| Literature DB >> 24568630 |
Karthik Krishnan, Zhaowei Ren, Liliana Losada, William C Nierman, Long Jason Lu, David S Askew1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The unfolded protein response (UPR) is a network of intracellular signaling pathways that supports the ability of the secretory pathway to maintain a balance between the load of proteins entering the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and the protein folding capacity of the ER lumen. Current evidence indicates that several pathogenic fungi rely heavily on this pathway for virulence, but there is limited understanding of the mechanisms involved. The best known functional output of the UPR is transcriptional upregulation of mRNAs involved in ER homeostasis. However, this does not take into account mechanisms of translational regulation that involve differential loading of ribosomes onto mRNAs. In this study, a global analysis of transcript-specific translational regulation was performed in the pathogenic mold Aspergillus fumigatus to determine the nature and scope of the translational response to ER stress.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24568630 PMCID: PMC3943501 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-15-159
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Figure 1Strategy for investigating the translational efficiency of mRNAs by polysome profiling and microarray hybridization. A representative polysome profile shows the monosome peak (1) at the top of the gradient (left), followed by peaks representing 2,3,4 and ≥ 5 ribosomes per mRNA. Following centrifugation, the gradient was divided into two: an under-translated fraction containing mRNAs associated with 1-4 ribosomes (fraction-U) and a well translated fraction containing mRNAs associated with 5 or more ribosomes (fraction-W). The mRNAs in each fraction were then used to interrogate microarrays, as detailed in Methods. The translational efficiency of each mRNA was defined as the ratio of the hybridization signal (fraction-W/fraction-U). Those mRNAs with a higher W/U ratio during ER stress than in the absence of ER stress (using a 2-fold change between conditions as the cut-off) were considered to be subject to translational upregulation during ER stress.
Figure 2Translationally regulated transcripts during ER stress in . The Venn diagram demonstrates the number of transcripts with a differential translational efficiency ratio in the presence of DTT or TM relative to untreated cultures (minimum 2-fold change in the W/U ratio). The region of overlap illustrates the number of mRNAs that are shared between the two treatments, representing mRNAs that are enriched for functions in ER stress response. The overlap contains translationally upregulated mRNAs (shaded region) as well as downregulated (Down). The area of each circle is scaled to the number of transcripts and the values for DTT and TM represent the total number of genes that were differentially regulated.
List of mRNAs with increased polysome association during ER stress (treatment with DTT or TM)
| Ribosomal proteins/translation | | |
| 2.81 | 2.92 | 60S ribosomal protein L27a (AFUA_3G05600) |
| 2.15 | 3.20 | 40S ribosomal protein S29 (AFUA_6G12720) |
| 2.87 | 2.26 | 40S ribosomal protein S8 (AFUA_6G07360)# |
| 2.80 | 2.16 | 50S ribosomal protein L36 (AFUA_4G12810) |
| 2.59 | 2.32 | 37S ribosomal protein S16 (AFUA_5G08350) |
| 1.48 | 2.60 | Mitochondrial ribosomal protein L11 (AFUA_5G11830) |
| 2.01 | 1.93 | Ribosome biogenesis protein (AFUA_8G04790) |
| 1.18 | 2.49 | 37S ribosomal protein S5 (AFUA_5G11540) |
| 1.51 | 1.93 | 40S ribosomal protein S9 (AFUA_3G06970)# |
| 1.01 | 2.42 | 40S ribosomal protein Rps16 (AFUA_2G10500)# |
| 1.07 | 2.20 | 60S ribosomal protein L6 (AFUA_6G09060) |
| 4.51 | 2.08 | Aconitate hydratase/Mitochondrial ribosomal protein subunit L49 (AFUA_3G08080)# |
| 3.11 | 1.36 | Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 3 subunit eIF-Ca (AFUA_1G05200) |
| 1.72 | 2.49 | Translation elongation factor eEF-1B gamma subunit, putative (AFUA_1G17120) |
| 1.27 | 2.52 | GTP binding protein Guf1 (AFUA_3G14350) |
| 1.86 | 1.05 | Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 3 subunit eIF-Ck (AFUA_3G09280) |
| Cell membrane/cell wall | | |
| 1.08 | 6.34 | Squalene monooxygenase Erg1 (AFUA_5G07780) |
| 1.61 | 1.43 | Ergosterol biosynthesis protein Erg28 (AFUA_2G11550) |
| 1.37 | 1.39 | 1,3-beta-glucanosyltransferase Gel2 (AFUA_6G11390) |
| 3.51 | 4.88 | Cell wall proline rich protein (AFUA_1G13450) |
| 2.59 | 3.62 | Actin cortical patch protein Sur7 (AFUA_2G02310) |
| 4.21 | 2.23 | CFEM domain protein (AFUA_6G14090) |
| 1.36 | 1.89 | GPI anchored protein (AFUA_2G07800) |
| 1.78 | 1.01 | GPI anchored dioxygenase (AFUA_3G01800) |
| 1.24 | 3.13 | Dolichol phosphate-mannose biosynthesis regulatory protein Dpm2 (AFUA_1G03020) |
