Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2026 Apr 6;21(4):e0337155. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0337155

ALKBH1 activity in vitro and human cell lines by isotope dilution mass spectrometry

Bennett Henzeler 1,#, Olga Hofmeister 1,#, Ken Kögel 1,#, Yuyang Qi 3,#, Felix Hagelskamp 1, Matthias Heiß 1, Florian Schelter 1, Felix Xu 1, Lena J Daumann 2, Thomas Carell 1, Stefanie Kaiser 3,*, Sabine Schneider 1,*
Editor: Yu-Hsuan Tsai4
PMCID: PMC13052853  PMID: 41941523

Abstract

AlkB homolog 1 (ALKBH1) is a member of the AlkB family of Fe(II) and α-ketoglutarate (α-KG)-dependent dioxygenases, known for its enzymatic activity on various nucleic acid substrates. Its reported targets include N1-methyladenosine (m1A), N6-methyladenosine (m6A), N3-methylcytidine (m3C), and 5-methylcytosine (m5C) in RNA, as well as N6-methyladenine (N6-mA, 6mA) in DNA and the histone protein H2A. Moreover, dysregulation or dysfunction of ALKBH1 has been implicated in a broad spectrum of human diseases. In order to shed further light on the substrate scope and role of ALKBH1, we used quantitative mass spectrometry to assess its activity in vitro and in human cell lines. To study ALKBH1 activity on defined substrates in vitro, we enzymatically generated tRNAs specifically carrying the m3C32 (tRNA-ThrUGU and tRNA-SerUCN) and i6A37 (tRNA-SerUCN) modifications. Here we show that ALKBH1 reduces m3C, m1A and m5C in vitro in total extracts of tRNAs, but has no impact on rRNA modifications in human cell lines. However, upon overexpression or siRNA-mediated knock-down of ALKBH1 in human cell lines no impact on the modification of total tRNA extracts or specifically enriched RNAs could be observed. In addition, varying the glucose and fetal bovine serum (FBS) concentration in the growth medium of HEK293T cells, in combination with ALKBH1 siRNA-mediated knock-down, also shows no impact on tRNA methylation. Based on our data, we conclude that in human cells lines grown under optimal conditions ALKBH1 does not play an important role in the demethylation of tRNAs.

Introduction

RNA modifications play a crucial role in shaping the three-dimensional structure, stability, and interaction networks of RNA molecules, thereby acting as important regulators of gene transcription and translation and ultimately influencing gene expression [1]. Transfer RNAs (tRNAs) and ribosomal RNAs (rRNAs) represent two RNA species that are particularly heavily modified, which is essential for their characteristic structures and functions. In tRNAs, modifications at the wobble position are central to maintaining translation fidelity and efficiency [2,3]. Additionally, modifications within the anticodon arm further contribute to tRNA stability and structural integrity, indirectly regulating protein biosynthesis through the modulation of translation efficiency [4]. Hence, dynamic regulation of tRNA modifications exerts a profound impact on translational efficiency and, consequently, protein expression. These modifications are catalyzed by RNA-modifying enzymes, commonly referred to as “writers” and “erasers”. An important class of erasers includes members of the AlkB family of Fe(II)/α-ketoglutarate (α-KG)-dependent dioxygenases [5,6]. Among them, ALKBH1 has been reported to catalyze the removal of various modifications, including N6-methyladenosine (m6A) [7], N1-methyladenosine (m1A) [8,9], N3-methylcytidine (m3C) [10], 5-methylcytosine (m5C) [11,12], N6-methyladenine (N6-mA, 6mA) [13], as well as modifications on histone H2A [14]. The catalytic versatility of ALKBH1 has been linked to diverse human disorders and proposed to act as a driver for oncogensis [7,9,11,1416]. However, its precise enzymatic activities and biological functions remain a subject of ongoing debate. For example, the claim that ALKBH1 demethylates 6mA in DNA has been challenged [17,18]. We have previously demonstrated that ALKBH1 localizes to mitochondrial RNA granules, and that knock-down of ALKBH1 increases oxygen consumption in human cells. This phenotype is associated with altered oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) and induction of the mitochondrial unfolded protein response (UPR) [19]. In the present study we investigate the activity of ALKBH1 in vitro and in human cell lines using quantitative isotope-labelled dilution mass spectrometry (quantitative LC-MS/MS) [20,21].

Recombinant ALKBH1 was expressed and purified to assess its activity on total tRNA and rRNA isolated from human cell lines. In these assays, ALKBH1 reduced the levels of m1A, m3C and m5C in tRNAs, while no detectable effect was observed on N6-methyladenosine (m6A). In eukaryotes, m3C is present at position 32 (m3C32) in the anticodon arm of mitochondrial tRNA-ThrUGU and tRNA-SerUCN (mt-RNAs) species, where it regulates protein expression by stabilizing the tRNA structure and modulating the kinetics of protein biosynthesis. Recently, an isoform of the RNA methyltransferase METTL8 was shown to localize to mitochondria in human cells, where it catalyzes methylation at C32 in mitochondrial tRNA-SerUCN and tRNA-ThrUGU. This modification contributes to the coordinated expression of mitochondrially encoded proteins, supporting the efficient function of the respiratory chain [22,23]. Since ALKBH1 did not exhibit activity on a synthetic anticodon-arm mimic containing m3C, we established an in vitro system to generate tRNAs with defined modifications. Specifically, in vitro-transcribed tRNA was enzymatically modified by METTL8 to introduce m3C32 and by Escherichia coli MiaA to introduce N6-isopentenyladenosine (i6A) at position 37. Using this substrate, ALKBH1 was able to reduce the m3C signal by approximately 20% in vitro. However, when we analyzed endogenous mitochondrial tRNAs isolated from HEK293T cells either overexpressing ALKBH1 or subjected to siRNA-mediated ALKBH1 knock-down, no significant differences in the modification spectra were detected by quantitative LC-MS/MS. Previous studies have reported that ALKBH1 expression is influenced by glucose availability, suggesting a metabolic link to ALKBH1-mediated regulation of nucleobase modifications, particularly m1A [8]. To address this, we cultured HEK293T cells under varying glucose concentrations and serum conditions and quantified RNA modifications by LC-MS/MS. Consistently, no significant alterations in tRNA or rRNA modification profiles were detected. Collectively, these results demonstrate that defined tRNA substrates carrying site-specific modifications can be enzymatically generated, providing a valuable platform for dissecting the activity of RNA modification “eraser” enzymes. Although ALKBH1 demonstrates demethylase activity toward multiple modified nucleobases in vitro, our findings suggest that it does not significantly influence the tRNA modification profile in HEK293T cells under homeostatic growth conditions

Results

ALKBH1 demethylates total tRNA but not rRNA in vitro

To gain insight into the substrate scope of ALKBH1, we heterologously expressed and purified ALKBH1 in E. coli (S1 Fig). We next incubated ALKBH1 with total tRNA and rRNA extracted from HEK293T cells in the presence of α-KG and Fe(II). Following treatment, the RNAs were digested to single nucleoside level and changes in the nucleoside modification spectra were quantified using quantitative LC-MS/MS [24]. This showed that ALKBH1 reduces m1A, m5C and m3C levels in tRNA but does not affect rRNA modifications (Fig 1.)

Fig 1. Substrate specific demethylation activity of ALKBH1.

Fig 1

A. Schematic representation of RNA size-based separation and demethylation by ALKBH1 heterologous expressed in E. coli. Total RNA is extracted from HEK293T cells and separated by size into distinct fractions corresponding to 28S rRNA, 18S rRNA and tRNA. These RNA species are then subjected to in vitro demethylation using ALKBH1 heterologous expressed in E. coli under defined reaction conditions. Following enzymatic treatment, the RNA is processed and analyzed for the detection of RNA modifications using LC-MS/MS. B-E. Absolute m1A (B), m5C (C), m6A (D) and m3C (E) content in 28S rRNA, 18S rRNA and tRNA post in vitro treatment with ALKBH1 heterologous expressed in E. coli at concentrations of 0 µM, 1 µM and 5 µM. Error bars in the graph represent the ± mean S.E. (standard error) of three biological replicates. p-value (p > 0.05 = ns, p ≤ 0.05 = *, p ≤ 0.01 = **, p ≤ 0.001 = *** and p ≤ 0.0001 = ****) mentioned in the text is calculated by one-way ANOVA and indicates significant differences in means (Created in BioRender. Henzeler, B. (2025)).

After ensuring the successful expression of active ALKBH1, we wanted to further evaluate the ALKBH1 activity in vitro. For this, we used the commercial Succinate-GloTM Assay (Promega), which indirectly measures Fe(II)/α-KG dependent dioxygenase activity by converting the generated succinate into ATP, which serves as a substrate for luciferase [25,26]. For this assay, auto-hydroxylation [27] of ALKBH1 may bias the results and thus we first designed ALKBH1 mutant constructs which are either catalytically inactive (AxA, catalytic His and Asp residues exchanged for Ala) or auto-hydroxylation-deficient (I218A) as controls. The use of these control constructs on total tRNA confirmed that succinate generation is not only correlated with catalytic activity but also- with auto-hydroxylation (S2 Fig).

Since ALKBH1 has also been shown to localize to the mitochondria [19,28], we utilized not only total tRNA, but also a synthetic RNA oligonucleotide mimicking the anticodon arm of the mt-tRNA-SerUCA, which carries the m3C modification at position 32 [23,29]. This synthetic tRNA-anticodon arm mimic does not appear to be a suitable substrate for ALKBH1, as no changes in succinate levels were observed upon addition of ALKBH1I218, which cannot undergo auto-hydroxylation (S2 Fig). We estimate that ALKBH1 requires certain structural elements of full-length tRNA, which could not form in the short, anticodon-mimicking fragments.

ALKBH1 demethylates m3C32 in in vitro transcribed tRNA

Following our previous observation that length and potentially structure are discriminators for ALKBH1 activity, we used in vitro transcription to generate longer, but defined substrates for testing ALKBH1 activity (S3 Fig). We initially introduced random methylation by treating the in vitro transcribed tRNA and human total tRNA with methyl methanesulfonate (MMS), which introduces damage-derived m1A, m7G and m3C at random positions [30]. Afterwards, we incubated the damaged tRNAs with ALKBH1 and quantified the abundance of modified nucleoside by quantitative LC-MS/MS. Here we can observe a slight reduction in the abundance of m1A, m3C and m7G in the MMS treated ct-tRNA-ValAAC (S4 Fig) which indicates that ALKBH1 recognizes in case of RNA damage the chemical structure of its substrate rather than the position within the tRNA. To shed light on ALKBH1’s activity towards native m3C, we obtained a defined tRNA modified at position 32, by expressing and purifying the methyltransferase METTL8. METTL8 was previously shown to methylate C32 at position N3 in mitochondrial tRNAs, specifically mt-tRNA-SerUCA and mt-tRNA-ThrUGU [22]. However, since methylation of mt-tRNA-SerUCA by METTL8 depends on the i6A modification at A37 [23], we also expressed and purified MiaA, the tRNA dimethylallyltransferase from E. coli. (S1 Fig). Thus, we introduced the i6A modification into mt-tRNA-SerUCA using EcMiaA, followed by methylation of N3 at C32 by METTL8. METTL8 directly introduces the m3C at C32 in mt-tRNA-ThrUGU. With this approach we obtained approximately 60% m3C32 modified tRNAs, as confirmed by hydrazine aniline cleavage [31], followed by PAGE analysis and quantitative LC-MS/MS (Fig 2A). We then quantitatively assessed the m3C demethylation of these enzymatically generated substrates by quantitative LC-MS/MS. These results show that ALKBH1 reduces m3C methylation levels in these tRNAs by about 25–40% (Fig 2B) and that m3C32 is indeed a substrate of ALKBH1. To test whether post translational modifications of ALKBH1 that are not installed upon heterologous expression in E. coli, affect its activity, we also expressed and purified ALKBH1 from HEK293T cells. However, the expression system did not influence ALKBH1 activity (Fig 2B).

Fig 2. In vitro demethylation activity of m3C in tRNA by ALKBH1.

Fig 2

A. Analysis of m3C modification of in vitro transcribed mt-tRNA-ThrUGU by METTL8 by hydrazine/aniline cleavage and urea-PAGE. Sequence and numbering of mt-tRNA-ThrUGU relative to wobble position 34. B. In vitro demethylation activity by ALKBH1 expressed in HEK293T or E. coli cells. mt-tRNA-ThrUGU and mt-tRNA-SerUCA were pre-methylated at m3C32 by METTL8 mt-tRNA-SerUCA was additionally modified by EcMiaA (i6A37). Error bars in the graph represent the ± mean S.E. of three biological replicates. p-value mentioned in the text is calculated by unpaired t test with no correction and indicates significant differences in means (Created in BioRender. Henzeler, B. (2025)).

ALKBH1 expression modulation does not impact on mt-tRNA modification level in HEK293T cells

To investigate the impact of ALKBH1 abundance on the modification of specific mitochondrial tRNAs, we overexpressed ALKBH1 or performed siRNA-mediated knock-down of ALKBH1 in HEK293T cells for 48 h (S5 Fig). It was previously shown that upon overexpression ALKBH1 localizes to mitochondria in several human cell lines [19]. Following RNA extraction, specific mitochondrial tRNAs were enriched using complementary, biotinylated DNA strands. 2 mt-tRNAs, namely mt-tRNA-SerUCA and mt-tRNA-ThrUGU [23,29], carry m3C32 and may be substrates for ALKBH1. As a non-substrate control, we selected mt-tRNA-SerAGU which does not carry m3C32 but is modified by NSUN2 [32,33] and carries m5C48-C50. The known substrate, mt-tRNA-Met, was not analyzed as the ALKBH1 reaction product 5-formylcytidine (f5C) is too low abundant for reliable detection and quantification in our quantitative LC-MS/MS set-up. The isolated tRNAs were digested to single nucleosides, and the modified nucleosides were quantified by quantitative LC-MS/MS [34,35]. The results show that the modification abundance (including pseudouridine (Ψ), m2G, m1A, m5C, m5U, m6A, t6A, m3C and ms2i6A) remained unaffected under both overexpression and knock-down conditions in HEK293T cells, grown under optimal conditions (Fig 3 and S6 Fig). One potential explanation for this unexpected finding might be that ALKBH1 has an extraordinarily long half-life which would bias knock-down experiments. We investigated the half-life of ALKBH1 using cycloheximide chase assay to inhibit de novo protein biosynthesis, which revealed that ALKBH1 abundance does not change over 72 h after addition of cycloheximide (S5 Fig), confirming its unexpected long half-life. This is also reflected in a pulse-chase nucleic acid isotope labeling coupled mass spectrometry (NAIL-MS) experiment [36], where tRNA and rRNA modifications were quantified following an 64–72 hr ALKBH1 knock-down. Again, we did not detect any significant changes in RNA modifications in the HEK293T cell line grown under optimal conditions (S7 Fig). This indicates that either remaining ALKBH1 activity is sufficient to maintain the steady-state abundance of its substrate modifications or that ALKBH1 is inactive in cells grown under non-stress conditions. We also did not observe any impact on the cell viability upon modulation (knock-down or overexpression) of ALKBH1 as assessed by the MTT assay (S8 Fig).

