FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3039606902> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3039606902 abstract "Article30 June 2020free access Transparent process Structural insights into mammalian mitochondrial translation elongation catalyzed by mtEFG1 Eva Kummer Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Biology and Biophysics, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland Search for more papers by this author Nenad Ban Corresponding Author [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-9527-210X Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Biology and Biophysics, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland Search for more papers by this author Eva Kummer Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Biology and Biophysics, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland Search for more papers by this author Nenad Ban Corresponding Author [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-9527-210X Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Biology and Biophysics, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland Search for more papers by this author Author Information Eva Kummer1 and Nenad Ban *,1 1Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Biology and Biophysics, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland *Corresponding author. Tel: +41 44 633 2785; E-mail: [email protected] EMBO J (2020)39:e104820https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.2020104820 PDFDownload PDF of article text and main figures. Peer ReviewDownload a summary of the editorial decision process including editorial decision letters, reviewer comments and author responses to feedback. ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyWechatReddit Figures & Info Abstract Mitochondria are eukaryotic organelles of bacterial origin where respiration takes place to produce cellular chemical energy. These reactions are catalyzed by the respiratory chain complexes located in the inner mitochondrial membrane. Notably, key components of the respiratory chain complexes are encoded on the mitochondrial chromosome and their expression relies on a dedicated mitochondrial translation machinery. Defects in the mitochondrial gene expression machinery lead to a variety of diseases in humans mostly affecting tissues with high energy demand such as the nervous system, the heart, or the muscles. The mitochondrial translation system has substantially diverged from its bacterial ancestor, including alterations in the mitoribosomal architecture, multiple changes to the set of translation factors and striking reductions in otherwise conserved tRNA elements. Although a number of structures of mitochondrial ribosomes from different species have been determined, our mechanistic understanding of the mitochondrial translation cycle remains largely unexplored. Here, we present two cryo-EM reconstructions of human mitochondrial elongation factor G1 bound to the mammalian mitochondrial ribosome at two different steps of the tRNA translocation reaction during translation elongation. Our structures explain the mechanism of tRNA and mRNA translocation on the mitoribosome, the regulation of mtEFG1 activity by the ribosomal GTPase-associated center, and the basis of decreased susceptibility of mtEFG1 to the commonly used antibiotic fusidic acid. Synopsis Mitochondrial translation relies on both conserved and mitochondria-specific features. Cryo-EM structures provide insights into tRNA translocation during the elongation stage of mitochondrial translation, which is catalyzed by mtEFG1 on the mitoribosome. tRNA-mRNA translocation is based on conserved large-scale motions of the small ribosomal subunit head, and interaction of mtEFG1 with the tRNA-mRNA module. Closure of the ribosomal GTPase-associated center facilitates translocation of tRNAs by elongation factor G. Increased stability of mtEFG1 switch-1 rationalizes decreased susceptibility of mitochondrial translation to the antibiotic fusidic acid. Mitochondria-specific L1 stalk element compensates for loss of flexible L1 stalk rRNA base. Introduction During protein synthesis, the ribosome moves along a messenger RNA (mRNA) that is successively decoded through interactions of mRNA codons with the anticodons of cognate tRNAs on the small ribosomal subunit (SSU). The ribosome harbors three binding sites for tRNAs: the aminoacyl (A) site, the peptidyl (P) site, and the exit (E) site. With the addition of each amino acid, the nascent chain is transferred from the P site-bound tRNA onto the A site tRNA. In a subsequent step, tRNA and mRNA are translocated by exactly one codon on the ribosome leading to a repositioning of the now deacylated P site tRNA to the E site and of the peptidyl-tRNA from the A site to the P site. The deacylated tRNA is then released from the E site of the ribosome, and the ribosomal A site is ready to accept the next aminoacylated tRNA for peptide bond formation (Rodnina, 2018). The translocation process is an important step during protein synthesis since the fidelity of simultaneous mRNA-tRNA movement has to be very high in order