|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 48, 33951-33958, November 26, 1999
Functional Modules in Ribosomal Protein L5 for Ribonucleoprotein
Complex Formation and Nucleocytoplasmic Transport*
Maike
Claußen,
Falko
Rudt, and
Tomas
Pieler
From the Institut für Biochemie und Molekulare Zellbiologie,
Georg-August-Universität, Humboldtallee 23, D-37073 Göttingen, Germany
 |
ABSTRACT |
Ribosomal protein L5 forms a small,
extraribosomal complex with 5 S ribosomal RNA, referred to as the 5 S
ribonucleoprotein complex, which shuttles between nucleus and cytoplasm
in Xenopus oocytes. Mapping elements in L5 that mediate
nuclear protein import defines three separate such activities
(L5-nuclear localization sequence (NLS)-1, -2, and -3), which are
functional in both oocytes and somatic cells. RNA binding activity
involves N-terminal as well as C-terminal elements of L5. In contrast
to the full-length protein, none of the individual NLSs carrying L5
fragments are able to allow for the predominating accumulation in the
nucleoli that is observed with the full-length protein. The separate
L5-NLSs differ in respect to two activities. Firstly, only L5-NLS-1 and -3, not L5-NLS-2, are capable of promoting the nuclear transfer of a
heterologous, covalently attached ribonucleoprotein complex. Secondly,
only L5-NLS-1 is able to bind strongly to a variety of different import
receptors; those that recognize L5-NLS-2 and -3 have yet to be identified.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Large quantities of 5 S ribosomal RNA are synthesized in excess
over other ribosomal components and stored in the cytoplasm during
early stages of oogenesis in Xenopus (1). 5 S rRNA storage occurs in the context of small, nonribosomal ribonucleoprotein complexes (RNPs),1 primarily
in association with transcription factor IIIA (7 S RNP) (2-4), but
also as part of a larger RNP, the 42 S RNP, which contains tRNA and the
two proteins, p48 and p43, in addition to 5 S rRNA (5-7). Later in
oogenesis, synthesis of the primary 5 S rRNA binding ribosomal protein
L5 increases (8), resulting in the formation of the preribosomal 5 S
RNP (9). Binding of newly synthesized 5 S rRNA to either L5 or TFIIIA
is necessary for nuclear export of the corresponding RNPs in
Xenopus oocytes (10). During later stages of oogenesis,
concurrent with increased assembly of ribosomal subunits, the
cytoplasmically stored 5 S rRNA is reimported into the nucleus and
subsequently utilized for ribosome assembly in the nucleoli. This
reimport of 5 S rRNA occurs in a complex with L5. In contrast, the
complex with TFIIIA remains sequestered in the cytoplasm, which is due
to masking of the NLS function in TFIIIA by the associated 5 S rRNA
(11-14).
The nucleocytoplasmic transport of proteins and RNA proceeds though the
nuclear pore complex, a large, multiprotein complex embedded in the
nuclear membrane. Ions, small metabolites, and small proteins can
passively diffuse through the aqueous channel of the nuclear pore
complex, whereas larger molecules are actively transported through the
gated channel of the nuclear pore. Nucleocytoplasmic transport of
macromolecules is a signal-mediated process and requires various
transport factors, some of which interact with the nuclear pore complex
(15-19). The directionality of the translocation process is controlled
by the RanGTPase system (20-22). RanGTP allows for the dissociation of
import complexes in the nucleus and is also required for the formation
of export complexes including those that serve to recycle import
receptors. In the cytoplasm, hydrolysis of the Ran-bound GTP allows for
the subsequent dissociation of such export complexes. All transport
receptors identified to date are members of the superfamily of importin
-like, Ran-binding proteins (23, 24).
The signal structures that target proteins to the nucleus are referred
to as nuclear localization sequences (NLSs). The classical NLS contains
either one cluster of basic amino acids (SV40 type) or two basic
clusters, separated by a 10-amino acid spacer region (bipartite type)
(25-28). The first transport receptor identified, the importin /
heterodimer, interacts with these classical, basic type NLSs (29-37).
Importin serves as an adaptor molecule that binds directly to the
NLS of the substrate protein (37) and interacts via its importin binding domain with the -subunit of the import complex (34, 38).
This heterotrimeric complex binds to the nuclear pore complex and is
translocated into the nucleoplasm in an energy-dependent manner (34,
39). Numerous other importin -related proteins have subsequently
been identified and found to be also involved in import and export
pathways of proteins and RNA. One of these, termed transportin or
karyopherin 2, has been shown to mediate the import of the
heterogeneous nuclear RNP protein A1 by binding to a novel, nonbasic
type NLS, named the M9 sequence (40-44). An analogous protein,
Kap104p, appears to be required for the import of various heterogeneous
nuclear RNP proteins in yeast, although no matching M9-like yeast
import signal has been identified to date (45).
Nuclear import of U snRNPs also appears to rely on the activity of
importin (46). In Xenopus oocytes, the nuclear import signal of U snRNPs is defined by the trimethyl guanosine cap structure on the one hand and by the assembled Sm core proteins on the other (47-53). Snurportin, a protein containing an importin -like
importin binding domain, directly interacts with the trimethyl
guansine cap structure of the RNA and stimulates U snRNP import in
Xenopus oocytes. It therefore appears likely that Snurportin
serves as an importin -like adaptor molecule, mediating the binding
of the transport substrate (U snRNP) to the import receptor (importin ). It is not yet clear, however, how the Sm core proteins carrying the second import signal are recognized. It seems possible that an
additional, yet to be identified import factor binds to the Sm core
proteins (54).
Ribosomal proteins are abundant, mostly small and basic proteins. The
NLSs of several different ribosomal proteins have been defined.
Although some of these resemble the basic NLSs of the SV40 type
(55-58), others seem to be more complex and do not fit any of the
previously identified structural classes of import signals (59, 60).
Functional analyses in yeast revealed the importance of two importin
-related proteins, Yrb4p (Kap123p) and Pse1p (Kap121p), for the
import of ribosomal proteins (61-63). Recently, it has been
demonstrated that importin , transportin, RanBP5, and RanBP7 are
capable of binding to and mediating the import of different ribosomal
proteins (including L5) in permeabilized HeLa cells (64). After
translocation to the nucleus, ribosomal proteins must migrate to the
nucleolus for ribosomal subunit assembly. Despite of the fact that some
regions of nucleolarly localized proteins have been shown to be
necessary for nucleolar accumulation, no consensus targeting sequence
has been defined to date. Nucleolar localization is likely to occur by
diffusion through the nucleoplasm, followed by nucleolar retention via
interaction with other nucleolar components (65-73), even though it
cannot as yet be excluded that this process might also be
signal-dependent and receptor-mediated. In some cellular
proteins, as well as in a number of viral proteins, very small regions
have been identified that were found to be sufficient to target a
reporter protein to the nucleolus, although there is no direct evidence
for signal/receptor-mediated transport (74-84).
Here, we analyze aspects of the nucleocytoplasmic transport of
ribosomal protein L5 and 5 S rRNA. L5 is found to contain three separate NLS elements that function in both somatic cells and oocytes,
but none of these is sufficient to promote nucleolar accumulation at
levels that are characteristic of the full-length protein. N- and
C-terminal sequence elements in L5 are required for 5 S rRNA binding.
