![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 47, 33198-33201, November 19, 1999
§,
From the
Department of Molecular Biology and
Microbiology, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University,
Cleveland, Ohio 44106 and the ¶ Department of Genetics, North
Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We have shown that elevated expression of
ribosomal protein L5 in Xenopus embryos results in the
ectopic activation of 5 S rRNA genes that are normally inactive. This
transcriptional stimulation mimics the effect of overexpressing
transcription factor IIIA (TFIIIA),
the 5 S rRNA gene-specific transcription factor. The results support a
model in which a network of nucleic acid-protein interactions involving
5 S rRNA, the 5 S rRNA gene, TFIIIA, and L5 mediates both feedback
inhibition of 5 S rRNA synthesis and coupling of 5 S rRNA synthesis to
accumulation of a ribosomal protein, L5. We propose that these
mechanisms contribute to the homeostatic control of ribosome assembly.
Ribosome biogenesis in eukaryotic cells requires the synthesis of
RNAs by all three nuclear RNA polymerases: RNA polymerase I for the 28 S, 18 S, and 5.8 S rRNAs; RNA polymerase II to produce mRNAs that
encode ribosomal proteins; and RNA polymerase III to synthesize 5 S
rRNA. The mechanisms responsible for coordinate accumulation of the
various ribosomal components are poorly understood, especially with
respect to coupling synthesis of 5 S rRNA to that of the other
ribosomal RNAs and of the ribosomal RNAs to the production of ribosomal proteins.
Transcription factor IIIA
(TFIIIA)1 is a 5 S rRNA
gene-specific transcription factor that binds to the internal control
region of 5 S rRNA genes in the first step of transcription complex
assembly (1, 2). Remarkably, TFIIIA also binds to 5 S rRNA, the gene product, to form a 7 S RNP complex in a fashion that is competitive and
incompatible with simultaneous binding to 5 S rRNA gene (3, 4). The 7 S
RNP complex accumulates to high levels in Xenopus oocytes as
a prelude to subsequent assembly of ribosomes near the end of oogenesis
(3, 5, 6). Interestingly, the 7 S RNP has also been proposed to mediate
a feedback regulation mechanism controlling 5 S rRNA synthesis in
somatic cells (3), because 5 S rRNA can compete for the binding of a
protein, TFIIIA, required for its own synthesis. The feedback
regulation model has been supported by experiments showing that
expression in Xenopus embryos of mutant forms of TFIIIA that
have reduced affinity for 5 S rRNA (7) leads to levels of 5 S rRNA
synthesis that are considerably higher than is obtained with comparable
expression of wild-type TFIIIA (8). This result suggests that
compromising the 5 S rRNA binding activity of TFIIIA leads to elevated
5 S rRNA gene transcription because of impairment of the normal
feedback inhibition loop. This interpretation is further supported by
the observation that 5 S rRNA synthesis in vitro is less
sensitive to inhibition by 5 S rRNA when transcription is mediated by
the mutant form of TFIIIA that results in high level 5 S rRNA gene transcription in vivo (8).
5 S rRNA binds not only to TFIIIA but also to ribosomal protein L5. L5
and 5 S rRNA interact to form a 5 S RNP (9-11) that is believed to be
a precursor for incorporation into the large subunit of the ribosome
(12). Thus, 5 S rRNA can form binary complexes with either TFIIIA or
L5, but binding to the two proteins is competitive, and ternary
complexes containing both proteins cannot be
detected.2 The interaction of
5 S rRNA with either TFIIIA or L5 to form discrete RNPs is also likely
to be important in the shuttling of 5 S rRNA, TFIIIA, and L5 between
the nucleus and cytoplasm (13-18).
The network of nucleic acid-protein interactions involving TFIIIA, L5,
5 S rRNA, and the 5 S rRNA gene suggests a model in which 5 S rRNA
synthesis is coupled to the accumulation of a ribosomal protein (L5).