to avoid frameshifting. Indeed, spontaneous frameshifting occurs in < 1 out of 100,000 translated codons demonstrating the high accuracy of the translocation reaction (Kurland, 1992). Translocation requires large-scale movements of the small ribosomal subunit including rotation of the SSU with respect to the large ribosomal subunit (LSU) and a swiveling motion of the SSU head (Ratje et al, 2010; Guo & Noller, 2012; Chen et al, 2013; Ramrath et al, 2013; Tourigny et al, 2013; Zhou et al, 2013; Holtkamp et al, 2014; Belardinelli et al, 2016; Wasserman et al, 2016). mRNA-tRNA movement occurs in multiple coordinated and evolutionary conserved steps that have been studied in detail in bacteria (for review see Rodnina et al, 2019). In the non-rotated ribosome, A and P site tRNAs occupy a “classical” state being bound to the same tRNA site on both SSU and LSU (the tRNA states are therefore denoted A/A and P/P). Subunit rotation triggers movement of the A and P site tRNA to the P and E sites on the LSU while remaining bound to the A and P sites on the SSU (A/ap and P/pe). These tRNA states are referred to as “hybrid” states. Binding of translation elongation factor G stabilizes the rotated ribosome and the hybrid tRNAs to induce the next step of translocation. In this step, movements of head and body of the SSU are uncoupled with the body progressively returning into a non-rotated conformation while the head starts the move, or “swivel”, around its own axis. The anticodon stem loops of the tRNAs stay associated with the A and P sites on the SSU head and follow its swiveling motion, which leads to their repositioning into the P and E sites on the SSU body. This tRNA state on the SSU is called “chimeric” (ap/ap and pe/pe). Eventually, the mRNA-tRNA complex is “unlocked”, i.e., mRNA-tRNA movement and motions of the SSU head are uncoupled. The acceptor ends of the tRNAs engage with their final positions in the P and E sites on the LSU, respectively, while the SSU head starts to move backwards. The anticodon stem loops (ASLs) of the tRNAs finally slip into their respective P and E site locations on the SSU head and body adopting again a classical conformation at the end of the translocation reaction (P/P, E/E). Translocation is catalyzed by elongation factor G (EFG) in bacteria and mtEFG1 in mitochondria, which guide ribosomal motions and tRNA movement (Eberly et al, 1985; Chung & Spremulli, 1990; Savelsbergh et al, 2003; Bhargava et al, 2004; Tsuboi et al, 2009; Holtkamp et al, 2014; Adio et al, 2015). Translocation is possible but very slow in the absence of the elongation factor (Shoji et al, 2006; Konevega et al, 2007; Bock et al, 2013). EFG accelerates the reaction by more than five orders of magnitude (Rodnina et al, 1997; Munro et al, 2010). As a translational GTPase, it uses the energy derived from GTP hydrolysis to facilitate the rearrangements of the pre-translocation ribosome and tRNA movement (Rodnina et al, 1997, 2019; Savelsbergh et al, 2003; Holtkamp et al, 2014; Adio et al, 2015; Belardinelli et al, 2016; Chen et al, 2016; Sharma et al, 2016) by (i) stabilizing the rotated state of the ribosomal subunits, (iii) uncoupling the motions of the SSU head and body from mRNA-tRNA movement during “unlocking”, and (iii) likely preventing back slippage of the tRNA during backrotation and backswiveling of the SSU body and head, respectively. EFG function has been extensively studied in bacteria. However, in the mitochondrial system translation elongation is poorly investigated so far and no structural information is available for mtEFG1 action during mRNA-tRNA translocation on mitochondrial ribosomes. Strikingly, mitochondria have evolved two paralogues of EFG, mtEFG1 and mtEFG2, which catalyze different steps of the translation cycle (Hammarsund et al, 2001; Tsuboi et al, 2009). Mitochondrial EFG1 (mtEFG1) acts during translation elongation while mitochondrial EFG2 (mtEFG2) partakes in ribosome recycling (Chung & Spremulli, 1990; Bhargava et al, 2004; Tsuboi et al, 2009). This strict task sharing is in stark contrast to canonical bacterial EFG that plays a role not only in the elongation phase but is also crucially involved in ribosome recycling. The molecular basis for the separation of the dual function of canonical bacterial EFG over two separate proteins in mitochondria is not understood. In recent years, it has become known that also some bacterial species carry two paralogues of EFG (Hammarsund et al, 2001; Pandit & Srinivasan, 2003; Atkinson & Baldauf, 2011). However, while both paralogues show a similar task distribution as mitochondrial mtEFG1 and mtEFG2 in the spirochaete Borrelia burgdorferi, the role of EFG2 in other bacterial species is still unclear (Connell et al, 2007; Seshadri et al, 2009; Suematsu et al, 2010). Here, we employed a previously developed in vitro reconstitution system to investigate how mitochondrial mtEFG1 interacts with the mammalian mitoribosome to clarify how mtEFG1 catalyzes tRNA translocation during elongation and how mtEFG1 and mtEFG2 have structurally specialized for their distinct functions. Results and Discussion Mitochondrial elongation complexes