Only two of the three NLSs, located at the N and C termini,
respectively, are capable of mediating nuclear transfer of a covalently
attached complex of TFIIIA and 5 S rRNA. Finally, we demonstrate that
the ability of L5 to bind to a set of different known import receptors
reflects a function of the N-terminal NLS but not of the other two NLSs.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Plasmids and Cloning Procedures--
All L5 proteins that were
tested in the import or RNA binding assays were fused to
-galactosidase in the pAX4+ vector (85). For in vitro
expression of the fusion proteins, L5 was fused to six N-terminal Myc
epitopes in pCS2+MT (86). The control pm- -Gal was generated by
inserting the Ecl136II/HindII (filled in)
fragment from pAX4a+ into pCS2+MT, which was cut with
StuI.
The different deletion mutants utilized in the Xenopus
oocyte microinjection experiments were generated either by use of the appropriate restriction sites or by PCR-based deletion mutagenesis (details available on request).
For transient transfection of HeLa cells with L5- -galactosidase
fusion constructs, the full-length L5 and the different NLS fragments
were cloned into a modified pSV expression vector via
BglII/NheI (87). Primers that generate
BglII and NheI restriction sites were used in a
PCR amplification reaction.
For in vitro protein-protein interaction experiments
transport factors were cloned into the pGEX 5X-1 vector (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech) to allow for protein expression and purification of
glutathione S-transferase fusions. After a PCR-mediated
amplification reaction, the obtained
BamHI/XhoI-fragments were ligated into the
BamHI/XhoI cut pGEX 5X-1 vector.
All L5 constructs that were used for in vitro
protein-protein interactions contain six Myc epitope tags and were
cloned via PCR fragments from the corresponding pm- -Gal-constructs
into the pCS2+MT vector. To generate pm-nucleoplasmin, the
nucleoplasmin gene was amplified by PCR from pTRB102 (88). For
amplification, primers were used that introduced an EcoRI
site at the 5'-end and a XbaI site at the 3'-end of the PCR
fragment, which was inserted into pCS2+MT
(EcoRI/XbaI).
pmTFIIIA and pmTFIIIA 5-6 were generated by fusing the TFIIIA
wild-type and TFIIIA 5-6 DNA to the six N-terminal Myc tags within
the pCS2+MT vector. These clones carry additional vector sequences
(pBluescriptII KS+) downstream of the TFIIIA gene, including a
BamHI site and an XbaI site.
For the cloning of the TFIIIA C/L5-NLS fusion constructs, the L5
sequences coding for aa 1-25 (NLS-1), 17-253 (NLS-2), and 261-296(NLS-3) were amplified by PCR with primers that introduce a
NsiI site at the 5'-end and a BamHI site and a
stop codon at the 3'-end of the PCR fragments. After digestion with
NsiI and BamHI, the fragments were inserted into
pmTFIIIA, which was also cut with NsiI and BamHI.
Because the L5 fragment aa 17-254 itself contains a NsiI
site, this fragment was cloned in two steps. Due to the use of the
NsiI site in TFIIIA, the sequences coding for the TFIIIA C
terminus, including the nuclear export signal, were deleted. TFIIIA C
was constructed by the deletion of the XbaI fragment in
pmTFIIIA. The plasmid was cut with XbaI, the ends were
filled in, and the DNA was religated.
Expression of Proteins in Vitro--
Proteins were expressed
from cDNAs in the coupled transcription/translation
(TNT) system from Promega. Reactions were performed following the Promega (TNT) protocol, and
[35S]methionine or [35S]cysteine (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech) was used for radiolabeling. In vitro
translation products were analyzed by SDS-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis and phosphoimaging (Molecular Dynamics).
Microinjection Experiments and
Immunoprecipitations--
Preparation of oocytes and microinjection
assays were performed as described in Ref. 13 with the exception that
oocytes were separated by collagenase (Sigma, type II) treatment
(collagenase-buffer contains 82.5 mM NaCl; 2 mM
KCl; 1 mM MgCl2; 5 mM Hepes, pH
7.5, 1 mg/ml collagenase).
Preparation of Radiolabeled RNAs--
Xenopus laevis
somatic type 5 S rRNA was transcribed in vitro using the RNA
transcription kit from Stratagene according to the supplied standard
reaction protocol. 1 µg of DraI-digested T7-5SXls DNA
(see Ref. 13) was used as template in this reaction, and
[ -32P]UTP (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) was added for
the radiolabeling of the RNA. RNA was purified using UB-blue, a
purification method for RNA in the presence of urea and methylene blue
(12).
Coimmunoprecipitation Experiments--
For coimmunoprecipitation
experiments, L5- -Gal-fusion proteins were in vitro
translated in the coupled TNT system of Promega in the
presence of 32P-labeled 5 S rRNA. The samples were
incubated for 90 min at 30 °C and subsequently added to protein
G-Sepharose-Myc antibody pellets. The immunoprecipitation was performed
in a final volume of 500 µl of NET-2 (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH
7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 0,05% Nonidet P-40, supplemented with 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride and 1 µg/ml pepstatin A)
for 1 h at 4 °C. The immunoprecipitates were washed three times
with NET-2 before 32P-labeled 5 S rRNA was phenol-extracted
and ethanol-precipitated. Unbound 32P-labeled 5 S rRNA from
the supernatant was also extracted, and all fractions were analyzed on
a 8% polyacrylamide-7 M urea gel followed by
phosphoimaging. As a control for the efficiency of the TNT
protein synthesis, all reactions were additionally performed in the
presence of [35S]methionine. After immunoprecipitation,
the bound fractions of labeled fusion proteins were analyzed by
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and phosphoimaging as described above.
Nuclear Import of in Vitro Reconstituted RNPs--
TFIIIA
wild-type and mutant proteins were translated in vitro with
the TNT system (Promega) in the presence of a mixture of the 32P-labeled 5 S RNA mutants Maxi and CA67 (13). As a
control, one reaction was carried out without DNA. The samples were
injected into the cytoplasm of oocytes and 18 h after injection,
the RNPs were immunoprecipitated from cytoplasmic and nuclear fractions via the Myc-tagged proteins. The 5 S RNAs were extracted from the
immunopellet with phenol, precipitated with ethanol, and analyzed by
polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (7% urea). Subsequently, the gels
were exposed to a PhosphoImager screen.
HeLa Cell Culture, Transfection, and
Immunofluorescence--
HeLa Cell culture, transfection experiments,
and immunofluorescence were done as described in Ref. 87.
