Picornaviruses constitute a large group of viruses comprising medically and economically important pathogens such as poliovirus, coxsackievirus, rhinovirus, enterovirus 71 and foot-and-mouth disease virus. A unique characteristic of these viruses is the use of a viral peptide (VPg) as primer for viral RNA synthesis. As a consequence, all newly formed viral RNA molecules possess a covalently linked VPg peptide. It is known that VPg is enzymatically released from the incoming viral RNA by a host protein, called TDP2, but it is still unclear whether the release of VPg is necessary to initiate RNA translation. To study the possible requirement of VPg release for RNA translation, we developed a novel method to modify the genomic viral RNA with VPg linked via a 'non-cleavable' bond. We coupled an azide-modified VPg peptide to an RNA primer harboring a cyclooctyne [bicyclo[6.1.0]nonyne (BCN)] by a copper-free 'click' reaction, leading to a VPg-triazole-RNA construct that was 'non-cleavable' by TDP2. We successfully ligated the VPg-RNA complex to the viral genomic RNA, directed by base pairing. We show that the lack of VPg unlinkase does not influence RNA translation or replication. Thus, the release of the VPg from the incoming viral RNA is not a prerequisite for RNA translation or replication.
Picornaviruses constitute a large group of viruses comprising medically and economically important pathogens such as poliovirus, coxsackievirus, rhinovirus, enterovirus 71 and foot-and-mouth disease virus. A unique characteristic of these viruses is the use of a viral peptide (VPg) as primer for viral RNA synthesis. As a consequence, all newly formed viral RNA molecules possess a covalently linked VPg peptide. It is known that VPg is enzymatically released from the incoming viral RNA by a host protein, called TDP2, but it is still unclear whether the release of VPg is necessary to initiate RNA translation. To study the possible requirement of VPg release for RNA translation, we developed a novel method to modify the genomic viral RNA with VPg linked via a 'non-cleavable' bond. We coupled an azide-modified VPg peptide to an RNA primer harboring a cyclooctyne [bicyclo[6.1.0]nonyne (BCN)] by a copper-free 'click' reaction, leading to a VPg-triazole-RNA construct that was 'non-cleavable' by TDP2. We successfully ligated the VPg-RNA complex to the viral genomic RNA, directed by base pairing. We show that the lack of VPg unlinkase does not influence RNA translation or replication. Thus, the release of the VPg from the incoming viral RNA is not a prerequisite for RNA translation or replication.
Picornaviruses constitute a large group of small non-enveloped RNA viruses including many
important human and animal pathogens like poliovirus (PV), coxsackievirus, rhinovirus,
enterovirus 71 and foot-and-mouth disease virus. These viruses possess a single-stranded RNA
genome of positive polarity ranging from 7.0 to 8.5 kb in length. The genome consists of a
single open reading frame flanked by two highly structured untranslated regions (UTRs). The
5′ UTR contains the internal ribosomal entry site essential for viral RNA translation
(1–3).
Additionally, at the ultimate 5′ terminus another element—the cloverleaf (CL)
structure—is present, which is involved in both viral RNA translation and replication
(4–8).A unique feature of picornaviruses is the presence of a small virally encoded peptide, VPg
(also known as 3B), at the 5′ terminus of the genomic RNA (9–11). This peptide plays a key role
in the RNA replication process. Once VPg is released from the viral polyprotein by the
3Cpro proteinase (12), the
tyrosine residue at position 3 of VPg is uridylylated by the 3D viral polymerase (13,14). The resulting VPg-pUpU then serves as a primer for both negative-sense as
well as positive-sense RNA transcription (15). As a consequence, all newly transcribed RNA copies contain VPg attached via a
covalent phosphodiester bond (9–11).Soon after the discovery that picornavirus virion RNA contained covalently linked VPg,
viral RNA molecules lacking VPg were detected in infected cells (15–17). Thus, VPg seems to be
released from the virion RNA early in the viral replication cycle. This so-called
‘unlinkase’ activity was also identified in lysates from uninfected cells (18–20), suggesting
that a host enzyme is responsible for the unlinkase event. Recently, the
5′-tyrosyl-DNA phosphodiesterase-2 (TDP2) enzyme was identified as the long-sought
‘unlinkase’ enzyme (21).The function of VPg release from the genomic viral RNA, if any, is still unknown. Clearly,
VPg is not essential for the translation of incoming viral RNA because proteinase K
treatment of genomic viral RNA, thereby truncating the VPg peptide, did not affect
translation efficiency (16,22). Moreover, in vitro
transcribed RNA, consequently lacking VPg, is translated and replicated efficiently. Because
VPg is released from the viral RNA on introduction in the cytoplasm, it has been suggested
that the presence of the VPg may hamper the formation of the translation initiation complex
(15,16,23). In line with this
hypothesis, analysis of viral RNA molecules that associated with ribosomes in infected cells
lacked VPg (16,17), although in another study, it was demonstrated that
VPg-containing RNA was able to form complexes with ribosomes (24). Therefore, it remains unclear whether the release of VPg
from the viral genomic RNA is a prerequisite for translation and/or RNA replication.It is technically challenging to modify the 5′ terminus of large RNA molecules. Here,
we describe a new methodology to decorate the 5′ terminus of the genomic viral RNA
with several different modifications. Using this methodology, we show that small
modifications at the 5′ terminus do not affect RNA translation and replication.
