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.

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

  • 10,172
    views
  • 2,062
    downloads
  • 110
    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
    Laura-Marie Silbermann, Benjamin Vermeer ... Katarzyna Tych
    Review Article

    Molecular chaperones are vital proteins that maintain protein homeostasis by assisting in protein folding, activation, degradation, and stress protection. Among them, heat-shock protein 90 (Hsp90) stands out as an essential proteostasis hub in eukaryotes, chaperoning hundreds of ‘clients’ (substrates). After decades of research, several ‘known unknowns’ about the molecular function of Hsp90 remain unanswered, hampering rational drug design for the treatment of cancers, neurodegenerative, and other diseases. We highlight three fundamental open questions, reviewing the current state of the field for each, and discuss new opportunities, including single-molecule technologies, to answer the known unknowns of the Hsp90 chaperone.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Raji E Joseph, Thomas E Wales ... Amy H Andreotti
    Research Advance

    Inhibition of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) has proven to be highly effective in the treatment of B-cell malignancies such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), autoimmune disorders, and multiple sclerosis. Since the approval of the first BTK inhibitor (BTKi), Ibrutinib, several other inhibitors including Acalabrutinib, Zanubrutinib, Tirabrutinib, and Pirtobrutinib have been clinically approved. All are covalent active site inhibitors, with the exception of the reversible active site inhibitor Pirtobrutinib. The large number of available inhibitors for the BTK target creates challenges in choosing the most appropriate BTKi for treatment. Side-by-side comparisons in CLL have shown that different inhibitors may differ in their treatment efficacy. Moreover, the nature of the resistance mutations that arise in patients appears to depend on the specific BTKi administered. We have previously shown that Ibrutinib binding to the kinase active site causes unanticipated long-range effects on the global conformation of BTK (Joseph et al., 2020). Here, we show that binding of each of the five approved BTKi to the kinase active site brings about distinct allosteric changes that alter the conformational equilibrium of full-length BTK. Additionally, we provide an explanation for the resistance mutation bias observed in CLL patients treated with different BTKi and characterize the mechanism of action of two common resistance mutations: BTK T474I and L528W.