Fig 3. ALKBH1 mediated demethylation of native mt-tRNAs in HEK293T cells.

Fig 3

A. Illustration of the transfection protocol for introducing plasmid or siRNA into HEK293T cells, followed by RNA extraction, enrichment and LC-MS/MS analysis. B. LC-MS/MS analysis of modification in transfected cells for mt-tRNA-SerAGU, mt-tRNA-SerUCA and mt-tRNA-ThrUGU enrichment. Error bars in the graph represent the ± mean S.E. of three technical replicates. p-value mentioned in the text is calculated by unpaired t-test with no correction and indicates significant differences in mean (Created in BioRender. Henzeler, B. (2025)).

Glucose concentration does not impact ALKBH1-mediated RNA-modification in HEK293T or HeLa cells

According to our previous results, ALKBH1 might act on its substrates mainly during stress conditions. Indeed, it was previously reported that glucose concentration in the growth medium affects ALKBH1 expression in HeLa cells, resulting in changes of m1A in tRNA. This leads to attenuation of translation initiation and reduced utilization of tRNAs in protein synthesis [8]. To follow up on this report, human HeLa and HEK293T cells were cultured for 8 h, as previously reported, in the presence of either 1 g/L or 4.5 g/L glucose and 2% or 10% FBS, and m1A levels in two different cytosolic tRNAs (ct-tRNA-HisGUG and ct-tRNA-GlyGCC) were analyzed by quantitative LC-MS/MS (Fig 4A and B). However, we did not observe variation in m1A abundance in the specific tRNAs isolated from these cell lines (Fig 4B). We also analyzed ALKBH1 -mRNA levels under these different growth conditions and observed only a minor impact from variations in glucose or FBS concentrations (Fig 4C). In addition, we carried out siRNA-mediated knock-down of ALKBH1 in HEK293T cells and cultured them in media containing 10% FBS and 4.5 g/L glucose (S9B Fig). Total tRNA was subsequently extracted and m1A, m3C, m6A, m1G and m5C levels were quantified using quantitative LC-MS/MS. Under these conditions, we observed only minimal changes in the overall m1A and m1G abundance, with no detectable differences in m3C or m5C levels compared to control (Fig 4D). The experiment was repeated under identical conditions, but with an elongated incubation time of 24 h. We find that even 24 h of starvation conditions did change mRNA and protein levels of ALKBH1 compared to the controls (S9A and S9C Fig) Similarly, tRNA modification analysis by LC-MS/MS did not reveal any significant shifts in the overall modification patterns under varying glucose and serum conditions (S9D Fig).

Fig 4. Glucose-dependent demethylation activity of ALKBH1.

Fig 4

A. Schematic representation of glucose (G)- and serum (FBS)-dependent demethylation activity of ALKBH1 in HEK293T or HeLa cells. Cells were treated with either 1 g/L or 4.5 g/L glucose and 2% or 10% FBS for 8 h. Following treatment, total RNA was extracted and either analyzed directly by LC-MS/MS or enriched for ct-tRNA-HisGUG and ct-tRNA-GlyGCC, enzymatically digested, and subjected to LC-MS/MS to detect RNA modifications. B. LC-MS/MS analysis of m1A in enriched ct-tRNAs from both HEK293T and HeLa cells grown under varying glucose and serum conditions. C. RT-qPCR analysis of ALKBH1 knockdown in HEK293T cells 48 h post-transfection with siRNAs targeting ALKBH1 (Negative control “ctrl”: scrambled siRNA). Untransfected HEK293T cells grown under varying glucose and serum conditions were also included. D. LC-MS/MS analysis of RNA modifications in total RNA from siRNA-transfected HEK293T cells. Error bars in the graph represent the ± mean S.E. of three/six biological replicates. Statistical significance was calculated by using a one-way ANOVA without correction (Created in BioRender. Henzeler, B. (2025)).

Discussion

Nucleic acid methylation is a dynamic, secondary layer essential for gene regulation. While the demethylation of 5-methylcytosine in DNA by TET enzymes can be tracked in vivo [20], the analogous processes in RNA remain technically challenging to observe. Here Fe(II)/α-KG-dependent dioxygenases of the AlkB-family play an important role as erasers of epitranscriptomic marks. Albeit there are numerous reports on the in vitro activity of these enzymes, reproduction of their in vivo activity appears to be challenging and possibly linked to their unclear biological roles and cellular programs.

The first report on tRNA demethylation through ALKBH1 focused on the demethylation of m1A under glucose starvation conditions and siRNA-mediated ALKBH1 knockdown. Consistent with this and other in vitro studies, we confirm ALKBH1 activity on m3C, m1A, and m5C in total tRNA extracts [812]. The use of defined synthetic tRNAs (with m3C32 and i6A37) further substantiates substrate-specific demethylation. However, such in vitro activities do not necessarily translate to observable changes in endogenous systems. Despite successful siRNA mediated knock-down or overexpression of ALKBH1 in human HEK293T cells, we do not observe significant changes on the nucleoside methylation levels. Our observation is also supported by a recent preprint in which CRISPR-Cas9 knock-out of ALKBH1 in 4 different cancer cell lines was shown to have no demethylation effect on tRNA modifications [37]. Similarly, we also did not observe any changes in ALKBH1-dependent RNA-modifications upon variation of the glucose or FBS concentration for 8 h in the growth media of HEK293T and HeLa cell lines, even though such effects have been previously observed [8]. Moreover, even after incubation for 24 h under these conditions, no significant changes in nucleoside modification in isolated total tRNAs could be observed. It should be noted, however, that HEK293T cells are a highly transformed, immortalized cell line, and most other cells would be unlikely to tolerate such stress conditions over this time frame. Under these circumstances, for example during the onset of cell death, numerous factors beyond ALKBH1 may become up- or downregulated or activated or inactivated, which could also potentially influence epigenetic modifications.

Under homeostatic conditions, ALKBH1 mRNA remains stable for over 72 h, suggesting that transcriptional stability may explain the lack of functional demethylation in these cell lines und starvation conditions. Another possible explanation is that ALKBH1 is functionally engaged only under particular stress conditions, during metabolic adaptation, or in differentiated cell types. Alternatively, post-translational mechanisms, including subcellular localization or cofactor availability, may gate its catalytic activity. We also note that the use of bulk LC-MS/MS approaches limits sensitivity to localized, transcript-specific, or compartmentalized demethylation events, which may escape detection despite being biologically relevant. In sum, our data emphasize that the function of RNA demethylases such as ALKBH1 is likely highly context-dependent. For example, a recent study by Shen et al. demonstrated that, in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells, ALKBH1 facilitates codon-biased translation of rare leucine codons by converting m5C to 5-formylcytosine at the wobble position of tRNAs [16].

Even for ALKBH5, the best studied RNA eraser (target: m6A in mRNA), in vivo demethylation cannot be tracked in homeostatically grown cells [38,39]. These findings support the idea that the activity of RNA erasers is tightly controlled to balance the methylation density of the substrate RNAs and specific triggers might be required for their activity.

We conclude that RNA (de-)methylation reactions observed in vitro are not easily linked to an in vivo activity. In case of ALKBH1, we consider in vivo studies that include the LC-MS/MS characterization of both the substrate, m5C, and the product, f5C, as highly credible as this technology is self-validated by the interplay of product and substrate detection. Unfortunately, the oxidation of m1A by ALKBH1 leads to products that are unstable (1-hydroxymethyladenosine or 1-formyladenosine) and decompose to adenosine. Thus, in vivo activity cannot be cross-validated by detection of the product as adenosine is thousand-fold more abundant than m1A in tRNA. Thus, the chemistry of the products may explain why the activity of ALKBH1 towards m5C was proven in vivo, while it remains uncertain for m1A and m3C (that also directly decomposes to form cytidine after oxidation). In this context quantitative LC-MS/MS analysis must be considered the gold standard in nucleoside detection due to its high specificity and sensitivity, that other detection methods such as dot blots cannot provide. Through the use of NAIL in pulse-chase applications, the resolution of LC-MS/MS can be extended by the dimension of time as done in this work and our recent work on ALKBH5 [38]. Nevertheless, a main challenge for detecting and quantifying modified ribonucleosides is the reproducibility across laboratories [40]. Here variations in growth conditions, cell lines, RNA isolation and processing as well as lack of a standard form of modified RNA for researchers to use as a benchmark for validating their studies hamper the accurate quantification of RNA modifications. In addition, there is no single optimal method for all 170 known modified ribonucleosides or the more than 50 human RNA modification. We hypothesize that the highly dynamic process of RNA demethylation is only observable in vivo once analysis is performed at temporal resolution. We want to conclude that the absence of measurable effects in standard cell culture conditions does not negate potential physiological roles under specific stimuli or disease states. Understanding how ALKBH1 is regulated and which substrates it acts upon in vivo remains a central challenge for elucidating its role in RNA biology.

Materials and methods

Cloning, expression and purification of ALKBH1, EcMiaA and METTL8

Homo sapiens ALKBH1.

For the overexpression of ALKBH1 in human cells two expression constructs were cloned in pcDNA3: one encoding the full-length ALKBH1 sequence (construct 1) and the second with the ALKBH1-sequence fused with a C-terminal Strep-tagII sequence (construct 2). For construct 1, the synthetic DNA sequence (Azenta) was cloned into pcDNA3 using the NEBuilder HiFi DNA Assembly Master Mix (New England Biolabs (NEB)) according to the manufactures protocol. This construct was used to investigate the effect of over expression of ALKBH1 on tRNA modification levels. For construct 2 NEB Q5® Site Directed Mutagenesis Kit was used to attach a C-terminal Strep-tag II using cloning primers. The sequence was identified by sequencing. The plasmid expressing human ALKBH1 with a C-terminal Strep-tag II (construct 2) was used solely to purify ALKBH1 from human cells in order to assess whether the source organism affects enzyme activity in vitro. The construct was delivered to cells by forward transfection using Lipofectamine 3000 reagent (Invitrogen). 90 μg of plasmid DNA and 180 μL of Lipofectamine 3000 (Invitrogen) were diluted separately in Opti-MEM and incubated briefly. The solutions were then mixed and incubated for 15 mins at room temperature. The complex was then slowly added to a confluent T175 cell flask (HEK293T) and incubated at 37°C under 5% CO2 for 48 h. Post incubation, cells were harvested and resuspended in 7.5 mL lysis buffer (100 mM Tris-HCl, 150 mM NaCl, TCEP, pH 8) supplemented with DNaseI (AppliChem) and protease inhibitors (Roche). and lysed by sonication using Sonic Dismembrator 120 (Fisherbrand) and the lysate was cleared by centrifugation (20,000 x g; 30 min; 4°C). Following this, nucleic acids were removed from the lysate by addition of polyethylenimine (PEI) dropwise (Merck) to a final concentration of 0.5% w/v followed by a second centrifugation step (20,000 x g; 20 min; 4° C). The cleared lysate was filtered and incubated with 1 mLStrepXT beads (IBA Lifesciences), at 4°C for 30 min. The incubated resin was loaded into a column and washed with wash buffer (100 mM Tris-HCl, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM TCEP, pH 8.0) and the protein was eluted with elution buffer (100 mM Tris-HCl, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM Tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine (TCEP), 50 mM biotin, pH 8.0). ALKBH1 containing fractions were pooled and concentrated with an Amicon Ultracell Centrifugal filter unit (MWCO 10 kDa, Merck) and flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80° C for further use.

For expression in E. coli, a synthetic, codon-optimized sequence encoding human ALKBH1(19-369), fused in-frame with an N-terminal Strep-affinity tag followed by a Tabacco Etch Virus (TEV) protease cleavage site (Azenta Life Science), was cloned into the pET28 vector (Novagen). The identity of the construct was verified by DNA sequencing. For protein expression, the plasmid was transformed into E. coli BL21(DE3) cells (Novagen). An overnight culture was prepared in LB medium supplemented with 50 μg/mL kanamycin. The following day, the culture was diluted 1:100 into fresh 2 × YT medium containing 50 μg/mL kanamycin and incubated at 37°C with shaking at 180 rpm until an OD₆₀₀ of 0.8 was reached. Protein expression was induced with 0.5 mM isopropyl-β-D-1-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG) and incubated overnight at 18°C and subsequently harvested by centrifugation (4000 × g; 20 min, RT). The cell pellet was resuspended in 30 mL lysis buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, 300 mM NaCl, 1 mM TCEP 0.5% v/v N-lauroylsarcosine, pH 8) supplemented with 250 U/ μL Benzonase (Merck), Lysozyme and protease inhibitors (Roche). Cells were then lysed by homogenization using an EmulsiFlexC5 (Avestin Inc.) and the lysate was cleared by centrifugation (22,000 × g; 30 min; 4°C). The cleared lysate was filtered and loaded onto 1 mL StrepXT beads (IBA Lifesciences), the column was then washed with wash buffer (100 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.0, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM TCEP) and the protein was eluted with elution buffer (100 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.0, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM TCEP, 50 mM biotin). Fractions containing ALKBH1 were pooled and His-tagged TEV-protease was added (1:10) and incubated overnight. TEV-protease was then removed using Ni-NTA beads (Qiagen) and tag-free ALKBH1 was obtained in the flow-through and diluted in CaptoQ-binding buffer (50 mM Tris/HCl pH 8.7, 1 mM TCEP). The diluted protein was then loaded onto a 1 mL CaptoQ column in a ÄktaGo FPLC system (Cytiva) and eluted with elution buffer (50 mM Tris/HCl pH 8.7, 1 M NaCl, 1 mM TCEP) with a gradient to 70% elution buffer over 10 column volumes (CV). ALKBH1 containing fractions were pooled and concentrated with an Amicon Ultracell Centrifugal filter unit (MWCO 10 kDa, Merck) and loaded onto a Superdex Increase 75 10/300 column (Cytiva), equilibrated with 50 mM Tris/HCl pH 7.5, 300 mM NaCl, 1 mM TCEP, 5% v/v glycerol. Finally, the fractions containing pure ALKBH1 were pooled, concentrated, flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80°C for further use.