Moreover, we generated viral RNA containing VPg linked via a ‘non-cleavable’
bond. We show that this RNA is efficiently translated and replicated, suggesting that VPg
unlinkase is not required for these processes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Cells and infectious clones
HeLa R19 cells were maintained in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium
supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum, penicillin (10 U/ml) and streptomycin (10
µg/ml). The coxsackievirus strain B3 (CVB3) infectious clone encoding the
Renilla luciferase (RLuc) gene under control of the
viral internal ribosomal entry site [RLuc-CVB3, (25)] was used as a template for site-directed mutagenesis (Stratagene). First,
the coding sequence of the first 6 nt of the CL structure was deleted (forward [Fw]:
5′-TAATACGACTCACTATAGG/CAGCCTGTGGGTTGATC-3′ and reverse [Rv]:
5′-GATCAACCCACAGGCTG/CCTATAGTGAGTCGTATTA-3′). The deletion was confirmed by
sequence analysis, and the resulting construct was used for another site-directed
mutagenesis to introduce either an 8-nt insertion (underlined) to yield the
RLuc-CVB3-Δ1-6 + 8 infectious clone (Fw:
5′-CTTTGTGCGCCTGTTTTAGCGGTGGATACCCCCTCCCCCA-3′ and
Rv: 5′-TGGGGGAGGGGGTATCCACCGCTAAAACAGGCGCACAAAG-3′) or
a 5-nt insertion (underlined) yielding the RLuc-CVB3-Δ1-6 + 5 infectious clone
(Fw:
5′-CGGTACCTTTGTGCGCCTGCCCTGTTTTATACCCCCTCCCCCAAC-3′
;and Rv:
5′-GTTGGGGGAGGGGGTATAAAACAGGGCAGGCGCACAAAGGTACCG-3′).
Again, the correct insertion was confirmed by sequencing.
RNA primers
Unmodified RNA primers, containing a 5′-terminal hydroxyl (OH) group, as well as
RNA primers possessing a 5′biotin, amine or Cy5 modification, were purchased from
Sigma. The RNA primer modified with bicyclo[6.1.0]nonyne (BCN) (26,27) was
synthesized by IBA using a BCN-phosphoramidite building block from B&A. Synthesis of
the three RNA primers containing a partial VPg peptide linked via; the natural tyrosine
phosphodiester bond—GH[5], H-Gly-Ala-Tyr-Thr-Gly-NH2; GH[9],
Ac-Gly-Ala-Tyr-Thr-Gly-NH2; and GH[11], Ac-Ala-Tyr-OH—has been described (28).
RNA transcription and RNA primer ligation
The 250-nt RNA fragment used for RNA ligations was produced by run-off RNA transcription
using the T7 RiboMAX kit (Promega) for 2 h at 37°C. As template, a 250-bp PCR product
was used (Fw: 5′-TAATACGACTCACTATAGG-3′ and Rv:
5′-GTAGTTGGCCGGATAACGAACG-3′) spanning the 5′-end of the
RLuc-CVB3-CLΔ1-6 + 8 genome containing a T7 promoter sequence. For
transcription of genomic RLuc-CVB3 wild-type (wt) RNA, RLuc-CVB3-Δ1-6 + 8 RNA
and RLuc-CVB3-Δ1-6 + 5 RNA, the infectious clone was linearized with BamHI, and
run-off RNA transcripts were made using the T7 RiboMAX kit (Promega) for 2 h at 37°C.
RNA transcripts were purified and concentrated using LiCl precipitation (Ambion) followed
by polyphosphatase treatment (Epicentre) for 2 h at 37°C. Finally, the RNA was
purified once more using LiCl precipitation (Ambion) and used for RNA ligations.For RNA primer ligation, 200 pmol of the 12-nt RNA primers
(5′-UUCCACCGCUAA-3′) or 9-nt RNA primers (5′-UUAAAACAG-3′) was
incubated with 20-pmol genomic RNA in the presence of 20 U of RNA ligase 2 (NEB) for 4 h
at 37°C (total volume 50 µl). Excess RNA primer was washed away using a GenElute
Mammalian total RNA miniprep column (Sigma). To assess RNA primer ligation efficiency, a
250-nt RNA fragment was released from 1.25 pmol of genomic RNA ligation product using DNA
primer-directed RNase H digestion (10-µl volume). RNA was incubated with 12.5 pmol
of DNA primer (5′-GTAGTTGGCCGATAACGAACG-3′) and 5 U of RNase H (Fermentas) for
20 min at 50°C. The released RNA fragment was analyzed on an 8-M urea, 8%
polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) gel and stained with Stains-All (Sigma).
RNA translation and replication assay
To determine RLuc translation levels, 100 ng of genomic RLuc-CVB3 run-off transcript RNA
(wt) or RNA ligation product were transfected (in triplicate) into 100 000 HeLa cells
using Lipofectamine2000 (Invitrogen) in the presence of 2.5 mM GuHCl. Cells were lysed in
passive lysis buffer (Promega) 8 h post-transfection, and RLuc values were measured using
the Renilla luciferase assay system according to manufacturer’s
instructions (Promega).To measure RNA replication, 1 ng of genomic RLuc-CVB3 run-off transcript RNA (wt) or RNA
ligation product were transfected (in triplicate) into 100 000 HeLa cells using
Lipofectamine2000 (Invitrogen) in the presence or absence of 2.5 mM GuHCl. Cells were
lysed in passive lysis buffer (Promega) 8 h post-transfection, and RLuc values were
measured using the Renilla luciferase assay system (Promega). The
increase of RLuc values in the absence of replication inhibitor GuHCl illustrates RNA
replication.
RNA stability assay
To determine RNA stability, 100 ng of genomic RLuc-CVB3 run-off transcript RNA (wt) or
RNA ligation product were transfected (in triplicate) into 100 000 HeLa cells using
Lipofectamine2000 (Invitrogen) in the presence of 2.5 mM GuHCl. At 1, 4 and 8 h
post-transfection, total RNA was isolated using the GenElute mammalian total RNA miniprep
kit (Sigma-Aldrich). Isolated RNA was treated with DNAse I (Invitrogen) before reverse
transcription. cDNA synthesis was performed with the TaqMan reverse transcription reagents
kit (Applied Biosystems) using random hexamer primers. Quantitative analysis of viral RNA
levels was performed using the LightCycler 480 (Roche).