In the proposed regulatory loop (Fig. 1), an increase in the
concentration of L5 would result in displacement of the equilibrium
between each of the relevant RNPs (5 and 7 S) and its constituent
components in opposite directions, resulting in the formation of
additional 5 S RNP and the release of free TFIIIA from 7 S RNPs. The
TFIIIA released from 7 S RNPs would be available for binding to and
nucleating transcription complex formation on additional 5 S rRNA
genes. Thus, 5 S rRNA synthesis would be responsive to levels of L5
expression, even though there is no reason to believe L5 is directly
involved in 5 S rRNA synthesis in any way. Brow and Geiduschek (19)
have proposed a comparable model for coupling 5 S rRNA synthesis in
yeast to accumulation of YL3, the yeast homolog of L5, but in
vivo evidence supporting such a model for coupling 5 S rRNA
synthesis to ribosomal protein accumulation in any species has been lacking.
Synthetic mRNAs--
Plasmids pT3myc/L1-N41+5'-UTR-DS and
pT3myc/L5
RNAs were synthesized in vitro with T3 RNA polymerase using
MegaScript reagents from Ambion and were capped by inclusion of m7G(5')ppp(5')G (Ambion) in the transcription reaction.
Synthetic RNAs were purified by DNase I treatment, extraction with
phenol/chloroform, and chromatography on Sephadex G-100. The recovered
RNA was then concentrated by precipitation with alcohol and quantified spectrophotometrically.
Other Methods--
Synthetic mRNAs were tested prior to
injection by in vitro translation in rabbit reticulocyte
lysate using materials and procedures obtained from Promega. RNA
polymerase III from Xenopus ovaries was purified through the
DEAE-Sephadex step according to Cozzarelli et al. (22).
Embryo injection, chromatin/nuclei preparation, and labeled RNA
isolation and analysis were performed as described by Rollins et
al. (8). Western blots on total embryonic extracts were performed
using a monoclonal antibody to the Myc tag incorporated at the N
termini of L1 and L5, goat anti-mouse IgG:horseradish peroxidase
conjugate, and chemiluminescent detection with LumiGLO (obtained from
Kirkegaard and Perry Laboratories, Gaithersburg, MD). Expression levels
of Myc-tagged proteins were estimated from autoradiographic exposures
adjusted to ensure that signals obtained were in the linear response
range of the film.
We have tested the model of Fig. 1
by overexpressing L5 in Xenopus embryos and measuring the
effect of elevating the in vivo L5 concentration on the
transcription of 5 S rRNA genes. We have chosen this approach because
previous work has shown that injection of synthetic mRNA into
fertilized eggs results in the elevated expression of encoded proteins
during subsequent embryonic development (23) and because our previous
work has also shown that TFIIIA overexpression during embryonic
development results in the ectopic activation of 5 S rRNA genes that
are normally inactive (8). The model of Fig. 1 suggests that elevating
L5 expression would mimic the effect of TFIIIA overexpression, at least
to a limit imposed by the intracellular concentration of 7 S RNP.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
N16 (gifts of W. Michael Wormington, University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA) were linearized with BamHI and used as
templates for synthesis of L1 and L5 mRNAs. For L5, the 9E10 Myc
epitope tag replaced 16 amino acids normally found at the N terminus of
the protein; for L1, the 41 N-terminal amino acids were deleted and
replaced with the Myc tag. pT3myc/L5
N16 was constructed by cloning
the KpnI/BamHI fragment of pSP65AT-L5b (11)
between the PstI and BamHI sites of a plasmid
derived from Bluescript KS+ and referred to as the "Myc
vector" by Peculis and Gall (20). KpnI and PstI
ends were blunted with T4 DNA polymerase in each case prior to
subcloning. pT3myc/L1-N41+5'-UTR-DS was constructed by subcloning a
HincII/BamHI fragment of p
L1-1.3 (21) between the blunted PstI and BamHI sites of the Myc
vector. The normal 5'-untranslated region (UTR) of L1 was then
reconstituted upstream of the Myc-L1 fusion by the insertion of
synthetic oligonucleotides containing the L1 5'-UTR between
KpnI and NcoI sites.
![]()
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
A model for feedback regulation of 5 S rRNA
synthesis and coupling of 5 S rRNA synthesis to accumulation of
ribosomal protein L5.
Synthetic, capped L5 mRNA was prepared by in vitro
synthesis from an appropriate template using T3 RNA polymerase. As a
control, mRNA for ribosomal protein L1 was prepared in parallel. In
both cases, an N-terminal Myc epitope tag was present so that we could confirm in vivo translation of the synthetic mRNAs
following injection into embryos. Prior to injection, synthetic
mRNAs were tested by in vitro translation in rabbit
reticulocyte lysates to ensure they were active as substrates for
protein synthesis (data not shown). Sibling groups of fertilized
Xenopus eggs were then injected with a mixture of
[
-32P]UTP and either L5, L1, or no synthetic mRNA.