Protein Expression and in Vitro Protein-Protein Binding
Experiments--
All transport factors fused to glutathione
S-transferase were purified from Escherichia coli
as follows. 50 ml of LB medium were inoculated with a 5-ml starter
culture, and cells were grown at 37 °C until they reached an
A550 of 0.7. Protein expression was induced
after addition of 1 mM
isopropyl-1-thio- -D-galactopyranoside for 3 h at
30 °C. The bacterial pellet was shock-frozen and then dissolved in 5 ml of cold Z-buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.7, 100 mM NaCl, 12.5 mM MgCl2, 20%
glycerol, 0, 1% Nonidet P-40, protease inhibitors), sonified, and
centrifuged at 12000 × g. The crude extract was aliquoted and
frozen in liquid nitrogen. For protein-protein interaction experiments,
the bacterial crude protein extracts were loaded on glutathione-agarose
pellets (Sigma). After washing two times with binding buffer (50 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 400 mM NaCl, 2.5 mM MgAc, 0,05% Nonidet P-40, 2 mM
mercaptoethanol, protease inhibitors), 10 µl of
35S-labeled in vitro translated L5 proteins or
NLS fragments were added to the preloaded pellets in 300 µl of
binding buffer plus 2 mg/ml bovine serum albumin. After 1 h
incubation, the pellets were washed three times with binding buffer
(without bovine serum albumin), and bound proteins were eluted with SDS
loading buffer and analyzed by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.
RanQ69L was purified as described (32), including 0.1 mM
GTP during purification steps.
 |
RESULTS |
The Ribosomal Protein L5 Contains Three Separate Nuclear
Localization Signals--
For the analysis of signal structure(s)
responsible for nuclear import of L5, an extensive series of N- or
C-terminal and internal fragments of L5 was fused to the C-terminal
third of -galactosidase in order to generate cargo molecules for
nucleocytoplasmic transport that are above the critical molecular
weight for nuclear transfer by passive diffusion. All constructs were
Myc epitope-tagged in order to allow for purification by
immunoprecipitation. The ability of these L5 derived fragments to
mediate the nuclear import of the corresponding fusion proteins was
investigated by microinjection of in vitro translated,
35S-labeled proteins into the cytoplasm of
Xenopus oocytes. 20 h after microinjection, the
-Gal-L5 full-length fusion protein is efficiently transported into
the nucleus. An N-terminal fragment (aa 1-25), which contains basic
amino acid residues that resemble the classical basic NLS of the
nucleoplasmin type, mediates import into the nucleus at a rate
comparable to full-length L5 (Fig. 1A). Sequence elements within
the first 16 amino acids of this NLS bearing fragment are necessary for
nuclear import function, as shown by injection of an aa
17-227-containing fragment, which is retained in the cytoplasmic
fraction of the oocytes.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Definition of nuclear import signal sequences
for ribosomal protein L5 in Xenopus oocytes.
Xenopus L5 and derived protein fragments fused to
-galactosidase or -galactosidase alone was injected into the
cytoplasm of Xenopus oocytes. Nuclear and cytoplasmic
fractions were separated manually, either immediately after injection
(t0) or after 20 h of incubation
(t20), and analyzed for their protein content by gel
electrophoresis. A, definition of the N-terminal L5-NLS-1.
B, definition of the centrally located L5-NLS-2.
C, definition of the C-terminal L5-NLS-3. D,
critical sequence elements in Xenopus ribosomal protein L5
containing either L5-NLS-1 or L5-NLS-3. Deletion end points of the L5
constructs utilized in the import analysis are indicated
(arrows). The nucleoplasmin NLS sequence (NucNLS)
is aligned for maximal sequence homology.
|
|
A second NLS function that localizes to the central portion of L5
appears to require amino acids that are widely separated within the
primary sequence. The L5 fragment aa 17-253 carries this second
nuclear import function (Fig. 1B). When amino acids were
deleted from the C terminus of this fragment, import into the nucleus
was lost, and this was similarly found to be the case upon N-terminal
truncation. The L5 fragment aa 32-296 254-281 is efficiently
transported into the nucleus (a third C-terminal NLS is deleted in this
fragment; see below). The deletion of an additional 10 N-terminal amino
acids leads to cytoplasmic retention. Therefore, a second nuclear
import function in L5 is contained in the region defined by amino acids
32-253. Deletion of internal sequences within this NLS, as well as the
replacement of these amino acids with a spacer peptide, leads to loss
of nuclear transport activity (data not shown), indicating either a
role of tertiary protein folding or involvement of extended sequence
elements for NLS function.
A second basic cluster of amino acids, which again resembles the
classical, basic NLS of the nucleoplasmin type, is located in the C
terminus of the protein and is also found to carry nuclear import
function (Fig. 1C). The C-terminal fragment (aa 217-289) contains this third NLS and is transported into the nucleus at a rate
comparable to full-length L5. Internal deletion of the basic cluster
within the C-terminal, NLS-containing fragment abolishes nuclear import
activity (aa 217-289 254-281). For a further delineation of the
third NLS, additional mutational analyses were performed. C-terminal
amino acids outside of the basic cluster are not required for NLS
function (aa 217-285). Basic amino acids outside of the nucleoplasmin
NLS homology region cooperate in NLS activity but are not essential (aa
217-280), whereas a partial removal of the nucleoplasmin homology
region leads to a loss of NLS activity (aa 217-273). N-terminal amino
acids adjacent to the basic cluster and including some additional basic
residues are not required for NLS function (aa 261-296). In contrast,
the deletion of the N-terminal basic amino acids of the nucleoplasmin
NLS homology region results in the sequestration of the protein to the
cytoplasm (aa 268-296). Therefore, the sequence responsible for the
C-terminal NLS function of L5 is defined by amino acids 261-285 (Fig.
1, C and D).
In summary, we have identified three separate sequence elements in L5
that exhibit nuclear import function. The N-terminal L5-NLS-1 (aa
1-25) and the C-terminal L5-NLS-3 (aa 261-285) resemble the basic NLS
of the nucleoplasmin type. The third NLS (L5-NLS-2) requires sequence
elements widely separated within the primary amino acid sequence (aa
31-253) and therefore does not fall into any class of NLS consensus
sequences that have been defined previously.
N- and C-terminal Sequences of the L5 Protein Are Required for
Specific 5 S rRNA Binding--
The complex of ribosomal protein L5 and
5 S rRNA not only serves as a precursor for ribosomal subunit assembly
but also plays an essential role in reimporting the cytoplasmically
stored 5 S rRNA into the nucleus of Xenopus oocytes. In
order to be able to correlate RNA binding and NLS activities, a series
of N- and C-terminally truncated L5 mutants was tested in an in
vitro RNA binding assay. For this purpose, rat and
Xenopus L5 fragments fused to -galactosidase and Myc
epitope tags were in vitro translated in the presence of
32P-labeled Xenopus 5 S rRNA in order to allow
for RNP formation. These preformed RNPs were then subjected to
immunoprecipitation with Myc antibodies, and coprecipitated 5 S rRNA
was extracted and analyzed by gel electrophoresis. Full-length
Xenopus L5 and an N-terminally truncated fragment (aa
17-296) bind efficiently to radiolabeled 5 S rRNA, whereas the -Gal
fusion component alone has no detectable 5 S rRNA binding activity
(Fig. 2). Two other N- and C-terminally
truncated L5 variants (aa 17-253 and 47-296) were also found to bind
to 5 S rRNA, albeit at a reduced efficiency. Shorter N-terminal
fragments of the protein, containing amino acids 17-95, 17-164, and
1-227, respectively, had no detectable 5 S rRNA binding activity.
Qualitatively corresponding results were obtained with series of N- and
C-terminal deleted fragments of the rat L5 protein (Fig. 2).