Escherichia coli MiaA.

The full-length sequence encoding E. coli MiaA (Uniprot No. 16384) was PCR-amplified from genomic E. coli K12 DNA and cloned in frame with a C-terminal His6-tag in pET28 via restriction digestion and ligation, using the NcoI and XhoI restriction sites and sequenced for identity. For protein expression the plasmid was transformed into T7express (NEB) and cultured overnight in LB medium supplemented with 50 μg/mL Kanamycin. Post incubation the culture was diluted 1:100 in 2YT medium (50 μg/mL kanamycin) and incubated at 37°C, 180 rpm until an OD600 of 0.8 was reached. Protein expression was induced with 1 mM IPTG and incubated overnight at 16°C and subsequently harvested by centrifugation (4000 × g; 20 min, RT). The cell pellet was resuspended in 20 mL lysis buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, 300 mM NaCl, 20% v/v glycerol, 20 mM imidazole, pH 8) supplemented with DNase I (AppliChem) and protease inhibitors (Roche). Cells were homogenized using an EmulsiFlexC5 (Avestin Inc.) and the lysate was cleared by centrifugation (22,000 × g; 30 min; 4°C). The cleared lysate was filtered and loaded onto a 5 mL HisTrap crude column (Cytiva) on an ÄktaGo FPLC (Cytiva) at 8°C, the column washed with lysis buffer and the protein was eluted with elution buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, 300 mM NaCl, 20% v/v glycerol, 300 mM Imidazole, pH 8). Fractions containing the pure protein were pooled, concentrated with an Amicon Ultracell Centrifugal filter unit (MWCO 10 kDa, Merck Millipore) and was exchanged to storage buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, 150 mM NaCl, 2 mM dithiotreitol (DTT) pH 8) using a PD10 column (Cytiva). The protein (yield ~38 mg/L expression culture) was aliquoted, flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80°C.

Homo sapiens METTL8.

The synthetic sequence encoding for the human METTL8 isoform1 Δ1–22 (Uniprot No. B3KW44, Azenta Life Science) Δ1–22 was cloned in pET28 in frame with a C-terminal His6-tag using the restriction sites NcoI and XhoI and sequenced for identity verification. For protein expression the plasmid was transformed into T7express (NEB) and cultured overnight in LB medium supplemented with 50 μg/mL Kanamycin. The following day, the culture was diluted 1:100 in 2YT medium (50 μg/mL kanamycin) and incubated at 37°C, 180 rpm until an OD600 of 0.8 was reached. Protein expression was induced with 0.5 mM IPTG and incubated overnight at 18° C and subsequently harvested by centrifugation (4000 × g; 20 min, 4°C). The cell pellet from a liter expression culture was resuspended in 25 mL lysis buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, 500 mM NaCl, 5% v/v glycerol, 10 mM imidazole, pH 8) supplemented with DNase I (AppliChem) and protease inhibitors (Roche). Cells were homogenized using an EmulsiFlexC5 (Avestin Inc.) and the lysate was cleared by centrifugation (20,000 × g; 30 min; 4°C). Nucleic acids were removed from the lysate by adding PEI dropwise to a final concentration of 0.5% w/v followed by a second centrifugation step (20,000 x g; 20 min; 4°C). The cleared lysate was filtered and incubated with Ni-NTA resin at 4°C for 30 min. The incubated resin was loaded into a column and washed 5 times with 2 CV of wash buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, 1 M NaCl, 5% v/v glycerol, 20 mM imidazole, pH 8). Afterwards, the His-tagged protein was eluted with elution buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, 300 mM NaCl, 20% v/v glycerol, 300 mM imidazole, pH 8). The collected elution fractions were combined and diluted 1:10 and loaded onto a HiTrap™ Heparin HP 5 mL column (Cytiva). The column was then washed with binding buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, 30 mM NaCl, 30 mM imidazol, 5% glycerol, pH 8) and the protein was eluted with elution buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl, 1 M NaCl, 5% v/v glycerol, pH 8) in a continuous gradient. Fractions containing pure protein were pooled, concentrated with an Amicon Ultracell Centrifugal filter unit (MWCO 10 kDa, Merck Millipore) and the buffer was exchanged to storage buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, 150 mM NaCl, 2 mM DTT, pH 8). The protein was aliquoted, flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80° C.

In vitro transcription of tRNA

Synthetic DNA strands (biomers.net GmbH) encoding for the sequences of human tRNAs and a 5’ T7 RNA polymerase promoter sequence, were hybridized and used as template. For the in vitro transcription the reaction was set up (NEB, HiScribe T7 Quick High Yield RNA Synthesis Kit) according to the manufactures’ protocol, followed by removal of the dsDNA template using DNaseI. The RNA products were then purified (NEB Monarch RNA Cleanup Kit) and stored at −80° C. To ensure proper folding, the tRNA was heated to 85° C and subsequently cooled down to 20°C over 30 min.

Dynamic light scattering (DLS)

In vitro-transcribed tRNA was diluted to 1 µg/µL in 50 µL of buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5; 10 mM MgCl₂; 100 mM NaCl), heated to 85 °C, and either slowly cooled to room temperature or immediately placed on ice prior to DLS analysis (Wyatt DynaPro NanoStar). In addition, tRNA was diluted in 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5) and 10 mM EDTA containing 55% (v/v) formamide. Samples were diluted to 200 ng/µL prior to dynamic light scattering analysis, which consisted of 20 consecutive measurements per sample.

Methylation assay

A 50 µL reaction mixture containing 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 20 mM KCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 1 mM DTT, 1 mM spermidine, 200 µM S-adenosyl methionine (SAM), 10 µM mt-tRNA-ThrUGU or mt-tRNA-SerUCA and 15–30 µM METTL8 was incubated at 37° C for 1 h. The resulting samples were purified using either the Monarch Spin RNA Cleanup Kit (10 μg NEB) according to the manufacturer’s instructions or ethanol precipitation. For ethanol precipitation, samples were mixed with 25 µL of 3 M sodium acetate (pH 5.5) and 0.75 mL of 100% ethanol, snap-frozen in liquid nitrogen, and centrifuged at 16,000 x g for 40 min at 4°C. The pellet was washed twice with 0.7 mL of 70% ethanol and resuspended in 25 µL of water. To ensure proper folding the tRNA was heated to 85°C and subsequently cooled down to 20°C over 30 min.

ALKBH1 in vitro activity

Recombinant ALKBH1 protein was diluted as needed using its designated storage buffer. For each in vitro reaction, the final buffer composition was adjusted to include: 50 mM HEPES (pH 7.5), 15 mM KCl, 2 mM L-ascorbate, 2 mM MgCl2, 300 µM α-ketoglutarate (α-KG), and 105 or 300 µM ferrous ammonium sulfate [Fe(II)(NH4)2(SO4)2]. To ensure reproducibility and stability, fresh aqueous stock solutions were prepared in either 10 mL or 50 mL centrifuge tubes at the following concentrations: 1 M HEPES (pH 7.5), 100 mM KCl, 20 mM L-ascorbate, 20 mM MgCl2, 10 mM α-ketoglutarate, and 10 mM [Fe(II)(NH4)2(SO4)2]. Notably, the L-ascorbate, α-KG, and Fe(II) solutions were freshly prepared immediately before each experiment to prevent oxidation and ensure activity. Where feasible, a master mix of the salt components was prepared to reduce pipetting errors and maintain consistency across reactions. Each 50 µL reaction mixture consisted of the appropriate buffer components, ALKBH1 enzyme, and RNA substrate. The mixture was gently homogenized by pipetting up and down and subsequently incubated in a heating block at 37° C for 2 h. The enzymatic reaction was halted, and RNA was precipitated by the addition of 500 µL (10 × volume) of cold 2% (w/v) lithium perchlorate in acetone. After 5 min incubation at room temperature, the mixture was centrifuged at 5,000 × g for 5 min to pellet the RNA. The supernatant was carefully removed, and the RNA pellet was air-dried briefly before resuspension in 20 µL of ultrapure water. Following resuspension, the RNA was enzymatically digested for downstream analysis.

Nucleic acid digestion for quantitative nucleoside analysis

RNA samples were enzymatically digested to nucleosides using a defined master mix (See S2 Table) containing buffer components, nucleases, phosphatase, and protective agents. The digestion buffer system consisted of Tris-HCl and MgCl2, which served as the primary buffering and divalent cation components, respectively. Nuclease digestion was carried out using Benzonase (endonuclease) and snake venom phosphodiesterase (PDE1), while dephosphorylation of nucleotides was achieved using calf intestinal phosphatase (CIP). To prevent chemical modifications of the released nucleosides during digestion, the reaction mixture was supplemented with pentostatin and tetrahydrouridine (THU) to inhibit deamination, and butylhydroxytoluene (BHT) as an antioxidant. To account for possible contamination of the THU stock solution with dihydrouracil (D), as a control samples without added THU were also prepared and, following the quantification, compared. Each digestion reaction contained 20 µL of RNA sample mixed with 10 µL of freshly prepared master mix. For RNA inputs differing from the standard 4 µg, the volumes of Tris-HCl and MgCl2 in the master mix were proportionally adjusted. Unless otherwise stated, all procedures refer to the digestion of 4 µg of RNA. After mixing thoroughly, the samples were incubated at 37°C for 2 h. Following digestion, each reaction was diluted with half the volume of LC-MS-compatible buffer. For LC-MS quantification, 1 µL of a 10 × SILIS (Stable Isotope-Labeled Internal Standard) solution was co-injected with each sample [41]. SILIS digestion for up to 3 µg of RNA was conducted using a protocol designed for 10 µg input RNA. In optional experiments, 0.1 × volumes of 100 µM theophylline and additional LC-MS/QQQ buffer were included for modulation. Final buffer volumes were adjusted to reach a target nucleosides concentration of 20 ng/µL prior to LC-MS/MS analysis.

Synthesis of m3C containing RNA

Synthesis of the m3C phosphoamidite and incorporation into RNA was carried out as previously reported [42,43], with a slight adaption of the RNA oligonucleotide synthesis. Coupling was done using Activator 42 (0.25 M) in acetonitrile and 5’-detritylation was achieved using 3% dichloroacetic acid in dichloromethane, on a ABI Oligo DNA RNA Synthesizer. The identity of the products was confirmed by NMR, ESI- or MALDI-MS.

Quantitative LC-MS analysis

Quantitative LC-MS analysis was performed using an Agilent Infinity 1290 HPLC system coupled to an Agilent G6490 or G6470A Triple Quadrupole mass spectrometer equipped with an electrospray ionization source. The Agilent G6490 was operated in positive ion mode with the following parameters: cell accelerating voltage of 5 V, nitrogen (N2) gas temperature of 120°C with a flow rate of 11 L/min, sheath gas (N2) temperature of 280° C at 11 L/min, capillary voltage of 3000 V, nozzle voltage of 0 V, and nebulizer pressure of 60 psi. High-pressure radiofrequency was set to 100 V, while low-pressure radio-frequency was set to 60 V. the Agilent G6470A was operated in positive ion mode with the following parameters: cell accelerating voltage of 5 V, nitrogen (N2) gas temperature of 230° C with a flow rate of 6 L/min, sheath gas (N2) temperature of 400°C at 12 L/min, capillary voltage of 2500 V, nozzle voltage of 0 V, and nebulizer pressure of 40 psi. High-pressure radiofrequency was set to 100 V, while low-pressure radiofrequency was set to 60 V. Data acquisition was conducted in dynamic multiple reaction monitoring (DMRM) mode. Chromatographic separation when using the Agilent G6490 was achieved using an Uptisphere C18-HDO column (3.0 µm, 150 × 2.1 mm; Interchim, UP3HDO-150/021) at 35°C with a flow rate of 0.35 mL/min. The mobile phase consisted of 5 mM ammonium acetate (NH4OAc, pH 4.9) as aqueous buffer A and 2 mM ammonium formate (NH4COOH) in 80% acetonitrile as organic buffer B. The gradient program was as follows: 100% A for 0.5 min, followed by an increase to 10% B over 5.5 min, then to 20% B from 6.0 to 8.5 min, followed by a ramp to 80% B in 1 min, held for 1.5 min, and re-equilibrated to 100% A over 0.5 min with a re-equilibration period of 2.2 min. Alternatively, when using the Agilent G6470A, a Synergi, 2.5 μm Fusion-RP, 100 Å, 100 mm x 2 mm column (Phenomenex, Torrance, CA, USA) was used with a flow rate of 0.35 mL/min. Here the mobile phase consisted of 5 mM ammonium acetate (NH4OAc, pH 5.3) as aqueous buffer A and 100% acetonitrile as buffer B. The gradient program was as follows: 100% A for 1 min, followed by an increase to 10% B over a period of 4 min, then to 40% B from 6.0 to 8 min and maintained for 1 min, before returning to 100% A. Each sample was analyzed by co-injecting a 10 µL aliquot with 1 µL of a stable isotope-labeled internal standard (ISTD). Data was processed using Agilent MassHunter quantitative analysis software with integrated calibration. Calibration curves ranged from 0.0488 to 100 pmol for canonical nucleosides and 0.0024 to 5 pmol for modified nucleosides (12 calibration levels, 1:2 serial dilution). The modified nucleosides were quantitatively related to the molar amount of each canonical nucleoside which were normalized to the expected occurrence in the respective tRNA sequence. DMRM transitions and retention times (RT) were as follows: m3C: 258.1 → 126.0 (RT 4.2 min); m³C-ISTD: 261.1 → 129.0 (RT 4.2 min).

