Plasmodium falciparum translational machinery condones polyadenosine repeats

  1. Slavica Pavlovic Djuranovic  Is a corresponding author
  2. Jessey Erath
  3. Ryan J Andrews
  4. Peter O Bayguinov
  5. Joyce J Chung
  6. Douglas L Chalker
  7. James AJ Fitzpatrick
  8. Walter N Moss
  9. Pawel Szczesny  Is a corresponding author
  10. Sergej Djuranovic  Is a corresponding author
  1. Washington University School of Medicine, United States
  2. Iowa State University, United States
  3. Washington University in St Louis, United States
  4. Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland

Abstract

Plasmodium falciparum is causative agent of human malaria. Sixty percent of mRNAs from its extremely AT-rich (81%) genome harbor long polyadenosine (polyA) runs within their ORFs, distinguishing the parasite from its hosts and other sequenced organisms. Recent studies indicate polyA runs cause ribosome stalling and frameshifting, triggering mRNA surveillance pathways and attenuating protein synthesis. Here, we show that the P. falciparum is an exception to this rule. We demonstrate that both endogenous genes and reporter sequences containing long polyA runs are efficiently and accurately translated in P. falciparum cells. We show that polyA runs do not elicit any response from No Go Decay (NGD) or result in the production of frameshifted proteins. This is in stark contrast to what we observe in human cells or T. thermophile, an organism with similar AT-content. Finally, using stalling reporters we show that Plasmodium cells evolved not to have a fully functional NGD pathway.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript, supporting files or referenced. Source data files have been referenced for Figures 1, 3 and 5, as well as for supplementary figures.

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Slavica Pavlovic Djuranovic

    Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
    For correspondence
    spavlov@wustl.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jessey Erath

    Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ryan J Andrews

    Roy J Carver Department of Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Molecular Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0275-0019
  4. Peter O Bayguinov

    Washington University Center for Cellular Imaging, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Joyce J Chung

    Biology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Douglas L Chalker

    Biology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0285-3344
  7. James AJ Fitzpatrick

    Department of Neuroscience, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Walter N Moss

    Roy J Carver Department of Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Molecular Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6419-5570
  9. Pawel Szczesny

    Department of Bioinformatics, Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland
    For correspondence
    szczesny.pawel@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Sergej Djuranovic

    Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
    For correspondence
    sergej.djuranovic@wustl.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9417-0822

Funding

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM112824)

  • Sergej Djuranovic

Washington University in St. Louis (CDI-CORE-2015-505)

  • James AJ Fitzpatrick

National Science Foundation (MCB 1412336)

  • Douglas L Chalker

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM112877)

  • Walter N Moss

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM007067)

  • Jessey Erath

Washington University in St. Louis (CDI-CORE-2019-813)

  • James AJ Fitzpatrick

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

Copyright

© 2020, Pavlovic Djuranovic 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

  • 2,504
    views
  • 361
    downloads
  • 19
    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. Slavica Pavlovic Djuranovic
  2. Jessey Erath
  3. Ryan J Andrews
  4. Peter O Bayguinov
  5. Joyce J Chung
  6. Douglas L Chalker
  7. James AJ Fitzpatrick
  8. Walter N Moss
  9. Pawel Szczesny
  10. Sergej Djuranovic
(2020)
Plasmodium falciparum translational machinery condones polyadenosine repeats
eLife 9:e57799.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.57799

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.57799

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Marius Landau, Sherif Elsabbagh ... Joachim E Schultz
    Research Article

    The biosynthesis of cyclic 3′,5′-adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) by mammalian membrane-bound adenylyl cyclases (mACs) is predominantly regulated by G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Up to now the two hexahelical transmembrane domains of mACs were considered to fix the enzyme to membranes. Here, we show that the transmembrane domains serve in addition as signal receptors and transmitters of lipid signals that control Gsα-stimulated mAC activities. We identify aliphatic fatty acids and anandamide as receptor ligands of mAC isoforms 1–7 and 9. The ligands enhance (mAC isoforms 2, 3, 7, and 9) or attenuate (isoforms 1, 4, 5, and 6) Gsα-stimulated mAC activities in vitro and in vivo. Substitution of the stimulatory membrane receptor of mAC3 by the inhibitory receptor of mAC5 results in a ligand inhibited mAC5–mAC3 chimera. Thus, we discovered a new class of membrane receptors in which two signaling modalities are at a crossing, direct tonic lipid and indirect phasic GPCR–Gsα signaling regulating the biosynthesis of cAMP.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Shraddha KC, Kenny H Nguyen ... Thomas C Boothby
    Research Article

    The conformational ensemble and function of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) are sensitive to their solution environment. The inherent malleability of disordered proteins, combined with the exposure of their residues, accounts for this sensitivity. One context in which IDPs play important roles that are concomitant with massive changes to the intracellular environment is during desiccation (extreme drying). The ability of organisms to survive desiccation has long been linked to the accumulation of high levels of cosolutes such as trehalose or sucrose as well as the enrichment of IDPs, such as late embryogenesis abundant (LEA) proteins or cytoplasmic abundant heat-soluble (CAHS) proteins. Despite knowing that IDPs play important roles and are co-enriched alongside endogenous, species-specific cosolutes during desiccation, little is known mechanistically about how IDP-cosolute interactions influence desiccation tolerance. Here, we test the notion that the protective function of desiccation-related IDPs is enhanced through conformational changes induced by endogenous cosolutes. We find that desiccation-related IDPs derived from four different organisms spanning two LEA protein families and the CAHS protein family synergize best with endogenous cosolutes during drying to promote desiccation protection. Yet the structural parameters of protective IDPs do not correlate with synergy for either CAHS or LEA proteins. We further demonstrate that for CAHS, but not LEA proteins, synergy is related to self-assembly and the formation of a gel. Our results suggest that functional synergy between IDPs and endogenous cosolutes is a convergent desiccation protection strategy seen among different IDP families and organisms, yet the mechanisms underlying this synergy differ between IDP families.