Full-length rat L5 bound well to Xenopus 5 S rRNA. Neither
N-terminally truncated rat L5 fragments nor the majority of
C-terminally deleted fragments bound to Xenopus 5 S rRNA. A
very weak 5 S rRNA binding activity could be obtained with a protein
containing amino acids 1-251. The importance of N- and C-terminal
sequence elements in Xenopus L5 for 5 S rRNA binding was
also demonstrated using electrophoretic mobility shift assays. A
systematic series of N- and C-terminally truncated Xenopus L5 deletion mutants was equally translated in vitro in the
presence of labeled 5 S rRNA, and such preformed RNPs were then
analyzed via nondenaturing gel electrophoresis. Results obtained were
qualitatively similar to those from the coimmunoprecipitation assay
(data not shown). Even though the binding activities of the rat L5
variants are comparatively low, which may be a consequence of using
heterologous 5 S rRNA substrate, results obtained with L5 from the two
different species are qualitatively comparable. It seems noteworthy
that the primary sequence of L5 has been highly conserved in evolution; the rat and Xenopus protein are 88.5% identical. In
summary, we have found that sequence elements located in the N-terminal
as well as in the C-terminal portion of L5 and overlapping with the NLS-2 function (see above) are required for the 5 S rRNA specific binding activity.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Delineation of RNA binding elements in
Xenopus and rat ribosomal protein L5. The various
Xenopus and rat L5 variants as well as the -galactosodase
fusion portion by itself were translated in vitro in the
presence of radiolabeled Xenopus 5 S rRNA, and RNP formation
was analyzed by coimmunoprecipitation. Bound and free RNA fractions, as
well as proteins were analyzed by gel electrophoresis as indicated. The
numbers above the individual lanes correspond to the numbers of the
individual protein constructs, as indicated at the
left.
|
|
L5 Nuclear Import Signals and Subnuclear Localization in Somatic
Cells--
In order to investigate the subcellular localization of the
different import competent L5 variants, and also in order to test whether the three different NLSs in L5 that were defined in the oocyte
injection system also function in somatic cells, transient transfection
experiments were performed. The full-length L5 and the different NLS
bearing fragments were fused to -galactosidase and transiently
expressed in HeLa cells. The nucleocytoplasmic distribution of the
corresponding fusion proteins was monitored by use of indirect
immunofluorescence methods. As control proteins we used the linker
histone H10, which is efficiently imported into the nucleus
but does not accumulate in the nucleoli, as well as an N-terminal
fragment of H10, which contains no functional NLS and is
therefore not transported into the nucleus (87). L5-NLS-1, -2, and -3 were found to be equally competent to mediate the nuclear import of the
corresponding -galactosidase fusion proteins in HeLa cells (Fig.
3). An almost exclusive nucleolar
accumulation is observed with the full-length L5 protein. In contrast,
the individual NLSs are also strongly detected within the nucleoplasm,
even though they also stain the nucleolar area. It is interesting to
note that the L5-NLS-2 bearing fragment (aa 17-253), in contrast to
the L5-NLS-1 and -3 fragments, also exhibits specific, albeit somewhat
weakened 5 S rRNA binding activity in vitro (see above and
Fig. 2). It therefore appears that nuclear transport and the ability to
form RNP are not sufficient for nucleolar accumulation and assembly
into ribosomal subunits.

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Analysis of L5-NLS-1, -2, and -3 import
activities in somatic cells. HeLa cells were transiently
transfected with plasmids driving the expression of various
-galactosidase fusion proteins, as indicated. The intracellular
localization of these proteins was detected by immunofluorescence
analysis (Tritc), and the nuclei were visualized by DNA
staining (DAPI). H10 was utilized as a positive
control for nuclear import and nucleoplasmic accumulation;
H10-N is a deletion mutant that lacks NLS activity and
serves as a negative control. The full-length L5 sequence
(L5-WT) mediates pronounced nucleolar accumulation; the
individual L5-NLS fragments allow nuclear transport but are more
equally distributed between nucleoplasm and nucleoli.
|
|
Only Two of the Three NLSs in L5 Mediate the Import of a
Heterologous RNP--
The apparent redundancy of nuclear import
signals as defined in L5 raises the question of whether these three
NLSs are functionally equivalent, in particular in respect to mediating
the nuclear import of the 5 S RNP. We therefore tested which one of
these three different NLSs is by itself able to mediate the nuclear import of a heterologous 5 S rRNA containing RNP (the 7 S RNP) that is
covalently attached. The 7 S RNP, consisting of TFIIIA and 5 S RNA, is
normally not imported into the nucleus of Xenopus oocytes,
which is due to masking of the TFIIIA NLS function upon 5 S RNA binding
(13). The three different L5 fragments bearing NLS activity were fused
to a TFIIIA variant (TFIIIA C) that lacks the C-terminal,
leucine-rich nuclear export signal, in order to avoid loss of nuclear
accumulation due to a dominant export activity. The different
TFIIIA C/L5-NLS fusion proteins were translated in vitro
and injected into the cytoplasm of Xenopus oocytes for the
analysis of RNP import function. TFIIIA C served as a control for
cytoplasmic RNP retention and the corresponding -Gal/L5-NLS fusion
proteins were coinjected as a control for protein import (Fig.
4A). Only two of the three
L5-NLSs were found to be able to mediate the nuclear import of the
corresponding heterologous RNPs, namely L5-NLS-1 and L5-NLS-3. In
contrast, the TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-2 RNP was retained in the cytoplasm,
even though the same NLS mediates efficient import when fused to
-galactosidase ( -Gal-L5-NLS-2). We note that the import rate
obtained with TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-1 and TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-3 appears to be
reduced when compared with the import rate of the corresponding
-Gal-L5-NLS-1 and -3 fusion proteins.

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Analysis of RNP import activities with
L5-NLS-1, -2 and -3 in Xenopus oocytes. A,
nuclear import of TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-1, -2, and -3 fusion proteins.
Mixtures of in vitro translated proteins (as indicated) were
microinjected into the cytoplasm of Xenopus oocytes and
incubated for 16 h, followed by manual separation of nuclear
(N) and cytoplasmic (C) fractions and protein
analysis by gel electrophoresis. TFIIIA C serves as a control for
cytoplasmic RNP retention, the different -Gal-L5-NLS fusions serve
as controls for protein import, and the nucleocytoplasmic distribution
of the different TFIIIA C/L5-NLS fusions reveals RNP import activity.
B, 5 S rRNA binding activity of TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-1, -2, and
-3 fusion proteins. RNA binding of the various proteins (as indicated
above each lane) was performed as described in Fig. 2. Protein and RNA
fractions of the complexes formed were analyzed by gel electrophoresis.
C, nuclear import of in vitro reconstituted RNPs.
