The final step of 40S ribosomal subunit maturation is controlled by a dual key lock

  1. Laura Plassart
  2. Ramtin Shayan
  3. Christian Montellese
  4. Dana Rinaldi
  5. Natacha Larburu
  6. Carole Pichereaux
  7. Carine Froment
  8. Simon Lebaron
  9. Marie-Françoise O'Donohue
  10. Ulrike Kutay
  11. Julien Marcoux
  12. Pierre-Emmanuel Gleizes  Is a corresponding author
  13. Celia Plisson-Chastang  Is a corresponding author
  1. Centre de Biologie Integrative, University of Toulouse, France
  2. ETH Zürich, Switzerland
  3. Institut de Pharmacologie et de Biologie Structurale, France
  4. CNRS, France

Abstract

Preventing premature interaction of pre-ribosomes with the translation apparatus is essential for translational accuracy. Hence, the final maturation step releasing functional 40S ribosomal subunits, namely processing of the 18S ribosomal RNA 3' end, is safeguarded by the protein DIM2, which both interacts with the endoribonuclease NOB1 and masks the rRNA cleavage site. To elucidate the control mechanism that unlocks NOB1 activity, we performed cryo-EM analysis of late human pre-40S particles purified using a catalytically-inactive form of the ATPase RIO1. These structures, together with in vivo and in vitro functional analyses, support a model in which ATP-loaded RIO1 cooperates with ribosomal protein RPS26/eS26 to displace DIM2 from the 18S rRNA 3' end, thereby triggering final cleavage by NOB1; release of ADP then leads to RIO1 dissociation from the 40S subunit. This dual key lock mechanism requiring RIO1 and RPS26 guarantees the precise timing of pre-40S particle conversion into translation-competent ribosomal subunits.

Data availability

Mass spectrometry proteomics data have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD019270. Cryo-EM maps have been deposited in the Electron Microscopy Data Bank (EMDB), under the accession codes : EMD-11440 (State A multi-body composite map); EMD-11441 (State B multi-body composite map); EMD-11446 (State A, head); EMD-11445 (State A, body); EMD-11447 (State A, platform); EMD-11443 (State B, head); EMD-11442 (State B, body); EMD-11444 (State B, platform). Atomic coordinate models of State A and State B RIO1(kd)-StHA pre-40S particles have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank (PDB), with respective PDB accession codes 6ZUO and 6ZV6.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Laura Plassart

    Molecular, Cellular and Developmental biology department (MCD), Centre de Biologie Integrative, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Ramtin Shayan

    Molecular, Cellular and Developmental biology department (MCD), Centre de Biologie Integrative, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Christian Montellese

    Institute of Biochemistry, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Dana Rinaldi

    Molecular, Cellular and Developmental biology department (MCD), Centre de Biologie Integrative, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Natacha Larburu

    Molecular, Cellular and Developmental biology department (MCD), Centre de Biologie Integrative, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Carole Pichereaux

    Department of Biophysics, Institut de Pharmacologie et de Biologie Structurale, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Carine Froment

    Institute of Pharmacology and Structural Biology, CNRS, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Simon Lebaron

    Molecular, Cellular and Developmental biology department (MCD), Centre de Biologie Integrative, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Marie-Françoise O'Donohue

    Molecular, Cellular and Developmental biology department (MCD), Centre de Biologie Integrative, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Ulrike Kutay

    Institute of Biochemistry, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8257-7465
  11. Julien Marcoux

    Institute of Pharmacology and Structural Biology, CNRS, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7321-7436
  12. Pierre-Emmanuel Gleizes

    Molecular, Cellular and Developmental biology department (MCD), Centre de Biologie Integrative, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
    For correspondence
    pierre-emmanuel.gleizes@univ-tlse3.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Celia Plisson-Chastang

    Molecular, Cellular and Developmental biology department (MCD), Centre de Biologie Integrative, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
    For correspondence
    celia.plisson-chastang@univ-tlse3.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8439-8428

