tRNA-mRNA Translocation Research Articles

Decoding and Recoding of mRNA Sequences by the Ribosome.

Faithful translation of messenger RNA (mRNA) into protein is essential to maintain protein homeostasis in the cell. Spontaneous translation errors are very rare due to stringent selection of cognate aminoacyl transfer RNAs (tRNAs) and the tight control of the mRNA reading frame by the ribosome. Recoding events, such as stop codon readthrough, frameshifting, and translational bypassing, reprogram the ribosome to make intentional mistakes and produce alternative proteins from the same mRNA. The hallmark of recoding is the change of ribosome dynamics. The signals for recoding are built into the mRNA, but their reading depends on the genetic makeup of the cell, resulting in cell-specific changes in expression programs. In this review, I discuss the mechanisms of canonical decoding and tRNA-mRNA translocation; describe alternative pathways leading to recoding; and identify the links among mRNA signals, ribosome dynamics, and recoding.

Frameshifting at collided ribosomes is modulated by elongation factor eEF3 and by integrated stress response regulators Gcn1 and Gcn20.

Ribosome stalls can result in ribosome collisions that elicit quality control responses, one function of which is to prevent ribosome frameshifting, an activity that entails the interaction of the conserved yeast protein Mbf1 with uS3 on colliding ribosomes. However, the full spectrum of factors that mediate frameshifting during ribosome collisions is unknown. To delineate such factors in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, we used genetic selections for mutants that affect frameshifting from a known ribosome stall site, CGA codon repeats. We show that the general translation elongation factor eEF3 and the integrated stress response (ISR) pathway components Gcn1 and Gcn20 modulate frameshifting in opposing manners. We found a mutant form of eEF3 that specifically suppressed frameshifting, but not translation inhibition by CGA codons. Thus, we infer that frameshifting at collided ribosomes requires eEF3, which facilitates tRNA–mRNA translocation and E-site tRNA release in yeast and other single cell organisms. In contrast, we found that removal of either Gcn1 or Gcn20, which bind collided ribosomes with Mbf1, increased frameshifting. Thus, we conclude that frameshifting is suppressed by Gcn1 and Gcn20, although these effects are not mediated primarily through activation of the ISR. Furthermore, we examined the relationship between eEF3-mediated frameshifting and other quality control mechanisms, finding that Mbf1 requires either Hel2 or Gcn1 to suppress frameshifting with wild-type eEF3. Thus, these results provide evidence of a direct link between translation elongation and frameshifting at collided ribosomes, as well as evidence that frameshifting is constrained by quality control mechanisms that act on collided ribosomes.

Time-resolved cryo-EM visualizes ribosomal translocation with EF-G and GTP

During translation, a conserved GTPase elongation factor—EF-G in bacteria or eEF2 in eukaryotes—translocates tRNA and mRNA through the ribosome. EF-G has been proposed to act as a flexible motor that propels tRNA and mRNA movement, as a rigid pawl that biases unidirectional translocation resulting from ribosome rearrangements, or by various combinations of motor- and pawl-like mechanisms. Using time-resolved cryo-EM, we visualized GTP-catalyzed translocation without inhibitors, capturing elusive structures of ribosome•EF-G intermediates at near-atomic resolution. Prior to translocation, EF-G binds near peptidyl-tRNA, while the rotated 30S subunit stabilizes the EF-G GTPase center. Reverse 30S rotation releases Pi and translocates peptidyl-tRNA and EF-G by ~20 Å. An additional 4-Å translocation initiates EF-G dissociation from a transient ribosome state with highly swiveled 30S head. The structures visualize how nearly rigid EF-G rectifies inherent and spontaneous ribosomal dynamics into tRNA-mRNA translocation, whereas GTP hydrolysis and Pi release drive EF-G dissociation.

Structural basis for +1 ribosomal frameshifting during EF-G-catalyzed translocation

Frameshifting of mRNA during translation provides a strategy to expand the coding repertoire of cells and viruses. How and where in the elongation cycle +1-frameshifting occurs remains poorly understood. We describe seven ~3.5-Å-resolution cryo-EM structures of 70S ribosome complexes, allowing visualization of elongation and translocation by the GTPase elongation factor G (EF-G). Four structures with a + 1-frameshifting-prone mRNA reveal that frameshifting takes place during translocation of tRNA and mRNA. Prior to EF-G binding, the pre-translocation complex features an in-frame tRNA-mRNA pairing in the A site. In the partially translocated structure with EF-G•GDPCP, the tRNA shifts to the +1-frame near the P site, rendering the freed mRNA base to bulge between the P and E sites and to stack on the 16S rRNA nucleotide G926. The ribosome remains frameshifted in the nearly post-translocation state. Our findings demonstrate that the ribosome and EF-G cooperate to induce +1 frameshifting during tRNA-mRNA translocation.