Embryos were allowed to develop and were collected for further analysis
at about stage 10-10.5 (early gastrula) (24). Total RNA was prepared
from each group of embryos and analyzed on a denaturing polyacrylamide
gel (Fig. 2) to determine how much 5 S
rRNA had been synthesized during early embryonic development following
injection of the synthetic mRNAs. The results were analyzed and
quantified by normalizing the amount of labeled 5 S rRNA to the amount
of labeled tRNA. Although there was some quantitative variability from
one injection experiment to the next, normalized 5 S rRNA synthesis in
L5-injected embryos was almost always elevated relative to the no-RNA
control (average fold stimulation of 2.8 ± 1.7 (S.D.) in four
independent experiments), whereas 5 S rRNA synthesis in L1-injected
embryos was indistinguishable from that in the control embryos. Western blots with an anti-Myc monoclonal antibody were used to measure L1 or
L5 synthesis in vivo following injection of the synthetic mRNAs. These experiments demonstrated that both Myc-tagged L1 and
L5 were readily detectable and expressed at roughly equivalent levels
(data not shown). Thus, the lack of any effect on 5 S rRNA synthesis in
L1-injected embryos was not due to a failure to express and accumulate
L1 protein.
|
These initial results suggested that 5 S rRNA synthesis in
Xenopus embryos is coupled to L5 accumulation, but it was
possible that the L5-mediated stimulation of labeled 5 S rRNA levels
resulted not from transcriptional activation of 5 S rRNA genes but
rather from some unexpected effect on 5 S rRNA stability. We therefore chose to focus on a more direct assay to measure activation of 5 S rRNA
genes. In this assay, nuclei were prepared from stage 10-10.5 embryos
that had been previously injected with synthetic L5, L1, or no
mRNA, and transcriptional activity was measured following
reconstitution with purified RNA polymerase III. Earlier work had shown
that stable transcription complexes formed on 5 S rRNA genes in
vivo are recovered in chromatin or nuclei preparations and can be
detected by adding purified RNA polymerase III and measuring 5 S rRNA
synthesis in vitro (8, 23, 25). Thus, the state of
transcriptional programming of 5 S rRNA genes in vivo can be
assessed quantitatively in an in vitro transcription assay.
Representative results from a single injection experiment are shown in
Fig. 3 along with a quantitative summary
of the results of several such experiments in Fig.
4. The data reveal an average increase of
4.7-fold in 5 S rRNA synthesis from chromatin templates prepared from
embryos injected with L5 mRNA when compared with control embryos
injected with an equivalent volume of water only. Furthermore, L1
overexpression has essentially no effect on 5 S rRNA gene activity
(Figs. 3-4). One may note that there is substantial quantitative
variability in the extent to which 5 S rRNA synthesis is stimulated by
overexpression of L5 (Fig. 4). We believe this fluctuation is a result
of variations in the extent to which injected L5 mRNA is
distributed throughout the embryo. It is possible that diffusion from
the site of injection may be restricted in some cases because of the
presence of nascent cell membranes or other barriers to free diffusion.
As a consequence, L5 overexpression, and an accompanying increase in
the number of 5 S rRNA genes that are transcriptionally activated, may
be restricted in some cases to only a part of the developing embryo.
Although similar considerations are likely to apply to the distribution
of L1 overexpression during early embryogenesis, we would not expect
variations in the distribution of overexpressed L1 to have any effect
on the measured level of 5 S rRNA synthesis; that is, L1 concentration
is uncoupled from 5 S rRNA synthesis in our model and thus would be
expected to have no effect on 5 S rRNA gene activation regardless of
its distribution in the embryo. In fact, as can be seen in Fig. 4,
there is much less variance in the level of 5 S rRNA synthesis measured
in embryos overexpressing L1 in comparison to those expressing high
levels of L5. Despite the quantitative variation in 5 S rRNA synthesis in L5-expressing embryos, the difference between these embryos and
those expressing L1 is clearly significant, with a p value of less than 0.025 as determined by analysis of variance. These results
demonstrate that the elevated levels of 5 S rRNA observed when L5 is
overexpressed is a consequence of transcriptional activation of 5 S
rRNA genes. Although we cannot exclude the possibility that the
enhanced transcriptional activity we observe when L5 is overproduced
results from higher activity of the same number of active 5 S rRNA
genes, it is more likely that additional 5 S rRNA genes that are
normally inactive at this stage of development have been recruited into
active transcription complexes (23, 26).