trapped in two states of translocation We in vitro assembled mitochondrial elongation complexes from isolated, native mammalian S. scrofa mitoribosomal subunits, recombinantly generated human mtEFG1 and fMet-mtRNAMet in the presence of a short hexanucleotide (CUGAUG) and the non-hydrolyzable nucleotide analog GMPPNP (please see the Materials and Methods section for details). We find mtEFG1 bound to the factor binding site nestling between the small and large ribosomal subunits. The factor binds the ribosome in an extended fashion and contacts the codon–anticodon paired mRNA-tRNA module in the P site of the ribosome (Fig 1A). Maximum likelihood-based classification approaches yielded two distinct elongation complexes (Figs 1A and EV1 and EV2A and B). Complex 1 (hereafter referred to as POST) at 3.0 Å resembles a post-translocation state carrying a P site tRNA in the classical P/P conformation (Figs 1A and B, and EV2B and EV3A). Complex 2 (hereafter referred to as TiPOST) at 4.2 Å contains two tRNAs that are still in transit into the P and E sites on the SSU showing that our in vitro system is in principle translocation competent (Figs 1A and B, and EV2A). In TiPOST, the acceptor ends of both tRNAs already engage with their final positions in the P and E sites on the LSU, respectively, whereas the anticodon stem loops on the SSU are bound in chimeric ap or pe positions, respectively, due to a rotation of the SSU head of about 17° (Fig 1C). Therefore, TiPOST adopts a conformation (ap/P, pe/E) prior to unlocking and shows a similar overall structure as previously reported for translocation intermediates in the bacterial system (Ramrath et al, 2013; Tourigny et al, 2013; Zhou et al, 2014). In TiPOST, the aminoacylated ap/P fMet-tRNAMet contacts the canonical P site element A430 (A790 in T. thermophilus) of the SSU body, whereas the P site element of the SSU head, the G782/A783 (G1338/A1339 in T. thermophilus) ridge, is still engaged with the deacylated pe/E tRNAMet (Fig 2A) (Selmer et al, 2006; Jenner et al, 2010). Mutations in G1338/A1339 result in a significant decrease in translational activity in bacteria (Abdi & Fredrick, 2005). Our data show that these rRNA residues have maintained their critical role in mitochondria in guiding the deacylated tRNA into the chimeric pe position on the SSU. Both tRNAs maintain base pairing interactions with their mRNA codons in TiPOST, although the pe/E site tRNA interacts due to a mismatch of the CUG mRNA codon more weakly (Fig 2B). During transition of TiPOST to POST, it appears that upon backswiveling of the SSU head a generally conserved β-hairpin of uS7m will dislodge the deacylated E site tRNA from the mRNA (Fig 2B). The tRNA then engages into the classical E/E position and is eventually ejected from the ribosome. Figure 1. The mitochondrial elongation complex trapped in two states Structures of mtEFG1 (red), aminoacylated fMet-tRNAMet (pink), and deacylated tRNAMet (green) with the 55S mitoribsome in TiPOST and POST states. Separate views for SSU and LSU as seen from the subunit interface are shown for clarity. The tRNA orientations of TiPOST and POST are depicted in comparison with published classical tRNA positions (gray) after superposition of the LSU (Selmer et al, 2006). The aminoacylated fMet-tRNAMet is colored in pink and the deacylated tRNAMet in green. The degree of head rotation comparing the TiPOST and POST complex is shown with the respective rotation axis and angle calculated in PyMOL using the draw_rotation_axis.py script (P.G. Calvo). The resulting displacement in Å is color-coded. Download figure Download PowerPoint Click here to expand this figure. Figure EV1. Particle classification schemeDuring classification, particles were discarded that were either of poor quality or could not be unambiguously interpreted. In each classification step, particles that were retained for further analysis are depicted in violet. The mask used for local 3D classification is shown in yellow superimposed onto the reference. Download figure Download PowerPoint Click here to expand this figure. Figure EV2. Experimental EM densities of the TiPOST and POST states Left: The postprocessed EM density of the TiPOST state is shown color-coded according to the underlying structural model (red: mtEFG1, yellow: SSU, blue: LSU). Right: A Gaussian filter (σ = 1.39 Å) has been applied to the EM densities in ChimeraX to visualize also regions of lower resolution. (Goddard et al, 2018) EM densities are shown from two different viewing angles. The POST state is shown in the same manner as the TiPOST state in (A). Download figure Download PowerPoint Click here to expand this figure. Figure EV3. Interaction of mtEFG1 with the tRNA-mRNA module Codon–anticodon interaction of the tRNA-mRNA module in the POST state. mtEFG1 loop 1 that nestles into the minor groove of the module is shown in light green. Superposition of EFG (gray blue), tRNA (yellow), and mRNA (light blue) from the bacterial post-translocation state (PDB: 4V5F) (Gao et al, 2009) with the mitochondrial POST state (mtEFG1 color-coded according to Fig 2D, fMet-tRNAMet in pink and mRNA in deep blue). The overall