Mapping translation 'hot-spots' in live cells by tracking single molecules of mRNA and ribosomes

  1. Zachary B Katz
  2. Brian p English
  3. Timothée Lionnet
  4. Young J Yoon
  5. Nilah Monnier
  6. Ben Ovryn
  7. Mark Bathe
  8. Robert H Singer  Is a corresponding author
  1. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, United States
  2. Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States
  3. Stanford University School of Medicine, United States
  4. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States

Abstract

Messenger RNA localization is important for cell motility by local protein translation. However, while single mRNAs can be imaged and their movements tracked in single cells, it has not yet been possible to determine whether these mRNAs are actively translating. Therefore, we imaged single β-actin mRNAs tagged with MS2 stem loops colocalizing with labeled ribosomes to determine when polysomes formed. A dataset of tracking information consisting of thousands of trajectories per cell demonstrated that mRNAs co-moving with ribosomes have significantly different diffusion properties from non-translating mRNAs that were exposed to translation inhibitors. This data indicates that ribosome load changes mRNA movement and therefore highly translating mRNAs move slower. Importantly, β-actin mRNA near focal adhesions exhibited sub-diffusive corralled movement characteristic of increased translation. This method can identify where ribosomes become engaged for local protein production and how spatial regulation of mRNA-protein interactions mediates cell directionality.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Zachary B Katz

    Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Brian p English

    Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Timothée Lionnet

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Young J Yoon

    Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Nilah Monnier

    Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Ben Ovryn

    Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Mark Bathe

    Department of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Robert H Singer

    Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    robert.singer@einstein.yu.edu
    Competing interests
    Robert H Singer, Reviewing editor, eLife.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Nahum Sonenberg, McGill University, Canada

Version history

  1. Received: July 28, 2015
  2. Accepted: December 29, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: January 13, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: February 12, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Katz et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 9,804
    views
  • 2,031
    downloads
  • 105
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Zachary B Katz
  2. Brian p English
  3. Timothée Lionnet
  4. Young J Yoon
  5. Nilah Monnier
  6. Ben Ovryn
  7. Mark Bathe
  8. Robert H Singer
(2016)
Mapping translation 'hot-spots' in live cells by tracking single molecules of mRNA and ribosomes
eLife 5:e10415.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10415

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10415

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Xiao-Ru Chen, Karuna Dixit ... Tatyana I Igumenova
    Research Article

    Regulated hydrolysis of the phosphoinositide phosphatidylinositol(4,5)-bis-phosphate to diacylglycerol and inositol-1,4,5-P3 defines a major eukaryotic pathway for translation of extracellular cues to intracellular signaling circuits. Members of the lipid-activated protein kinase C isoenzyme family (PKCs) play central roles in this signaling circuit. One of the regulatory mechanisms employed to downregulate stimulated PKC activity is via a proteasome-dependent degradation pathway that is potentiated by peptidyl-prolyl isomerase Pin1. Here, we show that contrary to prevailing models, Pin1 does not regulate conventional PKC isoforms α and βII via a canonical cis-trans isomerization of the peptidyl-prolyl bond. Rather, Pin1 acts as a PKC binding partner that controls PKC activity via sequestration of the C-terminal tail of the kinase. The high-resolution structure of full-length Pin1 complexed to the C-terminal tail of PKCβII reveals that a novel bivalent interaction mode underlies the non-catalytic mode of Pin1 action. Specifically, Pin1 adopts a conformation in which it uses the WW and PPIase domains to engage two conserved phosphorylated PKC motifs, the turn motif and hydrophobic motif, respectively. Hydrophobic motif is a non-canonical Pin1-interacting element. The structural information combined with the results of extensive binding studies and experiments in cultured cells suggest that non-catalytic mechanisms represent unappreciated modes of Pin1-mediated regulation of AGC kinases and other key enzymes/substrates.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Christian Galicia, Giambattista Guaitoli ... Wim Versées
    Research Article

    Roco proteins entered the limelight after mutations in human LRRK2 were identified as a major cause of familial Parkinson’s disease. LRRK2 is a large and complex protein combining a GTPase and protein kinase activity, and disease mutations increase the kinase activity, while presumably decreasing the GTPase activity. Although a cross-communication between both catalytic activities has been suggested, the underlying mechanisms and the regulatory role of the GTPase domain remain unknown. Several structures of LRRK2 have been reported, but structures of Roco proteins in their activated GTP-bound state are lacking. Here, we use single-particle cryo-electron microscopy to solve the structure of a bacterial Roco protein (CtRoco) in its GTP-bound state, aided by two conformation-specific nanobodies: NbRoco1 and NbRoco2. This structure presents CtRoco in an active monomeric state, featuring a very large GTP-induced conformational change using the LRR-Roc linker as a hinge. Furthermore, this structure shows how NbRoco1 and NbRoco2 collaborate to activate CtRoco in an allosteric way. Altogether, our data provide important new insights into the activation mechanism of Roco proteins, with relevance to LRRK2 regulation, and suggest new routes for the allosteric modulation of their GTPase activity.