Abstract

Intron splicing increases proteome complexity, promotes RNA stability, and enhances transcription. However, introns and the concomitant need for splicing extend the time required for gene expression and can cause an undesirable delay in the activation of genes. Here, we show that the plant microRNA processing factor SERRATE (SE) plays an unexpected and pivotal role in the regulation of intronless genes. Arabidopsis SE associated with more than 1000, mainly intronless, genes in a transcription-dependent manner. Chromatin-bound SE liaised with paused and elongating polymerase II complexes and promoted their association with intronless target genes. Our results indicate that stress-responsive genes contain no or few introns, which negatively affects their expression strength, but that some genes circumvent this limitation via a novel SE-dependent transcriptional activation mechanism. Transcriptome analysis of a Drosophila mutant defective in ARS2, the metazoan homologue of SE, suggests that SE/ARS2 function in regulating intronless genes might be conserved across kingdoms.

Data availability

Raw data have been deposited under accession codes accession number ERP016859 (ENA), PXD006004 (Pride) and GSE99367 (Geo Omnibus).

The following data sets were generated
    1. Martinho C
    2. Speth C
    3. Szabo EX
    4. Laubinger S
    (2018) RNA-seq of se mutants
    Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE99367).
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Corinna Speth

    Centre for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Emese Xochitl Szabo

    Centre for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Claudia Martinho

    Centre for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Silvio Collani

    Department of Plant Physiology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9603-0882
  5. Sven zur Oven-Krockhaus

    Centre for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Sandra Richter

    Centre for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Irina Droste-Borel

    Proteome Centre, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Boris Macek

    Proteome Centre, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. York-Dieter Stierhof

    Center for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Markus Schmid

    Department of Plant Physiology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Chang Liu

    Center for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2859-4288
  12. Sascha Laubinger

    Center for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    For correspondence
    sascha.laubinger@uol.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6682-0728

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

  • Sascha Laubinger

Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (Open-access funding)

  • Sven zur Oven-Krockhaus
  • York-Dieter Stierhof
  • Sascha Laubinger

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

Copyright

© 2018, Speth 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

  • 4,980
    views
  • 690
    downloads
  • 37
    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. Corinna Speth
  2. Emese Xochitl Szabo
  3. Claudia Martinho
  4. Silvio Collani
  5. Sven zur Oven-Krockhaus
  6. Sandra Richter
  7. Irina Droste-Borel
  8. Boris Macek
  9. York-Dieter Stierhof
  10. Markus Schmid
  11. Chang Liu
  12. Sascha Laubinger
(2018)
Arabidopsis RNA processing factor SERRATE regulates the transcription of intronless genes
eLife 7:e37078.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.37078

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.37078

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Developmental Biology
    Marius Regin, Yingnan Lei ... Claudia Spits
    Research Article

    About 70% of human cleavage stage embryos show chromosomal mosaicism, falling to 20% in blastocysts. Chromosomally mosaic human blastocysts can implant and lead to healthy new-borns with normal karyotypes. Studies in mouse embryos and human gastruloids showed that aneuploid cells are eliminated from the epiblast by p53-mediated apoptosis while being tolerated in the trophectoderm. These observations suggest a selective loss of aneuploid cells from human embryos, but the underlying mechanisms are not yet fully understood. Here, we investigated the cellular consequences of aneuploidy in a total of 125 human blastocysts. RNA-sequencing of trophectoderm cells showed activated p53 pathway and apoptosis proportionate to the level of chromosomal imbalance. Immunostaining corroborated that aneuploidy triggers proteotoxic stress, autophagy, p53-signaling, and apoptosis independent from DNA damage. Total cell numbers were lower in aneuploid embryos, due to a decline both in trophectoderm and in epiblast/primitive endoderm cell numbers. While lower cell numbers in trophectoderm may be attributed to apoptosis, aneuploidy impaired the second lineage segregation, particularly primitive endoderm formation. This might be reinforced by retention of NANOG. Our findings might explain why fully aneuploid embryos fail to further develop and we hypothesize that the same mechanisms lead to the removal of aneuploid cells from mosaic embryos.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Developmental Biology
    Augusto Berrocal, Nicholas C Lammers ... Michael B Eisen
    Research Advance

    Transcription often occurs in bursts as gene promoters switch stochastically between active and inactive states. Enhancers can dictate transcriptional activity in animal development through the modulation of burst frequency, duration, or amplitude. Previous studies observed that different enhancers can achieve a wide range of transcriptional outputs through the same strategies of bursting control. For example, in Berrocal et al., 2020, we showed that despite responding to different transcription factors, all even-skipped enhancers increase transcription by upregulating burst frequency and amplitude while burst duration remains largely constant. These shared bursting strategies suggest that a unified molecular mechanism constraints how enhancers modulate transcriptional output. Alternatively, different enhancers could have converged on the same bursting control strategy because of natural selection favoring one of these particular strategies. To distinguish between these two scenarios, we compared transcriptional bursting between endogenous and ectopic gene expression patterns. Because enhancers act under different regulatory inputs in ectopic patterns, dissimilar bursting control strategies between endogenous and ectopic patterns would suggest that enhancers adapted their bursting strategies to their trans-regulatory environment. Here, we generated ectopic even-skipped transcription patterns in fruit fly embryos and discovered that bursting strategies remain consistent in endogenous and ectopic even-skipped expression. These results provide evidence for a unified molecular mechanism shaping even-skipped bursting strategies and serve as a starting point to uncover the realm of strategies employed by other enhancers.