To couple the VPg peptide to the BCN-containing RNA primer, a strain-promoted
alkyne–azide cycloaddition (SPAAC) was used. Azide-modified CVB3 VPg
(H-Gly-Ala-X-Thr-Gly-Val-Pro-Asn-Gln-Lys-Pro-Arg-Val-Pro-Thr-Leu-Arg-Gln-Ala-Lys-Val-Gln-OH)
and poliovirus VPg (PV;
H-Gly-Ala-X-Thr-Gly-Leu-Pro-Asn-Lys-Lys-Pro-Asn-Val-Pro-Thr-Ile-Arg-Thr-Ala-Lys-Val-Gln-OH)
were synthesized by ALMAC (X = γ-azidohomoalanine residue), and a 100-fold
excess of VPg (225 nmol) was incubated with 2.25 nmol of BCN group containing RNA primer
(IBA) in a total volume of 50 µl of phosphate-buffered saline for 1 h at room
temperature. Coupling efficiency of the peptides to BCN was determined by 8-M urea,
20% PAGE gel analyses and stained with Stains-All (Sigma). VPg-containing RNA
primers were used for RNA ligation reactions.
Dot blot analysis VPg-containing genomic RNA
Equimolar amounts (5, 0.5 and 0.05 pmol) of VPg peptides and VPg-containing RNA ligation
products were spotted on an Immobilon-P membrane (Millipore). Membranes were washed once
with washing buffer (PBS + 0.1% Tween20) and incubated 1 h in blocking buffer
(PBS + 0.1% Tween20 + 5% bovine serum albumin). Membranes were
successively incubated for 1 h with a rabbit polyclonal antibody (1:500) raised against
the PV VPg (29) followed by 30-min
incubation with goat-anti-rabbit-HRPO conjugate (BIO-RAD, 1:10 000) diluted in blocking
buffer. In between and after the incubations, the membranes were washed, thrice each time,
with washing buffer. Finally, membranes were washed once with PBS, incubated with ECL
(Amersham) and scanned using the Odyssey Imager (LI-COR).
VPg unlinkase assay
The VPg unlinkase reaction was essentially performed as described before (21,30) with slight modifications. As positive control, viral RNA isolated from PV
virions was used (wt vRNA, gift from Wilfried Bakker). For the unlinkase reaction, 2 pmol
of RNA was incubated in 50 µl of unlinkase buffer (20 mM Tris–HCl, pH 7.5, 2
mM MgCl2, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 5% v/v glycerol) in the presence or
absence of 1 pmol of GST-TDP2 enzyme. Unlinkase reactions were performed for 30 min at
30°C, and treated RNA was purified over a GenElute Mammalian total RNA miniprep column
(Sigma). Purified RNA was used for dot blot analysis, and VPg was detected using an
antibody raised against the PV VPg (as described earlier). Signal intensity was quantified
using the supplied Image Studio Software of LI-COR.
RNA translation assay in rabbit reticulocyte lysate and HeLa S10 extracts
Rabbit reticulocyte lysate (RRL) from Promega was used for in vitro
translation. RRL mixtures (in triplicate) were pre-incubated at 30°C for 5 min, and
RNA (1 ng/µl final concentration) was added. Reactions were incubated for 30 min at
30°C, translation was stopped by adding a 10-fold excess of H2O, and the
RLuc values were measured using the Renilla luciferase assay system
(Promega).Translation in HeLa S10 extract was performed as previously described (31–33). RNA (0.1
ng/µl final concentration) was added to HeLa S10 extract in triplicate and incubated
30 min at 34°C. Adding a 10-fold excess of H2O stopped the translation
reaction, and the RLuc values were measured using the Renilla luciferase
assay system (Promega).
RESULTS
Use of the CL structure allows efficient ligation of 5′-modified RNA primers to
RLuc-CVB3 genomic RNA
To investigate the importance of VPg unlinkase for viral RNA translation and replication,
we made use of an infectious clone of CVB3 containing
Renilla luciferase upstream of the capsid region
(RLuc-CVB3) (25). Initial attempts to
modify the 5′ terminus of the RLuc-CVB3 genomic RNA via ligation of a modified RNA
primer were unsuccessful (data not shown). This was most likely the result of low ligation
efficiency. To optimize RNA primer ligation, we took advantage of stem A of the CL
structure (Figure 1A) for base
pairing-directed primer ligation. To this end, we generated an RLuc-CVB3 infectious clone
to transcribe RNA containing a mutated CL lacking the first 6 nt in the 5′ strand
and containing an insertion of 8 nt in the 3′strand of stem A (CLΔ1-6 +
8, Figure 1A). This RNA should allow
annealing of a 12-nt RNA primer with sequence complementary to the 3′strand (Figure 1A).
Figure
1.
Base pairing-directed RNA primer ligation to
RLuc-CVB3-CLΔ1−6 + 8 genomic RNA. (A) Schematic
representation of the wt and the CLΔ1 − 6 + 8-modified CL
structure. The 8-nt insertion in the 3′strand of stem A is indicated in gray.
Note that T7 RNA polymerase-transcribed RNA contains two additional guanine
nucleotides (italic), which form a wobble base pair with uracil
nucleotides of the 3′strand of stem A in the Δ1 − 6 +
8-modified CL structure. The 12-nt RNA primer used for base pairing-directed RNA
ligation is depicted in light gray, and ‘R’ represents the different
5′ modifications. (B) Urea–PAGE analysis of an RNA primer
ligation to a 250-nt RNA fragment possessing the Δ1−6 + 8-mutated
CL structure. RNA primer was ligated using either RNA Ligase 1 or RNA Ligase 2.