The different proteins (as indicated above each lane) were translated
in vitro in the presence of a mixture of the radiolabeled 5 S rRNA mutants Maxi and CA67 (input). Maxi binds exclusively
to TFIIIA, and CA67 binds exclusively to L5. The individual
preparations were injected into the oocyte cytoplasm, and RNPs were
immunoprecipitated from nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions after 18 h of incubation. The RNA components of these various RNPs were analyzed
by gel electrophoresis.
|
|
As a further control, we also tested the ability of the different
TFIIIA/L5-NLS fusion proteins to bind to 5 S rRNA in vitro (Fig. 4B). With the exception of TFIIIA 5-6, which is
known not to be capable of 5 S rRNA binding and was included as a
negative control, all TFIIIA fusion proteins analyzed in the import
assay bind to 5 S rRNA, which is compatible with the idea that the
nuclear import of TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-1 and TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-3 should
indeed reflect RNP import rather than import of the free proteins. To test this latter interpretation more directly, we examined the nuclear
import of RNPs reconstituted in vitro by translation of the
appropriate Myc-tagged TFIIIA protein variants in the presence of
radiolabeled 5 S RNA binding partners. The RNA preparation utilized was
a mixture of the two different 5 S RNA mutants, Maxi and CA67. Maxi
binds only to TFIIIA, not to L5, and is normally not imported after
cytoplasmic injection (13). The CA67 mutant binds to L5 but not to
TFIIIA and was included as a control for the specificity of RNP
formation. After injection, RNPs were immunoprecipitated from
cytoplasmic and nuclear fractions via the Myc tag. Coprecipitated RNA
was extracted and analyzed by gel electrophoresis (Fig. 4C). As expected, in complex with wild-type TFIIIA, Maxi was only detected in the cytoplasmic fraction. The same result was obtained for Maxi in
complex with TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-2. In contrast, Maxi was also recovered
with the nuclear fraction in complex with TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-1 or with
TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-3. A significant amount of CA67 was only co-precipitated with TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-2 from the cytoplasmic fraction. This is consistent with the observation that the L5 fragment contained in this fusion protein carries 5 S RNA binding activity (as discussed above and as illustrated in Fig. 2) and is therefore also able to
recognize CA67. Co-precipitation of CA67, which only binds to L5, not
to TFIIIA, with TFIIIA C/L5-NLS-2 also indicates that the structural
integrity of the L5-NLS-2 fragment is maintained in the context of this
TFIIIA fusion protein, albeit being unable to mediate RNP import.
Taken together, these observations provide a strong argument for the
notion that L5-NLS-1 and L5-NLS-3, but not L5-NLS-2, are competent to
mediate 5 S RNP import into the nucleus. This situation thus defines a
first functional difference in a comparison of the activities of the
three separate NLS elements in ribosomal protein L5.
Interaction of Various Known Import Receptors with L5-NLS-1 in
Vitro--
It has been demonstrated more recently that a number of
different import receptors, namely RanBP5, RanBP7, transportin and, to
some extent, also importin , can mediate import of human L5 in
vitro; this is in apparent contradiction to the ability of immobilized human L5 to select importin , RanBP5, and RanBP7 but not
transportin from total egg extract (64). In extension of these studies,
we have analyzed the ability of Xenopus L5, as well as of
the isolated L5-NLS-1, -2, and -3, to interact with recombinant
importin , importin , transportin, and RanBP7 (Fig. 5A); note that the binding
experiments by Jäkel and Görlich (64) were performed out of
a competitive situation with a complex mixture of the different import
receptors, whereas our analysis assays the binding ability with
individual recombinant proteins, i.e. out of a
noncompetitive situation. However, we cannot exclude the possibility
that the interactions that we detect are indirect, because the
radioactively labeled L5 variants employed are produced by in
vitro translation in rabbit reticulocyte lysate that contains multiple compounds of the import machinery. The different import receptors were expressed as glutathione S-transferase fusion
proteins; if in vitro translated nucleoplasmin was used as a
binding substrate, it was found to interact exclusively with importin
, thus serving as a positive control for binding specificity. The
binding activity under conditions of elevated ionic strength, which
reflects optimized assay conditions for the interaction of import
receptors with L5, is rather weak; it is equally specific but much
stronger at reduced ionic strength (data not shown). Full-length
Xenopus L5 interacts relatively weakly but specifically with
all four import receptors tested. The same pattern of binding
activities was observed with the L5-NLS-1 fragment; in contrast,
neither L5-NLS-2 nor L5-NLS-3 exhibits significant binding to any of
the import receptors analyzed in this study. The relatively low binding
observed with L5-NLS-2 prefers smaller protein fragments over the
full-length protein and is therefore interpreted as an unspecific
binding activity. The presence of 12 µM RanQ69L strongly
inhibited complex formation of importin , transportin and RanBP7
with Xenopus ribosomal protein L5 (Fig. 5B),
establishing that these interactions are highly specific. The binding
of importin is not reduced to the same extent, suggesting that the
interaction of L5 and importin is direct and not necessarily
achieved via formation of the importin / heterodimer. We conclude
that, as already described for human L5 (64), Xenopus L5 is
able to interact with multiple import receptors. We further find that
the full spectrum of binding activities is reproduced by the N-terminal
25 amino acids of Xenopus L5. The inability of hL5 to select
importin and transportin from total egg extract (64), which is in
apparent contrast to our in vitro binding studies with
Xenopus L5, may be explained by use of a different assay
system.

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
L5-NLS interactions with various import
receptors. A, the bacterially expressed import receptors
importin , importin , transportin, and Ran BP7, as well as their
fusion domain glutathione S-transferase, were immobilized
and incubated with in vitro translated nucleoplasmin
(Nuc), Xenopus ribosomal protein L5, or the NLS
containing L5 fragments (L5-NLS-1, -2 and-3). The protein fraction that
was bound to the different immobilized recombinant import receptors was
analyzed by gel electrophoresis. WT, wild-type.
B, the interaction of Xenopus ribosomal protein
L5 with different import receptors was analyzed in the presence and
absence of 12 µM RanQ69L (Ran-GTP).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Our analysis of RNA binding and nuclear import activities in the
ribosomal protein L5 from X. laevis allows for several
different conclusions. L5 contains three separate nuclear localization
signals, which are functionally distinct. Whereas L5-NLS-1 and -3 function in RNP import, L5-NLS-2 does not. L5-NLS-1 binds to a number
of different known NLS receptors in vitro, and L5-NLS-2 and
-3 do not. Complex formation with 5 S ribosomal RNA requires both N- and C-terminal sequence elements of L5. Finally, we also report that
NLS function and RNA binding activity are not sufficient to allow
wild-type levels of nucleolar accumulation.
The existence of multiple nuclear localization signals in ribosomal
proteins has been reported previously, such as for yeast L25 and L29,
as well as for human S6, S7, and L7 (55, 56, 58-60). Many of these
NLSs consist of basic amino acid stretches, which show similarities to
nuclear localization signals of the SV40 or nucleoplasmin type;
however, others do not fit into any of these types of consensus
sequences. Of the three different NLSs in L5, the two located at the N
and C termini resemble the canonical NLS of the nucleoplasmin type. The
third one, referred to as L5-NLS-2 and located within the central
portion of the protein, is structurally distinct and includes sequence
elements that are widely separated within the primary structure of L5.