conformation of the bacterial elongation factor and mtEFG1 is very similar as is the interaction of the translation factors with the tRNA-mRNA module. Important ribosomal regions surrounding the elongation factor and the tRNA-mRNA module are indicated (SRL: sarcin–ricin loop, PTC: peptidyl-transferase center on the large mitoribosomal subunit; A,P,E: A, P, E sites on the small mitoribosomal subunit). Interactions of different elongation factors with the tRNA-mRNA module. Upper panel: Interaction of mtEFG1 domain IV loops 1 and 2 with the mRNA-tRNA module in the P site of the POST state. Residues conserved in bacteria and important to establish the contact are highlighted. Middle panel: Bacterial EFG in the post-translocation state is shown for comparison (pdb: 4V5F) (Gao et al, 2009). Lower panel: A Phyre2 homology model of mtEFG2 (ruby) has been superimposed on mtEFG1 using the POST state of elongation in mitochondria. Neither the critical di-glycine motif nor Q542 that makes stabilizing interactions with the tRNA backbone are conserved. Download figure Download PowerPoint Figure 2. mtEFG1 and tRNA interactions in both translocation states Interactions of the tRNAs in TiPOST and POST states with ribosomal P site elements (blue) of the SSU head (G782/A783 ridge) and body (A430) rRNA. tRNA binding sites of the SSU body are indicated in circles. View from the subunit interface onto the SSU with the enlarged area being highlighted with a box. Left: In the transit TiPOST state, the SSU head is rotated with the G782/A783 ridge moving in concert with deacylated tRNAMet (green). This leads to a repositioning of aminoacylated fMet-tRNAMet and deacylated tRNAMet into a chimeric ap or pe positions, respectively. Right: In the POST state, the aminoacylated fMet-tRNAMet (pink) in the P site engages with both head and body elements. Both tRNAs remain associated with their respective mRNA codons in the TiPOST state. A superposition of the position of the uS7m beta-hairpin in the unrotated SSU head conformation is displayed in gray to indicate its clash with the deacylated tRNAMet (green) upon backswiveling of the SSU head. The arrow indicates the direction of motion of uS7m. The EM density of the TiPOST state is contoured at 4σ. Loops 1 and 2 of mtEFG1 domain IV contact the fMet-tRNAMet-mRNA module via conserved residues including a di-glycine motif (G544/G545), Q542 and H617 to prevent slippage of the tRNA and to maintain the mRNA reading frame. The EM density and the structural model are shown for the POST state but are very similar in the TiPOST state (The map is depicted at 4σ). mtEFG1, fMet-tRNAMet, and mRNA of the POST state are shown in isolation. The domain organization of mtEFG1 is indicated by different colors. A corresponding schematic representation including the amino acid numbering of domain borders is given at the bottom. Locations of the surrounding ribosomal elements are indicated. Download figure Download PowerPoint The conformation of mtEFG1 on the mitochondrial ribosome The overall conformation of mtEFG1 is similar to previous structural reports from the bacterial system (Fig EV3B) (Agrawal et al, 1998; Stark et al, 2000; Connell et al, 2007; Gao et al, 2009; Chen et al, 2013; Pulk & Cate, 2013; Ramrath et al, 2013; Tourigny et al, 2013; Zhou et al, 2013; Li et al, 2015; Lin et al, 2015; Mace et al, 2018). The factor is bound to the mitochondrial ribosome in TiPOST and POST states in an extended conformation, where the GTPase (G) domain is bound to the sarcin–ricin loop (SRL) and domain II contacts the SSU body. Domain IV interacts with the mRNA-tRNA codon–anticodon pair of the translocated P site tRNA in TiPOST as well as POST. Domain V of mtEFG1 engages closely with the GTPase-associated center (GAC) on the LSU, and domain III serves as bridging element that stabilizes the domain arrangement of mtEFG1 by simultaneously contacting the G domain and domains II and V (Figs 2D and EV3B). During translocation, A and P site tRNAs move together with their respective mRNA codons. It has been shown that bacterial EFG is crucial to maintain the mRNA-tRNA interaction during tRNA movement, as the absence or mutation of EFG leads to increased frameshifting and decreased translocation efficiency (Martemyanov et al, 1998; Savelsbergh et al, 2000a; Holtkamp et al, 2014; Peng et al, 2019; Zhou et al, 2019). An important parameter to maintain the mRNA reading frame is the interaction of mtEFG1 domain IV with the tRNA-mRNA module via two apical loops that engage with the minor groove of the codon–anticodon base pairs and with the backbone of the peptidyl-tRNA (Gao et al, 2009). This interaction is conserved in mitochondrial translocation as mtEFG1 retained a critical di-glycine motif (G544/G545) at the tip of loop1 that enables the loop to sterically fit into the minor groove of the mRNA-tRNA module (Figs 2C and EV3C). Loops 1 and 2 in addition contain conserved residues Q542 and H617 (Q500 and H573 in T. thermophilus) that contact the tRNA backbone and prevent tRNA slippage (Figs 2C and EV3C) (Gao et al, 2009; Ramrath et al, 2013; Zhou et al, 2014; Peng et al, 2019). GTPase regulation of mtEFG1 by