Clearly, the RNA Ligase 2 was more efficient in ligating the RNA primer to the
modified CLΔ1−6 + 8 structure. (C) RNA primer ligation
efficiency to genomic RNA possessing the CLΔ1−6 + 8 structure was
determined by urea–PAGE analysis of a 250-nt RNase H-digested
5′-terminal fragment. Note that ligation of the RNA primer reduces migration
speed of the 250-nt RNase H-digested RNA fragment. (D) Translation of
the incoming genomic RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt), RNA holding the mutated CL
(Δ1−6 + 8) and RNA ligation products with different 5′
;modifications (OH, amine, biotin, Cy5) were determined by transfection of RNA in
HeLa cells in the presence of GuHCl. Eight hours post-transfection, HeLa cells were
lysed and RLuc values were determined. Data from a representative experiment are
presented as the mean of duplicate ±SD and analyzed using unpaired
t-test (** indicates significant difference
P < 0.01). (E) Stability of RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt),
the mutated CL (Δ1−6 + 8) and RNA ligation product possessing a
5′hydroxyl group (OH) was followed over time. RNA was transfected into HeLa
cells. At 1, 4 and 8 h post-transfection, cells were lysed and intracellular viral
RNA level was analyzed using RT-qPCR. Relative RNA levels are shown in percentages
compared with RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt) at T = 1 h. (F) RNA replication
of the transfected RNA was determined by comparing the RLuc values in the presence
of GuHCl inhibitor (+GuHCl) and in the absence of the inhibitor (-GuHCl). Note
that the extended stem of the CLΔ1-6 + 8 structure hampered RNA
replication. Data from a representative experiment are presented as the mean of
duplicate ±SD.
Base pairing-directed RNA primer ligation to
RLuc-CVB3-CLΔ1−6 + 8 genomic RNA. (A) Schematic
representation of the wt and the CLΔ1 − 6 + 8-modified CL
structure. The 8-nt insertion in the 3′strand of stem A is indicated in gray.
Note that T7 RNA polymerase-transcribed RNA contains two additional guanine
nucleotides (italic), which form a wobble base pair with uracil
nucleotides of the 3′strand of stem A in the Δ1 − 6 +
8-modified CL structure. The 12-nt RNA primer used for base pairing-directed RNA
ligation is depicted in light gray, and ‘R’ represents the different
5′ modifications. (B) Urea–PAGE analysis of an RNA primer
ligation to a 250-nt RNA fragment possessing the Δ1−6 + 8-mutated
CL structure. RNA primer was ligated using either RNA Ligase 1 or RNA Ligase 2.
Clearly, the RNA Ligase 2 was more efficient in ligating the RNA primer to the
modified CLΔ1−6 + 8 structure. (C) RNA primer ligation
efficiency to genomic RNA possessing the CLΔ1−6 + 8 structure was
determined by urea–PAGE analysis of a 250-nt RNase H-digested
5′-terminal fragment. Note that ligation of the RNA primer reduces migration
speed of the 250-nt RNase H-digested RNA fragment. (D) Translation of
the incoming genomic RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt), RNA holding the mutated CL
(Δ1−6 + 8) and RNA ligation products with different 5′
;modifications (OH, amine, biotin, Cy5) were determined by transfection of RNA in
HeLa cells in the presence of GuHCl. Eight hours post-transfection, HeLa cells were
lysed and RLuc values were determined. Data from a representative experiment are
presented as the mean of duplicate ±SD and analyzed using unpaired
t-test (** indicates significant difference
P < 0.01). (E) Stability of RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt),
the mutated CL (Δ1−6 + 8) and RNA ligation product possessing a
5′hydroxyl group (OH) was followed over time. RNA was transfected into HeLa
cells. At 1, 4 and 8 h post-transfection, cells were lysed and intracellular viral
RNA level was analyzed using RT-qPCR. Relative RNA levels are shown in percentages
compared with RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt) at T = 1 h. (F) RNA replication
of the transfected RNA was determined by comparing the RLuc values in the presence
of GuHCl inhibitor (+GuHCl) and in the absence of the inhibitor (-GuHCl). Note
that the extended stem of the CLΔ1-6 + 8 structure hampered RNA
replication. Data from a representative experiment are presented as the mean of
duplicate ±SD.To validate this base pairing-directed RNA primer ligation procedure, an unmodified 12-nt
RNA primer was ligated to a 250-nt RNA fragment harboring the CLΔ1-6 +
8-modified CL structure. For this RNA ligation reaction, two different enzymes were
tested, and ligation efficiency was visualized by separating the RNA ligation products by
polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis in the presence of urea (urea-PAGE). As shown in Figure 1B, >50% of the 250-nt RNA
fragment was modified with the RNA primer using RNA ligase 1. Yet, using RNA ligase 2,
which has a preference for dsRNA substrates, allowed ligation efficiency near 100%
(Figure 1B). Thus, the annealing of the RNA
primer to the CLΔ1-6 + 8 modified CL structure, in combination with the RNA
ligase 2 enzyme, significantly increased ligation efficiency as compared with the standard
RNA ligation protocol. This new procedure now allows the modification of the RLuc-CVB3
genomic RNA.To modify the 5′ terminus of the full-length RLuc-CVB3 genomic RNA, several 12-nt
RNA primers containing different 5′ termini (R = OH, biotin, amine or Cy5)
were ligated to the genomic RLuc-CVB3-CLΔ1-6 + 8 RNA. Because the RLuc-CVB3
genomic RNA is too large (>7500 nt) to allow differentiation of a 12-nt modification on
a urea-PAGE gel, a 250-nt RNA fragment was released from the genomic RNA using DNA
primer-directed RNase H digestion. Analysis of these 250-nt fragments showed efficient
ligation of all different RNA primers to the genomic RLuc-CVB3 genomic RNA (Figure 1C). In conclusion, using the CLΔ1-6
+ 8-modified CL structure, we were able to ligate 12-nt RNA primers to the genomic
RNA and thereby introducing different modifications to the 5′ terminus.
