Q beta replicase containing altered forms of ribosomal protein S1

Site-Directed Chemical Probing to map transient RNA/protein interactions

RNA-protein interactions are at the bases of many biological processes, forming either tight and stable functional ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes (i.e. the ribosome) or transitory ones, such as the complexes involving RNA chaperone proteins. To localize the sites where a protein interacts on an RNA molecule, a common simple and inexpensive biochemical method is the footprinting technique. The protein leaves its footprint on the RNA acting as a shield to protect the regions of interaction from chemical modification or cleavages obtained with chemical or enzymatic nucleases. This method has proven its efficiency to study in vitro the organization of stable RNA-protein complexes. Nevertheless, when the protein binds the RNA very dynamically, with high off-rates, protections are very often difficult to observe. For the analysis of these transient complexes, we describe an alternative strategy adapted from the Site Directed Chemical Probing (SDCP) approach and we compare it with classical footprinting. SDCP relies on the modification of the RNA binding protein to tether an RNA probe (usually Fe-EDTA) to specific protein positions. Local cleavages on the regions of interaction can be used to localize the protein and position its domains on the RNA molecule. This method has been used in the past to monitor stable complexes; we provide here a detailed protocol and a practical example of its application to the study of Escherichia coli RNA chaperone protein S1 and its transitory complexes with mRNAs.

Structural basis for RNA-genome recognition during bacteriophage Qβ replication

Upon infection of Escherichia coli by bacteriophage Qβ, the virus-encoded β-subunit recruits host translation elongation factors EF-Tu and EF-Ts and ribosomal protein S1 to form the Qβ replicase holoenzyme complex, which is responsible for amplifying the Qβ (+)-RNA genome. Here, we use X-ray crystallography, NMR spectroscopy, as well as sequence conservation, surface electrostatic potential and mutational analyses to decipher the roles of the β-subunit and the first two oligonucleotide-oligosaccharide-binding domains of S1 (OB_1–2) in the recognition of Qβ (+)-RNA by the Qβ replicase complex. We show how three basic residues of the β subunit form a patch located adjacent to the OB₂ domain, and use NMR spectroscopy to demonstrate for the first time that OB₂ is able to interact with RNA. Neutralization of the basic residues by mutagenesis results in a loss of both the phage infectivity in vivo and the ability of Qβ replicase to amplify the genomic RNA in vitro. In contrast, replication of smaller replicable RNAs is not affected. Taken together, our data suggest that the β-subunit and protein S1 cooperatively bind the (+)-stranded Qβ genome during replication initiation and provide a foundation for understanding template discrimination during replication initiation.

Coliphage Q beta RNA replication: RNA catalytic for single-strand release

We have generated 14 recombinant RNA templates for Q beta replicase, each having either an exogenous inverted repeat sequence or a sequence with no repeat. These templates were used to initiate in vitro replication by Q beta replicase in amounts that saturated the enzyme. We observed that replication rates for RNAs that putatively contained secondary structures in the recombinant sequences ranged from 33 to 69% that of a wild-type MDV-1 RNA control, regardless of the size of the inserted hairpin. Moreover, most of the newly synthesized RNA was present as single strands. Alternatively, RNAs that contained exogenous sequences not expected to form secondary structures exhibited replication rates less than 25% that of MDV-1. In each case, the reaction rate was correlated with the length of the insertion, and the majority of product RNA consisted of duplexed molecules (complementary plus and minus strands hybridized together). When these same recombinant RNAs were used in reactions in which the molar amount of RNA template was 10(6)-10(7) times lower than that of the replicase, only those that putatively contained secondary structures survived in the replication reaction. Our results are consistent with the theory that hairpin structure formation during RNA synthesis by Q beta replicase directly influences the regeneration of single-stranded RNA products.

Template-free RNA synthesis by Q beta replicase

In the absence of extraneously added template, standard preparations of Q beta replicase spontaneously synthesize RNA in vitro, possibly as a result of RNA contamination. Using special enzyme purifications, Sumper and Luce presented evidence that self-replicating RNA not present ab initio can grow out of 'template-free' incorporation mixtures. In contrast to DNA polymerase I and RNA polymerase, which also show de novo synthesis, the products synthesized 'de novo' by Q beta replicase are RNA species containing nonrepetitive sequences of defined lengths which differ between experiments, even when synthesized under identical conditions, in fingerprints, chain lengths and kinetic parameters. Kinetic analysis of the de novo processes distinguished it from template-instructed synthesis and excluded an assumption of self-replicating RNA contamination. These conclusions were questioned recently by Hill and Blumenthal, who claimed to show that highly purified Q beta replicase preparations cannot produce RNA de novo. We now present evidence that, under the conditions required for de novo synthesis, Q beta replicase prepared according to their method is also capable of de novo synthesis. Furthermore, we show that Q beta replicase condenses nucleoside triphosphates to more or less random oligonucleotides.

Relaxation time, interthiol distance, and mechanism of action of ribosomal protein S1

The two sulfhydryl groups of ribosomal protein S1 from Escherichia coli have been labeled with fluorescent maleimides and the distance between them has been determined by nonradiative energy transfer. This distance was found to be approximately 27 A for both free S1 and S1 bound to 30 S subunits. This value probably represents an upper limit. The position of the fluorescence emission maximum indicates that both sulfhydryl groups are in a relatively hydrophobic environment. When poly(U) is added to labeled S1, either free or in 30 S subunits, the emission maximum shifts to the red by about 3 nm but without a detectable change in the interthiol distance. S1 labeled at one or both of its sulfhydryl groups retains most of its ability to enhance poly(U)-directed polyphenylalanine synthesis. About the same concentration of poly(U) is required to give the maximum shift in fluorescence as is required to give maximum polyphenylalanine synthesis, indicating that S1 binds poly(U) during translation. The peptide initiation inhibitor aurintricarboxylic acid almost completely quenches the fluorescence from either labeled sulfhydryl groups in S1 bound to ribosomes or free in solution. This quenching probably is due to energy transfer from the labeled sulfhydryls to bound aurintricarboxylic acid. Fluorescence anisotropy measurements indicated that the C-terminal domain of S1 is relatively rigid, but retains some independent movement when attached to ribosomes. The overall data are consistent with a model in which a region near the two sulfhydryl groups in the elongated C-terminal domain functions to sequester and bind mRNA to the ribosome during peptide synthesis.