Data analysis of nucleoside LC–MS/MS

Raw data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative MassHunter Software from Agilent. The signals for each nucleoside from dynamic multiple reaction monitoring (DMRM) acquisition were integrated along with the respective SILIS. The signal areas of nucleoside and respective SILIS were set into relation to calculate the nucleoside isotope factor (NIF):

NIF=signal area (nucleoside)signal area (SILIS)

The NIF was then plotted against the molar amount of each calibration, and regression curves were plotted through the data points. The slopes represent the respective relative response factors for the nucleosides (rRFN) and enable absolute quantification of nucleosides. Calibration curves were plotted automatically by quantitative MassHunter software from Agilent. Molar amounts of nucleosides in samples were calculated using the signal areas of the target compounds and SILIS in the samples and the respective rRFN, determined by calibration measurements. This step was also done automatically by quantitative MassHunter software. The detailed calculation is depicted in the following equation:

nsample nucleoside =signal areasample nucleoside rRFNnucleoside × signal arearespective SILIS 

The molar amount of modified nucleosides was then normalized to respective tRNA population to calculate the amount of modification per tRNA. This was done using the expected amount of canonical nucleosides of the respective tRNA population.

ntRNA=nC#C+nU#U+nG#G+nA#A4
number of modifications per tRNA =nmodifications ntRNA 

The molar amount of modified nucleosides in total RNA and total tRNA was normalized to the molar amount of 1000 canonical nucleosides:

#modification1000 nts=nmodification(nG1000+nA1000+nC1000+nU1000)

For experiments including nucleic acid isotope labeling, the isotopologues were normalized to the labeled canonical nucleosides to differentiate between pre-existing modifications and new modifications in the respective tRNA transcripts.

Cell Lines

HEK293T/HeLa cells were grown and maintained in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle’s Medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum, 1% penicillin-streptomycin, and 1% L-glutamine (Life Technologies) at 37°C and under 5% CO2 atmosphere.

RNA Extraction

Cells were lysed in TRI Reagent and stored at −80°C until further analysis. After defrosting, 0.2 mL of chloroform was added to each sample. The samples were shaken vigorously for 15 sec and allowed to stand at room temperature for 5 min. The mixtures were then centrifuged at 12,000 × g for 10 min at 4°C to separate the phases. The upper aqueous phase was mixed with isopropanol in a 1:1 ratio to precipitate total RNA. After overnight incubation at −20° C, samples were centrifuged at 12,000 × g for 30 min at 4°C. The supernatant was removed, and RNA pellets were washed twice with 150 μL 70% ethanol and centrifuged at 12,000 × g for 10 min at 4° C. After removing the supernatant, the samples were placed on the bench for 10 min to let the remaining ethanol evaporate. The RNA was then resuspended in 50 µL of Milli-Q water, and the concentration of each sample was measured using a nanophotometer (Biozym).

RNA isolation using Size-Exclusion Chromatography (SEC)

SEC was performed on an Agilent HPLC 1100 Series (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) equipped with an AdvanceBio SEC 300 Å, 2.7 μm, 7.8 × 300 mm for tRNA purification using 0.1 M ammonium acetate buffer (pH 7) at a flow rate of 1 mL/min and a temperature of 40°C. To determine the retention time of tRNA, a small amount of total RNA extracted from HEK293T cells was first injected as a test sample. The tRNA eluted between 6.85 and 8.0 min. Based on this, the start and end times were defined in the chromatogram for the fraction collector to isolate tRNA from the actual sample. The excess solvent from the collected tRNA fraction was reduced to 50 μL using a Savant SpeedVac SPD120 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). tRNA from samples were precipitated by adding 0.1 × volume of 5 M ammonium acetate (final concentration: 0.5 M) and 2.5 x volume of 100% ethanol (final concentration: 70% v/v). The samples were incubated overnight at −20° C, followed by centrifugation at 12,000 × g for 1 h at 4°C. After removing the supernatant, the RNA pellet was left to air-dry at room temperature. The RNA was then resuspended in 30 µL of Milli-Q water, and the concentration of each sample was measured using a Nanophotometer.

Reverse transcription quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR)

Universal SYBR Green Select Master Mix (Life Technologies) and custom designed primers were used to perform quantitative real-time PCR on qTower3 (Analytik Jena) system. Custom designed primers were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich for ALKBH1, β-actin and 18S rRNA. The levels of β-actin mRNA and/or 18S rRNA were used as a reference for normalizing the levels of target gene mRNAs. The data presented were normalized against β-actin and the fold or percentage (%) change in the expression levels of target gene were computed using relative 2−ΔΔCT method or absolute quantification.

siRNA-mediated transient knockdown

Pre-designed small-interfering RNAs (siRNAs) targeting human ALKBH1 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and a non-targeting control siRNA (Silencer™ Negative Control No. 1, Thermo Fisher Scientific) were used for RNA interference experiments. Transfections were performed using either Lipofectamine™ RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) or jetPRIME® (Sartorius) transfection reagent, following the manufacturer’s protocol with minor optimizations. For Lipofectamine RNAiMAX-mediated transfection, siRNAs were diluted to a final concentration of 25 nM in Opti-MEM™ I Reduced Serum Medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Separately, 12 µL of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX reagent was also diluted in Opti-MEM™. The diluted siRNA and reagent solutions were gently mixed and incubated briefly at room temperature to allow complex formation. The siRNA-lipo complexes were then combined with HEK293T cell suspensions or directly added to adherent cells in monolayer cultures. Cells were incubated at 37°C in a humidified incubator with 5% CO2 for 48 h before further analysis. For experiments involving esiRNA (endoribonuclease-prepared siRNA), HEK293T cells were seeded in T25 flasks containing 5 mL of unlabelled NAIL-MS medium. Transfections were carried out 24 h post-seeding, at approximately 30% confluency. A transfection mix (250 µL) was prepared by first mixing esiRNA with jetPRIME® buffer, followed by 10 s of vortexing. The jetPRIME® reagent was then added, mixed briefly (vortexed for 1 s), and incubated for 10 min at room temperature. The resulting transfection mix was added to the culture flask dropwise, evenly distributed across the surface, and gently swirled to ensure homogeneous delivery. Cells were incubated for 48 h under standard conditions before downstream processing.

Overexpression of ALKBH1 in HEK293T cells

Plasmid expressing human ALKBH1 was delivered to cells by forward transfection using Lipofectamine 2000 reagent (Invitrogen). 4 μg of plasmid DNA and 12 μL of Lipofectamine 2000 (Invitrogen) were diluted separately in Opti-MEM and incubated briefly. The solutions were then mixed and incubated for 30 min at room temperature. The complex was then mixed with cell suspension before seeding in a cell culture plate or added to cell monolayers and incubated at 37°C under 5% CO2 for 48 h before further processing.

Isolation of tRNA isoacceptors

Specific RNA molecules were purified using oligonucleotide (ON) hybridization [35]. A 30–40 nucleotide oligonucleotide, reverse-complementary to the sequence of the target RNA, to which a biotin tag was attached via a short, optional AAA adapter, was designed for each tRNA molecule to be purified. For mitochondrial tRNA isoacceptor purification, 3 μg of total tRNA was mixed with 100 pmol reverse complementary, biotinylated DNA oligonucleotides in a total volume of 100 μL of 5 x SSC buffer (0.75 M NaCl, 75 mM trisodium citrate, pH 7). The sequences of DNA oligonucleotide were taken from a previous publication [30]. The sequences can be found in S6 Table. The mixture was incubated at 90° C for 3 min for denaturation followed by a hybridization step at 65° C for 10 min. For each sample, 25 μL magnetic Dynabeads® Myone™ Streptavidin T1 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) were primed three times using Bind and Wash buffer (B&W, 5 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 0.5 M EDTA, 1 M NaCl) and once using 5 x SSC buffer. An aliquot of 25 μL magnetic beads in 5 x SSC buffer was added to each sample and incubated at RT for 30 min at 600 rpm. Magnetic racks were used to separate the beads from unbound tRNA and the magnetic beads were washed once using 50 μL of 1 × SSC buffer and three times using 25 μL of 0.1 × SSC buffer. Elution of the desired tRNA was carried out in 15 μL water at 75° C for 3 min. Samples were directly used for LC-MS preparations. Each isoacceptorwas purified as triplicate.

Immunoblotting

Cell lysates for blotting were prepared in a lysis buffer (250 mM NaCl, 62.5 mM Tris-HCl pH 7.4, 0.5% sodium dodecyl sulfate, 0.5% sodium deoxycholate, 1% Triton X-100) supplemented with protease inhibitor cocktail (Roche). The cell lysates were heat shocked at 96°C for 10 min followed by cooling. Using Pierce’s BCA protein assay kit, total protein was quantified following the manufacturer’s protocol. Equal amounts of protein were resolved in sodium dodecyl sulfate – polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane blocked with 5% (w/v) milk or 3% (w/v) bovine serum albumin (BSA) and incubated with primary antibody overnight at 4°C. Following a wash, the blots were treated with the secondary antibody for 1 h. The blots were re-probed by stripping with 0.5 M sodium hydroxide for 8 min at room temperature. Western blotting detection reagents SuperSignal™ West Pico PLUS Chemiluminescent Substrate were used to visualize the protein bands, and imagery was captured on an Amersham ImageQuant 800 imaging system. Images were exported as TIFFs and compiled into figures using Affinity Designer 2/ Inkscape. In cases where brightness and/or contrast adjustments were required, the changes were applied to the entire image. Using Amersham ImageQuant 800, protein band intensities were measured and normalized.

Cycloheximide chase assay

A549 cells were treated with mock (DMSO only) or drug (Cycloheximide 300 μg/mL in DMSO). Cells were harvested at different time points and total cell lysates were prepared using the lysis buffer (Immunoblotting), and the ALKBH1 and GAPDH polypeptides were detected by Western blotting. ALKBH1 and GAPDH bands were quantified using Amersham ImageQuant 800. The level of ALKBH1 in each sample was then normalized against the level of GAPDH in the sample. Finally, the normalized levels of ALKBH1 in mock samples were considered 100% to compare its level to ALKBH1 knockdown cells

Supporting information

S1 Fig. SDS-PAGE analysis of purified ALKBH1, METTL8 and EcMiaA. A.

Human ALKBH1 and ALKBH1I218A, ALKBH1AxA, METTL8 and E. coli MiaA were overexpressed and purified from E. coli. B. Human ALKBH1 was overexpressed and purified from HEK293T cells.

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s001.tif (424.6KB, tif)
S2 Fig. Analysis of the in vitro ALKBH1 activity using the Succinate-GloTM JmjC Demethylase/Hydroxylase Assay (Promega).

Activity of Fe(II)/α-KG dependent dioxygenases result in the conversion of α-KG to succinate, which in the assay is first converted to ATP that is finally measured by a luciferase/luciferin reaction. The light generated correlates to the amounts of succinate produced by the dioxygenases as a measure for the dioxygenase activity. As substrates either total tRNA extracted from HEK293T cells, as well as a synthetic RNA oligonucleotide as mimic for the mitochondrial tRNASer anticodon arm, with the single m3C32 modification were used. Both were incubated either with 1 μM or 5 μM of wildtype ALKBH1, ALKBH1I218, which cannot undergo auto hydroxylation, or inactive ALKBH1AxA as a control. This shows that the assay is also sensitive to auto-hydroxylation, since overall lower amounts of succinate are generated when ALKBH1I218 is added to total tRNAs, compared to the wild type (left panel). Moreover, the synthetic tRNA-anticodon arm mimic seems not to be a suitable substrate for ALKBH1, since no changes in succinate levels can be observed when ALKBH1I218, which cannot undergo auto hydroxylation was added (right panel). Without addition of α-KG to ALKBH1 no signal is observed.

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s002.tif (104KB, tif)
S3 Fig. Analysis of in vitro transcribed tRNAs.

A) Dynamic light scattering (DLS) analysis of folding of in vitro transcribed mt-tRNA-ThrUGU. Denaturing by heat and slow cooling results in monodispersed sample, indicating homogenous and correct folding. Heating followed by rapid cooling on ice leads to aggregation that can be seen by polydispersed distribution. Polydispersity of the sample is also increased by addition of formamide. B) Urea-PAGE (8%) analysis of in vitro transcribed RNA of mt-tRNAs. Both tRNAs were treated with METTL8. Mt-tRNA-SerUCA was first treated with EcMiaA.

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s003.tif (186.7KB, tif)
S4 Fig. Quantification of RNA modifications in in vitro transcribed ct-tRNA-ValAAC following ALKBH1 directed demethylation, with and without methyl methanesulfonate (MMS) treatment.

A – E. Absolute levels of m1A (A), m5C (B), m3C (C), m7G (D) and m1G (E) in in vitro transcribed ct-tRNA-ValAAC with and without MMS treatment (w/o MMS). Data represents n = 3 biological replicates. Error bars in graph represent the ± mean S.E. of three biological replicates. p-value (p > 0.05 = ns, p ≤ 0.05 = *, p ≤ 0.01 = **, p ≤ 0.001 = *** and p ≤ 0.0001 = ****) mentioned in the text is calculated by one-way ANOVA and indicates significant differences in medians.

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s004.tif (496KB, tif)
S5 Fig. Expression of ALKBH1 and analysis of ALKBH1 half-life.

Analysis of in vitro transcribed tRNAs. A) Dynamic light scattering (DLS) analysis of folding of in vitro transcribed mt-tRNA-ThrUGU. Denaturing by heat and slow cooling results in monodispersed sample, indicating homogenous and correct folding. Heating followed by rapid cooling on ice leads to aggregation that can be seen by polydispersed distribution. Polydispersity of the sample is also increased by addition of formamide. B) Urea-PAGE (8%) analysis of in vitro transcribed RNA of mt-tRNAs. Both tRNAs were treated with METTL8. Mt-tRNA-SerUCA was first treated with EcMiaA.

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s005.tif (344.2KB, tif)
S6 Fig. Quantification of total tRNA modifications following ALKBH1 knockdown or over expression.

A-D. LC-MS/MS analysis with absolute levels for Y, D, m2G, m1A, m5C, m22G, Gm and Cm (A). Absolute levels for m7G, m5U, m6A, m1G, I, i6A, t6A and m1I (B). Absolute levels for Am, Q, ManQ, GalQ, Um, acp3U, m3C and ac4C (C). Absolute levels for m3U, mcm5U, ncm5U, mcm5s2U, m6,6A, m5Um, m6t6A and ms2i6A (D). Error bars in the graph represent the ± mean S.E. of six biological replicates. p-value mentioned in the text is calculated by unpaired t-test with no correction and indicates significant differences in median.