Perturbation of ribosomal subunit dynamics by inhibitors of tRNA translocation.

Many antibiotics that bind to the ribosome inhibit translation by blocking the movement of tRNAs and mRNA or interfering with ribosome dynamics, which impairs the formation of essential translocation intermediates. Here we show how translocation inhibitors viomycin (Vio), neomycin (Neo), paromomycin (Par), kanamycin (Kan), spectinomycin (Spc), hygromycin B (HygB), and streptomycin (Str, an antibiotic that does not inhibit tRNA movement), affect principal motions of the small ribosomal subunits (SSU) during EF-G-promoted translocation. Using ensemble kinetics, we studied the SSU body domain rotation and SSU head domain swiveling in real time. We show that although antibiotics binding to the ribosome can favor a particular ribosome conformation in the absence of EF-G, their kinetic effect on the EF-G-induced transition to the rotated/swiveled state of the SSU is moderate. The antibiotics mostly inhibit backward movements of the SSU body and/or the head domains. Vio, Spc, and high concentrations of Neo completely inhibit the backward movements of the SSU body and head domain. Kan, Par, HygB, and low concentrations of Neo slow down both movements, but their sequence and coordination are retained. Finally, Str has very little effect on the backward rotation of the SSU body domain, but retards the SSU head movement. The data underscore the importance of ribosome dynamics for tRNA-mRNA translocation and provide new insights into the mechanism of antibiotic action.

Insights into genome recoding from the mechanism of a classic +1-frameshifting tRNA

While genome recoding using quadruplet codons to incorporate non-proteinogenic amino acids is attractive for biotechnology and bioengineering purposes, the mechanism through which such codons are translated is poorly understood. Here we investigate translation of quadruplet codons by a +1-frameshifting tRNA, SufB2, that contains an extra nucleotide in its anticodon loop. Natural post-transcriptional modification of SufB2 in cells prevents it from frameshifting using a quadruplet-pairing mechanism such that it preferentially employs a triplet-slippage mechanism. We show that SufB2 uses triplet anticodon-codon pairing in the 0-frame to initially decode the quadruplet codon, but subsequently shifts to the +1-frame during tRNA-mRNA translocation. SufB2 frameshifting involves perturbation of an essential ribosome conformational change that facilitates tRNA-mRNA movements at a late stage of the translocation reaction. Our results provide a molecular mechanism for SufB2-induced +1 frameshifting and suggest that engineering of a specific ribosome conformational change can improve the efficiency of genome recoding.

Thio-Modification of tRNA at the Wobble Position as Regulator of the Kinetics of Decoding and Translocation on the Ribosome.

Uridine 34 (U34) at the wobble position of the tRNA anticodon is post-transcriptionally modified, usually to mcm5s2, mcm5, or mnm5. The lack of the mcm5 or s2 modification at U34 of tRNALys, tRNAGlu, and tRNAGln causes ribosome pausing at the respective codons in yeast. The pauses occur during the elongation step, but the mechanism that triggers ribosome pausing is not known. Here, we show how the s2 modification in yeast tRNALys affects mRNA decoding and tRNA-mRNA translocation. Using real-time kinetic analysis we show that mcm5-modified tRNALys lacking the s2 group has a lower affinity of binding to the cognate codon and is more efficiently rejected than the fully modified tRNALys. The lack of the s2 modification also slows down the rearrangements in the ribosome-EF-Tu-GDP-Pi-Lys-tRNALys complex following GTP hydrolysis by EF-Tu. Finally, tRNA-mRNA translocation is slower with the s2-deficient tRNALys. These observations explain the observed ribosome pausing at AAA codons during translation and demonstrate how the s2 modification helps to ensure the optimal translation rates that maintain proteome homeostasis of the cell.

