Skip to main content
PMC home page
The Journal of Cell Biology logoLink to The Journal of Cell Biology
. 1994 Jun 1;125(5):971–980. doi: 10.1083/jcb.125.5.971

Nuclear transport of U1 snRNP in somatic cells: differences in signal requirement compared with Xenopus laevis oocytes

PMCID: PMC2120059  PMID: 8195300

Abstract

The signal requirement for the nuclear import of U1 RNA in somatic cells from different species was investigated by microinjection of both digoxygenin-labeled wild type and mutant U1 RNA molecules and in vitro reconstituted U1 snRNPs. U1 RNA was shown to be targeted to the nucleus by a temperature-dependent process that requires the prior assembly of RNPs from the common proteins and the microinjected RNA. Competition in the cell between immunoaffinity-purified U1 snRNPs and digoxygenin- labeled U1 snRNPs reconstituted in vitro showed that the transport is saturable and should therefore be a mediated process. The transport of a karyophilic protein under the same conditions was not affected, indicating the existence of a U snRNP-specific transport pathway in somatic cells, as already seen in the Xenopus laevis oocyte system. Surprisingly, the signal requirement for nuclear transport of U1 snRNP was found to differ between oocytes and somatic cells from mouse, monkey and Xenopus, in that the m3GGpppG-cap is no longer an essential signaling component in somatic cells. However, as shown by investigation of the transport kinetics of m3GpppG- and ApppG-capped U1 snRNPs, the m3GpppG-cap accelerates the rate of U1 snRNP import significantly indicating that it has retained a signaling role for nuclear targeting of U1 snRNP in somatic cells. Moreover, our data strongly suggest that cell specific rather than species specific differences account for the differential m3G-cap requirement in nuclear import of U1 snRNPs.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (2.5 MB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Branlant C., Krol A., Ebel J. P., Lazar E., Haendler B., Jacob M. U2 RNA shares a structural domain with U1, U4, and U5 RNAs. EMBO J. 1982;1(10):1259–1265. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1982.tb00022.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Carmo-Fonseca M., Pepperkok R., Sproat B. S., Ansorge W., Swanson M. S., Lamond A. I. In vivo detection of snRNP-rich organelles in the nuclei of mammalian cells. EMBO J. 1991 Jul;10(7):1863–1873. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1991.tb07712.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Carmo-Fonseca M., Tollervey D., Pepperkok R., Barabino S. M., Merdes A., Brunner C., Zamore P. D., Green M. R., Hurt E., Lamond A. I. Mammalian nuclei contain foci which are highly enriched in components of the pre-mRNA splicing machinery. EMBO J. 1991 Jan;10(1):195–206. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1991.tb07936.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. De Robertis E. M. Nucleocytoplasmic segregation of proteins and RNAs. Cell. 1983 Apr;32(4):1021–1025. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(83)90285-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Dingwall C., Laskey R. A. Nuclear targeting sequences--a consensus? Trends Biochem Sci. 1991 Dec;16(12):478–481. doi: 10.1016/0968-0004(91)90184-w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Dingwall C., Laskey R. The nuclear membrane. Science. 1992 Nov 6;258(5084):942–947. doi: 10.1126/science.1439805. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Feldherr C. M., Kallenbach E., Schultz N. Movement of a karyophilic protein through the nuclear pores of oocytes. J Cell Biol. 1984 Dec;99(6):2216–2222. doi: 10.1083/jcb.99.6.2216. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fischer-Fantuzzi L., Vesco C. Cell-dependent efficiency of reiterated nuclear signals in a mutant simian virus 40 oncoprotein targeted to the nucleus. Mol Cell Biol. 1988 Dec;8(12):5495–5503. doi: 10.1128/mcb.8.12.5495. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fischer U., Darzynkiewicz E., Tahara S. M., Dathan N. A., Lührmann R., Mattaj I. W. Diversity in the signals required for nuclear accumulation of U snRNPs and variety in the pathways of nuclear transport. J Cell Biol. 1991 May;113(4):705–714. doi: 10.1083/jcb.113.4.705. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Fischer U., Lührmann R. An essential signaling role for the m3G cap in the transport of U1 snRNP to the nucleus. Science. 1990 Aug 17;249(4970):786–790. doi: 10.1126/science.2143847. