![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 273, Issue 43, 27960-27967, October 23, 1998
From the Centro de Biología Molecular (Consejo Superior de
Investigaciones Científicas), Universidad Autónoma de
Madrid, Canto Blanco, 28049 Madrid, Spain
Transient expression of poliovirus
2Apro in mammalian cells by means of the recombinant
vaccinia virus vT7 expression system leads to drastic inhibition of
both cellular and vaccinia virus gene expression (Aldabe, R., Feduchi,
E., Novoa, I., and Carrasco, L. (1995) FEBS Lett. 377, 1-5; Aldabe, R., Feduchi, E., Novoa, I., and Carrasco, L. (1995)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 215, 928-936). To obtain
further insights into the molecular basis of this inhibition, a number
of 2Apro variants were generated and expressed in COS-1
cells. The effect of these variants on cellular translation, on
vaccinia virus-specific translation, and on transcription of the
reporter gene luciferase was analyzed. The ability of the different
2Apro variants to block cellular translation depends on
their capacities to cleave eIF-4G. The blockade exerted by
2Apro on transcription of the luciferase gene reinforces
the notion that this protease is a potent inhibitor of RNA polymerase
II-mediated transcription. Some of the 2Apro variants
tested failed to block luciferase transcription, despite the fact that
eIF-4G cleavage and inhibition of translation were observed. Two
reconstituted polioviruses mutated in 2Apro were defective
in inhibiting luciferase transcription, yet were still able to cleave
eIF-4G and block translation. These findings indicate that
2Apro interferes with cellular gene expression at both the
transcriptional and translational levels. Moreover, these two effects
probably reflect the inactivation of different host proteins by
poliovirus 2Apro.
Infection of susceptible cells by poliovirus, a representative
member of the Picornaviridae family, induces drastic alterations in
cellular metabolism and morphology. Thus, RNA synthesis by the three
cellular RNA polymerases, as well as mRNA translation, are severely
impaired soon after poliovirus infection of cultured fibroblasts (1,
2). The availability of the poliovirus genome as cDNA permitted the
identification of gene products responsible for these phenomena. A
number of studies have focused on the action of two poliovirus
proteases, 2Apro and 3Cpro, on cellular
macromolecular synthesis. The finding that 2Apro bisected
initiation factor eIF-4G1
suggested that this protease is responsible for the inhibition of
cellular mRNA translation (3-5). Indeed, several recombinant picornavirus 2Apro directly cleave eIF-4G when this factor
forms part of the eIF-4F complex (6-8). Inactivation of eIF-4F leads
to a drastic inhibition of mRNA translation in cell-free systems
(6-9). However, under some experimental situations, ongoing cellular
translation continues for hours at substantial levels in cells
containing cleaved eIF-4G, whereas translation of newly made mRNAs
in this situation is drastically blocked (10-14). Therefore, it is
possible that, in addition to the bisection of eIF-4G, some other event
contributes to the complete shut-off of ongoing translation after
poliovirus infection (10, 12). Translation of poliovirus RNA escapes
this inhibition because picornavirus RNA utilizes the COOH-terminal
moiety of eIF-4G bound to eIF-4A, instead of an intact eIF-4F complex
(15-17).
Poliovirus 3Cpro has been linked to the inhibition of
cellular transcription by RNA polymerases II and III after proteolytic inactivation of several components of the cellular transcriptional machinery. Thus, purified 3Cpro cleaves and inactivates a
subunit of transcription factor IID, the TATA-binding protein (TBP),
and the cAMP-responsive element-binding protein (CREB) (18-20).
Likewise, cleavage of transcription factor IIC subunit by poliovirus
3Cpro leading to the shut-off of RNA polymerase III
transcription in vitro has been documented (21, 22).
