Ribosomal mutation in helix 32 of 18S rRNA alters fidelity of eukaryotic translation start site selection

eIF2β zinc-binding domain interacts with the eIF2γ subunit through the guanine nucleotide binding interface to promote Met-tRNAiMet binding

The heterotrimeric eIF2 complex consists of a core eIF2γ subunit to which binds eIF2α and eIF2β subunits and plays an important role in delivering the Met-tRNAiMet to the 40S ribosome and start codon selection. The intricacies of eIF2β-γ interaction in promoting Met-tRNAiMet binding are not clearly understood. Previously, the zinc-binding domain (ZBD) eIF2βS264Y mutation was reported to cause Met-tRNAiMet binding defect due to the intrinsic GTPase activity. We showed that the eIF2βS264Y mutation has eIF2β-γ interaction defect. Consistently, the eIF2βT238A intragenic suppressor mutation restored the eIF2β-γ and Met-tRNAiMet binding. The eIF2β-ZBD residues Asn252Asp and Arg253Ala mutation caused Met-tRNAiMet binding defect that was partially rescued by the eIF2βT238A mutation, suggesting the eIF2β-ZBD modulates Met-tRNAiMet binding. The suppressor mutation rescued the translation initiation fidelity defect of the eIF2γN135D SW-I mutation and eIF2βF217A/Q221A double mutation in the HTH domain. The eIF2βT238A suppressor mutation could not rescue the eIF2β binding defect of the eIF2γV281K mutation; however, combining the eIF2βS264Y mutation with the eIF2γV281K mutation was lethal. In addition to the previously known interaction of eIF2β with the eIF2γ subunit via its α1-helix, the eIF2β-ZBD also interacts with the eIF2γ subunit via guanine nucleotide-binding interface; thus, the eIF2β-γ interacts via two distinct binding sites.

Altered proteome in translation initiation fidelity defective eIF5G31R mutant causes oxidative stress and DNA damage

The recognition of the AUG start codon and selection of an open reading frame (ORF) is fundamental to protein biosynthesis. Defect in the fidelity of start codon selection adversely affect proteome and have a pleiotropic effect on cellular function. Using proteomic techniques, we identified differential protein abundance in the translation initiation fidelity defective eIF5^G31R mutant that initiates translation using UUG codon in addition to the AUG start codon. Consistently, the eIF5^G31R mutant altered proteome involved in protein catabolism, nucleotide biosynthesis, lipid biosynthesis, carbohydrate metabolism, oxidation–reduction pathway, autophagy and re-programs the cellular pathways. The utilization of the upstream UUG codons by the eIF5^G31R mutation caused downregulation of uridylate kinase expression, sensitivity to hydroxyurea, and DNA damage. The eIF5^G31R mutant cells showed lower glutathione levels, high ROS activity, and sensitivity to H₂O₂.

Separated Siamese Twins: Intronic Small Nucleolar RNAs and Matched Host Genes May be Altered in Conjunction or Separately in Multiple Cancer Types

Small nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs) are non-coding RNAs involved in RNA modification and processing. Approximately half of the so far identified snoRNA genes map within the intronic regions of host genes, and their expression, as well as the expression of their host genes, is dependent on transcript splicing and maturation. Growing evidence indicates that mutations and/or deregulations that affect snoRNAs, as well as host genes, play a significant role in oncogenesis. Among the possible factors underlying snoRNA/host gene expression deregulation is copy number alteration (CNA). We analyzed the data available in The Cancer Genome Atlas database, relative to CNA and expression of 295 snoRNA/host gene couples in 10 cancer types, to understand whether the genetic or expression alteration of snoRNAs and their matched host genes would have overlapping trends. Our results show that, counterintuitively, copy number and expression alterations of snoRNAs and matched host genes are not necessarily coupled. In addition, some snoRNA/host genes are mutated and overexpressed recurrently in multiple cancer types. Our findings suggest that the differential contribution to cancer development of both snoRNAs and host genes should always be considered, and that snoRNAs and their host genes may contribute to cancer development in conjunction or independently.