ribosomal elements Translational GTPases engage on the ribosome with several conserved rRNA and protein elements that are important for factor binding and GTPase activation. This GTPase-associated center (GAC) comprises (i) the sarcin–ricin loop (SRL) of the mitochondrial 16S LSU rRNA, (ii) the ribosomal L7/L12 stalk composed of uL10m and 6 copies of bL7/12m in mammalian mitochondria (Kummer et al, 2018), and (iii) the stalk base (SB) that contains uL11m and 16S rRNA helices H43 and H44. In bacteria, the SB is the binding site for antibiotics of the thiopeptide family including thiostrepton that acts as a potent inhibitor of EFG-catalyzed translocation (Harms et al, 2008). Accordingly, mutations of the conserved apical adenosine nucleotides A1067 (A512 in S. scrofa mitoribosomes) and A1095 (U539 in S. scrofa mitoribosomes) of H43 and H44, respectively, confers resistance to thiostrepton in bacteria (Thompson et al, 1988; Rosendahl & Douthwaite, 1994; Cameron et al, 2004). As mitochondrial H43 harbors an uracil (U539) instead of the conserved adenosine at the tip of H43, mammalian mitoribosomes are naturally resistant to thiostrepton action (Rosendahl & Douthwaite, 1994). Thiostrepton is believed to act in bacteria not by inhibiting initial EFG engagement with the ribosome but rather by preventing the conversion of a loosely bound initial EFG complex to a stable complex that is competent to catalyze tRNA movement (Rodnina et al, 1999; Seo et al, 2006; Pan et al, 2007; Lin et al, 2015). It likely does so by inhibiting movements of the flexible SB that appear to be essential for the conversion into the tight conformation (Schuwirth et al, 2005; Harms et al, 2008). Rearrangements of the SB upon EFG binding have been observed in the bacterial as well as eukaryotic system although direction and magnitude of the described motions differ (Agrawal et al, 1998; Frank & Agrawal, 2001; Spahn et al, 2004; Seo et al, 2006; Brilot et al, 2013; Chen et al, 2013; Li et al, 2015). Eventually, tight complex formation is accompanied by the establishment of multiple conserved interactions of domain V of the elongation factor with the SB in both systems (Spahn et al, 2004; Connell et al, 2007; Gao et al, 2009; Zhou et al, 2013; Lin et al, 2015). In mitochondria, domain V of mtEFG1 closely associates with the GTPase-associated center of the mitoribosome in a manner similar to bacterial EFG (Fig 3). Intriguingly, mtEFG1 binding to the GAC triggers a concerted and directed downward motion of the SB including 16S rRNA H43, H44 as well as uL11m by on average 5 Å (Fig 3B and C). This movement is restricted to the SB as surrounding ribosomal elements are unaffected by factor binding (Fig 3C). SB motion results in a closure of the GAC on domain V of mtEFG1 establishing a large network of interactions that can be roughly clustered into 5 areas tightly connecting the SRL, uL11m-NTD, 16S rRNA helices H43, H44, and H89, and mtEFG1 domain V (Fig 3D and E). Considering that bacterial EFG becomes translocation competent upon conversion from a weakly to a tightly bound state, it is thus tempting to speculate that the observed closure of the mitoribosomal stalk base onto domain V of mtEFG1 may facilitate the progression to the tightly bound conformation. The rearrangement of the GAC appears to be factor-specific as we fail to detect similar motions either in the mitochondrial translation initiation complex containing mitochondrial initiation factor 2 (mtIF2) or in the mitochondrial ribosome in the absence of a translational GTPase (Figs 3B and EV4A) (Greber et al, 2015; Kummer et al, 2018). Sandwiching of mtEFG1 domain V between the SB and SRL could serve to stabilize the orientation of the G domain and its catalytic motifs at the SRL in order to promote efficient GTP hydrolysis and to delay subsequent release of inorganic phosphate (Fig 3D and E). These observations may be generally applicable to explain why EFG differs in its mode of action from other translational GTPases. Translational GTPases are usually active in the GTP-bound form and use the energy of GTP hydrolysis to leave the ribosome. However, EFG exerts translocation activity in the post-hydrolysis GDP-Pi state as GTP hydrolysis is much faster than tRNA repositioning (Rodnina et al, 1997; Savelsbergh et al, 2000b, 2003; Seo et al, 2006; Belardinelli et al, 2016). Closure of the GAC around mtEFG1 domain V and a subsequent stabilization of the G domain on the SRL could be an EFG-specific means to prolong the lifetime of the active GDP-Pi state and to prevent premature dissociation of the factor. Figure 3. mtEFG1 binding induces a concerted motion in the stalk base of the ribosomal GTPase-associated center The interaction of mtEFG1 in the POST state with the GTPase-associated center (GAC) via domain V and with a bL12m-CTD monomer (gray) via the G domain are shown (view from the subunit interface onto the LSU). The respective area is highlighted on the inset as red box. mtEFG1 domains are indicated according to the color code introduced in Fig 2D. The corresponding EM density is depicted low-pass filtered to 5 Å and at σ = 2.5. The positions of the uL11m N-terminal