However, the relevance of these cleavages for the inhibition of
cellular transcription by poliovirus infection remains to be
established. In addition to 3Cpro, transient expression of
poliovirus 2Apro in COS-1 cells also blocks transcription
of a reporter gene by RNA polymerase II (23, 24). Recently, in
vitro cleavage of TBP by recombinant poliovirus 2Apro
has been documented, although the functional significance of this event
remains obscure (25). Therefore, the possibility that 2Apro
interferes with cellular gene expression at both the transcriptional and translational levels is an attractive suggestion.
Poliovirus 2Apro is a small cysteine protease that exhibits
homology to trypsin-like proteases (26). 2Apro cleaves at
two different Tyr-Gly bonds present in the poliovirus polyprotein. The
first cleavage occurs in cis, while the polyprotein is still
being synthesized on polysomes, separating the precursor of structural
protein P1 from 2Apro itself (27). The second
2Apro-mediated cleavage is less efficient and occurs on the
3CDpro precursor to generate two alternative products, 3C'
and 3D', of still unknown function (28, 29). The catalytic triad of 2Apro is formed by His-20, Asp-38, and Cys-109. Some
mutations in this catalytic triad, particularly in Cys-109, render the
protease fully inactive, while other mutations outside this triad
generate a 2Apro still active in cis, but
incapable of bisecting eIF-4G (30-32). In addition to the functioning
of 2Apro in poliovirus polyprotein processing and
cytotoxicity, 2Apro has been implicated in other steps of
the poliovirus replicative cycle, such as enhancement of poliovirus
mRNA translation and participation in the RNA replication
apparatus, and as a determinant of the mouse neurovirulent phenotype
(29, 33-36). It is remarkable that a protein as small as
2Apro (only 149 amino acids) carries out multiple functions
during the virus life cycle, perhaps reflecting a common strategy
followed by viruses to condense their genetic information.
Recently, we reported that transient expression of poliovirus
2Apro in mammalian cells using recombinant vaccinia virus
(vT7), efficiently cleaves eIF-4G, leading to a drastic reduction of
both cellular and viral translation (37, 38). To obtain further insight into the molecular mechanism of this inhibition, a number of
2Apro variants were generated and expressed in COS-1 cells.
The proteolytic activities of these mutants on eIF-4G and their effects
on cellular and vaccinia virus translation, as well as their action on
transcription and translation of a reporter gene, were tested. Our
present results indicate that 2Apro blocks gene expression
at both transcriptional and translational levels.
Cells and Viruses--
COS and HeLa cells were grown in
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM) supplemented with 5%
newborn calf serum. Stably transfected HeLa cells (clone X1/5) carrying
the luciferase gene under the human cytomegalovirus promotor
EI(PhCMV) and the tetracycline-controlled operator was
generously provided by H. Bujard (Heidelberg, Germany) (39). These
cells were grown in DMEM supplemented with 10% newborn calf serum in
the presence of 0.02 µg/ml tetracycline until the induction. To this
end, tetracycline was removed and the luciferase activity was measured
6 h later. Recombinant vaccinia virus expressing the T7 RNA
polymerase (vT7) was amplified in HeLa cells growing in DMEM
supplemented with 2% newborn calf serum. Poliovirus type 1 (Mahoney
strain) was obtained and used as described previously (29). Poliovirus
mutants bearing substitutions in 2Apro, named as M3 (SS6F),
M6 (D135N), and M7 (V119M) were obtained as described previously
(40).
DNA Recombinant Technology--
All the plasmids were amplified
in Escherichia coli DH5 Construction of Poliovirus 2Apro
Mutants--
Deletion mutants were obtained from pTM1-2A vector using
restriction enzymes that cleave within the 2Apro gene as
follows. For pTM12A Transient Expression of 2Apro Variants in COS-1
Cells--
COS-1 cells growing in 24-well dishes at 70% confluence
were infected with vT7 virus at 5 pfu/cell in DMEM without serum. Twenty minutes later, the cells were transfected with 0.5 µg of the
indicated plasmid using Lipofectin (Life Technologies, Inc.) as
described previously (37). Depending on cell confluence, the percentage
of transfected cells varied from 70% to 90%, as judged by eIF-4G
cleavage.