|
|
The results described here are very similar to those obtained when TFIIIA was overexpressed during early embryogenesis using similar methods (8, 23). Because it is extremely unlikely that L5 is directly involved in the formation of 5 S rRNA transcription complexes (and there is certainly no evidence to support such an hypothesis), the most plausible interpretation of our current results is that L5 acts indirectly to increase the pool of free TFIIIA, which in turn nucleates transcription complex formation on 5 S rRNA genes that are normally inactive. This effect is a prediction of the model of Fig. 1 and thus supports the proposal that competitive binding of L5 and TFIIIA to 5 S rRNA on the one hand, and of TFIIIA to 5 S rRNA and the 5 S rRNA gene on the other, serves to couple 5 S rRNA synthesis to the accumulation of ribosomal protein L5. Furthermore, the results suggest that a pool of 7 S RNP exists in these embryonic cells that can be tapped as a source of additional TFIIIA for activation of 5 S rRNA genes. The extent to which 5 S rRNA gene expression can be activated by L5 would be limited by the concentrations of either L5, 7 S RNP, or both. Assuming the quantitative determination of 5 S rRNA synthesized in isolated nuclei reflects the number of 5 S rRNA genes that are active, a minimum estimate of the ratio of TFIIIA in 7 S RNP relative to that already bound to 5 S rRNA genes in active transcription complexes would be about 3.7. It should be noted that the current data also provide additional support for the feedback inhibition of 5 S rRNA synthesis by competitive binding of TFIIIA to 5 S rRNA and to the 5 S rRNA gene (3, 8). Competition of L5 and TFIIIA for binding to 5 S rRNA would result in activation of 5 S rRNA synthesis only if 5 S rRNA synthesis were limited by TFIIIA availability and if additional TFIIIA could be mobilized for transcription complex formation from the pool of 7 S RNPs.
The ultimate assembly of the 60 S subunit of the ribosome from three
different RNAs and dozens of proteins presents a complex problem of
coordinate synthesis or at least of coordinate accumulation. The data
reported here provide strong support for one model by which homeostatic
regulation of 5 S rRNA and a ribosomal protein to which it binds can be achieved.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank Martha Rollins for expert assistance and instruction in carrying out preliminary injection experiments and Dr. Sandra K. Lemmon for providing the Myc monoclonal antibody used in Western blotting. We are grateful to Tomas Pieler, Paul Huber, Paul Romaniuk, and particularly Mike Wormington for plasmids, advice, and helpful discussions.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (GM48035 to D. R. S. and HD24673 to M. T. A.).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.
§ Supported during a portion of these studies as a post-doctoral fellow of NIH Training Grant HD07194.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Molecular
Biology and Microbiology, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, OH 44106. Tel.: 216-368-5259; Fax: 216-368-3055;
E-mail: drs9@po.cwru.edu.
2 B. Scripture and P. Huber, personal communication.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: TFIIIA, transcription factor IIIA; RNP, ribonucleoprotein; UTR, untranslated region.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Lassar, A. B.,
Martin, P. L.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1983)
Science
222,
740-748 |
| 2. |
Setzer, D. R.,
and Brown, D. D.
(1985)
J. Biol. Chem.
260,
2483-2492 |
| 3. |
Pelham, H. R.,
and Brown, D. D.
(1980)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
77,
4170-4174 |
| 4. | Rawlings, S. L., Matt, G. D., and Huber, P. W. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 868-877 |
| 5. | Ford, P. J. (1971) Nature 233, 561-564[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 6. | Mairy, M., and Denis, H. (1971) Dev. Biol. 24, 143-165[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 7. | Setzer, D. R., Menezes, S. R., Del Rio, S., Hung, V. S., and Subramanyan, G. (1996) RNA 2, 1254-1269[Abstract] |
| 8. |
Rollins, M. B.,
Del Rio, S.,
Galey, A. L.,
Setzer, D. R.,
and Andrews, M. T.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
4776-4783 |
| 9. |
Huber, P. W.,
and Wool, I. G.
