Engineering a conserved RNA regulatory protein repurposes its biological function in vivo

  1. Vandita D Bhat
  2. Kathleen L McCann
  3. Yeming Wang
  4. Dallas R Fonseca
  5. Tarjani Shukla
  6. Jacqueline C Alexander
  7. Chen Qiu
  8. Marvin Wickens
  9. Te-Wen Lo
  10. Traci M Tanaka Hall  Is a corresponding author
  11. Zachary T Campbell  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Texas Dallas, United States
  2. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, United States
  3. Ithaca College, United States
  4. University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States

Abstract

PUF (PUmilio/FBF) RNA-binding proteins recognize distinct elements. In C. elegans, PUF-8 binds to an 8-nt motif and restricts proliferation in the germline. Conversely, FBF-2 recognizes a 9-nt element and promotes mitosis. To understand how motif divergence relates to biological function, we determined a crystal structure of PUF-8. Comparison of this structure to that of FBF-2 revealed a major difference in a central repeat. We devised a modified yeast 3-hybrid screen to identify mutations that confer recognition of an 8-nt element to FBF-2. We identified several such mutants and validated structurally and biochemically their binding to 8-nt RNA elements. Using genome engineering, we generated a mutant animal with a substitution in FBF-2 that confers preferential binding to the PUF-8 element. The mutant largely rescued overproliferation in animals that spontaneously generate tumors in the absence of puf-8. This work highlights the critical role of motif length in the specification of biological function.

Data availability

All data associated with the manuscript are present in the source data file. Data have also been deposited to PDB under the accession numbers 6NOD, 6NOH, 6NOF, and 6NOC.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Vandita D Bhat

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Texas Dallas, Richardson, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Kathleen L McCann

    Epigenetics and Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7144-4851
  3. Yeming Wang

    Epigenetics and Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Dallas R Fonseca

    Department of Biology, Ithaca College, Ithaca, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Tarjani Shukla

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Texas Dallas, Richardson, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Jacqueline C Alexander

    Department of Biology, Ithaca College, Ithaca, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Chen Qiu

    Epigenetics and Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Marvin Wickens

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Te-Wen Lo

    Department of Biology, Ithaca College, Ithaca, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Traci M Tanaka Hall

    Epigenetics and Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    For correspondence
    hall4@niehs.nih.gov
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6166-3009
  11. Zachary T Campbell

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Texas Dallas, Richardson, United States
    For correspondence
    zachary.campbell@utdallas.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3768-6996

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01NS100788)

  • Zachary T Campbell

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Timothy W Nilsen, Case Western Reserve University, United States

Version history

  1. Received: November 21, 2018
  2. Accepted: January 15, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: January 17, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 29, 2019 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: March 5, 2019 (version 3)

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 2,305
    views
  • 307
    downloads
  • 11
    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. Vandita D Bhat
  2. Kathleen L McCann
  3. Yeming Wang
  4. Dallas R Fonseca
  5. Tarjani Shukla
  6. Jacqueline C Alexander
  7. Chen Qiu
  8. Marvin Wickens
  9. Te-Wen Lo
  10. Traci M Tanaka Hall
  11. Zachary T Campbell
(2019)
Engineering a conserved RNA regulatory protein repurposes its biological function in vivo
eLife 8:e43788.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.43788

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.43788

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Zhuqing Wang, Yue Wang ... Wei Yan
    Research Article

    Despite rapid evolution across eutherian mammals, the X-linked MIR-506 family miRNAs are located in a region flanked by two highly conserved protein-coding genes (SLITRK2 and FMR1) on the X chromosome. Intriguingly, these miRNAs are predominantly expressed in the testis, suggesting a potential role in spermatogenesis and male fertility. Here, we report that the X-linked MIR-506 family miRNAs were derived from the MER91C DNA transposons. Selective inactivation of individual miRNAs or clusters caused no discernible defects, but simultaneous ablation of five clusters containing 19 members of the MIR-506 family led to reduced male fertility in mice. Despite normal sperm counts, motility, and morphology, the KO sperm were less competitive than wild-type sperm when subjected to a polyandrous mating scheme. Transcriptomic and bioinformatic analyses revealed that these X-linked MIR-506 family miRNAs, in addition to targeting a set of conserved genes, have more targets that are critical for spermatogenesis and embryonic development during evolution. Our data suggest that the MIR-506 family miRNAs function to enhance sperm competitiveness and reproductive fitness of the male by finetuning gene expression during spermatogenesis.

    1. Developmental Biology
    Edgar M Pera, Josefine Nilsson-De Moura ... Ivana Milas
    Research Article

    We previously showed that SerpinE2 and the serine protease HtrA1 modulate fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling in germ layer specification and head-to-tail development of Xenopus embryos. Here, we present an extracellular proteolytic mechanism involving this serpin-protease system in the developing neural crest (NC). Knockdown of SerpinE2 by injected antisense morpholino oligonucleotides did not affect the specification of NC progenitors but instead inhibited the migration of NC cells, causing defects in dorsal fin, melanocyte, and craniofacial cartilage formation. Similarly, overexpression of the HtrA1 protease impaired NC cell migration and the formation of NC-derived structures. The phenotype of SerpinE2 knockdown was overcome by concomitant downregulation of HtrA1, indicating that SerpinE2 stimulates NC migration by inhibiting endogenous HtrA1 activity. SerpinE2 binds to HtrA1, and the HtrA1 protease triggers degradation of the cell surface proteoglycan Syndecan-4 (Sdc4). Microinjection of Sdc4 mRNA partially rescued NC migration defects induced by both HtrA1 upregulation and SerpinE2 downregulation. These epistatic experiments suggest a proteolytic pathway by a double inhibition mechanism:

    SerpinE2 ┤HtrA1 protease ┤Syndecan-4 → NC cell migration.