L5-NLS-2 is also functionally distinct from L5-NLS-1 and -3; in
contrast to these latter NLSs, it is not capable of mediating the
nuclear import of a covalently attached, heterologous RNP. Because the NLS-2 bearing L5 fragment retains 5 S rRNA binding activity and also
due to its complex structure, one could imagine that L5-NLS-2 is masked
in the 5 S RNP and thus only visible in the free L5 protein. Candidate
nuclear import receptors for L5-NLS-2 remain to be identified, because
results obtained in in vitro binding assays with a set of
different known import receptors were negative. However, the fact that
L5-NLS-2 can mediate nuclear protein import but not RNP import seems to
indicate that these processes may occur via separate, perhaps only
partially overlapping pathways.
The redundancy of nuclear import signals in L5 may also directly
reflect a redundancy of nuclear import pathways. Very recently, Jäkel and Görlich (64) were able to demonstrate that four different importin -like transport factors, namely importin , transportin, Ran BP5, and Ran BP7, are able to mediate the nuclear transport of ribosomal proteins, including L5, in vitro.
This raises the question of whether the three different NLSs in L5 may
represent binding sites for different transport factors. Interestingly, L5-NLS-1 reproduces the spectrum of import receptor binding that is
observed with the full-length protein. Thus, it seems likely that this
basic, N-terminal NLS in L5 can utilize different import receptors or
pathways. This situation is reminiscent of what has been described for
ribosomal protein L23a. A relatively small sequence element in the
N-terminal region of L23a, which is equally enriched in basic amino
acids, serves as a binding site for four different import receptors,
and it has been proposed that this sequence element might be considered
as an archetypal import signal that evolved before the various import
receptors diverged in evolution (64). Our observations with NLS-1 in L5
appear to reinforce the same notion, even though L5 NLS-1 does not seem
to be closely related to the corresponding sequence element in L23a,
referred to as the BIB domain (64), except for the notion that both
sequences appear relatively enriched in basic amino acids.
Our RNA binding studies with ribosomal protein L5 demonstrate that
sequence elements located in the N-terminal as well as in the
C-terminal portion of the protein are required for 5 S rRNA recognition
and binding. Previous coprecipitation analyses by Michael and Dreyfuss
(89) using biotinylated 5 S rRNA had suggested that an N-terminal
fragment of rat L5 containing amino acids 1-93, as well as several
other fragments that contain the same N-terminal portion of the
protein, are sufficient to bind specifically to human 5 S rRNA. Using
the same type of binding assay, we have been able to reproduce those
results, and we have also obtained qualitatively similar results with
fragments derived from Xenopus L5. However, using
biotinylated U6 snRNA as a control revealed a high background of
unspecific binding with the same set of proteins (data not shown). We
conclude that the stringency of our coimmunoprecipitation analyses with
antibodies directed against the protein moiety of the RNP complex and
with an unmodified RNA substrate is significantly higher than in this
latter type of assay. The importance of N- and C-terminal amino acid
residues in the yeast L5 homolog, referred to as YL3, for binding to
yeast 5 S rRNA has similarly been reported previously. By in
vitro and in vivo binding assays, it was demonstrated
that point mutations in the N- and C-terminal part of the protein, as
well as C-terminal deletions, interfere with 5 S rRNA binding activity
(90).
After translocation into the nucleus, ribosomal proteins must travel to
the nucleolus in order to be able to participate in ribosomal subunit
assembly. Despite the fact that some regions of nucleolar proteins,
including some ribosomal proteins, have been shown to be necessary for
nucleolar targeting, no consensus targeting sequence has been defined
to date. Nucleolar localization could either occur by a combination of
diffusion through the nucleoplasm and nucleolar retention by
interaction with other nucleolar components (65-73), or it could be a
signal-dependent, receptor mediated process. Sequence
elements in some cellular and in a number of viral proteins have indeed
been identified that are sufficient to target a reporter protein to the
nucleolus, although there is no direct evidence for a receptor-mediated
transport (74-84). In transient transfection experiments, we were able
to show that only the full-length L5 protein is able to mediate
efficient nucleolar accumulation. This observation is compatible with
the idea that nucleolar accumulation of L5 requires the complex
activities of the protein, i.e. its ability to interact with
ribosomal RNA and other ribosomal proteins in the context of ribosomal
subunit assembly. However, our experiments do not exclude the existence
of a specific nucleolar localization signal that would have a complex
architecture and would not be maintained in the different L5 fragments
that we have used.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank our colleagues who have generously
provided plasmid constructs utilized in this study: Mike Wormington for
Xenopus L5, Mat Michael for the rat L5 DNAs, Dirk
Görlich and Gideon Dreyfuss for the various import receptor DNAs,
Detlef Doenecke for the Histone H1 constructs, and Don Brown for the
Maxi 5 S rRNA plasmid. We also thank Susanne Loop for providing
purified RanQ69L.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by funds from the Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft (to T. P.) (SFB 523).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.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 49-551-395683;
Fax: 49-551-395960; E-mail: tpieler@gwdg.de.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
RNP, ribonucleoprotein complex;
NLS, nuclear localization sequence;
PCR, polymerase chain reaction;
Gal, galactosidase;
aa, amino acid(s);
TNT, transcription/translation;
U snRNP, uridine-rich and
small nucleolar RNP.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Mairy, M.,
and Denis, H.
(1971)
Dev. Biol.
24,
143-165[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Picard, B.,
and Wegnez, M.
(1979)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
76,
241-245[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Honda, B. M.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1980)
Cell
22,
119-126[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Pelham, H. R.,
and Brown, D. D.
(1980)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
77,
4170-4174[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Mattaj, I. W.,
Coppard, N. J.,
Brown, R. S.,
Clark, B. F.,
and De Robertis, E. M.
(1987)
EMBO J.
6,
2409-2413[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Joho, K. E.,
Darby, M. K.,
Crawford, E. T.,
and Brown, D. D.
(1990)
Cell
61,
293-300[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Picard, B.,
le Maire, M.,
Wegnez, M.,
and Denis, H.
(1980)
Eur. J. Biochem.
109,
359-368[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Wormington, W. M.
(1989)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9,
5281-5288[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
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[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Guddat, U.,
Bakken, A. H.,
and Pieler, T.
(1990)
Cell
60,
619-628[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Allison, L. A.,
Romaniuk, P. J.,
and Bakken, A. H.
(1991)
Dev. Biol.
144,
129-144[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Allison, L. A.,
North, M. T.,
and Neville, L. A.
(1995)
Dev. Biol.
168,
284-295[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Rudt, F.,
and Pieler, T.
(1996)
EMBO J.
15,
1383-1391[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Murdoch, K. J.,
and Allison, L. A.
(1996)
Exp. Cell Res.
227,
332-343[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Nigg, E. A.
(1997)
Nature
386,
779-787[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Corbett, A. H.,
and Silver, P. A.
(1997)
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.
61,
193-211[Abstract]
|
| 17.
|
Mattaj, I. W.,
and Englmeier, L.
(1998)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
67,
265-306[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Wozniak, R. W.,
Rout, M. P.,
and Aitchison, J. D.
(1998)
Trends Cell Biol.
8,
184-188[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Izaurralde, E.,
and Adam, S.
(1998)
RNA
4,
351-364[Abstract]
|
| 20.
|
Melchior, F.,
and Gerace, L.
(1998)
Trends Cell Biol.
8,
175-179[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Dahlberg, J. E.,
and Lund, E.
(1998)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
10,
400-408[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Dasso, M.,
and Pu, R. T.