Analysis of Protein Synthesis by SDS-PAGE and by
Immunoblot--
At 16 h after transfection, the cells were
metabolically labeled with [35S]methionine (25 µCi/ml,
Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) for 1 h, recovered in lysis buffer,
and analyzed by SDS-PAGE (29). Immunoblot analyses were carried out as
described previously using the ECL Western blotting detection kit
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Rabbit antisera against eIFG-4G or
anti-3Cpro proteins were used at 1:1000 dilutions.
Isolation of RNA and RT-PCR Analysis--
To analyze
transcription of the luciferase gene, 1.5 × 106 COS
cells were co-transfected with 1 µg of reporter plasmids (pSVL-Luc or
pKS-Luc) and 3 µg of effector plasmid (pTM12A or its
2Apro variants) using Lipofectin in medium without serum.
After 12 h, expression of 2Apro was induced by
infection with vT7 at 5 pfu/cell. The cells were also treated with 40 µg/ml AraC to prevent the replication of vaccinia virus DNA. Twenty
hours later (32 h after transfection), cell monolayers were washed with
phosphate-buffered saline and cytoplasmic extracts were collected in
buffer A (10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.8), 1 mM EDTA,
150 mM NaCl, and 0.65% Nonidet P-40). An aliquot of 20 µl was taken to measure luciferase activity of each sample (42), and
the remainder was used for isolation of cytoplasmic RNA as described
(43). The RNA pellets were dissolved in buffer P (20 mM
Tris-HCl (pH 7.6), 60 mM NaCl, 10 mM
MgCl2 and 2 mM 1,4-dithiothreitol) and treated
with 20 units of RQ1 RNase-free DNase (Promega) for 1 h at
37 °C. The RNA solutions were extracted three times with phenol and
once with chloroform:isoamyl alcohol (24:1). The RNA was precipitated
with two volumes of ethanol at
Mutational Analysis of Poliovirus 2Apro
DISTINCT INHIBITORY FUNCTIONS OF 2Apro ON
TRANSLATION AND TRANSCRIPTION*
,
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References
according to standard procedures
(41). Restriction enzymes, Klenow fragment, mung bean nuclease, and T4
DNA ligase were purchased from New England Biolabs. Avian
myeloblastosis virus reverse transcriptase and RNasin were from
Promega. pSVL-Luc plasmid was constructed by inserting a
BamHI fragment encompassing the entire coding region of the
firefly luciferase gene into plasmid pSVL (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech)
digested with the same enzyme. pKS-Luc plasmid was constructed by
inserting the BamHI fragment mentioned above into Bluescript KS vector (Stratagene). In this case, the luciferase gene is under the
control of T7 RNA polymerase promotor and is induced after infection
with vT7 virus.
1-22, pTM1-2A vector was partially digested
with MscI and completely digested with SalI. The
fragment of 0.385 kb, which results from a single cleavage of
MscI at position 3447, was isolated from the agarose gel and
ligated with pTM1 vector previously digested with SmaI and
SalI. The resulting 2Apro lacks the 22 NH2-terminal amino acids. For pTM12A
66-79, pTM1-2A plasmid was fully digested with NdeI enzyme and partially
digested with XbaI. The DNA fragment of 5.8 kb was isolated
from the agarose gel, treated with Klenow fragment, and religated. The
resulting 2Apro gene contains an internal deletion of 30 codons. For pTM1-2A
101-146, pTM1-2A vector was partially
digested with MscI, and the fragment of 5.8 kb,
resulting from a single cleavage of MscI at position 3682, was isolated from the agarose gel. Then, the plasmid was digested with
NcoI, incubated with Klenow enzyme, and religated. The
resulting 2Apro contains a carboxyl-terminal deletion of 45 amino acids. For pTM1-2A
118-147, pTM1-2A plasmid was digested
with DraIII enzyme and the resulting 3' protruding ends were
removed by treatment with mung bean nuclease. This plasmid was digested
with PstI enzyme and the resulting 0.31-kbp DNA fragment was
isolated from the agarose gel. Additionally, pTM1-2A was digested with
NcoI and treated with mung bean nuclease to remove its 5'
protruding extreme and digested with PstI enzyme. The
resulting vector was isolated and ligated to the 0.31-kbp DNA fragment
mentioned above. The resulting 2Apro contains a
carboxyl-terminal deletion of 30 amino acids. Mutant 2A-1, which
contains a leucine inserted at position 103 of 2Apro, was
obtained by subcloning a 0.137-kbp NcoI-fragment obtained from plasmid pHF121pXA (generously given by N. Sonenberg, McGill University, Canada) into plasmid pTM12A previously digested with NcoI. Point mutations Y88S, Y88P, and Y88F in
2Apro have been described previously (29). Mutants N18K,
A22T, L39F, C55Y, G60R, S66F, G100N, G110S, V119M, G121E, A125V, G126D,
S134L, and D135N were obtained by random mutagenesis and genetic
selection in yeast as indicated (40).