Small modifications at the 5′ terminus of genomic RNA do not affect
translation
To determine whether the different RNA modifications affect translation, an
RLuc-translation assay was performed. To ensure that we only measured translation of the
incoming RNA, the RNA ligation products were transfected into HeLa cells in the presence
of the replication inhibitor guanidine hydrochloride ( + GuHCl) to prevent RNA
replication. Modification of the CL structure (CLΔ1-6 + 8) hampered RLuc
translation significantly (Figure 1D).
Restoring the CL structure by RNA primer ligation returned RLuc translation to levels
similar to those of wt RNA, which suggests that an intact CL stem A is essential for
efficient protein translation. The differences in RLuc translation levels were not
attributed to changes in RNA stability as result of the mutated CL structure, as
intracellular RNA levels were comparable over time (Figure 1E). Importantly, none of the 5′modifications (biotin, amine or
Cy5) affected RLuc translation as compared with RNA lacking a 5′modification (OH) or
the wt RNA, which possesses two additional guanine nucleotides and a triphosphate 5′
terminus (Figure 1D). Notably, the biotin,
amine and Cy5 modifications are not linked via a phosphodiester bond to the RNA and are
therefore not released by the TDP2 enzyme. Thus, small modifications at the 5′
terminus of the genomic RNA do not affect translation initiation.To investigate whether modifications at the 5′ terminus of the genomic RNA
influence replication, RNA ligation products were transfected in HeLa cells but this time
also in the absence of GuHCl (−GuHCl). This allows translation and also replication
of the RNA, which can be measured by an increase in RLuc values. When wt RLuc-CVB3 RNA was
transfected in HeLa cells without any drug addition, increased RLuc values were measured
(see wt, Figure 1F). Unfortunately, the RNA
ligation products that possessed the 8-nt extension of stem A (OH) failed to replicate
(Figure 1F), thereby precluding the
analysis of 5′-terminal modifications on RNA replication.
Small modifications at the 5′ terminus of RLuc-CVB3 RNA do not affect
translation and replication
To allow the analysis of 5′ modifications of genomic RLuc-CVB3 RNA on both
translation as well as replication, a new infectious clone was generated. This new clone
holds the same deletion of 6 nt in the 5′ strand of stem A but now possesses only a
5-nt insertion in the 3′ strand of stem A (CLΔ1-6 + 5, Figure 2A). This new mutated CL structure allowed
the ligation of 9-nt RNA primers (Figure 2A)
devoid of any 5′ modification (OH) or a bicyclo[6.1.0]nonyne (BCN) group (26). Additionally, we also used three RNA
primers holding a partial VPg peptide linked via the natural phosphodiester bond [GH(5), GH(9) and GH(11)] (28). Again the RNA primer ligation was very
efficient (Figure 2B).
Figure 2.
Base pairing-directed RNA primer ligation to
RLuc-CVB3-CLΔ1−6 + 5 genomic RNA. (A) Schematic
representation of the CLΔ1−6 + 5-modified CL structure. The 5-nt
insertion in the 3′ strand of stem A is indicated in gray. Note that T7 RNA
polymerase-transcribed RNA contains two additional guanine nucleotides
(italic), which form base pairs with cytosine nucleotides of the
3′ strand of stem A. The 9-nt RNA primer used for base pairing-directed RNA
ligation is depicted in light gray, and ‘R’ represents the different
5′ modifications. (B) RNA primer ligation efficiency to genomic
RNA possessing the CLΔ1−6 + 5 structure was determined by
urea–PAGE analysis of a 250-nt RNase H-digested 5′-terminal fragment.
Note that ligation of the RNA primer reduces migration speed of the 250-nt RNase
H-digested RNA fragment. (C) Translation of incoming genomic RLuc-CVB3
RNA (wt), RNA holding the mutated CL (Δ1−6 + 5) and RNA ligation
products possessing different 5′ modifications (OH, BCN, GH[5], GH[9], GH[11])
were determined by transfection of RNA in HeLa cells in the presence of GuHCl. Eight
hours post-transfection, HeLa cells were lysed and RLuc values were determined. Data
from a representative experiment are presented as the mean of duplicate ±SD
and analyzed using unpaired t-test (* indicates significant
difference P < 0.05). (D) RNA replication of the
transfected RNA was determined by comparing the RLuc values in the presence of GuHCl
inhibitor (+ GuHCl) and in the absence of the inhibitor (− GuHCl). Data
from a representative experiment are presented as the mean of duplicate ±SD.
Note that the modification of the CL structure (Δ1−6 + 5) hampered
RNA replication. However, reconstituting the stem by RNA primer ligation restored
RNA replication again.
Base pairing-directed RNA primer ligation to
RLuc-CVB3-CLΔ1−6 + 5 genomic RNA. (A) Schematic
representation of the CLΔ1−6 + 5-modified CL structure. The 5-nt
insertion in the 3′ strand of stem A is indicated in gray. Note that T7 RNA
polymerase-transcribed RNA contains two additional guanine nucleotides
(italic), which form base pairs with cytosine nucleotides of the
3′ strand of stem A. The 9-nt RNA primer used for base pairing-directed RNA
ligation is depicted in light gray, and ‘R’ represents the different
5′ modifications. (B) RNA primer ligation efficiency to genomic
RNA possessing the CLΔ1−6 + 5 structure was determined by
urea–PAGE analysis of a 250-nt RNase H-digested 5′-terminal fragment.
Note that ligation of the RNA primer reduces migration speed of the 250-nt RNase
H-digested RNA fragment. (C) Translation of incoming genomic RLuc-CVB3
RNA (wt), RNA holding the mutated CL (Δ1−6 + 5) and RNA ligation
products possessing different 5′ modifications (OH, BCN, GH[5], GH[9], GH[11])
were determined by transfection of RNA in HeLa cells in the presence of GuHCl. Eight
hours post-transfection, HeLa cells were lysed and RLuc values were determined. Data
from a representative experiment are presented as the mean of duplicate ±SD
and analyzed using unpaired t-test (* indicates significant
difference P < 0.05). (D) RNA replication of the
transfected RNA was determined by comparing the RLuc values in the presence of GuHCl
inhibitor (+ GuHCl) and in the absence of the inhibitor (− GuHCl). Data
from a representative experiment are presented as the mean of duplicate ±SD.
