Abstract

N6-methyladenosine (m6A) RNA modification impacts mRNA fate primarily via reader proteins, which dictate processes in development, stress, and disease. Yet little is known about m6A function in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, which occurs solely during early meiosis. Here we perform a multifaceted analysis of the m6A reader protein Pho92/Mrb1. Cross-linking immunoprecipitation analysis reveals that Pho92 associates with the 3’end of meiotic mRNAs in both an m6A-dependent and independent manner. Within cells, Pho92 transitions from the nucleus to the cytoplasm, and associates with translating ribosomes. In the nucleus Pho92 associates with target loci through its interaction with transcriptional elongator Paf1C. Functionally, we show that Pho92 promotes and links protein synthesis to mRNA decay. As such, the Pho92-mediated m6A-mRNA decay is contingent on active translation and the CCR4-NOT complex. We propose that the m6A reader Pho92 is loaded co-transcriptionally to facilitate protein synthesis and subsequent decay of m6A modified transcripts, and thereby promotes meiosis.

Data availability

The miCLIP, iCLIP and RNA-seq RAW and processed data are available to review GEO accession GSE193561:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE193561

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Radhika A Varier

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    radhikaav@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1302-3159
  2. Theodora Sideri

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5674-0804
  3. Charlotte Capitanchik

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Zornitsa Manova

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Enrica Calvani Enrica.Calvani

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Alice Rossi

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Raghu R Edupuganti

    Department of Molecular Biology, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Imke Ensinck

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Vincent WC Chan

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6638-5498
  10. Harshil Patel

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Joanna Kirkpatrick

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Peter Faull

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Ambrosius P Snijders

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Michiel Vermeulen

    Department of Molecular Biology, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Markus Ralser

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Jernej Ule

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2452-4277
  17. Nicholas M Luscombe

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Folkert Jacobus van Werven

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    folkert.vanwerven@crick.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6685-2084

Funding

Wellcome Trust (FC001203)

  • Radhika A Varier
  • Theodora Sideri
  • Zornitsa Manova
  • Alice Rossi
  • Imke Ensinck
  • Folkert Jacobus van Werven

Cancer Research UK (FC001203)

  • Radhika A Varier
  • Theodora Sideri
  • Zornitsa Manova
  • Alice Rossi
  • Imke Ensinck
  • Folkert Jacobus van Werven

Medical Research Council (FC001203)

  • Radhika A Varier
  • Theodora Sideri
  • Zornitsa Manova
  • Alice Rossi
  • Imke Ensinck
  • Folkert Jacobus van Werven

Wellcome Trust (FC010110)

  • Charlotte Capitanchik
  • Nicholas M Luscombe

Cancer Research UK (FC010110)

  • Charlotte Capitanchik
  • Nicholas M Luscombe

Medical Research Council (FC010110)

  • Charlotte Capitanchik
  • Nicholas M Luscombe

Medical Research Council (FC001134)

  • Enrica Calvani Enrica.Calvani
  • Markus Ralser

Cancer Research UK (FC001134)

  • Enrica Calvani Enrica.Calvani
  • Markus Ralser

Dutch Cancer Society

  • Raghu R Edupuganti
  • Michiel Vermeulen

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

Copyright

© 2022, Varier 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

  • 1,711
    views
  • 294
    downloads
  • 17
    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. Radhika A Varier
  2. Theodora Sideri
  3. Charlotte Capitanchik
  4. Zornitsa Manova
  5. Enrica Calvani Enrica.Calvani
  6. Alice Rossi
  7. Raghu R Edupuganti
  8. Imke Ensinck
  9. Vincent WC Chan
  10. Harshil Patel
  11. Joanna Kirkpatrick
  12. Peter Faull
  13. Ambrosius P Snijders
  14. Michiel Vermeulen
  15. Markus Ralser
  16. Jernej Ule
  17. Nicholas M Luscombe
  18. Folkert Jacobus van Werven
(2022)
N6-methyladenosine (m6A) reader Pho92 is recruited co-transcriptionally and couples translation to mRNA decay to promote meiotic fitness in yeast
eLife 11:e84034.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84034

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84034

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Jaskamaljot Kaur Banwait, Liana Islam, Aaron L Lucius
    Research Article

    Escherichia coli ClpB and Saccharomyces cerevisiae Hsp104 are AAA+ motor proteins essential for proteome maintenance and thermal tolerance. ClpB and Hsp104 have been proposed to extract a polypeptide from an aggregate and processively translocate the chain through the axial channel of its hexameric ring structure. However, the mechanism of translocation and if this reaction is processive remains disputed. We reported that Hsp104 and ClpB are non-processive on unfolded model substrates. Others have reported that ClpB is able to processively translocate a mechanically unfolded polypeptide chain at rates over 240 amino acids (aa) per second. Here, we report the development of a single turnover stopped-flow fluorescence strategy that reports on processive protein unfolding catalyzed by ClpB. We show that when translocation catalyzed by ClpB is challenged by stably folded protein structure, the motor enzymatically unfolds the substrate at a rate of ~0.9 aa s−1 with a kinetic step-size of ~60 amino acids at sub-saturating [ATP]. We reconcile the apparent controversy by defining enzyme catalyzed protein unfolding and translocation as two distinct reactions with different mechanisms of action. We propose a model where slow unfolding followed by fast translocation represents an important mechanistic feature that allows the motor to rapidly translocate up to the next folded region or rapidly dissociate if no additional fold is encountered.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Marina Dajka, Tobias Rath ... Benesh Joseph
    Research Article

    Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) confer resistance against harsh conditions, including antibiotics, in Gram-negative bacteria. The lipopolysaccharide transport (Lpt) complex, consisting of seven proteins (A-G), exports LPS across the cellular envelope. LptB2FG forms an ATP-binding cassette transporter that transfers LPS to LptC. How LptB2FG couples ATP binding and hydrolysis with LPS transport to LptC remains unclear. We observed the conformational heterogeneity of LptB2FG and LptB2FGC in micelles and/or proteoliposomes using pulsed dipolar electron spin resonance spectroscopy. Additionally, we monitored LPS binding and release using laser-induced liquid bead ion desorption mass spectrometry. The β-jellyroll domain of LptF stably interacts with the LptG and LptC β-jellyrolls in both the apo and vanadate-trapped states. ATP binding at the cytoplasmic side is allosterically coupled to the selective opening of the periplasmic LptF β-jellyroll domain. In LptB2FG, ATP binding closes the nucleotide binding domains, causing a collapse of the first lateral gate as observed in structures. However, the second lateral gate, which forms the putative entry site for LPS, exhibits a heterogeneous conformation. LptC binding limits the flexibility of this gate to two conformations, likely representing the helix of LptC as either released from or inserted into the transmembrane domains. Our results reveal the regulation of the LPS entry gate through the dynamic behavior of the LptC transmembrane helix, while its β-jellyroll domain is anchored in the periplasm. This, combined with long-range ATP-dependent allosteric gating of the LptF β-jellyroll domain, may ensure efficient and unidirectional transport of LPS across the periplasm.