Mechanism of ribosome rescue by ArfA and RF2

  1. Gabriel Demo
  2. Egor Svidritskiy
  3. Rohini Madireddy
  4. Ruben Diaz-Avalos
  5. Timothy Grant
  6. Nikolaus Grigorieff
  7. Duncan Sousa
  8. Andrei A Korostelev  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Massachusetts Medical School, United States
  2. Medicago, United States
  3. Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States
  4. Florida State University, United States

Abstract

ArfA rescues ribosomes stalled on truncated mRNAs by recruiting release factor RF2, which normally binds stop codons to catalyze peptide release. We report two 3.2-Å resolution cryo-EM structures – determined from a single sample – of the 70S ribosome with ArfA•RF2 in the A site. In both states, the ArfA C-terminus occupies the mRNA tunnel downstream of the A site. One state contains a compact inactive RF2 conformation. Ordering of the ArfA N-terminus in the second state rearranges RF2 into an extended conformation that docks the catalytic GGQ motif into the peptidyl-transferase center. Our work thus reveals the structural dynamics of ribosome rescue. The structures demonstrate how ArfA “senses” the vacant mRNA tunnel and activates RF2 to mediate peptide release without a stop codon, allowing stalled ribosomes to be recycled.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Gabriel Demo

    RNA Therapeutics Institute, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Egor Svidritskiy

    RNA Therapeutics Institute, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Rohini Madireddy

    Medicago, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Ruben Diaz-Avalos

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Timothy Grant

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Nikolaus Grigorieff

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    Nikolaus Grigorieff, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1506-909X
  7. Duncan Sousa

    Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Andrei A Korostelev

    RNA Therapeutics Institute, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    For correspondence
    andrei.korostelev@umassmed.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1588-717X

Funding

National Institutes of Health (GM106105)

  • Andrei A Korostelev

National Institutes of Health (GM107465)

  • Andrei A Korostelev

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Rachel Green, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, United States

Version history

  1. Received: November 27, 2016
  2. Accepted: March 14, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 16, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: April 3, 2017 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: April 4, 2017 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2017, Demo 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

  • 2,656
    views
  • 444
    downloads
  • 45
    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. Gabriel Demo
  2. Egor Svidritskiy
  3. Rohini Madireddy
  4. Ruben Diaz-Avalos
  5. Timothy Grant
  6. Nikolaus Grigorieff
  7. Duncan Sousa
  8. Andrei A Korostelev
(2017)
Mechanism of ribosome rescue by ArfA and RF2
eLife 6:e23687.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23687

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23687

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Maximilian Nagel, Marco Niestroj ... Marc Spehr
    Research Article

    In most mammals, conspecific chemosensory communication relies on semiochemical release within complex bodily secretions and subsequent stimulus detection by the vomeronasal organ (VNO). Urine, a rich source of ethologically relevant chemosignals, conveys detailed information about sex, social hierarchy, health, and reproductive state, which becomes accessible to a conspecific via vomeronasal sampling. So far, however, numerous aspects of social chemosignaling along the vomeronasal pathway remain unclear. Moreover, since virtually all research on vomeronasal physiology is based on secretions derived from inbred laboratory mice, it remains uncertain whether such stimuli provide a true representation of potentially more relevant cues found in the wild. Here, we combine a robust low-noise VNO activity assay with comparative molecular profiling of sex- and strain-specific mouse urine samples from two inbred laboratory strains as well as from wild mice. With comprehensive molecular portraits of these secretions, VNO activity analysis now enables us to (i) assess whether and, if so, how much sex/strain-selective ‘raw’ chemical information in urine is accessible via vomeronasal sampling; (ii) identify which chemicals exhibit sufficient discriminatory power to signal an animal’s sex, strain, or both; (iii) determine the extent to which wild mouse secretions are unique; and (iv) analyze whether vomeronasal response profiles differ between strains. We report both sex- and, in particular, strain-selective VNO representations of chemical information. Within the urinary ‘secretome’, both volatile compounds and proteins exhibit sufficient discriminative power to provide sex- and strain-specific molecular fingerprints. While total protein amount is substantially enriched in male urine, females secrete a larger variety at overall comparatively low concentrations. Surprisingly, the molecular spectrum of wild mouse urine does not dramatically exceed that of inbred strains. Finally, vomeronasal response profiles differ between C57BL/6 and BALB/c animals, with particularly disparate representations of female semiochemicals.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Claudia D Consalvo, Adedeji M Aderounmu ... Brenda L Bass
    Research Article

    Invertebrates use the endoribonuclease Dicer to cleave viral dsRNA during antiviral defense, while vertebrates use RIG-I-like Receptors (RLRs), which bind viral dsRNA to trigger an interferon response. While some invertebrate Dicers act alone during antiviral defense, Caenorhabditis elegans Dicer acts in a complex with a dsRNA binding protein called RDE-4, and an RLR ortholog called DRH-1. We used biochemical and structural techniques to provide mechanistic insight into how these proteins function together. We found RDE-4 is important for ATP-independent and ATP-dependent cleavage reactions, while helicase domains of both DCR-1 and DRH-1 contribute to ATP-dependent cleavage. DRH-1 plays the dominant role in ATP hydrolysis, and like mammalian RLRs, has an N-terminal domain that functions in autoinhibition. A cryo-EM structure indicates DRH-1 interacts with DCR-1’s helicase domain, suggesting this interaction relieves autoinhibition. Our study unravels the mechanistic basis of the collaboration between two helicases from typically distinct innate immune defense pathways.