying the fluorescent methylanthraniloyl (mant-) group, as well as thermodynamic analysis of eRF3 binding to unlabeled guanine nucleotides. Whereas the kinetics of eRF3 binding to mant-GDP is consistent with a one-step binding model, the double-exponential transients of eRF3 binding to mant-GTP indicate a two-step binding mechanism, in which the initial eRF3·mant-GTP complex undergoes subsequent conformational change. The affinity of eRF3 for GTP (Kd, ∼70 μm) is about 70-fold lower than for GDP (Kd, ∼ 1 μm) and both nucleotides dissociate rapidly from eRF3 (\batchmode \documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsmath} \pagestyle{empty} \begin{document} \(k_{-1}^{\mathrm{mant-GDP}}\) \end{document} ∼ 2.4 s-1; \batchmode \documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsmath} \pagestyle{empty} \begin{document} \(k_{-2}^{\mathrm{mant-GTP}}\) \end{document} ∼ 3.3 s-1). Whereas not influencing eRF3 binding to GDP, association of eRF3 with eRF1 at physiological Mg2+ concentrations specifically changes the kinetics of eRF3/mant-GTP interaction and stabilizes eRF3·GTP binding by two orders of magnitude (Kd ∼ 0.7 μm) due to lowering of the dissociation rate constant ∼24-fold (\batchmode \documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsmath} \pagestyle{empty} \begin{document} \(k_{-1}^{\mathrm{mant-GTP}}{\sim}0.14\mathrm{s}^{-1}\) \end{document} ∼ 0.14 s-1). Thus, eRF1 acts as a GTP dissociation inhibitor (TDI) for eRF3, promoting efficient ribosomal recruitment of its GTP-bound form. 80 S ribosomes did not influence guanine nucleotide binding/exchange on the eRF1·eRF3 complex. Guanine nucleotide binding and exchange on eRF3, which therefore depends on stimulation by eRF1, is entirely different from that on prokaryotic RF3 and unusual among GTPases.

Distinct eRF3 requirements suggest alternate eRF1 conformations mediate peptide release during eukaryotic translation termination.

Organisms that use the standard genetic code recognize UAA, UAG, and UGA as stop codons, whereas variant code species frequently alter this pattern of stop codon recognition. We previously demonstrated that a hybrid eRF1 carrying the Euplotes octocarinatus domain 1 fused to Saccharomyces cerevisiae domains 2 and 3 (Eo/Sc eRF1) recognized UAA and UAG, but not UGA, as stop codons. In the current study, we identified mutations in Eo/Sc eRF1 that restore UGA recognition and define distinct roles for the TASNIKS and YxCxxxF motifs in eRF1 function. Mutations in or near the YxCxxxF motif support the cavity model for stop codon recognition by eRF1. Mutations in the TASNIKS motif eliminated the eRF3 requirement for peptide release at UAA and UAG codons, but not UGA codons. These results suggest that the TASNIKS motif and eRF3 function together to trigger eRF1 conformational changes that couple stop codon recognition and peptide release during eukaryotic translation termination.

eIF5 and eIF5B together stimulate 48S initiation complex formation during ribosomal scanning

48S initiation complex (48S IC) formation is the first stage in the eukaryotic translation process. According to the canonical mechanism, 40S ribosomal subunit binds to the 5′-end of messenger RNA (mRNA) and scans its 5′-untranslated region (5′-UTR) to the initiation codon where it forms the 48S IC. Entire process is mediated by initiation factors. Here we show that eIF5 and eIF5B together stimulate 48S IC formation influencing initiation codon selection during ribosomal scanning. Initiation on non-optimal start codons—following structured 5′-UTRs, in bad AUG context, within few nucleotides from 5′-end of mRNA and CUG start codon—is the most affected. eIF5-induced hydrolysis of eIF2-bound GTP is essential for stimulation. GTP hydrolysis increases the probability that scanning ribosomal complexes will recognize and arrest scanning at a non-optimal initiation codon. Such 48S ICs are less stable owing to dissociation of eIF2*GDP from initiator tRNA, and eIF5B is then required to stabilize the initiator tRNA in the P site of 40S subunit. Alternative model that eIF5 and eIF5B cause 43S pre-initiation complex rearrangement favoring more efficient initiation codon recognition during ribosomal scanning is equally possible. Mutational analysis of eIF1A and eIF5B revealed distinct functions of eIF5B in 48S IC formation and subunit joining.