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s006.tif (370.2KB, tif)
S7 Fig. Quantification of RNA modifications in the pulse-chase NAIL-MS following ALKBH1 knockdown.

A-E. Absolute levels for m1A (A), m5C (B), m6A (C), m3C (D) and m7G (E) per respective RNA molecule (left column: 28S rRNA; middle column: 18S rRNA; right column: tRNA). Each boxplot is divided into three bars: the left column shows the old, unlabeled nucleosides before medium change (t = 0 h, 64 h after seeding), the middle bar shows the old, unlabeled nucleosides after incubation with stable isotope-labeled medium (t = 8 h, 72 h after seeding), and the right bar shows the new, labeled nucleosides after 8 h* of incubation. At each time point, RNA was isolated from siRNAs targeting ALKBH1 (Negative control “ctrl”: scrambled siRNA). All values are derived from n = 2 biological replicates.

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s007.tif (1,006KB, tif)
S8 Fig. Cell viability of ALKBH1 modified cells.

A and B. HEK293T cells were transfected with siRNAs targeting ALKBH1 (Negative control “ctrl”: scrambled siRNA) or ALKBH1-pcDNA3 (Negative control “ctrl”: empty vector) for 48 h. The cell viability was then measured by MTT assay based on the OD value. The mean cell viability was calculated. The cell viability in ctrl. was considered 100% to compare the cell viability in ALKBH1 siRNA or ALKBH1-pcDNA3 transfected cells. C. Cell viability was assessed using the MTT assay, based on OD values for the cycloheximide chase experiment where HEK293T cells were transfected with siRNAs targeting ALKBH1 (Negative control “ctrl”: scrambled siRNA).

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s008.tif (581KB, tif)
S9 Fig. Glucose-dependent demethylation activity of ALKBH1.

A-C. Longer incubation times (24 h) corresponding to Figure 4. Cells were processed and analyzed by (A) RT-qPCR, and total cell lysates were analyzed by (B; 8 h and C; 24 h) western blotting to assess ALKBH1 expression under varying glucose and serum conditions. D. In parallel, total tRNA was enzymatically digested and subjected to LC-MS/MS for the detection of RNA modifications. Error bars represent the mean ± SEM of three or six biological replicates. Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA without correction. (Created in BioRender. Henzeler, B. (2025).).

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s009.tif (545.1KB, tif)
S10 Fig. Uncropped gel images of SDS-PAGE analysis of purified ALKBH1, METTL8 and EcMiaA shown in Supporting Fig S1.

A-D. Human ALKBH1 and ALKBH1I218A, METTL8 and E. coli MiaA were overexpressed and purified from E. coli. E. Human ALKBH1 was overexpressed and purified from HEK293T cells.

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s010.tif (435KB, tif)
S11 Fig. Uncropped gel images of Urea-PAGE analysis of in vitro transcribed tRNA.

A) shown in Fig 2A and B) Supporting Fig S3.

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s011.tif (199.4KB, tif)
S12 Fig. Uncropped blot images of western blots shown in Supporting Fig S5B, D and E (A-E) and Supporting Fig S9B and C (F and G).

(TIF)

pone.0337155.s012.tif (1.1MB, tif)
S1 Table. Protein sequences.

Highlighted in bold and underlined are additional amino acid residues. Ile218 mutated to prevent auto-hydroxylation (ALKBH1I218A) is highlighted in red. His 231 and Asp 233 in the active site, coordinating the iron were mutated to inactivate ALKBH1 (ALKBH1AxA), are highlighted in blue.

(PDF)

pone.0337155.s013.pdf (210KB, pdf)
S2 Table. Used Nucleoside digestion mix.

(PDF)

pone.0337155.s014.pdf (100.6KB, pdf)
S3 Table. tRNA sequences. Highlighted in bold is the C in the anticodon arm that is methylated by METTL8.

(PDF)

pone.0337155.s015.pdf (31.8KB, pdf)
S4 Table. qPCR primers.

(PDF)

pone.0337155.s016.pdf (52.9KB, pdf)
S5 Table. siRNA sequences.

(PDF)

pone.0337155.s017.pdf (98.6KB, pdf)
S6 Table. Biotinylated capture probes for tRNA molecules.

(PDF)

pone.0337155.s018.pdf (226KB, pdf)
S7 Table. Antibodies used in this study.

(PDF)

pone.0337155.s019.pdf (5.4KB, pdf)
S8 Table. Abbreviations of the specified RNA modifications are listed below.

(PDF)

pone.0337155.s020.pdf (16.1KB, pdf)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.

Funding Statement

This study was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) in the form of a grant awarded to S.S., S. K., L.D. and T.C. (SFB 1309; project number 325871075) and a grant awarded to S.S. (SCHN 1273-9) in the form of a salary for O.H., K.K., Y.Q, F.H and F.S.. Moreover this study was supported by the Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR) in the form of a grant awarded to S.S. (Cluster for Nucleic Acid Therapeutics Munich, CNATM, ID: 03ZU1201AA) in the form of a salary for B.H.. The specific roles of this author are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Boo SH, Kim YK. The emerging role of RNA modifications in the regulation of mRNA stability. Exp Mol Med. 2020;52(3):400–8. doi: 10.1038/s12276-020-0407-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Agris PF, Narendran A, Sarachan K, Väre VYP, Eruysal E. The Importance of Being Modified: The Role of RNA Modifications in Translational Fidelity. Enzymes. 2017;41:1–50. doi: 10.1016/bs.enz.2017.03.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Ranjan N, Rodnina MV. tRNA wobble modifications and protein homeostasis. Translation (Austin). 2016;4(1):e1143076. doi: 10.1080/21690731.2016.1143076 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Smith TJ, Giles RN, Koutmou KS. Anticodon stem-loop tRNA modifications influence codon decoding and frame maintenance during translation. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2024;154(Pt B):105–13. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2023.06.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Fedeles BI, Singh V, Delaney JC, Li D, Essigmann JM. The AlkB Family of Fe(II)/α-Ketoglutarate-dependent Dioxygenases: Repairing Nucleic Acid Alkylation Damage and Beyond. J Biol Chem. 2015;290(34):20734–42. doi: 10.1074/jbc.R115.656462 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ougland R, Rognes T, Klungland A, Larsen E. Non-homologous functions of the AlkB homologs. J Mol Cell Biol. 2015;7(6):494–504. doi: 10.1093/jmcb/mjv029 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Li H, Zhang Y, Guo Y, Liu R, Yu Q, Gong L, et al. ALKBH1 promotes lung cancer by regulating m6A RNA demethylation. Biochem Pharmacol. 2021;189:114284. doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2020.114284 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Liu F, Clark W, Luo G, Wang X, Fu Y, Wei J, et al. ALKBH1-Mediated tRNA Demethylation Regulates Translation. Cell. 2016;167(7):1897. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.045 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Chen W, Wang H, Mi S, Shao L, Xu Z, Xue M. ALKBH1-mediated m1 A demethylation of METTL3 mRNA promotes the metastasis of colorectal cancer by downregulating SMAD7 expression. Mol Oncol. 2023;17(2):344–64. doi: 10.1002/1878-0261.13366 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ma C-J, Ding J-H, Ye T-T, Yuan B-F, Feng Y-Q. AlkB Homologue 1 Demethylates N3-Methylcytidine in mRNA of Mammals. ACS Chem Biol. 2019;14(7):1418–25. doi: 10.1021/acschembio.8b01001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Zhang C, Li J, Wang L, Yang P, Luo X. ALKBH1 knockdown promotes the growth, migration and invasion of HTR-8/SVneo cells through regulating the m5C modification PSMD14. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):7345. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-91233-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Arguello AE, Li A, Sun X, Eggert TW, Mairhofer E, Kleiner RE. Reactivity-dependent profiling of RNA 5-methylcytidine dioxygenases. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):4176. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-31876-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Xie Q, Wu TP, Gimple RC, Li Z, Prager BC, Wu Q, et al. N(6)-methyladenine DNA Modification in Glioblastoma. Cell. 2018;175(5):1228–43 e20. Epub 2018/11/06. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ougland R, Lando D, Jonson I, Dahl JA, Moen MN, Nordstrand LM, et al. ALKBH1 is a histone H2A dioxygenase involved in neural differentiation. Stem Cells. 2012;30(12):2672–82. doi: 10.1002/stem.1228 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Nordstrand LM, Svärd J, Larsen E, Nilsen A, Ougland R, Furu K, et al. Mice lacking Alkbh1 display sex-ratio distortion and unilateral eye defects. PLoS One. 2010;5(11):e13827. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013827 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Shen C, Che Y, Zhou K, Wang K, Li W, Xue D, et al. ALKBH1 Drives Tumorigenesis and Drug Resistance via tRNA-decoding Reprogramming and Codon-biased Translation. Cancer Discov. 2025;15(11):2298–325. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-24-1043 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Douvlataniotis K, Bensberg M, Lentini A, Gylemo B, Nestor CE. No evidence for DNA N6-methyladenine in mammals. Sci Adv. 2020;6(12):eaay3335. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aay3335 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Lyu C, Niu Y, Lai W, Wang Y, Wang Y, Dai P, et al. Rare and misincorporated DNA N6-methyladenine is a hallmark of cytotoxic stresses for selectively stimulating the stemness and proliferation of glioblastoma cells. Cell Discov. 2022;8(1):39. doi: 10.1038/s41421-022-00399-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Wagner A, Hofmeister O, Rolland SG, Maiser A, Aasumets K, Schmitt S, et al. Mitochondrial Alkbh1 localizes to mtRNA granules and its knockdown induces the mitochondrial UPR in humans and C. elegans. J Cell Sci. 2019;132(19):jcs223891. doi: 10.1242/jcs.223891 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Traube FR, Schiffers S, Carell T. Quantification of DNA methylation and its oxidized derivatives using LC-MS. Methods Mol Biol. 2021;2272:77–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Traube FR, Schiffers S, Iwan K, Kellner S, Spada F, Müller M, et al. Isotope-dilution mass spectrometry for exact quantification of noncanonical DNA nucleosides. Nat Protoc. 2019;14(1):283–312. doi: 10.1038/s41596-018-0094-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Schöller E, Marks J, Marchand V, Bruckmann A, Powell CA, Reichold M, et al. Balancing of mitochondrial translation through METTL8-mediated m3C modification of mitochondrial tRNAs. Mol Cell. 2021;81(23):4810-4825.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2021.10.018 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Huang M-H, Peng G-X, Mao X-L, Wang J-T, Zhou J-B, Zhang J-H, et al. Molecular basis for human mitochondrial tRNA m3C modification by alternatively spliced METTL8. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022;50(7):4012–28. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkac184 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Traube FR, Schiffers S, Iwan K, Kellner S, Spada F, Müller M, et al. Isotope-dilution mass spectrometry for exact quantification of noncanonical DNA nucleosides. Nat Protoc. 2019;14(1):283–312. doi: 10.1038/s41596-018-0094-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Šimelis K, Belle R, Kawamura A. Unravelling 2-oxoglutarate turnover and substrate oxidation dynamics in 5-methylcytosine-oxidising TET enzymes. Commun Chem. 2024;7(1):305. doi: 10.1038/s42004-024-01382-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Alves J, Vidugiris G, Goueli SA, Zegzouti H. Bioluminescent High-Throughput Succinate Detection Method for Monitoring the Activity of JMJC Histone Demethylases and Fe(II)/2-Oxoglutarate-Dependent Dioxygenases. SLAS Discov. 2018;23(3):242–54. doi: 10.1177/2472555217745657 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Chen Y-H, Comeaux LM, Eyles SJ, Knapp MJ. Auto-hydroxylation of FIH-1: an Fe(ii), alpha-ketoglutarate-dependent human hypoxia sensor. Chem Commun (Camb). 2008;(39):4768–70. doi: 10.1039/b809099h [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kawarada L, Suzuki T, Ohira T, Hirata S, Miyauchi K, Suzuki T. ALKBH1 is an RNA dioxygenase responsible for cytoplasmic and mitochondrial tRNA modifications. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45(12):7401–15. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx354 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kleiber N, Lemus-Diaz N, Stiller C, Heinrichs M, Mai MM-Q, Hackert P, et al. The RNA methyltransferase METTL8 installs m3C32 in mitochondrial tRNAsThr/Ser(UCN) to optimise tRNA structure and mitochondrial translation. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):209. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-27905-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Heiss M, Hagelskamp F, Marchand V, Motorin Y, Kellner S. Cell culture NAIL-MS allows insight into human tRNA and rRNA modification dynamics in vivo. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):389. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-20576-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Cui J, Liu Q, Sendinc E, Shi Y, Gregory RI. Nucleotide resolution profiling of m3C RNA modification by HAC-seq. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49(5):e27. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaa1186 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Shinoda S, Kitagawa S, Nakagawa S, Wei F-Y, Tomizawa K, Araki K, et al. Mammalian NSUN2 introduces 5-methylcytidines into mitochondrial tRNAs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(16):8734–45. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz575 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Van Haute L, Lee S-Y, McCann BJ, Powell CA, Bansal D, Vasiliauskaitė L, et al. NSUN2 introduces 5-methylcytosines in mammalian mitochondrial tRNAs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(16):8720–33. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz559 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Suzuki T, Suzuki T. A complete landscape of post-transcriptional modifications in mammalian mitochondrial tRNAs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42(11):7346–57. doi: 10.1093/nar/gku390 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hauenschild R, Tserovski L, Schmid K, Thüring K, Winz M-L, Sharma S, et al. The reverse transcription signature of N-1-methyladenosine in RNA-Seq is sequence dependent. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43(20):9950–64. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkv895 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Reichle VF, Kaiser S, Heiss M, Hagelskamp F, Borland K, Kellner S. Surpassing limits of static RNA modification analysis with dynamic NAIL-MS. Methods. 2019;156:91–101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Nakayashiki A, Nagai A, Iwasaki Y, Mousa A, Kumai M, Kimura M. ALKBH1 drives codon-biased, pro-oncogenic translation and tumor microenvironment remodeling in glioma via tRNA wobble oxidation. bioRxiv. 2025. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Stejskal S, Rájecká V, Covelo-Molares H, Sinigaglia K, Brožinová K, Kašiarová L, et al. Global analysis by LC-MS/MS of N6-methyladenosine and inosine in mRNA reveal complex incidence. RNA. 2025;31(4):514–28. doi: 10.1261/rna.080324.124 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Wesseling H, Kaiser S. Temporal and spatial profiling of ALKBH5 activity through NAIL-MS and compartmentalized RNA Isolation. RNA. 2025;:rna.080593.125. doi: 10.1261/rna.080593.125 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Hengesbach M, Chan C-K, Bhandari T, Bruzel A, DeMott MS, Podoprygorina G, et al. Toward standardized epitranscriptome analytics: an inter-laboratory comparison of mass spectrometric detection and quantification of modified ribonucleosides in human RNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 2025;53(17):gkaf895. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaf895 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Borland K, Diesend J, Ito-Kureha T, Heissmeyer V, Hammann C, Buck AH, et al. Production and Application of Stable Isotope-Labeled Internal Standards for RNA Modification Analysis. Genes (Basel). 2019;10(1):26. doi: 10.3390/genes10010026 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Mathivanan J, Du J, Mao S, Zheng YY, Sheng J. Synthesis and Purification of N3 -Methylcytidine (m3 C) Modified RNA Oligonucleotides. Curr Protoc. 2021;1(11):e307. doi: 10.1002/cpz1.307 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Mao S, Haruehanroengra P, Ranganathan SV, Shen F, Begley TJ, Sheng J. Base Pairing and Functional Insights into N3-Methylcytidine (m3C) in RNA. ACS Chem Biol. 2021;16(1):76–85. doi: 10.1021/acschembio.0c00735 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Mohammad H Ghazimoradi

6 Jan 2026

Dear Dr. Schneider,

plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

  • A letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols....