(1998)
Am. J. Hum. Genet.
63,
311-316[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Moroianu, J.
(1998)
J. Cell. Biochem.
70,
231-239[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Görlich, D.,
Dabrowski, M.,
Bischoff, F. R.,
Kutay, U.,
Bork, P.,
Hartmann, E.,
Prehn, S.,
and Izaurralde, E.
(1997)
J. Cell Biol.
138,
65-80[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Kalderon, D.,
Roberts, B. L.,
Richardson, W. D.,
and Smith, A. E.
(1984)
Cell
39,
499-509[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Robbins, J.,
Dilworth, S. M.,
Laskey, R. A.,
and Dingwall, C.
(1991)
Cell
64,
615-623[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Dingwall, C.,
and Laskey, R. A.
(1991)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
16,
478-481[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Dingwall, C.,
Sharnick, S. V.,
and Laskey, R. A.
(1982)
Cell
30,
449-458[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Imamoto, N.,
Shimamoto, T.,
Takao, T.,
Tachibana, T.,
Kose, S.,
Matsubae, M.,
Sekimoto, T.,
Shimonishi, Y.,
and Yoneda, Y.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
3617-3626[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Imamoto, N.,
Shimamoto, T.,
Kose, S.,
Takao, T.,
Tachibana, T.,
Matsubae, M.,
Sekimoto, T.,
Shimonishi, Y.,
and Yoneda, Y.
(1995)
FEBS Lett.
368,
415-419[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Imamoto, N.,
Tachibana, T.,
Matsubae, M.,
and Yoneda, Y.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
8559-8565[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Görlich, D.,
Prehn, S.,
Laskey, R. A.,
and Hartmann, E.
(1994)
Cell
79,
767-778[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Görlich, D.,
and Laskey, R. A.
(1995)
Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol.
60,
695-699[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Görlich, D.,
Vogel, F.,
Mills, A. D.,
Hartmann, E.,
and Laskey, R. A.
(1995)
Nature
377,
246-248[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
Radu, A.,
Moore, M. S.,
and Blobel, G.
(1995)
Cell
81,
215-222[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Radu, A.,
Blobel, G.,
and Moore, M. S.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
1769-1773[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 37.
|
Adam, E. J.,
and Adam, S. A.
(1994)
J. Cell Biol.
125,
547-555[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Weis, K.,
Dingwall, C.,
and Lamond, A. I.
(1996)
EMBO J.
15,
7120-718[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Moroianu, J.,
Blobel, G.,
and Radu, A.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
2008-2011[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Siomi, M. C.,
Eder, P. S.,
Kataoka, N.,
Wan, L.,
Liu, Q.,
and Dreyfuss, G.
(1997)
J. Cell Biol.
138,
1181-1192[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Pollard, V. W.,
Michael, W. M.,
Nakielny, S.,
Siomi, M. C.,
Wang, F.,
and Dreyfuss, G.
(1996)
Cell
86,
985-994[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 42.
|
Siomi, H.,
and Dreyfuss, G.
(1995)
J. Cell Biol.
129,
551-560[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Fridell, R. A.,
Truant, R.,
Thorne, L.,
Benson, R. E.,
and Cullen, B. R.
(1997)
J. Cell Sci.
110,
1325-1331[Abstract]
|
| 44.
|
Weighardt, F.,
Biamonti, G.,
and Riva, S.
(1995)
J. Cell Sci.
108,
545-555[Abstract]
|
| 45.
|
Aitchison, J. D.,
Blobel, G.,
and Rout, M. P.
(1996)
Science
274,
624-627[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
Palacios, I.,
Hetzer, M.,
Adam, S. A.,
and Mattaj, I. W.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
6783-6792[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Fischer, U.,
and Lührmann, R.
(1990)
Science
249,
786-790[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 48.
|
Fischer, U.,
Sumpter, V.,
Sekine, M.,
Satoh, T.,
and Lührmann, R.
(1993)
EMBO J.
12,
573-583[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
Fischer, U.,
Darzynkiewicz, E.,
Tahara, S. M.,
Dathan, N. A.,
Lührmann, R.,
and Mattaj, I. W.
(1991)
J. Cell Biol.
113,
705-714[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 50.
|
Fischer, U.,
Heinrich, J.,
van Zee, K.,
Fanning, E.,
and Lührmann, R.
(1994)
J. Cell Biol.
125,
971-980[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 51.
|
Hamm, J.,
Darzynkiewicz, E.,
Tahara, S. M.,
and Mattaj, I. W.
(1990)
Cell
62,
569-577[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 52.
|
Michaud, N.,
and Goldfarb, D.
(1992)
J. Cell Biol.
116,
851-861[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 53.
|
Marshallsay, C.,
and Lührmann, R.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
222-231[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 54.
|
Huber, J.,
Cronshagen, U.,
Kadokura, M.,
Marshallsay, C.,
Wada, T.,
Sekine, M.,
and Lührmann, R.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
4114-4126[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 55.
|
Schmidt, C.,
Lipsius, E.,
and Kruppa, J.
(1995)
Mol. Biol. Cell
6,
1875-1885[Abstract]
|
| 56.
|
Annilo, T.,
Karis, A.,
Hoth, S.,
Rikk, T.,
Kruppa, J.,
and Metspalu, A.
(1998)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
249,
759-766[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 57.
|
Moreland, R. B.,
Nam, H. G.,
Hereford, L. M.,
and Fried, H. M.
(1985)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
82,
6561-6565[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 58.
|
Underwood, M. R.,
and Fried, H. M.
(1990)
EMBO J.
9,
91-99[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 59.
|
Schaap, P. J.,
van't Riet, J.,
Woldringh, C. L.,
and Raue, H. A.
(1991)
J. Mol. Biol.
221,
225-237[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 60.
|
Russo, G.,
Ricciardelli, G.,
and Pietropaolo, C.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
5229-5235[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 61.
|
Schlenstedt, G.,
Smirnova, E.,
Deane, R.,
Solsbacher, J.,
Kutay, U.,
Görlich, D.,
Ponstingl, H.,
and Bischoff, F. R.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
6237-6249[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 62.
|
Rout, M. P.,
Blobel, G.,
and Aitchison, J. D.
(1997)
Cell
89,
715-725[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 63.
|
Yaseen, N. R.,
and Blobel, G.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
4451-4456[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 64.
|
Jäkel, S.,
and Görlich, D.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
4491-4502[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 65.
|
Zirwes, R. F.,
Schmidt-Zachmann, M. S.,
and Franke, W. W.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
11387-11392[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 66.
|
Zirwes, R. F.,
Kouzmenko, A. P.,
Peters, J. M.,
Franke, W. W.,
and Schmidt-Zachmann, M. S.
(1997)
Mol. Biol. Cell
8,
231-248[Abstract]
|
| 67.
|
Maeda, Y.,
Hisatake, K.,
Kondo, T.,
Hanada, K.,
Song, C. Z.,
Nishimura, T.,
and Muramatsu, M.
(1992)
EMBO J.
11,
3695-3704[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 68.
|
Yan, C.,
and Melese, T.