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Fischer U., Sumpter V., Sekine M., Satoh T., Lührmann R. Nucleo-cytoplasmic transport of U snRNPs: definition of a nuclear location signal in the Sm core domain that binds a transport receptor independently of the m3G cap. EMBO J. 1993 Feb;12(2):573–583. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1993.tb05689.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Forbes D. J. Structure and function of the nuclear pore complex. Annu Rev Cell Biol. 1992;8:495–527. doi: 10.1146/annurev.cb.08.110192.002431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Garcia-Bustos J., Heitman J., Hall M. N. Nuclear protein localization. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1991 Mar 7;1071(1):83–101. doi: 10.1016/0304-4157(91)90013-m. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Goldfarb D. S., Gariépy J., Schoolnik G., Kornberg R. D. Synthetic peptides as nuclear localization signals. Nature. 1986 Aug 14;322(6080):641–644. doi: 10.1038/322641a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Graessmann A., Graessmann M., Mueller C. Microinjection of early SV40 DNA fragments and T antigen. Methods Enzymol. 1980;65(1):816–825. doi: 10.1016/s0076-6879(80)65076-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Hamm J., Darzynkiewicz E., Tahara S. M., Mattaj I. W. The trimethylguanosine cap structure of U1 snRNA is a component of a bipartite nuclear targeting signal. Cell. 1990 Aug 10;62(3):569–577. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(90)90021-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Jantsch M. F., Gall J. G. Assembly and localization of the U1-specific snRNP C protein in the amphibian oocyte. J Cell Biol. 1992 Dec;119(5):1037–1046. doi: 10.1083/jcb.119.5.1037. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Jarmolowski A., Mattaj I. W. The determinants for Sm protein binding to Xenopus U1 and U5 snRNAs are complex and non-identical. EMBO J. 1993 Jan;12(1):223–232. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1993.tb05648.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Kalderon D., Richardson W. D., Markham A. F., Smith A. E. Sequence requirements for nuclear location of simian virus 40 large-T antigen. Nature. 1984 Sep 6;311(5981):33–38. doi: 10.1038/311033a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Kambach C., Mattaj I. W. Intracellular distribution of the U1A protein depends on active transport and nuclear binding to U1 snRNA. J Cell Biol. 1992 Jul;118(1):11–21. doi: 10.1083/jcb.118.1.11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kastner B., Bach M., Lührmann R. Electron microscopy of small nuclear ribonucleoprotein (snRNP) particles U2 and U5: evidence for a common structure-determining principle in the major U snRNP family. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990 Mar;87(5):1710–1714. doi: 10.1073/pnas.87.5.1710. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kleinschmidt A. M., Pederson T. RNA processing and ribonucleoprotein assembly studied in vivo by RNA transfection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990 Feb;87(4):1283–1287. doi: 10.1073/pnas.87.4.1283. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Lanford R. E., Butel J. S. Construction and characterization of an SV40 mutant defective in nuclear transport of T antigen. Cell. 1984 Jul;37(3):801–813. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(84)90415-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lanford R. E., Kanda P., Kennedy R. C. Induction of nuclear transport with a synthetic peptide homologous to the SV40 T antigen transport signal. Cell. 1986 Aug 15;46(4):575–582. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(86)90883-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lerner E. A., Lerner M. R., Janeway C. A., Jr, Steitz J. A. Monoclonal antibodies to nucleic acid-containing cellular constituents: probes for molecular biology and autoimmune disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 May;78(5):2737–2741. doi: 10.1073/pnas.78.5.2737. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Liautard J. P., Sri-Widada J., Brunel C., Jeanteur P. Structural organization of ribonucleoproteins containing small nuclear RNAs from HeLa cells. Proteins interact closely with a similar structural domain of U1, U2, U4 and U5 small nuclear RNAs. J Mol Biol. 1982 Dec 15;162(3):623–643. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(82)90392-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Lührmann R., Kastner B., Bach M. Structure of spliceosomal snRNPs and their role in pre-mRNA splicing. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1990 Nov 30;1087(3):265–292. doi: 10.1016/0167-4781(90)90001-i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Marshallsay C., Lührmann R. In vitro nuclear import of snRNPs: cytosolic factors mediate m3G-cap dependence of U1 and U2 snRNP transport. EMBO J. 1994 Jan 1;13(1):222–231. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1994.tb06252.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Mattaj I. W. Cap trimethylation of U snRNA is cytoplasmic and dependent on U snRNP protein binding. Cell. 1986 Sep 12;46(6):905–911. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(86)90072-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Mattaj I. W., De Robertis E. M. Nuclear segregation of U2 snRNA requires binding of specific snRNP proteins. Cell. 1985 Jan;40(1):111–118. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(85)90314-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Michaud N., Goldfarb D. S. Multiple pathways in nuclear transport: the import of U2 snRNP occurs by a novel kinetic pathway. J Cell Biol. 1991 Jan;112(2):215–223. doi: 10.1083/jcb.112.2.215. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Michaud N., Goldfarb D. Microinjected U snRNAs are imported to oocyte nuclei via the nuclear pore complex by three distinguishable targeting pathways. J Cell Biol. 1992 Feb;116(4):851–861. doi: 10.1083/jcb.116.4.851. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Newmeyer D. D., Forbes D. J. An N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive cytosolic factor necessary for nuclear protein import: requirement in signal-mediated binding to the nuclear pore. J Cell Biol. 1990 Mar;110(3):547–557. doi: 10.1083/jcb.110.3.547. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Newmeyer D. D., Forbes D. J. Nuclear import can be separated into distinct steps in vitro: nuclear pore binding and translocation. Cell. 1988 Mar 11;52(5):641–653. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(88)90402-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Nigg E. A., Baeuerle P. A., Lührmann R. Nuclear import-export: in search of signals and mechanisms. Cell. 1991 Jul 12;66(1):15–22. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90135-l. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Richardson W. D., Mills A. D., Dilworth S. M., Laskey R. A., Dingwall C. Nuclear protein migration involves two steps: rapid binding at the nuclear envelope followed by slower translocation through nuclear pores. Cell. 1988 Mar 11;52(5):655–664. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(88)90403-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Rihs H. P., Peters R. Nuclear transport kinetics depend on phosphorylation-site-containing sequences flanking the karyophilic signal of the Simian virus 40 T-antigen. EMBO J. 1989 May;8(5):1479–1484. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1989.tb03531.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Robbins J., Dilworth S. M., Laskey R. A., Dingwall C. Two interdependent basic domains in nucleoplasmin nuclear targeting sequence: identification of a class of bipartite nuclear targeting sequence. Cell. 1991 Feb 8;64(3):615–623. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90245-t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Silver P. A. How proteins enter the nucleus. Cell. 1991 Feb 8;64(3):489–497. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90233-o. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Slavicek J. M., Jones N. C., Richter J. D. A karyophilic signal sequence in adenovirus type 5 E1A is functional in Xenopus oocytes but not in somatic cells. J Virol. 1989 Sep;63(9):4047–4050. doi: 10.1128/jvi.63.9.4047-4050.1989. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Standiford D. M., Richter J. D. Analysis of a developmentally regulated nuclear localization signal in Xenopus. J Cell Biol. 1992 Sep;118(5):991–1002. doi: 10.1083/jcb.118.5.991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. van Zee K., Dickmanns A., Fischer U., Lührmann R., Fanning E. A cytoplasmically anchored nuclear protein interferes specifically with the import of nuclear proteins but not U1 snRNA. J Cell Biol. 1993 Apr;121(2):229–240. doi: 10.1083/jcb.121.2.229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Journal of Cell Biology are provided here courtesy of The Rockefeller University Press

RESOURCES