Kinetics of Spontaneous and EF-G-Accelerated Rotation of Ribosomal Subunits

Ribosome dynamics play an important role in translation. The rotation of the ribosomal subunits relative to one another is essential for tRNA-mRNA translocation. An important unresolved question is whether subunit rotation limits the rate of translocation. Here,we monitor subunit rotation relative to peptide bond formation and translocation using ensemble kineticsand single-molecule FRET. We observe that spontaneous forward subunit rotation occurs at a rate of 40s(-1), independent of the rate of preceding peptidebond formation. Elongation factor G (EF-G) accelerates forward subunit rotation to 200 s(-1). tRNA-mRNA movement is much slower (10-40 s(-1)), suggesting that forward subunit rotation does not limit the rate of translocation. The transition back to the non-rotated state of the ribosome kinetically coincides with tRNA-mRNA movement. Thus, large-scale movements of the ribosome are intrinsically rapid and gated by its ligands such as EF-G and tRNA.

A conserved histidine in switch-II of EF-G moderates release of inorganic phosphate.

Elongation factor G (EF-G), a translational GTPase responsible for tRNA-mRNA translocation possesses a conserved histidine (H91 in Escherichia coli) at the apex of switch-II, which has been implicated in GTPase activation and GTP hydrolysis. While H91A, H91R and H91E mutants showed different degrees of defect in ribosome associated GTP hydrolysis, H91Q behaved like the WT. However, all these mutants, including H91Q, are much more defective in inorganic phosphate (Pi) release, thereby suggesting that H91 facilitates Pi release. In crystal structures of the ribosome bound EF-G•GTP a tight coupling between H91 and the γ-phosphate of GTP can be seen. Following GTP hydrolysis, H91 flips ~140° in the opposite direction, probably with Pi still coupled to it. This, we suggest, promotes Pi to detach from GDP and reach the inter-domain space of EF-G, which constitutes an exit path for the Pi. Molecular dynamics simulations are consistent with this hypothesis and demonstrate a vital role of an Mg2+ ion in the process.

Dynamics of tRNA translocation, mRNA translocation and tRNA dissociation during ribosome translation through mRNA secondary structures.

The ribosome can translate through the duplex region or secondary structure of mRNA. Recent single-molecule experimental data showed that downstream mRNA secondary structures have more sensitive effects on deacylated tRNA dissociation from the E site than on tRNA translocation in the 50S subunit. However, it is unclear how the downstream mRNA secondary structure can affect the tRNA dissociation from the E site, which is distant from the secondary structure. Here, based on our proposed ribosomal translocation model, we theoretically study the dynamics of tRNA translocation in the 50S subunit, mRNA translocation and tRNA dissociation, giving quantitative explanations of the single-molecule experimental data. It is shown that the effect of the downstream mRNA secondary structure on tRNA dissociation is via the effect on mRNA translocation, while the mRNA secondary structure has no effect on the rate of deacylated tRNA dissociation from the posttranslocation state. The slow mRNA translocation, which results in slow tRNA dissociation, derives from the occurrence of the futile transition, which is induced by the energy barrier from base pair unwinding to resist the forward translocation. The reduced translation rate through the mRNA secondary structure is induced by the slow mRNA translocation rather than the slow tRNA dissociation.

Translocation dynamics of tRNA–mRNA in the ribosome

Translocation of tRNA–mRNA complex in the ribosome is an essential step in the elongation cycle of protein synthesis. However, some important issues concerning the molecular mechanism of the tRNA–mRNA translocation catalyzed by EF-G.GTP or by EF-G.GDPNP remain controversial. For example, can EF-G.GTP selectively bind to the hybrid pretranslocation state or bind to both the non-rotated pretranslocation and the hybrid pretranslocation states? Does the greater potency of EF-G in the presence of GTP rather than GDPNP in facilitating translocation derive from the effects on transition from the classical non-rotated to hybrid state (the first step of the translocation) or on transition from the hybrid to posttranslocation state (the second step)? Here, based on our proposed model, we study theoretically the dynamics of the tRNA–mRNA translocation through the ribosome catalyzed by EF-G.GTP and by EF-G.GDPNP. By comparing our theoretical results with the available experimental data, we show that EF-G.GTP can also bind to the classical non-rotated pretranslocation state and the greater potency of GTP hydrolysis in facilitating translocation of tRNA–mRNA complex derives from its effects on the second step of the translocation process.

