Eliane Hajnsdorf

Chapter 4 Poly(A)‐Assisted RNA Decay and Modulators of RNA Stability

In Escherichia coli, RNA degradation is orchestrated by the degradosome with the assistance of complementary pathways and regulatory cofactors described in this chapter. They control the stability of each transcript and regulate the expression of many genes involved in environmental adaptation. The poly(A)-dependent degradation machinery has diverse functions such as the degradation of decay intermediates generated by endoribonucleases, the control of the stability of regulatory non coding RNAs (ncRNAs) and the quality control of stable RNA. The metabolism of poly(A) and mechanism of poly(A)-assisted degradation are beginning to be understood. Regulatory factors, exemplified by RraA and RraB, control the decay rates of subsets of transcripts by binding to RNase E, in contrast to regulatory ncRNAs which, assisted by Hfq, target RNase E to specific transcripts. Destabilization is often consecutive to the translational inactivation of mRNA. However, there are examples where RNA degradation is the primary regulatory step.

Stimulation of poly(A) synthesis by Escherichia coli poly(A)polymerase I is correlated with Hfq binding to poly(A) tails

The bacterial Lsm protein, host factor I (Hfq), is an RNA chaperone involved in many types of RNA transactions such as replication and stability, control of small RNA activity and polyadenylation. In this latter case, Hfq stimulates poly(A) synthesis and binds poly(A) tails that it protects from exonucleolytic degradation. We show here, that there is a correlation between Hfq binding to the 3′ end of an RNA molecule and its ability to stimulate RNA elongation catalyzed by poly(A)polymeraseu2003I. In contrast, formation of the Hfq–RNA complex inhibits elongation of the RNA by polynucleotide phosphorylase. We demonstrate also that Hfq binding is not affected by the phosphorylation status of the RNA molecule and occurs equally well at terminal or internal stretches of poly(A).

Polyadenylation of a functional mRNA controls gene expression in Escherichia coli

Although usually implicated in the stabilization of mRNAs in eukaryotes, polyadenylation was initially shown to destabilize RNA in bacteria. All the data are consistent with polyadenylation being part of a quality control process targeting folded RNA fragments and non-functional RNA molecules to degradation. We report here an example in Escherichia coli, where polyadenylation directly controls the level of expression of a gene by modulating the stability of a functional transcript. Inactivation of poly(A)polymerase I causes overexpression of glucosamine–6-phosphate synthase (GlmS) and both the accumulation and stabilization of the glmS transcript. Moreover, we show that the glmS mRNA results from the processing of the glmU-glmS cotranscript by RNase E. Interestingly, the glmU-glmS cotranscript and the mRNA fragment encoding GlmU only slightly accumulated in the absence of poly(A)polymerase, suggesting that the endonucleolytically generated glmS mRNA harbouring a 5′ monophosphate and a 3′ stable hairpin is highly susceptible to poly(A)-dependent degradation.

Multiple degradation pathways of the rpsO mRNA of Escherichia coli. RNase E interacts with the 5′ and 3′ extremeties of the primary transcript

The degradation process of the rpsO mRNA is one of the best characterised in E coli. Two independent degradation pathways have been identified. The first one is initiated by an RNase E endonucleolytic cleavage which allows access to the transcript by polynucleotide phosphorylase and RNase II. Cleavage by RNase E gives rise to an rpsO message lacking the stabilising hairpin of the primary transcript; this truncated mRNA is then degraded exonucleolytically from its 3 terminus. This pathway might be coupled to the translation of the message. The second pathway allows degradation of polyadenylated rpsO mRNA independently of RNase II, PNPase and RNase E. The ribonucleases responsible for degradation of poly(A) mRNAs under these conditions are not known. Poly(A) tails have been proposed to facilitate the degradation of structured RNA by polynucleotide phosphorylase. In contrast, we believe that removal of poly(A) by RNase II stabilises the rpsO mRNA harbouring a 3 hairpin. In addition to these two pathways, we have identified endonucleolytic cleavages which occur only in strains deficient for both RNase E and RNase III suggesting that these two endonucleases protect the 5 leader of the mRNA from the attack of unidentified ribonuclease(s). Looping of the rpsO mRNA might explain how RNase E bound at the 5 end can cleave at a site located just upstream the hairpin of the transcription terminator.