20 °C. Finally, RNA concentration
was quantified by absorbance at 260 nm and by agarose gel
electrophoresis.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Construction and Expression of Poliovirus 2Apro
Variants in COS Cells--
Expression of 2Apro using the
vT7 system in COS-1 cells induces a marked inhibition of cellular
translation (37). To analyze this effect in more detail, the
2Apro variants depicted in Fig.
1 were generated and cloned in pTM1 plasmid as indicated under "Experimental Procedures." The
pTM1-based expression system provides a high level of expression at
only a few hours after transfection and infection of COS-1 cells with VT7. 2Apro mutants with deletions at the amino terminus
(
1-22), at the carboxyl terminus (
101-146;
124-146), as
well as internally (
66-97) were generated. In addition, 17 point
mutations in 2Apro were obtained, some of them by
site-directed mutagenesis (Y88S, Y88P, and Y88L) and the rest using a
recently described genetic system to select cytotoxic-deficient
2Apro mutants in yeast cells (40). Mutant 2A-1 contains a
leucine insertion at position 103 as described (44). Two questions were addressed with this collection of 2Apro variants. 1) Is
there a correlation between eIF-4G cleavage and the blockade of protein
synthesis? 2) To what extent are transcription and translation
differentially affected, particularly by the 2Apro variants
deficient in cleavage of eIF-4G?
|
Action of 2Apro Variants on eIF-4G Cleavage and Cellular Translation-- Infection of COS-1 cells with vaccinia virus (vT7) inhibits the translation of cellular mRNA (45). However, if cells are treated with AraC after infection, the replication of vaccinia virus is blocked and cellular translation continues at substantial levels (60-80% of control) for several hours. Consequently, the use of AraC offers the possibility to test the action of poliovirus 2Apro on cellular protein synthesis in cells infected with vT7 and transfected with pTM1-2Apro. Initially, pTM1 constructs bearing the different 2Apro variants were transfected, infected with VT7, and treated with 40 µg/ml AraC. After 16 h of incubation, protein synthesis was estimated by [35S]methionine labeling of transfected COS-1 cells. An aliquot of each sample was immunoreacted with anti-eIF-4G antibodies. Expression of wt poliovirus 2Apro reduced cellular protein synthesis by 80% as estimated by densitometric quantitation of actin synthesis (Fig. 2). Analysis of eIF-4G cleavage in these cells shows that most of this factor has been degraded, although 10-20% of eIF-4G remains intact, most probably corresponding to untransfected cells. Notably, the level of expression was very variable for the different 2Apro mutants. In general there is an inverse correlation between 2Apro synthesis and the capacity to block protein synthesis and to cleave eIF-4G. For most of the variants, the major protein synthesized by transfected cells corresponds to 2Apro.
|
1-22 and
66-97 variants were synthesized at very low
levels, and they were detectable only after prolonged gel exposures. At present we do not know the reason for this low expression, but one
possibility is that these proteins are very unstable and are rapidly
degraded. The 2Apro with point mutations cleaved eIF-4G to
varying degrees. Some variants such as A22T, L39F, S66F, Y88S, Y88P,
Y88F, G110S, V119M, G126D, and D135N hydrolyzed eIF-4G and blocked
protein synthesis at levels comparable to wt 2Apro.