Intramolecular Movements in EF-G, Trapped at Different Stages in Its GTP Hydrolytic Cycle, Probed by FRET

Elongation factor G (EF-G) is one of several GTP hydrolytic proteins (GTPases) that cycles repeatedly on and off the ribosome during protein synthesis in bacterial cells. In the functional cycle of EF-G, hydrolysis of guanosine 5′-triphosphate (GTP) is coupled to tRNA–mRNA translocation in ribosomes. GTP hydrolysis induces conformational rearrangements in two switch elements in the G domain of EF-G and other GTPases. These switch elements are thought to initiate the cascade of events that lead to translocation and EF-G cycling between ribosomes. To further define the coupling mechanism, we developed a new fluorescent approach that can detect intramolecular movements in EF-G. We attached a fluorescent probe to the switch I element (sw1) of Escherichia coli EF-G. We monitored the position of the sw1 probe, relative to another fluorescent probe anchored to the GTP substrate or product, by measuring the distance-dependent, Förster resonance energy transfer between the two probes. By analyzing EF-G trapped at five different functional states in its cycle, we could infer the cyclical movements of sw1 within EF-G. Our results provide evidence for conformational changes in sw1, which help to drive the unidirectional EF-G cycle during protein synthesis. More generally, our approach might also serve to define the conformational dynamics of other GTPases with their cellular receptors.

Conformational changes in switch I of EF-G drive its directional cycling on and off the ribosome

We have trapped elongation factor G (EF-G) from Escherichia coli in six, functionally defined states, representing intermediates in its unidirectional catalytic cycle, which couples GTP hydrolysis to tRNA-mRNA translocation in the ribosome. By probing EF-G with trypsin in each state, we identified a substantial conformational change involving its conserved switch I (sw1) element, which contacts the GTP substrate. By attaching FeBABE (a hydroxyl radical generating probe) to sw1, we could monitor sw1 movement (by approximately 20 A), relative to the 70S ribosome, during the EF-G cycle. In free EF-G, sw1 is disordered, particularly in GDP-bound and nucleotide-free states. On EF-G*GTP binding to the ribosome, sw1 becomes structured and tucked inside the ribosome, thereby locking GTP onto EF-G. After hydrolysis and translocation, sw1 flips out from the ribosome, greatly accelerating release of GDP and EF-G from the ribosome. Collectively, our results support a central role of sw1 in driving the EF-G cycle during protein synthesis.

A thermal ratchet model of tRNA–mRNA translocation by the ribosome

The translocation of tRNA coupled with mRNA in the ribosome is one of important steps during protein synthesis. Despite extensive experimental studies, the detailed mechanism of the translocation remains undetermined. Here, based on previous biochemical, cryo-electron microscopic and X-ray crystallographic studies, a thermal ratchet model is presented for this translocation. In the model, during one elongation cycle of the protein synthesis, two large conformational transitions of the ribosome are involved, with one being the relative rotation between the two ribosomal subunits following the peptide transfer, which is facilitated by the EF-G.GTP binding, and the other one being the reverse relative rotation between the two ribosomal subunits upon EF-G.GTP hydrolysis. The former conformational change plays an important role in ensuring the completion of the release of the deacylated tRNA from the ribosome before tRNA–mRNA translocation. The latter reverse conformational change upon GTP hydrolysis is followed by rapid tRNA–mRNA translocation and Pi release, both of which take place independently of each other. This is consistent with the previous biochemical experimental data. Also, the model is consistent with other available experimental results such as the suppression of EF-G-dependent translocation in cross-linked ribosomes and frameshifting under some conditions.

Structural dynamics of the ribosome

Protein synthesis is inherently a dynamic process, requiring both small-scale and large-scale movements of tRNA and mRNA. It has long been suspected that these movements might be coupled to conformational changes in the ribosome, and in its RNA moieties in particular. Recently, the nature of ribosome structural dynamics has begun to emerge from a combination of approaches, most notably cryo-EM, X-ray crystallography, and FRET. Ribosome movement occurs both on a grand scale, as in the intersubunit rotational movements that are coupled to tRNA-mRNA translocation, and in intricate localized rearrangements such as those that accompany codon-anticodon recognition and peptide bond formation. In spite of much progress, our understanding of the mechanics of translation is now beset with countless new questions, reflecting the vast molecular architecture of the ribosome itself.