(1986)
J. Biol. Chem.
261,
3002-3005 |
| 10. |
Scripture, J. B.,
and Huber, P. W.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
27358-27365 |
| 11. |
Wormington, W. M.
(1989)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9,
5281-5288 |
| 12. |
Steitz, J. A.,
Berg, C.,
Hendrick, J. P.,
La Branche-Chabot, H.,
Metspalu, A.,
Rinke, J.,
and Yario, T.
(1988)
J. Cell Biol.
106,
545-556 |
| 13. | Rudt, F., and Pieler, T. (1996) EMBO J. 15, 1383-1391[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 14. | Pieler, T., and Rudt, F. (1997) Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 8, 79-82[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 15. | Guddat, U., Bakken, A. H., and Pieler, T. (1990) Cell 60, 619-628[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 16. | Allison, L. A., Romaniuk, P. J., and Bakken, A. H. (1991) Dev. Biol. 144, 129-144[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 17. | Allison, L. A., North, M. T., and Neville, L. A. (1995) Dev. Biol. 168, 284-295[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 18. |
Allison, L. A.,
North, M. T.,
Murdoch, K. J.,
Romaniuk, P. J.,
Deschamps, S.,
and Le Maire, M.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
6819-6831 |
| 19. |
Brow, D. A.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1987)
J. Biol. Chem.
262,
13953-11398 |
| 20. |
Peculis, B. A.,
and Gall, J. G.
(1992)
J. Cell Biol.
116,
1-14 |
| 21. |
Wormington, W. M.
(1986)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
83,
8639-8643 |
| 22. | Cozzarelli, N. R., Gerrard, S. P., Schlissel, M., Brown, D. D., and Bogenhagen, D. F. (1983) Cell 34, 829-835[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 23. | Andrews, M. T., and Brown, D. D. (1987) Cell 51, 445-453[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 24. | Nieuwkoop, P. D., and Faber, J. (1956) Normal Tables of Xenopus laevis Daudin , Elsevier-North Holland, Amsterdam |
| 25. | Schlissel, M. S., and Brown, D. D. (1984) Cell 37, 903-913[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 26. |
Darby, M. K.,
Andrews, M. T.,
and Brown, D. D.
(1988)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
85,
5516-5520 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. P. Plant, P. Wang, J. L. Jacobs, and J. D. Dinman A programmed -1 ribosomal frameshift signal can function as a cis-acting mRNA destabilizing element Nucleic Acids Res., February 3, 2004; 32(2): 784 - 790. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D.-B. Huang, D. Vu, L. A. Cassiday, J. M. Zimmerman, L. J. Maher III, and G. Ghosh Crystal structure of NF-{kappa}B (p50)2 complexed to a high-affinity RNA aptamer PNAS, August 5, 2003; 100(16): 9268 - 9273. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. Mathieu, Y. Yukawa, J.-L. Prieto, I. Vaillant, M. Sugiura, and S. Tourmente Identification and characterization of transcription factor IIIA and ribosomal protein L5 from Arabidopsis thaliana Nucleic Acids Res., May 1, 2003; 31(9): 2424 - 2433. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. A. Cassiday and L. J. Maher III Having it both ways: transcription factors that bind DNA and RNA Nucleic Acids Res., October 1, 2002; 30(19): 4118 - 4126. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. B. Schulman and D. R. Setzer Identification and characterization of transcription factor IIIA from Schizosaccharomyces pombe Nucleic Acids Res., July 1, 2002; 30(13): 2772 - 2781. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Kanevskij, G. Taimor, M. Schafer, H. M. Piper, and K.-D. Schluter Neuropeptide Y modifies the hypertrophic response of adult ventricular cardiomyocytes to norepinephrine Cardiovasc Res, March 1, 2002; 53(4): 879 - 887. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Lin, S.-W. Lin, and A. Lin The participation of 5S rRNA in the co-translational formation of a eukaryotic 5S ribonucleoprotein complex Nucleic Acids Res., June 15, 2001; 29(12): 2510 - 2516. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Molecular and Cellular Proteomics |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |