The presence of the ACA box in archaeal H/ACA guide RNAs promotes atypical pseudouridylation

Landscape of RNA pseudouridylation in archaeon Sulfolobus islandicus

Pseudouridine, one of the most abundant RNA modifications, is synthesized by stand-alone or RNA-guided pseudouridine synthases. Here, we comprehensively mapped pseudouridines in rRNAs, tRNAs and small RNAs in the archaeon Sulfolobus islandicus and identified Cbf5-associated H/ACA RNAs. Through genetic deletion and in vitro modification assays, we determined the responsible enzymes for these modifications. The pseudouridylation machinery in S. islandicus consists of the stand-alone enzymes aPus7 and aPus10, and six H/ACA RNA-guided enzymes that account for all identified pseudouridines. These H/ACA RNAs guide the modification of all eleven sites in rRNAs, two sites in tRNAs, and two sites in CRISPR RNAs. One H/ACA RNA shows exceptional versatility by targeting eight different sites. aPus7 and aPus10 are responsible for modifying positions 13, 54 and 55 in tRNAs. We identified four atypical H/ACA RNAs that lack the lower stem and the ACA motif and confirmed their function both in vivo and in vitro. Intriguingly, atypical H/ACA RNAs can be modified by Cbf5 in a guide-independent manner. Our data provide the first global view of pseudouridylation in archaea and reveal unexpected structures, substrates, and activities of archaeal H/ACA RNPs.

Guide RNA acrobatics: positioning consecutive uridines for pseudouridylation by H/ACA pseudouridylation loops with dual guide capacity

Site-specific pseudouridylation of human ribosomal and spliceosomal RNAs is directed by H/ACA guide RNAs composed of two hairpins carrying internal pseudouridylation guide loops. The distal "antisense" sequences of the pseudouridylation loop base-pair with the target RNA to position two unpaired target nucleotides 5'-UN-3', including the 5' substrate U, under the base of the distal stem topping the guide loop. Therefore, each pseudouridylation loop is expected to direct synthesis of a single pseudouridine (Ψ) in the target sequence. However, in this study, genetic depletion and restoration and RNA mutational analyses demonstrate that at least four human H/ACA RNAs (SNORA53, SNORA57, SCARNA8, and SCARNA1) carry pseudouridylation loops supporting efficient and specific synthesis of two consecutive pseudouridines (ΨΨ or ΨNΨ) in the 28S (Ψ3747/Ψ3749), 18S (Ψ1045/Ψ1046), and U2 (Ψ43/Ψ44 and Ψ89/Ψ91) RNAs, respectively. In order to position two substrate Us for pseudouridylation, the dual guide loops form alternative base-pairing interactions with their target RNAs. This remarkable structural flexibility of dual pseudouridylation loops provides an unexpected versatility for RNA-directed pseudouridylation without compromising its efficiency and accuracy. Besides supporting synthesis of at least 6% of human ribosomal and spliceosomal Ψs, evidence indicates that dual pseudouridylation loops also participate in pseudouridylation of yeast and archaeal rRNAs.

CircMEG3 inhibits telomerase activity by reducing Cbf5 in human liver cancer stem cells

Circular RNA (CircRNA) is a newly identified special class of non-coding RNA (ncRNA) that plays an important regulatory role in the progression of certain diseases. Herein, our results indicate that CircMEG3 is downregulated expression and negatively correlated with the expression of telomerase-related gene Cbf5 in human liver cancer. Moreover, CircMEG3 inhibits the growth of human liver cancer stem cells in vivo and in vitro. CircMEG3 inhibits the expression of m6A methyltransferase METTL3 dependent on HULC. Moreover, CircMEG3 inhibits the expression of Cbf5, a component of telomere synthetase H/ACA ribonucleoprotein (RNP; catalyst RNA pseudouracil modification) through METTL3 dependent on HULC. Thereby, CircMEG3 inhibits telomerase activity and shortens telomere lifespan dependent on HULC and Cbf5 in human liver cancer stem cell. Strikingly, increased Cbf5 abrogates the ability of CircMEG3 to inhibit malignant differentiation of human liver cancer stem cells. In summary, these observations provide important basic information for finding effective liver cancer therapeutic targets.