Colicin E3 cleavage of 16S rRNA impairs decoding and accelerates tRNA translocation on Escherichia coli ribosomes

The cytotoxin colicin E3 targets the 30S subunit of bacterial ribosomes and specifically cleaves 16S rRNA at the decoding centre, thereby inhibiting translation. Although the cleavage site is well known, it is not clear which step of translation is inhibited. We studied the effects of colicin E3 cleavage on ribosome functions by analysing individual steps of protein synthesis. We find that the cleavage affects predominantly the elongation step. The inhibitory effect of colicin E3 cleavage originates from the accumulation of sequential impaired decoding events, each of which results in low occupancy of the A site and, consequently, decreasing yield of elongating peptide. The accumulation leads to an almost complete halt of translation after reading of a few codons. The cleavage of 16S rRNA does not impair monitoring of codon–anticodon complexes or GTPase activation during elongation-factor Tu-dependent binding of aminoacyl-tRNA, but decreases the stability of the codon–recognition complex and slows down aminoacyl-tRNA accommodation in the A site. The tRNA–mRNA translocation is faster on colicin E3-cleaved than on intact ribosomes and is less sensitive to inhibition by the antibiotic viomycin.

Conformational Changes of the Small Ribosomal Subunit During Elongation Factor G-dependent tRNA–mRNA Translocation

Translocation, a coordinated movement of two tRNAs together with mRNA on the ribosome, is catalyzed by elongation factor G (EF-G). The reaction is accompanied by conformational rearrangements of the ribosome that are, as yet, not well characterized. Here, we analyze those rearrangements by restricting the conformational flexibility of the ribosome by antibiotics binding to specific sites of the ribosome. Paromomycin (Par), viomycin (Vio), spectinomycin (Spc), and hygromycin B (HygB) inhibited the tRNA-mRNA movement, while the other partial reactions of translocation, including the unlocking rearrangement of the ribosome that precedes tRNA-mRNA movement, were not affected. The functional cycle of EF-G, i.e. binding of EF-G.GTP to the ribosome, GTP hydrolysis, Pi release, and dissociation of EF-G.GDP from the ribosome, was not affected either, indicating that EF-G turnover is not coupled directly to tRNA-mRNA movement. The inhibition of translocation by Par and Vio is attributed to the stabilization of tRNA binding in the A site, whereas Spc and HygB had a direct inhibitory effect on tRNA-mRNA movement. Streptomycin (Str) had essentially no effect on translocation, although it caused a large increase in tRNA affinity to the A site. These results suggest that conformational changes in the vicinity of the decoding region at the binding sites of Spc and HygB are important for tRNA-mRNA movement, whereas Str seems to stabilize a conformation of the ribosome that is prone to rapid translocation, thereby compensating the effect on tRNA affinity.

An Elongation Factor G-Induced Ribosome Rearrangement Precedes tRNA-mRNA Translocation

The elongation cycle of protein synthesis is completed by translocation, a rearrangement during which two tRNAs bound to the mRNA move on the ribosome. The reaction is promoted by elongation factor G (EF-G) and accelerated by GTP hydrolysis. Here we report a pre-steady-state kinetic analysis of translocation. The kinetic model suggests that GTP hydrolysis drives a conformational rearrangement of the ribosome that precedes and limits the rates of tRNA-mRNA translocation and Pi release from EF-G·GDP·Pi. The latter two steps are intrinsically rapid and take place at random. These results indicate that the energy of GTP hydrolysis is utilized to promote the ribosome rearrangement and to bias spontaneous fluctuations within the ribosome-EF-G complex toward unidirectional movement of mRNA and tRNA.

Coupling of GTP hydrolysis by elongation factor G to translocation and factor recycling on the ribosome.

The translocation step of elongation entails the coordinated movement of tRNA and mRNA on the ribosome. Translocation is promoted by elongation factor G (EF-G) and accompanied by GTP hydrolysis, which affects both translocation and turnover of EF-G. Both reactions are much slower (50-100-fold) when GTP is replaced with non-hydrolyzable GTP analogues or GDP, indicating that the reaction rates are determined by conformational transitions induced by GTP hydrolysis. Compared to the rate of uncatalyzed, spontaneous translocation, ribosome binding of EF-G with any guanine nucleotide reduces the free energy of activation by about 18 kJ/mol, whereas GTP hydrolysis contributes another 10 kJ/mol. The acceleration by GTP hydrolysis is due to large decrease in activation enthalpy by about 30 kJ/mol, compared to the reaction with GTP analogues or GDP, whereas the activation entropy becomes unfavorable and is lowered by about 20 kJ/mol (37 degrees C). The data suggest that GTP hydrolysis induces, by a conformational change of EF-G, a rapid conformational rearrangement of the ribosome ("unlocking") which determines the rates of both tRNA-mRNA translocation and recycling of the factor.