However, other variants such as N18K, G60R, and G121E showed weak
proteolytic activity on eIF-4G and did not significantly reduce
cellular translation. Particularly striking is the G121E variant, which
synthesizes 2Apro at very high levels and yet cellular
translation is not affected. G121E together with N18K are the least
efficient variants as regards eIF-4G cleavage. Interestingly, mutant
2A-1, which was described as devoid of eIF-4G cleavage activity, showed
significant proteolytic activity on this factor when assayed by the vT7
transient expression system. This apparent discrepancy may reflect the
different systems used to detect eIF-4G cleavage.
Inhibition of Vaccinia Virus Translation by Several Poliovirus 2Apro Variants-- Poliovirus 2Apro is very toxic for vaccinia virus, such that it was impossible to obtain recombinant vaccinia viruses bearing the 2Apro gene (46, 47). Further work analyzing the action of this protease on vaccinia virus gene expression indicated that 2Apro profoundly interferes with vaccinia virus replication, such that no viral protein synthesis is detected at late times of infection (48). Therefore, the action of the different 2Apro variants described above was tested on vaccinia virus late translation. An aliquot was taken to assay the extent of eIF-4G cleavage in order to estimate the percentage of transfected cells. The experiment was carried out as indicated in Fig. 2, but AraC was omitted. The percentage of transfection achieved was about 95% as judged by eIF-4G cleavage induced by wt 2Apro (Fig. 3B). This result is consistent with the level of translation inhibition obtained, which was above 90% (Fig. 3, A and C). The higher inhibition of vaccinia virus protein synthesis obtained as compared with the experiment shown in Fig. 2 may correspond in part to a more efficient transfection. The point mutants that showed less inhibitory potency on vaccinia virus translation (Fig. 3A), such as G60R, N18K, C55Y, and G121E, left more eIF-4G uncleaved (Fig. 3B). However, with other 2Apro variants there is not an evident correlation between eIF-4G cleavage and inhibition of late viral protein synthesis. For instance, this is the case for the N18K variant, which reduces viral translation by 75-80%, leaving part of eIF-4G uncleaved. This inhibition of translation may be explained by the fact that vaccinia virus late translation requires the synthesis of early and intermediate proteins. Therefore, it may be that even partial cleavage of eIF-4G interferes with viral protein synthesis at earlier times of infection, amplifying the inhibition of late viral translation. Alternatively, it is possible that poliovirus 2Apro blocks an as yet unidentified vaccinia virus function unrelated to eIF-4G cleavage, which may lead to inhibition of late translation. This possibility agrees well with the toxicity of poliovirus 2Apro for vaccinia virus (46, 47).
|
Blockade of Transcription and Translation of a Reporter Gene by Poliovirus 2Apro and Its Variants-- The pioneering work of Davies et al. (24) on the action of poliovirus 2Apro in different steps of gene expression showed that 2Apro inhibited the transcription of a reporter gene more potently than its translation. However, it remains unclear whether this effect of 2Apro on transcription reflects a specific inactivation of a component of the cellular transcriptional machinery or if transcription is affected indirectly by the inhibition of protein synthesis provoked by 2Apro. To distinguish between these two possibilities, the action of poliovirus 2Apro and some of the variants described above were assayed on transcription and translation of luciferase as a reporter gene. Luciferase was expressed either from pSVL-Luc (nuclear transcription) or from pKSLuc (cytoplasmic transcription). Poliovirus wt 2Apro drastically reduces transcription from the nuclear plasmid pSVL-Luc, but not from plasmid pKS-Luc, where transcription is driven by phage T7 RNA polymerase in the cytoplasm. Densitometric quantitation revealed a reduction of luciferase transcription from pSVL-Luc of about 15-20-fold with respect to control cells transfected with pTM1 vector without insert (Fig. 4A). By contrast, luciferase synthesis is powerfully blocked in both instances (Fig. 4, B and D). The effect of 2Apro on luciferase mRNA translation was estimated by dividing the enzymatic activity of each sample by the luciferase mRNA content. Thus, expression of poliovirus 2Apro reduced translation of luciferase mRNA about 5-fold when plasmid pSV-Luc is tested, while the inhibition was about 100-fold with pKS-Luc. The conclusion from this experiment is that nuclear transcription of a reporter gene is certainly blocked by 2Apro in good agreement with previous results (24), while cytoplasmic transcription is not affected. Translation of the newly generated mRNA is blocked by poliovirus 2Apro in both instances.
