Marburg and Ebola Virus mRNA 3' Untranslated Regions Contain Negative Regulators of Translation That Are Modulated by ADAR1 Editing.

Abstract

ABSTRACTThe filovirus family includes deadly pathogens such as Ebola virus (EBOV) and Marburg virus (MARV). A substantial portion of filovirus genomes encode 5′ and 3′ untranslated regions (UTRs) of viral mRNAs. Select viral genomic RNA sequences corresponding to 3′ UTRs are prone to editing by adenosine deaminase acting on RNA 1 (ADAR1). A reporter mRNA approach, in which different 5′ or 3′ UTRs were inserted into luciferase-encoding mRNAs, demonstrates that MARV 3′ UTRs yield different levels of reporter gene expression, suggesting modulation of translation. The modulation occurs in cells unable to produce microRNAs (miRNAs) and can be recapitulated in a MARV minigenome assay. Deletion mutants identified negative regulatory regions at the ends of the MARV nucleoprotein (NP) and large protein (L) 3′ UTRs. Apparent ADAR1 editing mutants were previously identified within the MARV NP 3′ UTR. Introduction of these changes into the MARV nucleoprotein (NP) 3′ UTR or deletion of the region targeted for editing enhances translation, as indicated by reporter assays and polysome analysis. In addition, the parental NP 3′ UTR, but not the edited or deletion mutant NP 3′ UTRs, induces a type I interferon (IFN) response upon transfection into cells. Because some EBOV isolates from the West Africa outbreak exhibited ADAR1 editing of the viral protein of 40 kDa (VP40) 3′ UTR, VP40 3′ UTRs with parental and edited sequences were similarly assayed. The EBOV VP40 3′ UTR edits also enhanced translation, but neither the wild-type nor the edited 3′ UTRs induced IFN. These findings implicate filoviral mRNA 3′ UTRs as negative regulators of translation that can be inactivated by innate immune responses that induce ADAR1.IMPORTANCE UTRs comprise a large percentage of filovirus genomes and are apparent targets of editing by ADAR1, an enzyme with pro- and antiviral activities. However, the functional significance of the UTRs and ADAR1 editing has been uncertain. This study demonstrates that MARV and EBOV 3′ UTRs can modulate translation, in some cases negatively. ADAR1 editing or deletion of select regions within the translation suppressing 3′ UTRs relieves the negative effects of the UTRs. These data indicate that filovirus 3′ UTRs contain translation regulatory elements that are modulated by activation of ADAR1, suggesting a complex interplay between filovirus gene expression and innate immunity.