Note that the modification of the CL structure (Δ1−6 + 5) hampered
RNA replication. However, reconstituting the stem by RNA primer ligation restored
RNA replication again.When the RNA ligation products were used for an RLuc translation assay in HeLa cells,
mutation of the CL structure (CLΔ1-6 + 5) again showed a slight, but
significant, effect on RLuc translation (Figure
2C). As observed before, repair of the CL structure by RNA primer ligation
restored RLuc translation back to levels similar as wt (Figure 2C). Interestingly, in contrast to the CL + 8
modified stem (Figure 1F), the smaller
extension of stem A did not affect replication of the genomic RNA (Figure 2D). Note that the RNA ligation products containing the
partial VPg peptides [GH(5), GH(9) and GH(11)] are linked via the natural phosphodiester bond and
therefore should be released by the TDP2 enzyme. On the contrary, the bond between the RNA
and the BCN group is not a known substrate for TDP2. Nonetheless, this BCN-containing RNA
was still efficiently translated and replicated with similar efficiency as wt RNA (Figure. 2C and D). Thus, small modifications,
like a BCN group, at the 5′terminus of genomic RNA do not affect translation or
replication.
Coupling of VPg via a ‘non-cleavable’ bond to the genomic RNA via SPAAC
and RNA ligation
BCN is a reactive cyclic alkyne that can be used to link azide-containing molecules via a
SPAAC, also called copper-free ‘click’ reaction (Figure 3A) (26,34,35). To this end, we ordered azide-containing VPg peptides from
both CVB3 and PV where the tyrosine at position 3 was replaced by a
γ-azidohomoalanine residue. The BCN-containing RNA primer was efficiently coupled to
the VPg peptides by SPAAC, resulting in a slower migrating RNA fragment following
urea-PAGE analysis (Figure 3B). The resulting
triazole bond is larger than the natural phosphodiester bond (Figure 3C) and should be ‘non-cleavable’ by the TDP2
enzyme. The RNA primers containing VPg linked via a ‘non-cleavable’ bond were
successfully ligated to the CLΔ1-6 + 5 genomic RNA (Figure 3D), and the presence of VPg on the genomic RNA was
further confirmed by dot blot analysis. Equimolar amounts of VPg-containing genomic RNA
and VPg peptides were spotted on a membrane and a PV-VPg antibody (29) bound to these samples with a similar efficiency (Figure 3E), suggesting that the majority of RNA
contained VPg. To confirm that the unnatural triazole bond between VPg and the genomic RNA
is ‘non-cleavable’ by the TDP2 enzyme, RNA ligation product containing PV VPg
and an equimolar amount of viral RNA isolated from PV virions, hence possessing VPg via a
natural phosphodiester bond, was treated with the TDP2 enzyme (21,30). As shown
in Figure 3F, only VPg linked via the natural
phosphodiester bond (wt vRNA) was released from the genomic RNA, while the BCN-VPg bond
(PV VPg) was unaffected. Taken together, we were able to attach VPg to genomic viral RNA
via a SPAAC reaction, which is ‘non-cleavable’ by the TDP2 enzyme.
Figure 3.
Modification of the 5′
terminus of picornavirus genomic RNA with VPg linked via a
‘non-cleavable’ bond. (A) Schematic representation of the
SPAAC ‘click’ reaction that was used to couple the VPg peptides to the
RNA primer (B) SPAAC ‘click’ reaction efficiency was
determined by urea–PAGE analysis. The unmodified RNA primer (OH) and the
BCN-modified RNA primer (BCN) migrated faster than the VPg-containing BCN primers
(CVB3 VPg and PV VPg). (C) Structure of VPg-RNA linked either by the
natural tyrosine phosphodiester bond or the triazole linkage. Arrow indicates the
unlinkase site of the TDP2 enzyme. (D) RNA primer ligation efficiency
to genomic RLuc-CVB3-Δ1-6 + 5 RNA was determined by urea–PAGE
analysis of a 250-nt RNase H-digested 5′-terminal fragment. Note that ligation
of the RNA primer reduces migration speed, especially in the case of the RNA primers
containing VPg (CVB3 VPg and PV VPg). (E) The presence of VPg was
determined by dot blot analysis. Equimolar amounts of the VPg peptide and RNA
possessing VPg via a ‘non-cleavable’ bond were spotted on a membrane,
and VPg presence was detected by a polyclonal antibody (29). Note that CVB3 VPg is less reactive than PV VPg as
the antibody is raised against the PV VPg. Importantly, the signals of the peptides
correlated with the signal intensities from the RNA ligation products possessing
VPg. (F) Unlinkase reaction using recombinant TDP2 was performed using
the RNA ligation product containing the unmodified RNA primer (OH), the PV VPg
peptide (PV VPg) linked via a ‘non-cleavable’ bond and genomic RNA
isolated from PV virions (wt vRNA). Values were corrected for background signal
(OH), and mean of two independent experiments are shown ±SD and analyzed
using unpaired t-test (* indicates significant difference
P < 0.05). Note that TDP2 treatment reduced only the signal
from viral RNA isolated from virions (wt vRNA) and not from RNA modified with PV VPg
linked via a ‘non-cleavable’ bond (PV VPg).