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Mohammad H. Ghazimoradi

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf....

2. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

“Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SCHN 1273-9) and SFB 1309 (project number 325871075) BMFTR Cluster4Future program (Cluster for Nucleic Acid Therapeutics Munich, CNATM, ID: 03ZU1201AA).”

Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed.

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

“This work was financially supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SCHN 1273-9) and SFB 1309 (project number 325871075) to S.S., L.D., T.C. and S.K., as well as the BMBF Cluster4Future program (Cluster for Nucleic Acid Therapeutics Munich, CNATM, ID: 03ZU1201AA). “

We note that you have provided additional information within the Acknowledgements Section that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. Please note that funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SCHN 1273-9) and SFB 1309 (project number 325871075) BMFTR Cluster4Future program (Cluster for Nucleic Acid Therapeutics Munich, CNATM, ID: 03ZU1201AA).”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels.

5. In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any questions.

6. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: Henzeler et al present their analysis of the potential and controversial ALKBH1 function as an RNA modifying enzymes. This subject is timely and important, and their negative results are a very important addition to the literature. ALKBH1 has been a subject of controversy for quite some time. Initially reported to protect against DNA alkylation damage (Drabløs et al, DNA Repair, 2004), ALKBH1 was later recognized as important RNA modifying enzyme. First, Liu et al identified it as an m1A demethylase (Liu et al, Cell, 2016). This was later validated by 2 independent groups. Rashad et al (RNA Biol, 2020) showed that ALKBH1 demethylates m1A specifically during oxidative stress. Arguello et al (Nat Comm, 2022) also examined the m1A activity using orthogonal methods. Surprisingly, Xie et al, (Cell, 2018) reported that ALKBH1 is a DNA m6A demethylase, a claim that was thoroughly challenged in multiple articles (Douvlataniotis et al, Sci Adv, 2020; Lyu et al, Cell Discov, 2022). ALKBH1 is also thoroughly validated as a tRNA dioxygenase, catalyzing the oxygenation of wobble m5C to hm5C and then to f5C (Kawarada et al, Nucleic Acids Res, 2017, Arguello et al, Nat Comm, 2022; Nakayashiki et al, Biorxiv, 2025; Shen et al, Cancer Discov, 2025). Through this effect, ALKBH1 can regulate the decoding of rare leucine codons and drive oncogenesis (Nakayashiki et al and Shen et al). Nonetheless, due to its clear importance in cancer biology, many claims have been made regarding its function, using suboptimal methods. For example, researchers claimed that it demethylates m7G, m5C, and m1A in mRNA, to mention a few. This ambiguity is indeed detrimental to understanding its function and role in diseases, which is why the article at hand is important and timely, especially with the great interest in RNA modifications currently observed.

There are, nonetheless, several points that need to be taken into consideration. Given that the authors report negative results, engaging with the different approaches reported in the literature regarding ALKBH1 activity is important. Additionally, there are a couple of new important articles on ALKBH1 function that engage with these inquiries that need to be cited, as they support the authors’ observations. Below I will give specific comments:

1-In the abstract, the authors write: “In addition, varying the glucose and fetal bovine serum (FBS) concentration in the growth medium of HEK293T cells, in combination with alkbh1 siRNA-mediated knock-down, also shows no impact on the tRNA modification spectra”. This is a bit of generalization, given that ALKBH1 does in fact impact wobble modifications (f5C and hm5C) that are not characterized here. It is better to change the language to either focus on methylation modifications or ALKBH1 eraser activity.

2-The authors’ in vivo analysis focused on specific mitochondrial tRNAs that were isolated using complementary DNA oligos (mt-tRNA-SerUCA and mt-tRNA-ThrUGU). However, why the authors did not attempt to evaluate other reported mt-tRNAs that interact with ALKBH1 such as mt-tRNA-Arg and mt-tRNA-Lys (reported in Kawarada et al, Nucleic Acids Res, 2017). Additionally, the article by Liu et al (Cell, 2016) focused heavily on cytosolic tRNA-Met, which the authors did not test. Validating previously reported ALKBH1-interacting tRNAs is of utmost importance.

3-The authors did not observe changes in tRNA methylation status after exposing HEK293T cells to different glucose or FBS concentrations. However, the authors only cultured the cells for 8 hours, which might not be enough to elicit responses at the level of tRNA modifications. Furthermore, simple changes in glucose or FBS concentrations might not be sufficient, unless protracted durations, to induce an effect. Rashad et al (RNA Biol, 2020) reported that ALKBH1 acts as m1A demethylase during acute oxidative stress. Thus, a more stressful stimulus, such as FBS or glucose deprivation, could elicit the response. In a preprint (Rashad et al, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.02.14.580389) it was shown that FBS deprivation does impact m1A levels. Thus, I would recommend either extending the duration of cell culture (24~48 hours) or using deprivation media to make sure that there is no effect (ideally various conditions should be used).

4-Another point related to the Rashad et al, RNA Biol, 2020 report. Testing under conditions of oxidative stress could also be of value, given that Arguello et al (Nat Comm, 2022) validated stress induced demethylase activity of ALKBH1.

5- There are 2 new articles that I would like to direct the authors’ attention to: Shen et al, Cancer Discov, 2025, in which the authors show that ALKBH1 is a tRNA dioxygenase acting to facilitate the translation of rare Leucine codons. The second paper is Nakayashiki et al, Biorxiv, 2025 (doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.11.28.691056). This preprint is important also as it not only validates the function of ALKBH1 on wobble modifications and rare leucine codons, but also the authors perform CRISPR/Cas9 KO or ALKBH1 and overexpression in 5 different cancer cell lines and use LC-MS/MS to analyze the changes in tRNA modifications. The authors did not observe demethylation activity of ALKBH1 in their analysis, which further validates the presented work.

6-Final note, I recommend the authors to engage more with the wealth of aberrantly reported activities of RNA modifying enzymes. Discussing the importance of rigorous testing and the differences between in vitro and in vivo observations should be further highlighted in the discussion. Many articles have reported “new RNA modifying functions” of various enzymes using suboptimal tools such as simple dot blots. These trends should be challenged and addressed. It is important to also discuss the previous reports on ALKBH1 tRNA activity by highlighting the methods used and their strengths/weaknesses.

Reviewer #2: Summary and overall assessment

In this study, Bennett Henzeler et al. aim to reconcile ALKBH1’s reported breadth of in vitro RNA demethylation activity with the frequent difficulty of detecting in vivo effects under standard culture conditions. Using quantitative isotope-dilution nucleoside LC–MS/MS the authors demonstrate in vitro reduction of multiple modified nucleosides (m1A, m3C, m5C) in total tRNA extracts and develop an enzymatic pipeline to generate defined mt-tRNA substrates carrying m3C32 (and i6A37) and observe partial m3C reduction upon ALKBH1 treatment. They also report no detectable changes in bulk nucleoside modification profiles upon ALKBH1 overexpression or siRNA knockdown in HEK293T cell nor after 8 h glucose/FBS variation in HEK293T/HeLa cells for two cytosolic tRNAs.

The in vitro biochemical work is competent, and the negative cellular results are potentially valuable. However, multiple conclusions are currently over-scoped relative to the experimental design, and key “dependency” claims (Fe(II)/α-KG) are not directly demonstrated. Most importantly, the authors’ own data indicate ALKBH1 has an unusually long half-life, which substantially weakens inference from short-term perturbations (siRNA and 8 h metabolic shifts). The study can have some improvements before it can be published. See the comments below:

Major comments

1) Cellular “no effect” conclusions are underpowered given ALKBH1 stability; siRNA alone is not a strong depletion strategy here. The authors show ALKBH1 abundance “does not change over 72 h after cycloheximide” and interpret this as an unusually long half-life. They also acknowledge that remaining ALKBH1 activity may be sufficient to maintain steady-state modification levels. Under these circumstances, “no detectable change” after siRNA is not strong evidence that ALKBH1 lacks cellular substrates. Complement siRNA with a protein degradation approach (e.g., PROTAC-mediated ALKBH1 degradation) in both HEK293T and HeLa cells to achieve rapid, deep depletion at the protein level, and re-test the key modification readouts. At minimum, the authors should quantify ALKBH1 protein reduction (not just mRNA) under each perturbation regime and correlate depletion depth with modification changes (or lack thereof).

2) After the overexpression of ALKBH1, the author should perform the localization assay of the ALKBH1, since it can both locate in the mitochondria, nucleus and cytosolic ER.

Minor comment:

1) “m3C32 is a major natural substrate” is over-stated relative to the cellular evidence. The manuscript concludes that the enzymatically generated substrates show ALKBH1 reduces m3C by ~25–40% and therefore “m3C32 is indeed a major natural substrate”, yet endogenous mt-tRNA modification spectra remain unchanged upon overexpression/knockdown in HEK293T cells. It is better to tone down wording to “biochemically competent substrate in vitro,” unless the authors can demonstrate a cellular condition where ALKBH1 depletion/activation produces a measurable, reproducible change.

2) Fe (II)/α-KG dependency is asserted but not directly tested. The manuscript states an intent to “further evaluate the Fe (II)/α-KG dependency of ALKBH1 in vitro”, but the described Succinate-Glo experiments primarily validate that succinate generation correlates with catalytic competency and is partially confounded by auto-hydroxylation, rather than establishing cofactor (Fe (II) /α-KG) dependency. The author should include explicit –Fe(II) and –α-KG conditions (and ideally chelation, e.g., EDTA or titration of Fe concentration;) for this assay. Alternatively, the authors may change their claim and tune down it. The currently assay is more like a validation of the success of the catalytic death mutant of ALKBH1.

3) The 8 h glucose/FBS assay does not robustly test “glucose does not impact ALKBH1-mediated RNA modification”. The authors culture cells for 8 h under different glucose/FBS conditions and observe no change in m1A in two enriched cytosolic tRNAs, plus only minor effects on alkbh1 mRNA. Given the long ALKBH1 half-life and the likelihood that bulk tRNA modification pools turnover slowly, an 8 h window is not a stringent test of glucose-driven, ALKBH1-dependent remodeling. I suggest reframing the claim narrowly (no detectable change under this 8 h condition in these two cytosolic tRNAs)

4) Please specify clearly which ALKBH1 overexpression construct was used in each cellular experiment (untagged vs C-terminal Strep-tag)

5) In the method section, the tRNA refolding part (line 383) please cite a reference. In addition, if the author can add evidence to show the tRNA refolding correctly, that would be appreciated.

**********

what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy..-->

Reviewer #1: Yes: Sherif RashadSherif RashadSherif RashadSherif Rashad

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures

You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation.

NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications.

PLoS One. 2026 Apr 6;21(4):e0337155. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0337155.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 1


2 Feb 2026

Review Comments to the Author

We thank the reviewer for thoroughly reading of our manuscript and the positive and constructive comments, that allowed us to markedly improve the manuscript.

Reviewer #1: Henzeler et al present their analysis of the potential and controversial ALKBH1 function as an RNA modifying enzymes. This subject is timely and important, and their negative results are a very important addition to the literature. ALKBH1 has been a subject of controversy for quite some time. Initially reported to protect against DNA alkylation damage (Drabløs et al, DNA Repair, 2004), ALKBH1 was later recognized as important RNA modifying enzyme. First, Liu et al identified it as an m1A demethylase (Liu et al, Cell, 2016). This was later validated by 2 independent groups. Rashad et al (RNA Biol, 2020) showed that ALKBH1 demethylates m1A specifically during oxidative stress. Arguello et al (Nat Comm, 2022) also examined the m1A activity using orthogonal methods. Surprisingly, Xie et al, (Cell, 2018) reported that ALKBH1 is a DNA m6A demethylase, a claim that was thoroughly challenged in multiple articles (Douvlataniotis et al, Sci Adv, 2020; Lyu et al, Cell Discov, 2022). ALKBH1 is also thoroughly validated as a tRNA dioxygenase, catalyzing the oxygenation of wobble m5C to hm5C and then to f5C (Kawarada et al, Nucleic Acids Res, 2017, Arguello et al, Nat Comm, 2022; Nakayashiki et al, Biorxiv, 2025; Shen et al, Cancer Discov, 2025). Through this effect, ALKBH1 can regulate the decoding of rare leucine codons and drive oncogenesis (Nakayashiki et al and Shen et al). Nonetheless, due to its clear importance in cancer biology, many claims have been made regarding its function, using suboptimal methods. For example, researchers claimed that it demethylates m7G, m5C, and m1A in mRNA, to mention a few. This ambiguity is indeed detrimental to understanding its function and role in diseases, which is why the article at hand is important and timely, especially with the great interest in RNA modifications currently observed.

There are, nonetheless, several points that need to be taken into consideration. Given that the authors report negative results, engaging with the different approaches reported in the literature regarding ALKBH1 activity is important. Additionally, there are a couple of new important articles on ALKBH1 function that engage with these inquiries that need to be cited, as they support the authors’ observations. Below I will give specific comments:

We have included in the introduction additional references to emphasis further on the ambiguity of ALKBH1 function.

