Cooperative modulation by eIF4G of eIF4E-binding to the mRNA 5′ cap in yeast involves a site partially shared by p20

Interaction between the mRNA 5′‐cap‐binding protein eIF4E and the multiadaptor protein eIF4G has been demonstrated in all eukaryotic translation assemblies examined so far. This study uses immunological, genetic and biochemical methods to map the surface amino acids on eIF4E that contribute to eIF4G...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The EMBO journal 1998-08, Vol.17 (16), p.4798-4808
Main Authors: Ptushkina, Marina, von der Haar, Tobias, Vasilescu, Simona, Frank, Ronald, Birkenhäger, Ralf, McCarthy, John E.G.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Amino Acid Sequence
Antibodies, Monoclonal
Binding Sites
cooperativity
eIF4E and eIF4G
Eukaryotic Initiation Factor-4E
Eukaryotic Initiation Factor-4G
interaction sites
Models, Molecular
Molecular Sequence Data
Nuclear Cap-Binding Protein Complex
Peptide Initiation Factors - chemistry
Peptide Initiation Factors - metabolism
Peptide Mapping
Phosphoproteins - metabolism
Protein Binding
Protein Biosynthesis
regulation by 4E-binding proteins
RNA Caps
RNA, Fungal - metabolism
RNA, Messenger - metabolism
Saccharomyces cerevisiae - genetics
Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins
yeast gene expression
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Interaction between the mRNA 5′‐cap‐binding protein eIF4E and the multiadaptor protein eIF4G has been demonstrated in all eukaryotic translation assemblies examined so far. This study uses immunological, genetic and biochemical methods to map the surface amino acids on eIF4E that contribute to eIF4G binding. Cap‐analogue chromatography and surface plasmon resonance (SPR) analyses demonstrate that one class of mutations in these surface regions disrupts eIF4E–eIF4G association, and thereby polysome formation and growth. The residues at these positions in wild‐type eIF4E mediate positive cooperativity between the binding of eIF4G to eIF4E and the latter's cap‐affinity. Moreover, two of the mutations confer temperature sensitivity in eIF4G binding to eIF4E which correlates with the formation of large numbers of inactive ribosome 80S couples in vivo and the loss of cellular protein synthesis activity. The yeast 4E‐binding protein p20 is estimated by SPR to have a ten times lower binding affinity than eIF4G for eIF4E. Investigation of a second class of eIF4E mutations reveals that p20 shares only part of eIF4G's binding site on the cap‐binding protein. The results presented provide a basis for understanding how cycling of eIF4E and eIF4G occurs in yeast translation and explains how p20 can act as a fine, but not as a coarse, regulator of protein synthesis.
ISSN:0261-4189
1460-2075
1460-2075
DOI:10.1093/emboj/17.16.4798