TASEP modelling provides a parsimonious explanation for the ability of a single uORF to derepress translation during the Integrated Stress Response

  1. Dmitry E Andreev
  2. Maxim Arnold
  3. Stephen J Kiniry
  4. Gary Loughran
  5. Audrey M Michel
  6. Dmitry Rachinskiy  Is a corresponding author
  7. Pavel V Baranov  Is a corresponding author
  1. University College Cork, Ireland
  2. University of Texas at Dallas, United States

Abstract

Translation initiation is the rate-limiting step of protein synthesis that is downregulated during the Integrated Stress Response (ISR). Previously we demonstrated that most human mRNAs resistant to this inhibition possess translated uORFs, and that in some cases a single uORF is sufficient for the resistance (Andreev et al., 2015). Here we developed a computational model of Initiation Complexes Interference with Elongating Ribosomes (ICIER) to gain insight into the mechanism. We explored the relationship between the flux of scanning ribosomes upstream and downstream of a single uORF depending on uORF features. Paradoxically our analysis predicts that reducing ribosome flux upstream of certain uORFs increases initiation downstream. The model supports the derepression of downstream translation as a general mechanism of uORF-mediated stress resistance. It predicts that stress resistance can be achieved with long slowly decoded uORFs that do not favor translation reinitiation and start with initiators of low leakiness.

Data availability

All data generated during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Source data files have been provided for Figures 2 to 7.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Dmitry E Andreev

    School of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Maxim Arnold

    Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Stephen J Kiniry

    School of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Gary Loughran

    School of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2683-5597
  5. Audrey M Michel

    School of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Dmitry Rachinskiy

    Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, United States
    For correspondence
    Dmitry.Rachinskiy@utdallas.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Pavel V Baranov

    School of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
    For correspondence
    p.baranov@ucc.ie
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9017-0270

Funding

Science Foundation Ireland (12/IA/1335))

  • Pavel V Baranov

National Science Foundation (DMS-1413223)

  • Dmitry Rachinskiy

Russian Science Foundation (RSF16-14-10065)

  • Dmitry E Andreev

Irish Research Council

  • Stephen J Kiniry
  • Audrey M Michel

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Nahum Sonenberg, McGill University, Canada

Publication history

  1. Received: October 17, 2017
  2. Accepted: June 21, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 22, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 5, 2018 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2018, Andreev 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

  • 1,806
    Page views
  • 242
    Downloads
  • 15
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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. Dmitry E Andreev
  2. Maxim Arnold
  3. Stephen J Kiniry
  4. Gary Loughran
  5. Audrey M Michel
  6. Dmitry Rachinskiy
  7. Pavel V Baranov
(2018)
TASEP modelling provides a parsimonious explanation for the ability of a single uORF to derepress translation during the Integrated Stress Response
eLife 7:e32563.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32563

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Le Xiong et al.
    Research Article

    The transcription factor Oct4 is essential for the maintenance and induction of stem cell pluripotency, but its functional roles are not fully understood. Here, we investigate the functions of Oct4 by depleting and subsequently recovering it in mouse embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and conducting a time-resolved multiomics analysis. Oct4 depletion leads to an immediate loss of its binding to enhancers, accompanied by a decrease in mRNA synthesis from its target genes that are part of the transcriptional network that maintains pluripotency. Gradual decrease of Oct4 binding to enhancers does not immediately change the chromatin accessibility but reduces transcription of enhancers. Conversely, partial recovery of Oct4 expression results in a rapid increase in chromatin accessibility, whereas enhancer transcription does not fully recover. These results indicate different concentration-dependent activities of Oct4. Whereas normal ESC levels of Oct4 are required for transcription of pluripotency enhancers, low levels of Oct4 are sufficient to retain chromatin accessibility, likely together with other factors such as Sox2.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Justin H Hwang et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers (mCRPCs) are treated with therapies that antagonize the androgen receptor (AR). Nearly all patients develop resistance to AR-targeted therapies (ARTs). Our previous work identified CREB5 as an upregulated target gene in human mCRPC that promoted resistance to all clinically approved ART. The mechanisms by which CREB5 promotes progression of mCRPC or other cancers remains elusive. Integrating ChIP-seq and rapid immunoprecipitation and mass spectroscopy of endogenous proteins, we report that cells overexpressing CREB5 demonstrate extensive reprogramming of nuclear protein–protein interactions in response to the ART agent enzalutamide. Specifically, CREB5 physically interacts with AR, the pioneering actor FOXA1, and other known co-factors of AR and FOXA1 at transcription regulatory elements recently found to be active in mCRPC patients. We identified a subset of CREB5/FOXA1 co-interacting nuclear factors that have critical functions for AR transcription (GRHL2, HOXB13) while others (TBX3, NFIC) regulated cell viability and ART resistance and were amplified or overexpressed in mCRPC. Upon examining the nuclear protein interactions and the impact of CREB5 expression on the mCRPC patient transcriptome, we found that CREB5 was associated with Wnt signaling and epithelial to mesenchymal transitions, implicating these pathways in CREB5/FOXA1-mediated ART resistance. Overall, these observations define the molecular interactions among CREB5, FOXA1, and pathways that promote ART resistance.