Search

ABSTRACTsnR30/U17 is a highly conserved H/ACA RNA that is required for maturation of the small ribosomal subunit in eukaryotes. By base-pairing to the expansion segment 6 (ES6) of 18S ribosomal RNA (rRNA), the snR30 H/ACA Ribonucleoprotein (RNP) indirectly facilitates processing of the precursor rRNA (pre-rRNA) together with other proteins such as Utp23 and other RNAs acting as ribosome assembly factors. However, the details of the molecular interaction network of snR30 and its binding partners and how these interactions contribute to pre-rRNA processing remains unknown. Here, we report the in vitroreconstitution of a Saccharomyces cerevisiaesnR30 RNP and quantitative characterization of the interactions of snR30, H/ACA proteins, the Utp23 protein and ES6 of the 18S rRNA. The snR30 RNA is bound tightly by both H/ACA proteins and Utp23. We dissected the importance of different 18S rRNA regions for snR30 RNP binding and demonstrated that the snR30 complex is tightly anchored on the pre-rRNA through base-pairing to ES6 whereas other reported rRNA binding sites do not contribute to the affinity of the snR30 RNP. On its own, the ribosome assembly factor Utp23 binds in a tight, but unspecific manner to RNA. However, in complex with the snR30 RNP, Utp23 increases the affinity of the RNP for rRNA revealing synergies between snR30 RNP and Utp23 which are enhancing specificity and affinity for rRNA, respectively. Together, these findings provide mechanistic insights how the snR30 RNP and Utp23 cooperate to interact tightly and specifically with rRNA during the early stages of ribosome biogenesis.

tRNAs undergo an extensive maturation process including posttranscriptional modifications that influence secondary and tertiary interactions. Precursor and mature tRNAs lacking key modifications are often recognized as aberrant and subsequently targeted for decay, illustrating the importance of modifications in promoting structural integrity. tRNAs also rely on tRNA chaperones to promote the folding of misfolded substrates into functional conformations. The best characterized tRNA chaperone is the La protein, which interacts with nascent RNA polymerase III transcripts to promote folding and offers protection from exonucleases. More recently, certain tRNA modification enzymes have also been demonstrated to possess tRNA folding activity distinct from their catalytic activity, suggesting that they may act as tRNA chaperones. In this review, we will discuss pioneering studies relating posttranscriptional modification to tRNA stability and decay pathways, present recent advances into the mechanism by which the RNA chaperone La assists pre-tRNA maturation, and summarize emerging research directions aimed at characterizing modification enzymes as tRNA chaperones. Together, these findings shed light on the importance of tRNA folding and how tRNA chaperones, in particular, increase the fraction of nascent pre-tRNAs that adopt a folded, functional conformation.

tRNAs constitute the most highly modified class of RNA. Every tRNA contains a unique set of modifications, and Ψ55, m5U54, and m7G46 are frequently found within the elbow of the tRNA structure. Despite the abundance of tRNA modifications, we are only beginning to understand the orchestration of modification enzymes during tRNA maturation. Here, we investigated whether pre-existing modifications impact the binding affinity or catalysis by tRNA elbow modification enzymes. Specifically, we focused on the Escherichia colienzymes TruB, TrmA, and TrmB which generate Ψ55, m5U54, and m7G46, respectively. tRNAs containing a single modification were prepared, and the binding and activity preferences of purified E. coliTrmA, TruB, and TrmB were examined in vitro. TruB preferentially binds and modifies unmodified tRNA. TrmA prefers to modify unmodified tRNA, but binds most tightly to tRNA that already contains Ψ55. In contrast, binding and modification by TrmB is insensitive to the tRNA modification status. Our results suggest that TrmA and TruB are likely to act on mostly unmodified tRNA precursors during the early stages of tRNA maturation whereas TrmB presumably acts on later tRNA intermediates that are already partially modified. In conclusion, we uncover the mechanistic basis for the preferred modification order in the E. colitRNA elbow region.