1-In the abstract, the authors write: “In addition, varying the glucose and fetal bovine serum (FBS) concentration in the growth medium of HEK293T cells, in combination with alkbh1 siRNA-mediated knock-down, also shows no impact on the tRNA modification spectra”. This is a bit of generalization, given that ALKBH1 does in fact impact wobble modifications (f5C and hm5C) that are not characterized here. It is better to change the language to either focus on methylation modifications or ALKBH1 eraser activity.

We have reworded the sentence, which reads now: “In addition, varying the glucose and fetal bovine serum (FBS) concentration in the growth medium of HEK293T cells, in combination with alkbh1 siRNA-mediated knock-down, also shows no impact on tRNA methylation.”

2-The authors’ in vivo analysis focused on specific mitochondrial tRNAs that were isolated using complementary DNA oligos (mt-tRNA-SerUCA and mt-tRNA-ThrUGU). However, why the authors did not attempt to evaluate other reported mt-tRNAs that interact with ALKBH1 such as mt-tRNA-Arg and mt-tRNA-Lys (reported in Kawarada et al, Nucleic Acids Res, 2017). Additionally, the article by Liu et al (Cell, 2016) focused heavily on cytosolic tRNA-Met, which the authors did not test. Validating previously reported ALKBH1-interacting tRNAs is of utmost importance.

Our selection of mitochondrial tRNAs was guided by 3 considerations, which are now stated in the manuscript: (i) we find activity of ALKBH1 in vitro towards m3C. As in vivo activity of ALKBH1 against m3C-containing mt-tRNAs were not yet reported, mt-tRNA-Ser and mt-tRNA-Thr were our main candidates of interest. (ii) Both mt-tRNA-Ser and mt-tRNA-Thr contain m1A and may be substrate to ALKBH1 as reported by Liu et al for cytosolic tRNAs (Cell 2016) and (iii) m5C/f5C and f5Cm-modified mt-tRNAs (from Kawarada et al, NAR, 2017) were not considered as these are not technologically accessible with our LC-MS method. Therefore mt-tRNA-Met was not studied. Sequence and modification of mt-tRNASer (UCN and AGY) and mt-tRNAThr as reported by Suzuki et al, 2020, Nat Commun.

Regarding the suggested mt-tRNAs of the reviewer, we want to point out that mt-tRNAs are of extreme low abundance and thus their isolation requires either specialized equipment as shown by the Suzuki lab in the past years (Kawarada, NAR, 2017 or the hallmark study Suzuki et al, 2020, Nat Commun) or a highly sensitive LC-MS set-up that allows analysis of sub-nanogram amounts of mt-tRNA isolates (this manuscript). Nevertheless, the abundance of mt-tRNAs remains a challenge and therefore, 3 mt-tRNA isoacceptors was the maximum of tRNAs we could isolate with the material gained after economic and technical considerations. Our priority was guided by the following considerations: The reported mt-tRNA-Met against which ALKBH1 shows activity would have been the ideal control. Yet, the substrate/product of ALKBH1, namely m5C/f5C, in mt-tRNA-Met, cannot be analyzed in our ammonium acetate chromatography set-up, and thus this potential control could not be done. Further, to the best of our knowledge Liu et al (Cell 2016) analyzed cytosolic tRNAs Lys and Arg and not mt-tRNAs. In conjunction with our observation that ALKBH1 targets m3C in vitro, our highest priority was the isolation of the 2 m3C-containing tRNAs and the remaining seryl-tRNA with a C32 shown in the manuscript. These also contain m1A which expands the study of Liu et al (Cell 2016), although we did not observe in vivo activity.

3-The authors did not observe changes in tRNA methylation status after exposing HEK293T cells to different glucose or FBS concentrations. However, the authors only cultured the cells for 8 hours, which might not be enough to elicit responses at the level of tRNA modifications. Furthermore, simple changes in glucose or FBS concentrations might not be sufficient, unless protracted durations, to induce an effect. Rashad et al (RNA Biol, 2020) reported that ALKBH1 acts as m1A demethylase during acute oxidative stress. Thus, a more stressful stimulus, such as FBS or glucose deprivation, could elicit the response. In a preprint (Rashad et al, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.02.14.580389) it was shown that FBS deprivation does impact m1A levels. Thus, I would recommend either extending the duration of cell culture (24~48 hours) or using deprivation media to make sure that there is no effect (ideally various conditions should be used).

In order to address this, we incubated HEK293T cells under reduced FBS and/or glucose conditions for 24h. However it should be noted that after 24h under these stress condition cell confluency was lower compared to standard growth conditions, albeit we did not observe increased cell death (MTT assay). It should be noted, however, that HEK293T cells are a highly transformed, immortalized cell line, and most other cells would be unlikely to tolerate such stress conditions over this time frame. Under these circumstances, for example during the onset of cell death, numerous factors beyond ALKBH1 may become up- or downregulated or activated or inactivated, which could also potentially influence epigenetic modifications. However, we did not observe any significant impact on ALKBH1 and nucleoside modifications in total tRNA.

We agree with the reviewer, that to identify the conditions and cellular states in which the clearly important role of ALKBH1 plays surfaces. However, this is beyond the scope of our study, where we emphasis that highly immortalized cells under standard laboratory culturing conditions are not the appropriate model system to achieve this.

4-Another point related to the Rashad et al, RNA Biol, 2020 report. Testing under conditions of oxidative stress could also be of value, given that Arguello et al (Nat Comm, 2022) validated stress induced demethylase activity of ALKBH1.

We agree with the reviewer that identifying conditions, cell states etc where ALKBH1 activity is important is of paramount interest to elucidate the exact role of this clearly important enzyme. However, this is beyond the scope of this manuscript. Here we show that the cell culture conditions and cell system chosen is essential and that ALKBH1 does not play a role in the demethylation of tRNAs in human cells lines grown under optimal conditions.

5- There are 2 new articles that I would like to direct the authors’ attention to: Shen et al, Cancer Discov, 2025, in which the authors show that ALKBH1 is a tRNA dioxygenase acting to facilitate the translation of rare Leucine codons. The second paper is Nakayashiki et al, Biorxiv, 2025 (doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.11.28.691056). This preprint is important also as it not only validates the function of ALKBH1 on wobble modifications and rare leucine codons, but also the authors perform CRISPR/Cas9 KO or ALKBH1 and overexpression in 5 different cancer cell lines and use LC-MS/MS to analyze the changes in tRNA modifications. The authors did not observe demethylation activity of ALKBH1 in their analysis, which further validates the presented work.

We thank the reviewer for pointing this out and have included these reports in the discussion.

6-Final note, I recommend the authors to engage more with the wealth of aberrantly reported activities of RNA modifying enzymes. Discussing the importance of rigorous testing and the differences between in vitro and in vivo observations should be further highlighted in the discussion. Many articles have reported “new RNA modifying functions” of various enzymes using suboptimal tools such as simple dot blots. These trends should be challenged and addressed. It is important to also discuss the previous reports on ALKBH1 tRNA activity by highlighting the methods used and their strengths/weaknesses.

We thank the reviewer for this excellent suggestion and we have re-written the discussion to first discuss our observations on ALKBH1 activity observed by us and others. As the final paragraph, we discuss the challenges in the in vivo analysis of RNA demethylation detection and highlight suitable technologies to approach proving in vivo activity of demethylases.

Reviewer #2: Summary and overall assessment

In this study, Bennett Henzeler et al. aim to reconcile ALKBH1’s reported breadth of in vitro RNA demethylation activity with the frequent difficulty of detecting in vivo effects under standard culture conditions. Using quantitative isotope-dilution nucleoside LC–MS/MS the authors demonstrate in vitro reduction of multiple modified nucleosides (m1A, m3C, m5C) in total tRNA extracts and develop an enzymatic pipeline to generate defined mt-tRNA substrates carrying m3C32 (and i6A37) and observe partial m3C reduction upon ALKBH1 treatment. They also report no detectable changes in bulk nucleoside modification profiles upon ALKBH1 overexpression or siRNA knockdown in HEK293T cell nor after 8 h glucose/FBS variation in HEK293T/HeLa cells for two cytosolic tRNAs.

The in vitro biochemical work is competent, and the negative cellular results are potentially valuable. However, multiple conclusions are currently over-scoped relative to the experimental design, and key “dependency” claims (Fe(II)/α-KG) are not directly demonstrated. Most importantly, the authors’ own data indicate ALKBH1 has an unusually long half-life, which substantially weakens inference from short-term perturbations (siRNA and 8 h metabolic shifts). The study can have some improvements before it can be published. See the comments below:

For AlkB-family of dioxygenases their Fe(II)/α-KG dependency has been clearly established. The residues involved in binding to Fe(II) and α-KG are well conserved in the AlkB homologs and are essential for catalytic activity. We introduced two point mutations of the crucial Asp residues, which abolishes activity as seen in the succinate glow assay.

We have now carried out additional experiments and tested incubating HEK293T cells under FBS and/or glucose starvation conditions for 24h. Please see below detailed comment below and above (Reviewer 1).

Major comments

1) Cellular “no effect” conclusions are underpowered given ALKBH1 stability; siRNA alone is not a strong depletion strategy here. The authors show ALKBH1 abundance “does not change over 72 h after cycloheximide” and interpret this as an unusually long half-life. They also acknowledge that remaining ALKBH1 activity may be sufficient to maintain steady-state modification levels. Under these circumstances, “no detectable change” after siRNA is not strong evidence that ALKBH1 lacks cellular substrates. Complement siRNA with a protein degradation approach (e.g., PROTAC-mediated ALKBH1 degradation) in both HEK293T and HeLa cells to achieve rapid, deep depletion at the protein level, and re-test the key modification readouts. At minimum, the authors should quantify ALKBH1 protein reduction (not just mRNA) under each perturbation regime and correlate depletion depth with modification changes (or lack thereof).

We have also analysed the effect on siRNA-mediated knockdown of ALKBH1 on the protein level by Westerblot (Supporting Fig. S5). Here we see a significant reduction on protein level. We have now also included Westernblots for cells grown under low FBS and/or low glucose (new Supporting Fig S9).

A recent manuscript by Nakayashiki et al (bioRxiv preprint doi: 10.1101/2025.11.28.691056) where ALKBH1 was knocked-out using CRISPR-Cas9 also showed no effect on f5C-levels in tRNA in cell lines. This further supports the key massage of our manuscript that in human cells lines grown under optimal conditions ALKBH1 does not play an important role in the demethylation of tRNAs.

Of course it is of paramount interest to identify the specific cellular states and conditions where ALKBH1 activity is of importance. However, this is beyond the scope of the present manuscript.

2) After the overexpression of ALKBH1, the author should perform the localization assay of the ALKBH1, since it can both locate in the mitochondria, nucleus and cytosolic ER.

In a previous study it was shown that upon overexpression ALKBH1 localises to the mitochondria in several human cell lines such as HeLa, HT-29 and PC3 cells (Wagner et al 2019). We have added the following sentence to the manuscript: “It was previously shown that upon overexpression ALKBH1 locates to the mitochondria in several human cell lines [19].”

Minor comment:

1) “m3C32 is a major natural substrate” is over-stated relative to the cellular evidence. The manuscript concludes that the enzymatically generated substrates show ALKBH1 reduces m3C by ~25–40% and therefore “m3C32 is indeed a major natural substrate”, yet endogenous mt-tRNA modification spectra remain unchanged upon overexpression/knockdown in HEK293T cells. It is better to tone down wording to “biochemically competent substrate in vitro,” unless the authors can demonstrate a cellular condition where ALKBH1 depletion/activation produces a measurable, reproducible change.

We re-worded the sentence: “These results show that ALKBH1 reduces m3C methylation levels in these tRNAs by about 25-40 % (Fig 2B) and that m3C32 is indeed a substrate of ALKBH1.”

2) Fe (II)/α-KG dependency is asserted but not directly tested. The manuscript states an intent to “further evaluate the Fe (II)/α-KG dependency of ALKBH1 in vitro”, but the described Succinate-Glo experiments primarily validate that succinate generation correlates with catalytic competency and is partially confounded by auto-hydroxylation, rather than establishing cofactor (Fe (II) /α-KG) dependency. The author should include explicit –Fe(II) and –α-KG conditions (and ideally chelation, e.g., EDTA or titration of Fe conc

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response-to-reviewer.pdf

pone.0337155.s021.pdf (75.6KB, pdf)

Decision Letter 1

Yu-Hsuan Tsai

8 Feb 2026

Dear Dr. Schneider,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 25 2026 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

  • A letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols....

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Yu-Hsuan Tsai

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Journal Requirements:

1. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise.

2. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

Somehow the previous handling editor is no longer available, and I have taken over the processing of your revised submission (PONE-D-25-59513_R1). Both reviewers appear generally satisfied with the revisions. However, please **still address Reviewer 1’s second point** before we proceed further.

In addition, please **carefully proofread the revised manuscript for grammar, typographical errors, and internal consistency**. Several issues are listed below as examples; please correct these and ensure there are no similar errors elsewhere. I anticipate that these changes should be straightforward and should not require substantial time.

As I will be on vacation **12–23 February** for the Chinese New Year holiday, if you can return the revised files **by 11 February**, I should be able to complete processing before I am away. No further external review is expected for the next round.

### Examples of required language/consistency corrections

**Abstract / Results**

* “does not impact on rRNA modifications” → revise to “does not impact rRNA modifications” or “has no impact on rRNA modifications”.

* “siRNA-mediated knock-down of alkbh1” → standardize to “siRNA-mediated knockdown of ALKBH1” (and ensure consistent capitalization throughout).

* “ALKBH1 locates to the mitochondria” → revise to “ALKBH1 localizes to mitochondria” (add a comma after the introductory clause, as appropriate).

* “may be substrate to ALKBH1” → revise to “may be substrates for ALKBH1”.

* “LC-MS set-up.The …” → add missing space: “set-up. The …”.

**Methods: siRNA transfection**

* “siRNA mediated” → “siRNA-mediated”.

* “following manufacturer protocol” → “following the manufacturer’s protocol”.

* “… vortexing. jetPRIME® reagent …” → revise to “... vortexing. **The** jetPRIME® reagent …”.

* “1-s vortex” → revise to “vortexed for 1 s” (or “1 s vortexing”).