| 1.32 | 1.05 | N-acetylglucosaminyl-phosphatidylinositol deacetylase, putative (AFUA_5G12550) |
| 1.10 | 2.58 | Integral membrane protein (Pth11) (AFUA_6G03600)# |
| Protein folding & modification | | |
| 1.29 | 2.48 | Alpha-1,2-mannosyltransferase (Alg2) (AFUA_5G13210) |
| 1.83 | 2.58 | Disulfide isomerase (TigA) (AFUA_5G12260)# |
| 1.04 | 2.84 | Protein disulfide isomerase Pdi1 (AFUA_2G06150) |
| 1.04 | 1.82 | N-acetyltransferase family protein (AFUA_4G10930) |
| 1.35 | 1.47 | N-acetyltransferase complex ARD1 subunit (AFUA_1G09600) |
| 2.11 | 2.89 | Prefoldin subunit 5 (AFUA_1G10740)# |
| Endosome/protein transport and sorting | | |
| 1.71 | 1.94 | Rho GTPase activator (Bem3) (AFUA_6G06400) |
| 1.69 | 1.41 | Fasciclin domain family protein (AFUA_1G14300) |
| 3.75 | 1.50 | Ras-like GTP-binding protein (AFUA_4G03100) |
| 1.39 | 2.26 | Endosomal cargo receptor (Erv14) (AFUA_6G07290) |
| 1.58 | 2.16 | Synaptobrevin-like protein Sybl1 (AFUA_6G11270) |
| 1.57 | 3.04 | RAB GTPase Vps21/Ypt51 (AFUA_3G10740)# |
| 5.38 | 2.13 | Vacuolar protein sorting 55 superfamily (AFUA_6G04780)# |
| 1.03 | 2.77 | AP-1 adaptor complex subunit sigma (AFUA_2G01570) |
| 1.93 | 1.75 | Mitochondrial import inner membrane translocase subunit (TIM22) (AFUA_5G02200)# |
| Transcription | | |
| 3.07 | 3.04 | bZIP transcription factor JlbA/IDI-4 (AFUA_5G01650)# |
| 1.88 | 3.90 | CBF/NF-Y family transcription factor (AFUA_2G14250) |
| 4.34 | 1.41 | C6 transcription factor (AFUA_3G09130) |
| 2.03 | 3.35 | Transcription factor RfeF (AFUA_4G10200) |
| 1.03 | 4.24 | CP2 transcription factor (AFUA_1G17350) |
| 3.09 | 1.71 | bZIP transcription factor (LziP) (AFUA_1G16460)# |
| 1.84 | 2.39 | Transcription initiation factor TFIID, 31kd subunit, putative (AFUA_1G14600) |
| 2.18 | 1.29 | C6 transcription factor (AFUA_6G11230) |
| 1.48 | 1.08 | RNA polymerase II mediator complex component Srb8, putative (AFUA_3G06250) |
| 1.63 | 3.90 | CHCH domain protein (AFUA_3G06370)# |
| 2.44 | 1.48 | Nitrogen metabolite repression regulator NmrA (AFUA_5G02920) |
| Stress response | | |
| 1.24 | 1.99 | General stress response phosphoprotein phosphatase Psr1/2 (AFUA_1G04790)# |
| 4.37 | 3.43 | Glutathione peroxidase Hyr1 (AFUA_3G12270) |
Values represent log2[translational efficiency ratio], as described in Methods. #Those mRNAs that were also subject to translational upregulation in the thermal stress dataset (37°C, 60 min).
Figure 3The mRNA increases its association with polysomes during ER stress. Mycelial extracts from control (untreated) and TM-treated cultures were fractionated into 7 pools. The RNA in each pool was then separated by RNA gel electrophoresis and the level of erg1 mRNA in each fraction was determined by hybridization to an erg1 probe. Band intensities were quantified by phosphorimager analysis and shown on the top graph. A representative OD254 profile is superimposed on the graph for reference. The findings demonstrate increased erg1 mRNA levels in the polysome fraction during ER stress.
Figure 4Effects of a temperature shift on the polysome profile . Overnight cultures at 25°C were shifted to 37°C and polysome profiles were prepared from mycelial extracts at the indicated times.
Figure 5Translational response to thermal stress. Hierarchical clustering of mRNAs that showed temperature-dependent increases in translational efficiency fell into three major clusters (left). A schematic representation of each pattern of translational efficiency change is shown in the center: Late (increased at 60 min), Continuous (increased at 30 min and maintained or further increased at 60 min, and Early (transient increase at 30 min). The Venn diagram illustrates the number of mRNAs in each category.
Figure 6Summary of translationally upregulated mRNAs. The Venn diagram shows the number of transcripts with a higher translational efficiency (2-fold change) when treated with DTT or TM or when moved from 25°C to 37°C for 1 h. The overlapping region (shaded) represents a core set of translationally up-regulated genes that respond to all three types of stress in A. fumigatus.
Figure 7RNA-seq coverage plots for the and mRNAs. The number of sequence reads on the y-axis (reads per kilobase per million) is shown along the length of each gene in the absence (red) or presence (blue) of ER stress (1 mM DTT, 1 h). Vertical lines demarcate predicted intron boundaries (shown in green for the unconventional intron in hacA). The coverage plot for yvc1 shows an increase in reads at the 3′ end of the gene specifically in the presence of ER stress.
Figure 8Northern blot analysis of expression. RNA was isolated from the indicated strains in the presence or absence of ER stress (1 mM DTT for 1 h, 10 μg/ml TM for 1 h) or osmotic stress (0.8 M NaCl for 1 h). The blot was hybridized with the full-length A. fumigatus yvc1 gene, then stripped and re-probed with the UPR marker bipA. Accuracy of RNA loading is shown by SYBR-green staining of rRNA.