(1993)
J. Cell Biol.
123,
1081-1091[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 69.
|
Valdez, B. C.,
Perlaky, L.,
Henning, D.,
Saijo, Y.,
Chan, P. K.,
and Busch, H.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
23776-23783[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 70.
|
Antoine, M.,
Reimers, K.,
Dickson, C.,
and Kiefer, P.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
29475-2981[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 71.
|
Schmidt-Zachmann, M. S.,
and Nigg, E. A.
(1993)
J. Cell Sci.
105,
799-806[Abstract]
|
| 72.
|
Heine, M. A.,
Rankin, M. L.,
and DiMario, P. J.
(1993)
Mol. Biol. Cell
4,
1189-1204[Abstract]
|
| 73.
|
Creancier, L.,
Prats, H.,
Zanibellato, C.,
Amalric, F.,
and Bugler, B.
(1993)
Mol. Biol. Cell
4,
1239-1250[Abstract]
|
| 74.
|
Moroianu, J.,
and Riordan, J. F.
(1994)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
203,
1765-1772[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 75.
|
Kubota, S.,
Siomi, H.,
Satoh, T.,
Endo, S.,
Maki, M.,
and Hatanaka, M.
(1989)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
162,
963-970[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 76.
|
Siomi, H.,
Shida, H.,
Nam, S. H.,
Nosaka, T.,
Maki, M.,
and Hatanaka, M.
(1988)
Cell
55,
197-209[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 77.
|
Mears, W. E.,
and Rice, S. A.
(1996)
J. Virol.
70,
7445-7453[Abstract]
|
| 78.
|
Siomi, H.,
Shida, H.,
Maki, M.,
and Hatanaka, M.
(1990)
J. Virol.
64,
1803-1807[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 79.
|
Dang, C. V.,
and Lee, W. M.
(1989)
J. Biol. Chem.
264,
18019-18023[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 80.
|
Liu, J. L.,
Lee, L. F.,
Ye, Y.,
Qian, Z.,
and Kung, H. J.
(1997)
J. Virol.
71,
3188-3196[Abstract]
|
| 81.
|
Dundr, M.,
Leno, G. H.,
Hammarskjöld, M. L.,
Rekosh, D.,
Helga-Maria, C.,
and Olson, M. O.
(1995)
J. Cell Sci.
108,
2811-2823[Abstract]
|
| 82.
|
Dundr, M.,
Meier, U. T.,
Lewis, N.,
Rekosh, D.,
Hammarskjöld, M. L.,
and Olson, M. O. J.
(1997)
Chromosoma
105,
407-417[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 83.
|
Lutz, P.,
Puvion-Dutilleul, F.,
Lutz, Y.,
and Kedinger, C.
(1996)
J. Virol.
70,
3449-3460[Abstract]
|
| 84.
|
Cochrane, A. W.,
Perkins, A.,
and Rosen, C. A.
(1990)
J. Virol.
64,
881-885[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 85.
|
Markmeyer, P.,
Rühlmann, A.,
Englisch, U.,
and Cramer, F.
(1990)
Gene
93,
129-134[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 86.
|
Rupp, R. A.,
Snider, L.,
and Weintraub, H.
(1994)
Genes Dev.
8,
1311-1323[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 87.
|
Schwamborn, K.,
Albig, W.,
and Doenecke, D.
(1998)
Exp. Cell Res.
244,
206-217[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 88.
|
Bürglin, T. R.,
Mattaj, I. W.,
Newmeyer, D. D.,
Zeller, R.,
and De Robertis, E. M.
(1987)
Genes Dev.
1,
97-107[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 89.
|
Michael, W. M.,
and Dreyfuss, G.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
11571-11574[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 90.
|
Deshmukh, M.,
Stark, J.,
Yeh, L. C.,
Lee, J. C.,
and Woolford, J. L., Jr.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
30148-30156[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. Yao, Q. Ling, H. Wang, and H. Huang
Ribosomal proteins promote leaf adaxial identity
Development,
April 1, 2008;
135(7):
1325 - 1334.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Kundu-Michalik, M.-A. Bisotti, E. Lipsius, A. Bauche, A. Kruppa, T. Klokow, G. Kammler, and J. Kruppa
Nucleolar Binding Sequences of the Ribosomal Protein S6e Family Reside in Evolutionary Highly Conserved Peptide Clusters
Mol. Biol. Evol.,
March 1, 2008;
25(3):
580 - 590.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. Goffin, S. Vodala, C. Fraser, J. Ryan, M. Timms, S. Meusburger, B. Catimel, E. C. Nice, P. A. Silver, C.-Y. Xiao, et al.
The Unfolded Protein Response Transducer Ire1p Contains a Nuclear Localization Sequence Recognized by Multiple beta Importins
Mol. Biol. Cell,
December 1, 2006;
17(12):
5309 - 5323.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Nagahama, Y. Hara, A. Seki, T. Yamazoe, Y. Kawate, T. Shinohara, K. Hatsuzawa, K. Tani, and M. Tagaya
NVL2 Is a Nucleolar AAA-ATPase that Interacts with Ribosomal Protein L5 through Its Nucleolar Localization Sequence
Mol. Biol. Cell,
December 1, 2004;
15(12):
5712 - 5723.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M.-S. Dai and H. Lu
Inhibition of MDM2-mediated p53 Ubiquitination and Degradation by Ribosomal Protein L5
J. Biol. Chem.,
October 22, 2004;
279(43):
44475 - 44482.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Claussen, K. Horvay, and T. Pieler
Evidence for overlapping, but not identical, protein machineries operating in vegetal RNA localization along early and late pathways in Xenopus oocytes
Development,
September 1, 2004;
131(17):
4263 - 4273.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Z. Barciszewska, E. Wyszko, R. Bald, V. A. Erdmann, and J. Barciszewski
5S rRNA Is a Leadzyme. A Molecular Basis for Lead Toxicity
J. Biochem.,
March 1, 2003;
133(3):
309 - 315.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S.-H. Wang, W.-J. Syu, K.-J. Huang, H.-Y. Lei, C.-W. Yao, C.-C. King, and S.-T. Hu
Intracellular localization and determination of a nuclear localization signal of the core protein of dengue virus
J. Gen. Virol.,
December 1, 2002;
83(12):
3093 - 3102.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Bauerle, D. Doenecke, and W. Albig
The Requirement of H1 Histones for a Heterodimeric Nuclear Import Receptor
J. Biol. Chem.,
August 30, 2002;
277(36):
32480 - 32489.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. J. Quadrini and J. J. Bieker
Kruppel-like Zinc Fingers Bind to Nuclear Import Proteins and Are Required for Efficient Nuclear Localization of Erythroid Kruppel-like Factor
J. Biol. Chem.,
August 23, 2002;
277(35):
32243 - 32252.
[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]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. F. Bunn, J. A. Neidig, K. E. Freidinger, T. A. Stankiewicz, B. S. Weaver, J. McGrew, and L. A. Allison
Nucleocytoplasmic Shuttling of the Thyroid Hormone Receptor {{alpha}}
Mol. Endocrinol.,
April 1, 2001;
15(4):
512 - 533.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. Zhang and Y. Xiong
Control of p53 Ubiquitination and Nuclear Export by MDM2 and ARF
Cell Growth Differ.,
April 1, 2001;
12(4):
175 - 186.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 1999 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|