|
1-22,
101-146, V119M, G121E, and D135N did not affect luciferase
transcription. Mutant S66F showed an effect similar to wt
2Apro, and the rest of the variants A22T, L39F, G60R, and
G100N showed an intermediate phenotype.
|
|
Transcriptional Inhibition of an Integrated Luciferase Gene in Poliovirus-infected HeLa Cells-- The experiments shown above suggested that poliovirus 2Apro blocks class II transcription in a specific manner. Our next step was to evaluate the contribution of 2Apro activity to the inhibition of cellular transcription observed after poliovirus infection. Previous work has shown that inhibition of RNA polymerase II-mediated transcription is due to 3Cpro activity in poliovirus-infected cells. Indeed, recombinant 3Cpro directly cleaves TATA-binding protein and CREB in cell-free systems (18-20). Much less is known about the action of poliovirus infection or 3Cpro alone on transcription in intact cells. Most of these experiments have been done using nuclear extracts programmed with plasmid DNA carrying the reporter gene to be transcribed. The availability of a HeLa cell line that expresses luciferase in a tetracycline-dependent manner opens the possibility of assaying the action of poliovirus and individual poliovirus proteases on transcription driven by RNA polymerase II (39). Luciferase activity in HeLa cells clone X1/5 is induced about 1500-fold 6 h after tetracycline withdrawal (Fig. 6B). Infection of these cells with poliovirus 1 h after luciferase induction provoked a drastic reduction in both luciferase activity and transcription of the luciferase gene (Fig. 6, A and B). The presence of guanidine, a known inhibitor of poliovirus RNA synthesis, does not prevent this inhibition. Three different poliovirus variants bearing point mutations in 2Apro, i.e. S66F (M3), D135N (M6), and V119M (M7), were assayed for their effect on luciferase gene expression. These poliovirus variants, which have been characterized in detail recently (40), are viable but show defects in the transactivation of translation by 2Apro. The three poliovirus mutants tested cleaved eIF-4G and shut down host translation (Fig. 6, C and D). Consequently, the three mutants drastically prevented luciferase synthesis, but mutants M7 and M6 showed defects in blocking luciferase transcription. Notably, the M7 mutant synthesized luciferase mRNA transcripts at levels comparable to the uninfected control, despite the fact that this mutant virus synthesized substantial amounts of 3Cpro (Fig. 6, A and D). The finding that the poliovirus M7 mutant blocks luciferase activity while having no effect on transcription agrees well with the results described above, where this 2Apro mutant failed to block transcription from pSVL-Luc (Fig. 5), but cellular and luciferase synthesis were profoundly affected (Figs. 2 and 5).
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The inhibition of host gene expression after poliovirus infection has been linked to the action of virus-encoded proteinases 2Apro and 3Cpro (4, 19, 24, 26). However, little is known about the effect of individual expression of these proteinases on transcription and translation in mammalian cells. Therefore, the exact mechanism by which poliovirus disarms the cellular gene expression is still a matter of intense research.