Modification of the 5′
terminus of picornavirus genomic RNA with VPg linked via a
‘non-cleavable’ bond. (A) Schematic representation of the
SPAAC ‘click’ reaction that was used to couple the VPg peptides to the
RNA primer (B) SPAAC ‘click’ reaction efficiency was
determined by urea–PAGE analysis. The unmodified RNA primer (OH) and the
BCN-modified RNA primer (BCN) migrated faster than the VPg-containing BCN primers
(CVB3 VPg and PV VPg). (C) Structure of VPg-RNA linked either by the
natural tyrosine phosphodiester bond or the triazole linkage. Arrow indicates the
unlinkase site of the TDP2 enzyme. (D) RNA primer ligation efficiency
to genomic RLuc-CVB3-Δ1-6 + 5 RNA was determined by urea–PAGE
analysis of a 250-nt RNase H-digested 5′-terminal fragment. Note that ligation
of the RNA primer reduces migration speed, especially in the case of the RNA primers
containing VPg (CVB3 VPg and PV VPg). (E) The presence of VPg was
determined by dot blot analysis. Equimolar amounts of the VPg peptide and RNA
possessing VPg via a ‘non-cleavable’ bond were spotted on a membrane,
and VPg presence was detected by a polyclonal antibody (29). Note that CVB3 VPg is less reactive than PV VPg as
the antibody is raised against the PV VPg. Importantly, the signals of the peptides
correlated with the signal intensities from the RNA ligation products possessing
VPg. (F) Unlinkase reaction using recombinant TDP2 was performed using
the RNA ligation product containing the unmodified RNA primer (OH), the PV VPg
peptide (PV VPg) linked via a ‘non-cleavable’ bond and genomic RNA
isolated from PV virions (wt vRNA). Values were corrected for background signal
(OH), and mean of two independent experiments are shown ±SD and analyzed
using unpaired t-test (* indicates significant difference
P < 0.05). Note that TDP2 treatment reduced only the signal
from viral RNA isolated from virions (wt vRNA) and not from RNA modified with PV VPg
linked via a ‘non-cleavable’ bond (PV VPg).
The ‘non-cleavable’ bond does not interfere with protein translation or
RNA replication
Using the genomic RNA possessing VPg via a ‘non-cleavable' bond, we were able to
study the prerequisite of VPg unlinkase for translation of the incoming RNA and successive
RNA replication. RNA ligation products were subjected to the RLuc translation assay in
HeLa cells. As observed before, ligation of the BCN-modified RNA primer to the
CLΔ1-6 + 5 genomic RNA resulted in similar translation levels as RNA lacking a
5′ modification (OH) and the wt RNA (Figure
4A). Importantly, also RNA modified with VPg via a ‘non-cleavable’
bond showed efficient RLuc translation. Therefore, it seems that, at least in this assay
system, the inability to release VPg from the genomic RNA did not affect RNA translation.
To confirm these results, alternative translation systems such as the HeLa S10 extract
(31,32) and rabbit reticulocyte extracts (24,33,36) were also tested. In the rabbit
reticulocyte extracts (Figure 4B) as well as
HeLa S10 extracts (Figure 4C), the inability
to release VPg from the genomic RLuc-RNA did not affect RLuc translation levels. Thus, VPg
release from the genomic RNA is dispensable for translation of the incoming viral RNA.
Figure 4.
VPg unlinking is not required
for picornavirus RNA translation and replication. (A) Translation of
the incoming genomic RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt), RNA holding the mutated CL (Δ1
− 6 + 5), RNA ligation products possessing a hydroxyl (OH) or a BCN group
(BCN) at the 5′-end, and RNA holding VPg via a ‘non-cleavable’
bond (CVB3-VPg and PV-VPg) were determined by transfection of RNA in HeLa cells in
the presence of GuHCl. Eight hours post-transfection, HeLa cells were lysed and RLuc
values were determined. Data from a representative experiment are presented as the
mean of triplicate ±SD and analyzed using unpaired t-test
(* indicates significant difference P < 0.05).
(B) Translation of the incoming genomic RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt), RNA
holding the mutated CL (Δ1−6 + 5) and RNA ligation products in RRL
System (Promega) and (C) in HeLa S10 extracts. RLuc values were
determined after 30 min of incubation. Data from a representative experiment are
presented as the mean of triplicate ±SD and analyzed using unpaired
t-test (* indicates significant difference P
< 0.05, ns indicates no significant difference). As observed in HeLa cells, the
5′modification did not affect translation efficiency. (D) RNA
replication of the transfected RNA was determined by comparing the amount of RLuc
values in the presence of GuHCl inhibitor (+GuHCl) and in the absence of the
inhibitor (−GuHCl). Data from a representative experiment are presented as the
mean of triplicate ±SD. Note that the modification of CL structure (Δ1
− 6 + 5) hampered RNA replication. However, reconstituting the stem by
RNA primer ligation restored RNA replication. Importantly, neither modification at
the 5′ terminus affected RNA replication.
VPg unlinking is not required
for picornavirus RNA translation and replication. (A) Translation of
the incoming genomic RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt), RNA holding the mutated CL (Δ1
− 6 + 5), RNA ligation products possessing a hydroxyl (OH) or a BCN group
(BCN) at the 5′-end, and RNA holding VPg via a ‘non-cleavable’
bond (CVB3-VPg and PV-VPg) were determined by transfection of RNA in HeLa cells in
the presence of GuHCl. Eight hours post-transfection, HeLa cells were lysed and RLuc
values were determined. Data from a representative experiment are presented as the
mean of triplicate ±SD and analyzed using unpaired t-test
(* indicates significant difference P < 0.05).