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (16-CE11-0029)

  • Laura Plassart
  • Ramtin Shayan
  • Natacha Larburu
  • Simon Lebaron
  • Julien Marcoux
  • Pierre-Emmanuel Gleizes
  • Celia Plisson-Chastang

Swiss National Science Fundation (31003A_166565)

  • Christian Montellese

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

Copyright

© 2021, Plassart 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

  • 2,614
    views
  • 293
    downloads
  • 28
    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. Laura Plassart
  2. Ramtin Shayan
  3. Christian Montellese
  4. Dana Rinaldi
  5. Natacha Larburu
  6. Carole Pichereaux
  7. Carine Froment
  8. Simon Lebaron
  9. Marie-Françoise O'Donohue
  10. Ulrike Kutay
  11. Julien Marcoux
  12. Pierre-Emmanuel Gleizes
  13. Celia Plisson-Chastang
(2021)
The final step of 40S ribosomal subunit maturation is controlled by a dual key lock
eLife 10:e61254.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61254

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61254

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Timothy Fuqua, Yiqiao Sun, Andreas Wagner
    Research Article

    Gene regulation is essential for life and controlled by regulatory DNA. Mutations can modify the activity of regulatory DNA, and also create new regulatory DNA, a process called regulatory emergence. Non-regulatory and regulatory DNA contain motifs to which transcription factors may bind. In prokaryotes, gene expression requires a stretch of DNA called a promoter, which contains two motifs called –10 and –35 boxes. However, these motifs may occur in both promoters and non-promoter DNA in multiple copies. They have been implicated in some studies to improve promoter activity, and in others to repress it. Here, we ask whether the presence of such motifs in different genetic sequences influences promoter evolution and emergence. To understand whether and how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution, we start from 50 ‘promoter islands’, DNA sequences enriched with –10 and –35 boxes. We mutagenize these starting ‘parent’ sequences, and measure gene expression driven by 240,000 of the resulting mutants. We find that the probability that mutations create an active promoter varies more than 200-fold, and is not correlated with the number of promoter motifs. For parent sequences without promoter activity, mutations created over 1500 new –10 and –35 boxes at unique positions in the library, but only ~0.3% of these resulted in de-novo promoter activity. Only ~13% of all –10 and –35 boxes contribute to de-novo promoter activity. For parent sequences with promoter activity, mutations created new –10 and –35 boxes in 11 specific positions that partially overlap with preexisting ones to modulate expression. We also find that –10 and –35 boxes do not repress promoter activity. Overall, our work demonstrates how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution. It has implications for predicting and understanding regulatory evolution, de novo genes, and phenotypic evolution.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Developmental Biology
    Valentin Babosha, Natalia Klimenko ... Oksana Maksimenko
    Research Article

    The male-specific lethal complex (MSL), which consists of five proteins and two non-coding roX RNAs, is involved in the transcriptional enhancement of X-linked genes to compensate for the sex chromosome monosomy in Drosophila XY males compared with XX females. The MSL1 and MSL2 proteins form the heterotetrameric core of the MSL complex and are critical for the specific recruitment of the complex to the high-affinity ‘entry’ sites (HAS) on the X chromosome. In this study, we demonstrated that the N-terminal region of MSL1 is critical for stability and functions of MSL1. Amino acid deletions and substitutions in the N-terminal region of MSL1 strongly affect both the interaction with roX2 RNA and the MSL complex binding to HAS on the X chromosome. In particular, substitution of the conserved N-terminal amino-acids 3–7 in MSL1 (MSL1GS) affects male viability similar to the inactivation of genes encoding roX RNAs. In addition, MSL1GS binds to promoters such as MSL1WT but does not co-bind with MSL2 and MSL3 to X chromosomal HAS. However, overexpression of MSL2 partially restores the dosage compensation. Thus, the interaction of MSL1 with roX RNA is critical for the efficient assembly of the MSL complex on HAS of the male X chromosome.