The differential effect of 2Apro expression on cellular transcription and translation has now been analyzed using a genetic approach. A number of 2Apro mutants have been obtained and expressed in COS cells by means of pTM1/vT7 expression system. The ability of 2Apro variants to block cellular translation depends on their capacity to hydrolyze eIF-4G. Point mutants such as G60R, N18K, and G121E showed weak proteolytic activity compared with wt 2Apro and failed to block cellular translation (Table I). These data suggest that 2Apro expression, employing the vT7 system, impairs cellular translation through the inactivation of eIF-4G. However, these results do not rule out that another event apart from eIF-4G cleavage participates in the early shut-off of translation observed in poliovirus infected cells (10, 12).
Vaccinia virus specific translation appears to be more sensitive to the
action of 2Apro than does cellular translation. Thus, only
the deletion mutant
66-97 was unable to interfere with vaccinia
translation. The point mutants G60R, N18K, and G121E, which failed to
shut down cellular translation, affected vaccinia late translation at
substantial levels. This effect could be explained in part by the fact
that vaccinia virus late translation relies upon the action of early and intermediate proteins. In addition, transcription of these genes in
a cascade fashion is necessary to obtain late protein synthesis. A
small effect of these 2Apro variants on early vaccinia
translation may result in an amplified effect on translation of
vaccinia late polypeptides. It should be kept in mind that the presence
of the poliovirus 2Apro gene alone is toxic for vaccinia
replication, even when this sequence is placed in the inverse
orientation where no expression of 2Apro occurs (46,
47).
Notably, we have observed that poliovirus 2Apro is a potent transcriptional inhibitor of class II genes when expressed in COS cells. The presence of 2Apro leads to a 15-20-fold inhibition of transcription from a reporter gene (pSVL-Luc) bearing the late promoter of SV40. These results agree well with whose obtained by Davies et al. (24) and support the notion that 2Apro impairs gene expression by blocking both cellular transcription and translation. Furthermore, the fact that 2Apro expression did not affect cytoplasmic transcription driven by T7 RNA polymerase suggests that 2Apro inactivates the nuclear transcriptional machinery. Interestingly, some 2Apro mutants such as D135N and V119M failed to repress luciferase transcription, despite retaining the capacity to block cellular and luciferase translation. This finding argues against the transcriptional inhibition as an indirect effect of translational blockade induced by 2Apro. Clearly, the inhibitory functions of 2Apro on cellular transcription and translation can be separated using mutants described in this work (Table I).
The above conclusion was reinforced by the analysis of reconstituted polioviruses bearing mutated 2Apro: V119M (M7) and D135N (M6). These mutants shut down cellular translation but were defective in blocking transcription of the integrated luciferase gene, despite the synthesis of substantial amounts of 3Cpro. This result was surprising because previous studies have linked the activity of 3Cpro to the shut-off of cellular transcription after poliovirus infection (18, 19). Indeed, some transcription factors such as TBP, CREB, and transcription factor IIC have been described as targets of poliovirus 3Cpro, although the relevance of these inactivations to the transcriptional inhibition induced by poliovirus remain to be established. The results obtained with poliovirus mutant M7 (2AV119M) point to the action of poliovirus 2Apro as a major determinant of class II-specific transcriptional inhibition after poliovirus infection. In this study the effect of poliovirus infection on transcription of a specific host gene has been tested for the first time in intact cells. However, the possibility that both 2Apro and 3Cpro proteinases may cooperate to complete the global transcriptional inhibition observed after poliovirus infection, remains open.
How does 2Apro impair cellular transcription? Immunostaining of cells expressing poliovirus 2Apro shows that this enzyme is preferentially located in the cytoplasm (37). However, it cannot be ruled out that a small amount of 2Apro might migrate to the nucleus to cleave some cellular factors as has been shown for poliovirus 3Cpro (18, 49). At present, the best known cellular substrate for poliovirus 2Apro is the translational initiation factor eIF-4G. However, after poliovirus infection, several proteins become degraded; the majority of them remain to be identified (50). It could be that some of these cellular polypeptides, perhaps implicated in cellular transcription, are directly or indirectly inactivated by 2Apro. In this respect, Yalamanchili et al. (25) have reported recently that recombinant poliovirus 2Apro cleaves TBP in vitro, although this cleavage does not appear to lead to inhibition of transcription by RNA polymerase II in vitro. Additional experiments will be required to test whether cleavage of TBP by poliovirus 2Apro has repercussions on class II transcription in vivo.