H/ACA small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (snoRNPs) pseudouridylate RNA in eukaryotes and archaea. They target many RNAs site-specifically through base-pairing interactions between H/ACA guide and substrate RNA. Besides ribosomal RNA (rRNA) and small nuclear RNA (snRNA), H/ACA snoRNPs are thought to also modify messenger RNA (mRNA) with potential impacts on gene expression. However, the base pairing between known target RNAs and H/ACA guide RNAs varies widely in nature, and therefore the rules governing substrate RNA selection are still not fully understood. To provide quantitative insight into substrate RNA recognition, we systematically altered the sequence of a substrate RNA target by the Saccharomyces cerevisiaeH/ACA guide RNA snR34. Time courses measuring pseudouridine formation revealed a gradual decrease in the initial velocity of pseudouridylation upon reducing the number of base pairs between substrate and guide RNA. Changing or inserting nucleotides close to the target uridine severely impairs pseudouridine formation. Interestingly, filter binding experiments show that all substrate RNA variants bind to H/ACA snoRNPs with nanomolar affinity. Next, we showed that binding of inactive, near-cognate RNAs to H/ACA snoRNPs does not inhibit their activity for cognate RNAs, presumably because near-cognate RNAs dissociate rapidly. We discuss that the modulation of initial velocities by the base-pairing strength might affect the order and efficiency of pseudouridylation in rRNA during ribosome biogenesis. Moreover, the binding of H/ACA snoRNPs to near-cognate RNAs may be a mechanism to search for cognate target sites. Together, our data provide critical information to aid in the prediction of productive H/ACA guide—substrate RNA pairs.

ABSTRACTFor a long time, eukaryotic stand-alone pseudouridine synthases (Pus enzymes) were neglected as non-essential enzymes adding seemingly simple modifications to tRNAs and small nuclear RNAs. Most studies were limited to the identification and initial characterization of the yeast Pus enzymes. However, recent transcriptome-wide mapping of pseudouridines in yeast and humans revealed pervasive modification of mRNAs and other non-coding RNAs by Pus enzymes which is dynamically regulated in response to cellular stress. Moreover, mutations in at least 2 genes encoding human Pus enzymes cause inherited diseases affecting muscle and brain function. Together, the recent findings suggest a broader-than-anticipated role of the Pus enzymes which are emerging as potential regulators of gene expression. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge on Pus enzymes, generate hypotheses regarding their cellular function and outline future areas of research of pseudouridine synthases.

In all organisms, several distinct stand-alone pseudouridine synthase (PUS) family enzymes are expressed to isomerize uridine into pseudouridine (Ψ) by specific recognition of RNAs. In addition, Ψs are generated in Archaea and Eukaryotes by PUS enzymes which are organized as ribonucleoprotein particles (RNP)—the box H/ACA s/snoRNPs. For this modification system, a unique TruB-like catalytic PUS subunit is associated with various RNA guides which specifically target and secure substrate RNAs by base-pairing. The archaeal Cbf5 PUS displays the special feature of exhibiting both RNA guide-dependent and -independent activities. Structures of substrate-bound TruB and H/ACA sRNP revealed the importance of histidines in positioning the target uridine in the active site. To analyze the respective role of H60 and H77, we have generated variants carrying alanine substitutions at these positions. The impact of the mutations was analyzed for unguided modifications U55in tRNA and U2603in 23S rRNA, and for activity of the box H/ACA Pab91 sRNP enzyme. H77 (H43 in TruB), but not H60, appeared to be crucial for the RNA guide-independent activity. In contrast to earlier suggestions, H60 was found to be noncritical for the activity of the H/ACA sRNP, but contributes together with H77 to the full activity of H/ACA sRNPs. The data suggest that a similar catalytic process was conserved in the two divergent pseudouridylation systems.

Pseudouridine synthases catalyze formation of the most abundant modification of functional RNAs by site-specifically isomerizing uridines to pseudouridines. While the structure and substrate specificity of these enzymes have been studied in detail, the kinetic and the catalytic mechanism of pseudouridine synthases remain unknown. Here, the first pre-steady-state kinetic analysis of three Escherichia coli pseudouridine synthases is presented. A novel stopped-flow absorbance assay revealed that substrate tRNA binding by TruB takes place in two steps with an overall rate of 6 sec–1. In order to observe catalysis of pseudouridine formation directly, the traditional tritium release assay was adapted for the quench-flow technique, allowing, for the first time, observation of a single round of pseudouridine formation. Thereby, the single-round rate constant of pseudouridylation (kΨ) by TruB was determined to be 0.5 sec–1. This rate constant is similar to the kcatobtained under multiple-turnover conditions in steady-state experiments, indicating that catalysis is the rate-limiting step for TruB. In order to investigate if pseudouridine synthases are characterized by slow catalysis in general, the rapid kinetic quench-flow analysis was also performed with two other E. coli enzymes, RluA and TruA, which displayed rate constants of pseudouridine formation of 0.7 and 0.35 sec–1, respectively. Hence, uniformly slow catalysis might be a general feature of pseudouridine synthases that share a conserved catalytic domain and supposedly use the same catalytic mechanism.