(B) Translation of the incoming genomic RLuc-CVB3 RNA (wt), RNA
holding the mutated CL (Δ1−6 + 5) and RNA ligation products in RRL
System (Promega) and (C) in HeLa S10 extracts. RLuc values were
determined after 30 min of incubation. Data from a representative experiment are
presented as the mean of triplicate ±SD and analyzed using unpaired
t-test (* indicates significant difference P
< 0.05, ns indicates no significant difference). As observed in HeLa cells, the
5′modification did not affect translation efficiency. (D) RNA
replication of the transfected RNA was determined by comparing the amount of RLuc
values in the presence of GuHCl inhibitor (+GuHCl) and in the absence of the
inhibitor (−GuHCl). Data from a representative experiment are presented as the
mean of triplicate ±SD. Note that the modification of CL structure (Δ1
− 6 + 5) hampered RNA replication. However, reconstituting the stem by
RNA primer ligation restored RNA replication. Importantly, neither modification at
the 5′ terminus affected RNA replication.To test whether the inability to release VPg interfered with RNA replication, an RNA
replication assay was performed in the presence and absence of GuHCl. Also, in this
replication assay, the ‘non-cleavable’ VPg bond did not negatively influence
the RNA replication levels (Figure 4D). These
data combined suggest that the release of VPg from the genomic RNA is not a prerequisite
for RNA translation and replication.
DISCUSSION
Over 35 years ago, the discovery was made that genomic RNA of picornaviruses possessed a
covalently linked VPg peptide. Soon after this discovery, it was recognized that VPg is
released from the incoming genomic RNA by a cellular enzyme. The importance of VPg unlinkase
for efficient translation and/or replication has remained unknown ever since. It has been
technically difficult to study the possible importance of VPg unlinkase because modification
of the 5′ terminus of large RNA molecules, like the picornavirus genomic RNA, has
proven to be challenging. Here we present a novel method to covalently derivatize the
5′ terminus of large RNA molecules with a diverse set of modifications. We exploited
the highly folded CL structure in the 5′ UTR to allow base pairing-directed ligation
of modified RNA primers. Combining this RNA ligation method with the new ‘click’
chemistry principle, we were able to modify the large genomic RNA with VPg via a
‘non-cleavable’ bond. Using these modified genomic RNA molecules in a series of
translation and replication assays, we show that the inability to release VPg from the
incoming viral RNA does not affect translation and replication efficiency.For the ‘click’ reaction, we used a novel ring-strained alkyne, the BCN group
(26). The main advantage of BCN over the
other common cyclooctynes like DIBO, DIBAC or BARAC is the rather small size, the
straightforward synthesis protocol and low lipophilicity (26). BCN reacted efficiently with the azide-modified VPg, and the
resulting triazole-containing linkage between VPg and the genomic RNA, although somewhat
longer, mimics the natural tyrosine phosphodiester structure (Figure 3C).In contrast to the viral RNA isolated from virions, the ‘clicked’ VPg was not
released from the RNA by the TDP2 enzyme in the in vitro unlinkase assay
(Figure 3F). Most likely, the absence of the
aromatic ring adjacent to the phosphodiester bond, which plays an important role in ligand
recognition by TDP2 (37–39), results in the ‘non-cleavable’ linkage. However, as
result of the low sensitivity of the dot blot analysis, we were unable to confirm the
presence of VPg following transfection of cells with modified genomic RNA. Therefore, it
cannot be ruled out that, for instance, cellular proteolytic activity might cleave the VPg
peptide, but not at the triazole structure, which has been described to be extremely inert,
as alkyne- and azide-containing molecules are not typically found in biological molecules
(26,34,35). Recently, it has been shown
that this triazole bond can only be reversed via strong mechanical force induced by, for
instance, ultrasound (40). However, we
performed our translation and replication assays under native conditions, and therefore the
unnatural bond that is created between the genomic RNA and VPg via the ‘click’
reaction will most likely be retained after transfection of the RNA.The presence of VPg linked via a ‘non-cleavable’ bond at the 5′ terminus
of the genomic RNA did not affect translation of the transfected RNA (Figure 4A–C). A previous study already showed that
VPg-containing genomic RNA was able to associate with ribosomes (24). However, because these authors performed their assays under
conditions that impaired translation, they were unable to determine whether VPg-containing
RNA could be translated. Our study extends these data and shows that the presence of VPg at
the 5′ terminus of the genomic RNA does not impair translation as well as replication.
This important new piece of data consequently argues against some of the original
speculation that the presence of VPg might prevent efficient translation of viral RNA, as
discussed in (15,16,23). However,
it should be noted that the translation data presented in our study were obtained after RNA
transfection or in cell-free extracts. It is possible that viral translation requirements
are different when picornavirus virion RNA is delivered to the cell cytoplasm following
uncoating of entering virus particles.If the presence of VPg is not affecting translation or replication of the incoming viral
RNA, why is this peptide released from the genomic RNA on introduction in the cytoplasm? It
has been suggested that VPg might play a role in encapsidation of the genomic RNA in
particles (16,20,21), as virions
only contain VPg-containing viral RNA (15,41). Unlinkase of VPg from the
viral RNA could mark the RNA exclusively for translation and replication. This suggestion is
in line with the recent observation that the TDP2 enzyme is relocated to cytoplasmic sites
distal to the viral RNA late in infection (21), which correlates with the shift from RNA translation/replication to RNA
encapsidation. Thus, VPg release may mark viral RNA for translation and replication, but
this study clearly shows that it is not required for these processes.
FUNDING
The Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research
[NWO-825.11.022 to M.A.L. and
NWO-017.006.043 to Q.F.]; the National Institutes of
Health [AI026765 to B.L.S.]; and a Graduate
Research Fellowship from the U.S. National Science Foundation
(to S.M.). Funding for open access charge: the Netherlands Organization for
Scientific Research (NWO).Conflict of interest statement. None declared.
Authors: Jan Dommerholt; Samuel Schmidt; Rinske Temming; Linda J A Hendriks; Floris P J T Rutjes; Jan C M van Hest; Dirk J Lefeber; Peter Friedl; Floris L van Delft Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2010-12-03 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Sonia Maciejewski; Joseph H C Nguyen; Fernando Gómez-Herreros; Felipe Cortés-Ledesma; Keith W Caldecott; Bert L Semler Journal: mBio Date: 2015-12-29 Impact factor: 7.867