domain (NTD) and 16S rRNA helices H43 and H44 that form the stalk base of the GAC experience a downward motion upon binding of mtEFG1 (violet) but not upon binding of mtIF2 (orange, pdb: 6GAW; Kummer et al, 2018) or in the factor-free ribosome (gray, pdb: 5AJ4 Greber et al, 2015). Complexes have been superimposed using the 16S rRNA of the LSU. The arrows display the direction of motion. The magnitude of the downward motion of the stalk base comparing the mtIF2-bound and mtEFG1-bound mitoribosome has been calculated in Å, and the stalk base components have been colored accordingly. Elements rebuilt in the current model were excluded from the calculation and are shown in gray. An enlarged view of the area in the black box of Fig 3A is shown. mtEFG1 domain V extensively interacts with multiple elements of the GAC at 5 sites that have been color-coded. The orange, pink, and blue clusters interact with 16S rRNA helices H89, H43 and H44, respectively. The red cluster stacks onto the tip of the sarcin–ricin loop (SRL), and the green cluster contacts the uL11m N-terminal domain (NTD). Close-ups of the five interaction sites of mtEFG1 domain V with the SRL (red), uL11m-NTD (green), 16S rRNA helices H43 (magenta), H44 (blue), and H89 (orange). The respective EM densities of the POST state are shown at σ = 4. Download figure Download PowerPoint Click here to expand this figure. Figure EV4. Overview of the GAC in the mitochondrial elongation and initiation complexes 16S rRNA of the LSU in the initiation and elongation complexes has been superimposed to enable a direct comparison of both complexes using the exactly same view. The different interaction sites of the bL12m-CTD on mtEFG1 (color-coded according to Fig 2D) and mtIF2 (orange) are visible. Moreover, it becomes apparent that mtEFG1 engages in a close interaction with H43 of 16S rRNA as well as uL11m, leading to a downward motion of these elements onto the factor. In contrast, mtIF2 does not contact these elements in the initiation complex. A Phyre2 model of the bL12m-CTD has been rigid-body fitted into the EM density of the POST state. The interaction site of the bL12m-CTD (gray) with the G′ insertion of the G domain of mtEFG1 is shown (light orange). For comparison, the interfaces of bL12m-CTD (S. scrofa, gray) and bL12-CTD (E. coli, yellow, pdb: 1CTF Leijonmarck & Liljas, 1987) that contact the mitochondrial or bacterial elongation factor, respectively, are shown. Key residues for interaction with the G domain of translational GTPases are conserved. Download figure Download PowerPoint In addition to SB rearrangement, we find a monomer of the bL12m-CTD associated with the G′ subdomain of the mtEFG1 G domain (Figs 3A and EV4A and B). The C-terminal domains (CTDs) of bL12m are mobile elements of the ribosomal L7/L12 stalk, and their function is not fully understood. The bacterial bL12-CTD has been assigned multiple roles in promotion of factor binding, GTPase activation, as well as Pi release (Savelsbergh et al, 2000b, 2005; Mohr et al, 2002; Diaconu et al, 2005). Interactions of the mitochondrial bL12m-CTD have already been observed with the G domain of mtIF2 during translation initiation (Kummer et al, 2018). Binding occurs in both cases via a highly conserved surface on the bL12m-CTD but different sites are used on the G domains of mtEFG1 and mtIF2, as the G′ insertion is not present in mtIF2 (Fig EV4A) (Helgstrand et al, 2007; Gao et al, 2009). It has been reported that E. coli EFG is unable to support translocation on mitochondrial ribosomes and this inability was attributed to an incompatibility of the mitochondrial bL12m-CTD with bacterial EFG (Denslow & O'Brien, 1979; Eberly et al, 1985; Terasaki et al, 2004). However, we do not find bL12m-CTD to engage with mtEFG1 in a different manner as compared to the bacterial system (Gao et al, 2009; Tourigny et al, 2013; Zhou et al, 2013). As the interaction surface of the bL12m-CTD is in addition highly conserved, it remains to be clarified whether and how the bL12m-CTD" @default.
• W3039606902 created "2020-07-10" @default.
• W3039606902 creator A5042899064 @default.
• W3039606902 creator A5068740731 @default.
• W3039606902 date "2020-06-30" @default.
• W3039606902 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W3039606902 title "Structural insights into mammalian mitochondrial translation elongation catalyzed by mt <scp>EFG</scp> 1" @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1490031381 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1568616381 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1582074486 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1635714443 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1803102843 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1964333133 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1968991430 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1971018806 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1974681176 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1977776515 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1979492402 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1984043400 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1984294833 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1985441949 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1985718471 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1985793507 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1986576285 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1987438269 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1987460726 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1989562763 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1989685910 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1992554281 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1992657741 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1996882817 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1996993889 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W1998688100 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2006117365 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2009185547 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2016654377 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2018988920 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2019680204 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2022754910 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2022895983 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2024443737 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2028293439 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2028438332 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2029376088 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2034304629 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2034984854 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2044710235 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2048646541 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2056145682 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2056781801 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2058371301 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2062841623 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2069885328 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2070193499 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2073149987 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2073504319 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2078726019 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2080720176 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2082475735 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2083098371 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2083157472 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2086899951 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2087217881 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2088307810 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2097379047 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2099804723 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2104234755 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2104604761 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2105162317 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2109249085 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2122866176 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2124026197 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2126996947 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2127285213 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2129986515 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2131293378 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2132629607 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2137081760 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2137206793 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2148941629 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2149191396 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2152348402 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2156483862 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2158230673 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2162061938 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2170491996 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2178409878 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2231655718 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2294416498 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2303315418 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2425004119 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2514758480 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2586267308 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2593511418 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2734356283 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2786390877 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2803047458 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2886477036 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2899714098 @default.
• W3039606902 cites W2932998258 @default.

• next