Finally, inducible expression of poliovirus 2Apro in yeast also arrests cellular transcription (32). It is possible that poliovirus 2Apro inactivates similar factor(s) in both mammalian and yeast cells. This attractive hypothesis would allow us to capitalize on the genetic advantages of yeast to find novel cellular substrates of poliovirus 2Apro. Experiments in this direction are in progress in our laboratory.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank R. Aldabe, H. Bujard, and N. Sonenberg for providing with plasmid pTM1-2Apro, HeLa cell clone X1/5, and plasmid pHF121pXA, respectively. We acknowledge the critical reading of the manuscript by John Lewis, and the expert technical assistance of M. A. Sanz.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported in part by DGICYT Grant PB94-0148 and an institutional grant (to the Centro de Biología Molecular) from the Fundación Ramón Areces.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Recipient of a Comunidad Autónoma de Madrid fellowship. To
whom correspondence and reprint requests should be addressed. Tel:
34-1-91-3978450; Fax: 34-1-91-3974799; E-mail:
iventoso{at}trasto.cbm.uam.es.
§ Recipient of a Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas postdoctoral fellowship.
The abbreviations used are: eIF-4G, eukaryotic initiation factor 4G; PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis; pfu, plaque-forming unit(s); wt, wild-type; TBP, TATA-binding protein; CREB, cAMP-responsive element-binding protein; DMEM, Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium; kb, kilobase(s); kbp, kilobase pair(s); RT, reverse transcriptase; PCR, polymerase chain reaction.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. Castello, E. Alvarez, and L. Carrasco Differential Cleavage of eIF4GI and eIF4GII in Mammalian Cells: EFFECTS ON TRANSLATION J. Biol. Chem., November 3, 2006; 281(44): 33206 - 33216. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Zhou and W. Song Leaky Scanning and Reinitiation Regulate BACE1 Gene Expression. Mol. Cell. Biol., May 1, 2006; 26(9): 3353 - 3364. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Alvarez, L. Menendez-Arias, and L. Carrasco The Eukaryotic Translation Initiation Factor 4GI Is Cleaved by Different Retroviral Proteases J. Virol., December 1, 2003; 77(23): 12392 - 12400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Ventoso, R. Blanco, C. Perales, and L. Carrasco HIV-1 protease cleaves eukaryotic initiation factor 4G and inhibits cap-dependent translation PNAS, October 16, 2001; (2001) 231343498. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X. Li, H.-H. Lu, S. Mueller, and E. Wimmer The C-terminal residues of poliovirus proteinase 2Apro are critical for viral RNA replication but not for cis- or trans-proteolytic cleavage J. Gen. Virol., February 1, 2001; 82(2): 397 - 408. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
A. Barco, E. Feduchi, and L. Carrasco A Stable HeLa Cell Line That Inducibly Expresses Poliovirus 2Apro: Effects on Cellular and Viral Gene Expression J. Virol., March 1, 2000; 74(5): 2383 - 2392. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
I. Novoa and L. Carrasco Cleavage of Eukaryotic Translation Initiation Factor 4G by Exogenously Added Hybrid Proteins Containing Poliovirus 2Apro in HeLa Cells: Effects on Gene Expression Mol. Cell. Biol., April 1, 1999; 19(4): 2445 - 2454. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Ventoso, R. Blanco, C. Perales, and L. Carrasco HIV-1 protease cleaves eukaryotic initiation factor 4G and inhibits cap-dependent translation PNAS, November 6, 2001; 98(23): 12966 - 12971. [Abstract] |