Hfq affects mRNA levels independently of degradation

BackgroundThe bacterial Lsm protein, Hfq, is an RNA chaperone involved in many reactions related to RNA metabolism, such as replication and stability, control of small RNA activity and polyadenylation. Despite this wide spectrum of known functions, the global role of Hfq is almost certainly undervalued; its capacity to bind DNA and to interact with many other proteins are only now beginning to be taken into account.ResultsThe role of Hfq in the maturation and degradation of the rpsO mRNA of E. coli was investigated in vivo. The data revealed a decrease in rpsO mRNA abundance concomitant to an increase in its stability when Hfq is absent. This indicates that the change in mRNA levels in hfq mutants does not result from its modification of RNA stability. Moreover, a series of independent experiments have revealed that the decrease in mRNA level is not a consequence of a reduction of translation efficiency and that Hfq is not directly implicated in translational control of rpsO expression. Reduced steady-state mRNA levels in the absence of Hfq were also shown for rpsT, rpsB and rpsB-tsf, but not for lpp, pnp or tRNA transcripts. The abundance of chimeric transcripts rpsO-lacZ and rpsB-lacZ, whose expression was driven by rpsO and rpsB promoters, respectively, was also lower in the hfq null-mutants, while the β-galactosidase yield remained about the same as in the parent wild-type strain.ConclusionsThe data obtained suggest that alteration of rpsO, rpsT and rpsB-tsf transcript levels observed under conditions of Hfq deficiency is not caused by the post-transcriptional events, such as mRNA destabilization or changes in translation control, and may rather result from changes in transcriptional activity. So far, how Hfq affects transcription remains unclear. We propose that one of the likely mechanisms of Hfq-mediated modulation of transcription might operate early in the elongation step, when interaction of Hfq with a nascent transcript would help to overcome transcription pauses and to prevent preliminary transcript release.

Hfq stimulates the activity of the CCA-adding enzyme.

BackgroundThe bacterial Sm-like protein Hfq is known as an important regulator involved in many reactions of RNA metabolism. A prominent function of Hfq is the stimulation of RNA polyadenylation catalyzed by E. coli poly(A) polymerase I (PAP). As a member of the nucleotidyltransferase superfamily, this enzyme shares a high sequence similarity with an other representative of this family, the tRNA nucleotidyltransferase that synthesizes the 3-terminal sequence C-C-A to all tRNAs (CCA-adding enzyme). Therefore, it was assumed that Hfq might not only influence the poly(A) polymerase in its specific activity, but also other, similar enzymes like the CCA-adding enzyme.ResultsBased on the close evolutionary relation of these two nucleotidyltransferases, it was tested whether Hfq is a specific modulator acting exclusively on PAP or whether it also influences the activity of the CCA-adding enzyme. The obtained data indicate that the reaction catalyzed by this enzyme is substantially accelerated in the presence of Hfq. Furthermore, Hfq binds specifically to tRNA transcripts, which seems to be the prerequisite for the observed effect on CCA-addition.ConclusionThe increase of the CCA-addition in the presence of Hfq suggests that this protein acts as a stimulating factor not only for PAP, but also for the CCA-adding enzyme. In both cases, Hfq interacts with RNA substrates, while a direct binding to the corresponding enzymes was not demonstrated up to now (although experimental data indicate a possible interaction of PAP and Hfq). So far, the basic principle of these stimulatory effects is not clear yet. In case of the CCA-adding enzyme, however, the presented data indicate that the complex between Hfq and tRNA substrate might enhance the product release from the enzyme.

RNA protein crosslinks introduced into E. coli ribosomes by use of the intrinsic probe 4-thiouridine.

Abstract— 70S Ribosome substituted by the uridine photoactivable analogue 4‐thiouridine has been prepared by an in vivo method (substitution level 4.5%). The r‐proteins crosslinked to 16S and 23S rRNA before and after 366‐nm photoactivation were identified. Proteins S2‐S7‐S9/11‐S18 are found linked to 16S RNA in dark‐prepared 30S subunits. Illumination increases uniformly their binding by a factor of 2.5. Similarly, proteins L5‐L15‐L18‐L23‐L28‐L32 are found crosslinked to 23S RNA in dark‐prepared 50S subunits. Photoactivation increases their binding but in addition promotes the covalent linking of proteins L1‐L3‐L4.

Photoregulation of E. Coli Growth and the near Ultraviolet Photochemistry of tRNA

Near UV illumination of E. coli cells triggers a division and growth delay (GD). The mechanism of GD is analysed at the molecular level.

An electrophoretic method for the purification of RNA regions involved in protein crosslinking.

Direct information about structural interactions in ribonucleoprotein complexes can be obtained from crosslinking data. The purification of specific complexes, i.e., their separation from noncrosslinked proteins, from free RNA, and from other complexes, is essential for the identification of the bound proteins and the precise localization of their attachment sites in RNA. We describe a two-dimensional denaturing gel system which achieves this purification; in the first dimension basic proteins do not enter the gel and RNA--protein complexes are slowed down compared to protein free RNA, and in the second dimension sodium dodecyl sulfate improves the separation between the different complexes on the basis of their protein content.