**tRNA isoacceptor purification**

* “reverse complementary” → use “reverse-complementary” or “reverse complement”.

* “DNA oligonucleotide were” → “DNA oligonucleotides were”; also add article: “from **a** previous publication”.

* “Equal amount” → “Equal amounts” (and adjust verb agreement where needed).

* “15 μl” → “15 μL”.

* “Each iso-acceptor was purified as triplicate.” → “Each isoacceptor was purified in triplicate.” (also standardize “isoacceptor” vs. “iso-acceptor” throughout).

**Immunoblotting**

* “over night” → “overnight”.

* “Equal amount of protein were …” → “Equal amounts of protein were …” (or “An equal amount … was …”).

* “sulfate” vs “sulphate” in the SDS-PAGE description → standardize to one spelling (preferably “sulfate”).

* “following manufacturers protocol” → “following the manufacturer’s protocol”.

**Miscellaneous**

* “stored at -80°C until further analysis After defrosting,” → revise to “…analysis. After defrosting, …”.

* Author contributions: “und” → “and”.

* Cycloheximide chase: “mock were considered 100%” → “mock was considered 100%” (or “mock samples were considered 100%”).

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: The authors responded to my comments in an excellent manner. I agree with their assessment of ALKBH1 function, especially in light of new evidence. I have 2 minor comments:

1- IN Nakayashiki et al's preprint, they used 4 cell lines and not 5 (This was a typo in my previous comment, but the authors should double check)

2- The authors should add a limitation section in their discussion including some of the points they discussed (mitochondrial tRNA limitations, technology limitations in assessing other modifications, different results compared to literature due to different approaches, etc.)

Apart from those 2 minor points, I believe my concerns and comments are all addressed.

Reviewer #2: In this revision, the authors strengthen their manuscript by (1) adding protein-level validation of ALKBH1 knockdown/overexpression and documenting an unusually long ALKBH1 half-life, (2) extending glucose/FBS stress experiments to 24 h with matched ALKBH1 mRNA/protein and tRNA nucleoside LC–MS/MS readouts, (3) adding a –α-KG control and rewording prior “Fe(II)/α-KG dependency” language, and (4) providing DLS evidence supporting in vitro tRNA refolding. In summary, these additional experiments has addressed my previous concerns and improved the rigor of this study. They also appropriately narrow several over-scoped claims. The paper is suitable for publication.

**********

what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy..-->

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures

You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation.

NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications.

PLoS One. 2026 Apr 6;21(4):e0337155. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0337155.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 2


9 Feb 2026

We thank again the reviewer for their time and thoughtful comments that have allowed us to further improve our manuscript.

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The authors responded to my comments in an excellent manner. I agree with their assessment of ALKBH1 function, especially in light of new evidence. I have 2 minor comments:

1- IN Nakayashiki et al's preprint, they used 4 cell lines and not 5 (This was a typo in my previous comment, but the authors should double check)

In the cited manuscript by Nakayashiki et al 5 cell lines were used. However, 4 are only relevant for our manuscript. Thus we have corrected it in the manuscript.

2- The authors should add a limitation section in their discussion including some of the points they discussed (mitochondrial tRNA limitations, technology limitations in assessing other modifications, different results compared to literature due to different approaches, etc.)

We have added the following limitation section to the discussion: “In this context quantitative LC-MS analysis must be considered the gold standard in nucleoside detection due to its high specificity and sensitivity, that other detection methods such as dot blots cannot provide. …. Nevertheless, a main challenge for detecting and quantifying modified ribonucleosides is the reproducibility across laboratories [40]. Here variations in growth conditions, cell lines, RNA isolation and processing as well as lack of a standard form of modified RNA for researchers to use as a benchmark for validating their studies hamper the accurate quantification of RNA modifications. In addition, there is no single optimal method for all 170 known modified ribonucleosides or the more than 50 human RNA modification.”

Apart from those 2 minor points, I believe my concerns and comments are all addressed.

We thank the reviewer for his time and valuable comments.

Reviewer #2: In this revision, the authors strengthen their manuscript by (1) adding protein-level validation of ALKBH1 knockdown/overexpression and documenting an unusually long ALKBH1 half-life, (2) extending glucose/FBS stress experiments to 24 h with matched ALKBH1 mRNA/protein and tRNA nucleoside LC–MS/MS readouts, (3) adding a –α-KG control and rewording prior “Fe(II)/α-KG dependency” language, and (4) providing DLS evidence supporting in vitro tRNA refolding. In summary, these additional experiments has addressed my previous concerns and improved the rigor of this study. They also appropriately narrow several over-scoped claims. The paper is suitable for publication.

We thank the reviewer for his time and valuable comments.

Attachment

Submitted filename: response-to-reviewer.docx

pone.0337155.s022.docx (7.2KB, docx)

Decision Letter 2

Yu-Hsuan Tsai

13 Feb 2026

ALKBH1 activity in vitro and human cell lines by isotope dilution mass spectrometry

PONE-D-25-59513R2

Dear Dr. Schneider,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support....

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Yu-Hsuan Tsai

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Yu-Hsuan Tsai

PONE-D-25-59513R2

PLOS One

Dear Dr. Schneider,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS One. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Yu-Hsuan Tsai

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. SDS-PAGE analysis of purified ALKBH1, METTL8 and EcMiaA. A.

    Human ALKBH1 and ALKBH1I218A, ALKBH1AxA, METTL8 and E. coli MiaA were overexpressed and purified from E. coli. B. Human ALKBH1 was overexpressed and purified from HEK293T cells.

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s001.tif (424.6KB, tif)
    S2 Fig. Analysis of the in vitro ALKBH1 activity using the Succinate-GloTM JmjC Demethylase/Hydroxylase Assay (Promega).

    Activity of Fe(II)/α-KG dependent dioxygenases result in the conversion of α-KG to succinate, which in the assay is first converted to ATP that is finally measured by a luciferase/luciferin reaction. The light generated correlates to the amounts of succinate produced by the dioxygenases as a measure for the dioxygenase activity. As substrates either total tRNA extracted from HEK293T cells, as well as a synthetic RNA oligonucleotide as mimic for the mitochondrial tRNASer anticodon arm, with the single m3C32 modification were used. Both were incubated either with 1 μM or 5 μM of wildtype ALKBH1, ALKBH1I218, which cannot undergo auto hydroxylation, or inactive ALKBH1AxA as a control. This shows that the assay is also sensitive to auto-hydroxylation, since overall lower amounts of succinate are generated when ALKBH1I218 is added to total tRNAs, compared to the wild type (left panel). Moreover, the synthetic tRNA-anticodon arm mimic seems not to be a suitable substrate for ALKBH1, since no changes in succinate levels can be observed when ALKBH1I218, which cannot undergo auto hydroxylation was added (right panel). Without addition of α-KG to ALKBH1 no signal is observed.

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s002.tif (104KB, tif)
    S3 Fig. Analysis of in vitro transcribed tRNAs.

    A) Dynamic light scattering (DLS) analysis of folding of in vitro transcribed mt-tRNA-ThrUGU. Denaturing by heat and slow cooling results in monodispersed sample, indicating homogenous and correct folding. Heating followed by rapid cooling on ice leads to aggregation that can be seen by polydispersed distribution. Polydispersity of the sample is also increased by addition of formamide. B) Urea-PAGE (8%) analysis of in vitro transcribed RNA of mt-tRNAs. Both tRNAs were treated with METTL8. Mt-tRNA-SerUCA was first treated with EcMiaA.

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s003.tif (186.7KB, tif)
    S4 Fig. Quantification of RNA modifications in in vitro transcribed ct-tRNA-ValAAC following ALKBH1 directed demethylation, with and without methyl methanesulfonate (MMS) treatment.

    A – E. Absolute levels of m1A (A), m5C (B), m3C (C), m7G (D) and m1G (E) in in vitro transcribed ct-tRNA-ValAAC with and without MMS treatment (w/o MMS). Data represents n = 3 biological replicates. Error bars in graph represent the ± mean S.E. of three biological replicates. p-value (p > 0.05 = ns, p ≤ 0.05 = *, p ≤ 0.01 = **, p ≤ 0.001 = *** and p ≤ 0.0001 = ****) mentioned in the text is calculated by one-way ANOVA and indicates significant differences in medians.

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s004.tif (496KB, tif)
    S5 Fig. Expression of ALKBH1 and analysis of ALKBH1 half-life.

    Analysis of in vitro transcribed tRNAs. A) Dynamic light scattering (DLS) analysis of folding of in vitro transcribed mt-tRNA-ThrUGU. Denaturing by heat and slow cooling results in monodispersed sample, indicating homogenous and correct folding. Heating followed by rapid cooling on ice leads to aggregation that can be seen by polydispersed distribution. Polydispersity of the sample is also increased by addition of formamide. B) Urea-PAGE (8%) analysis of in vitro transcribed RNA of mt-tRNAs. Both tRNAs were treated with METTL8. Mt-tRNA-SerUCA was first treated with EcMiaA.

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s005.tif (344.2KB, tif)
    S6 Fig. Quantification of total tRNA modifications following ALKBH1 knockdown or over expression.

    A-D. LC-MS/MS analysis with absolute levels for Y, D, m2G, m1A, m5C, m22G, Gm and Cm (A). Absolute levels for m7G, m5U, m6A, m1G, I, i6A, t6A and m1I (B). Absolute levels for Am, Q, ManQ, GalQ, Um, acp3U, m3C and ac4C (C). Absolute levels for m3U, mcm5U, ncm5U, mcm5s2U, m6,6A, m5Um, m6t6A and ms2i6A (D). Error bars in the graph represent the ± mean S.E. of six biological replicates. p-value mentioned in the text is calculated by unpaired t-test with no correction and indicates significant differences in median.

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s006.tif (370.2KB, tif)
    S7 Fig. Quantification of RNA modifications in the pulse-chase NAIL-MS following ALKBH1 knockdown.

    A-E. Absolute levels for m1A (A), m5C (B), m6A (C), m3C (D) and m7G (E) per respective RNA molecule (left column: 28S rRNA; middle column: 18S rRNA; right column: tRNA). Each boxplot is divided into three bars: the left column shows the old, unlabeled nucleosides before medium change (t = 0 h, 64 h after seeding), the middle bar shows the old, unlabeled nucleosides after incubation with stable isotope-labeled medium (t = 8 h, 72 h after seeding), and the right bar shows the new, labeled nucleosides after 8 h* of incubation. At each time point, RNA was isolated from siRNAs targeting ALKBH1 (Negative control “ctrl”: scrambled siRNA). All values are derived from n = 2 biological replicates.

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s007.tif (1,006KB, tif)
    S8 Fig. Cell viability of ALKBH1 modified cells.

    A and B. HEK293T cells were transfected with siRNAs targeting ALKBH1 (Negative control “ctrl”: scrambled siRNA) or ALKBH1-pcDNA3 (Negative control “ctrl”: empty vector) for 48 h. The cell viability was then measured by MTT assay based on the OD value. The mean cell viability was calculated. The cell viability in ctrl. was considered 100% to compare the cell viability in ALKBH1 siRNA or ALKBH1-pcDNA3 transfected cells. C. Cell viability was assessed using the MTT assay, based on OD values for the cycloheximide chase experiment where HEK293T cells were transfected with siRNAs targeting ALKBH1 (Negative control “ctrl”: scrambled siRNA).

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s008.tif (581KB, tif)
    S9 Fig. Glucose-dependent demethylation activity of ALKBH1.

    A-C. Longer incubation times (24 h) corresponding to Figure 4. Cells were processed and analyzed by (A) RT-qPCR, and total cell lysates were analyzed by (B; 8 h and C; 24 h) western blotting to assess ALKBH1 expression under varying glucose and serum conditions. D. In parallel, total tRNA was enzymatically digested and subjected to LC-MS/MS for the detection of RNA modifications. Error bars represent the mean ± SEM of three or six biological replicates. Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA without correction. (Created in BioRender. Henzeler, B. (2025).).

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s009.tif (545.1KB, tif)
    S10 Fig. Uncropped gel images of SDS-PAGE analysis of purified ALKBH1, METTL8 and EcMiaA shown in Supporting Fig S1.

    A-D. Human ALKBH1 and ALKBH1I218A, METTL8 and E. coli MiaA were overexpressed and purified from E. coli. E. Human ALKBH1 was overexpressed and purified from HEK293T cells.

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s010.tif (435KB, tif)
    S11 Fig. Uncropped gel images of Urea-PAGE analysis of in vitro transcribed tRNA.

    A) shown in Fig 2A and B) Supporting Fig S3.

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s011.tif (199.4KB, tif)
    S12 Fig. Uncropped blot images of western blots shown in Supporting Fig S5B, D and E (A-E) and Supporting Fig S9B and C (F and G).

    (TIF)

    pone.0337155.s012.tif (1.1MB, tif)
    S1 Table. Protein sequences.

    Highlighted in bold and underlined are additional amino acid residues. Ile218 mutated to prevent auto-hydroxylation (ALKBH1I218A) is highlighted in red. His 231 and Asp 233 in the active site, coordinating the iron were mutated to inactivate ALKBH1 (ALKBH1AxA), are highlighted in blue.

    (PDF)

    pone.0337155.s013.pdf (210KB, pdf)
    S2 Table. Used Nucleoside digestion mix.

    (PDF)

    pone.0337155.s014.pdf (100.6KB, pdf)
    S3 Table. tRNA sequences. Highlighted in bold is the C in the anticodon arm that is methylated by METTL8.

    (PDF)

    pone.0337155.s015.pdf (31.8KB, pdf)
    S4 Table. qPCR primers.

    (PDF)

    pone.0337155.s016.pdf (52.9KB, pdf)
    S5 Table. siRNA sequences.

    (PDF)

    pone.0337155.s017.pdf (98.6KB, pdf)
    S6 Table. Biotinylated capture probes for tRNA molecules.

    (PDF)

    pone.0337155.s018.pdf (226KB, pdf)
    S7 Table. Antibodies used in this study.

    (PDF)

    pone.0337155.s019.pdf (5.4KB, pdf)
    S8 Table. Abbreviations of the specified RNA modifications are listed below.

    (PDF)

    pone.0337155.s020.pdf (16.1KB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response-to-reviewer.pdf

    pone.0337155.s021.pdf (75.6KB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: response-to-reviewer.docx

    pone.0337155.s022.docx (7.2KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES