Skip to main content

Some NLM-NCBI services and products are experiencing heavy traffic, which may affect performance and availability. We apologize for the inconvenience and appreciate your patience. For assistance, please contact our Help Desk at info@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

RNA logoLink to RNA
. 2018 Mar;24(3):262–267. doi: 10.1261/rna.065219.117

Pre-mRNA processing includes N6 methylation of adenosine residues that are retained in mRNA exons and the fallacy of “RNA epigenetics”

Robert B Darnell 1, Shengdong Ke 1, James E Darnell Jr 2
PMCID: PMC5824346  PMID: 29222117

Abstract

By using a cell fraction technique that separates chromatin-associated nascent RNA, newly completed nucleoplasmic mRNA and cytoplasmic mRNA, we have shown in a previous study that residues in exons are methylated (m6A) in nascent pre-mRNA and remain methylated in the same exonic residues in nucleoplasmic and cytoplasmic mRNA. Thus, there is no evidence of a substantial degree of demethylation in mRNA exons that would correspond to so-called “epigenetic” demethylation. The turnover rate of mRNA molecules is faster, depending on m6A content in HeLa cell mRNA, suggesting that specification of mRNA stability may be the major role of m6A exon modification. In mouse embryonic stem cells (mESCs) lacking Mettl3, the major mRNA methylase, the cells continue to grow, making the same mRNAs with unchanged splicing profiles in the absence (>90%) of m6A in mRNA, suggesting no common obligatory role of m6A in splicing. All these data argue strongly against a commonly used “reversible dynamic methylation/demethylation” of mRNA, calling into question the concept of “RNA epigenetics” that parallels the well-established role of dynamic DNA epigenetics.

INTRODUCTION

Producing eukaryotic mRNA, especially in animal cells, requires many biochemical steps including 5′ capping, 3′ polyadenylation, obligatory and alternative splicing of many exons and base modifications, the latter of which has been much discussed recently with respect to N6 adenosine methylation of residues that exist in mRNA (He 2010; Fu et al. 2014; Wang and He 2014; Cao et al. 2016; Ke et al. 2017; Meyer and Jaffrey 2017; Roundtree et al. 2017). To reflect more directly on the recent mRNA methylation studies and commentaries, a look back at earlier and recent techniques and conclusions is in order.3

A central question was originally, and has remained, when in the formation of an mRNA do any required biochemical modifications of pre-RNA occur (for review, see Darnell 2013)? Only in 1994 did a cell fractionation technique emerge that liberated for study unfinished, nascent pre-mRNA still attached to polymerase and chromatin. Wuarin and Schibler (1994) prepared liver cell nuclei and released this chromatin fraction by dissolving the nuclei in a solution containing 1 M urea. Using specific hybridization of labeled DNA probes, they established that in two specific pre-mRNAs some but not all of the introns in the still attached nascent RNA were removed. This experiment was the first indisputable evidence that splicing can and does occur in pre-mRNA before transcription is complete in mammalian cells and provides the opportunity to determine when in the course of mRNA formation m6A methylation occurs.

N6 adenosine methylation in mRNA

m6A residues in mRNA were discovered in 1974 in cultured mouse cells by Robert Perry, a pioneer in early mammalian mRNA studies, and his colleague Dawn Kelley (Perry and Kelley 1974). The quantitative measurement of an average of one m6A residue per ∼1000 nucleotides (nt) in mRNA (Perry and Kelley 1974), and the presence of m6A in cellular mRNA was confirmed by others (Desrosiers et al. 1975; Furuichi et al. 1975a,b; Wei et al. 1975). Also, m6A was found in large nuclear poly(A)+ mRNA (now known to be pre-mRNA) (Salditt-Georgieff et al. 1976). m6A was also found in adenovirus infected cells in both viral mRNA (Sommer et al. 1976, 1978) and pre-mRNA (Chen-Kiang et al. 1979). Bokar et al. (1994) discovered the likely methylase and cloned the first mRNA methylase (Bokar et al. 1997). James Manley and colleagues established the favored oligonucleotide context for m6A addition (Harper et al. 1990). This much about m6A in mRNA was known by 1997. However, little was learned about the details of when in the formation of cellular mRNA the N6 methylation actually occurred or what the function of m6A in RNA might be.

Based on new technology, the methylation of N6 on adenosine residues in pre-mRNA and mRNA has attracted much recent attention. Highly specific m6A antibodies (Munns and Sims 1975) only became commercially available after 2010, allowing precipitation of m6A-containing mRNA fragments followed by sequencing of the precipitated fragments. The initial sequencing experiments showed wide distribution of m6A residues in mRNA (Dominissini et al. 2012; Meyer et al. 2012) with a heavy concentration in the last exon (Ke et al. 2015) not close to (within ∼50 nt of) a STOP codon but mostly in the 3′ UTR (untranslated region). These latter experiments examined RNA that was UV cross-linked to anti-m6A antibody followed by RNA sequencing (HITS-CLIP) (Licatalosi et al. 2008), and m6A-induced truncation site analysis has allowed precise localization of m6A modified residues (Ke et al. 2017).

Chromatin liberation and nascent RNA isolation coupled with HITS-CLIP analysis for m6A residues

The Wuarin–Schibler technique for isolation of the chromatin fraction and the attached nascent RNA was adapted to cultured cells by Douglas Black and his graduate student, Amy Pandya-Jones, in 2009 (Pandya-Jones and Black 2009). Extensive studies from the Black (Pandya-Jones et al. 2013) and Steve Smale (Bhatt et al. 2012) laboratories then traced the formation of seven toxin-induced mRNAs in macrophages from nascent RNA to a nucleoplasmic fraction and then to the cytoplasm, establishing an accurate time course and the extent of processing in each fraction. In every case, processing was complete before the release into the nucleoplasm with both poly(A) addition and splicing completed in the chromatin fraction. Poly(A) was apparently added in most cases before the last splicing was completed and all nucleoplasmic molecules were completely processed.

Together with Jones and Black, we investigated the time of m6A appearance in HeLa cell mRNA formation (Ke et al. 2017). It was very clear that m6A methylation occurred on the nascent RNA, in many instances before splicing had occurred. Adenosine residues in exons received at least 98% of the methylation despite at least a threefold excess of intron to exon residues being present in the nascent RNA. Furthermore, the nascent RNA introns had many more informatically predicted target sites for m6A than the exons. The distribution of m6A residues within the exons in the pre-mRNA strongly favored the last exon and the majority of these were within the 3′ UTR, as was observed earlier in the total cytoplasmic mRNA (Ke et al. 2015). As emphasized below, m6A location in pre-mRNA exons included all sites in the fully processed nucleoplasmic and cytoplasmic mRNA, arguing strongly against obvious and frequent separate m6A editing activity after completion and release of the nascent pre-mRNA.

Important role of m6A in mRNA turnover but not splicing

The major functional role we identified for a great majority of the m6A residues in mRNA was in increasing the turnover time, T1/2, of m6A bearing molecules (Ke et al. 2017). There was a general coincidence of increasing turnover of an mRNA with increasing m6A content. While no single m6A residue was shown to be required for mRNA turnover, the correlation of fast turnover time with m6A content suggests most m6A residues in mRNA function in mRNA instability.

We also examined mouse embryonic stem cells (ESC) missing the major methylase Mettl3 (by genetic knockouts generated by Shay Geula and Jacob Hanna [Geula et al. 2015; Ke et al. 2017]). The Mettl3 ESC cells generated by Geula and Hanna continue to grow indefinitely in culture, and produce virtually all the mRNAs the wild-type parental cells produce, as Geula et al. (2015) had described earlier. We found that mRNA splicing in the Mettl3 cells was essentially indistinguishable from normal cells even though they had only 10% of normal m6A methylation. This result contradicts the claim of Dominissini et al. (2012). That group described a pervasive effect on splicing of a Mettl3 knockdown of HepG2 cells. However, the analysis was on day 6 of the knockdown when cells were described as severely damaged (Dominissini et al. 2012). Moreover, using their published data, we could not confirm the pervasive splicing changes described. While it remains possible that some splicing events might require m6A, such an occurrence remains to be demonstrated. It seems safe to state that the vast majority of m6A residues do not participate in splicing and in HeLa cells they are not concentrated near splice junctions (Ke et al. 2017). Translation of the majority of mRNAs in the Mettl3 ESCs must be reasonably normal since the mutants lacking 90% of m6A grow normally (Geula et al. 2015; Ke et al. 2017). However, it must be kept in mind that the ESC have lost regulation of changes necessary for differentiation. Since the mRNAs for transcription factors are among those heavily methylated (Ke et al. 2017), it would be reasonable to expect a critical balance of transcription factors to be upset (Geula et al. 2015).

Specific function of m6A residues at 5′ end of mRNAs

Recently, a few specifically targeted effects of m6A addition to residues in the 5′-end region of mRNAs have been described. These are the only single m6A residues to have a specific function demonstrated at the moment. Heat shock is known to cause the formation of new mRNAs (Lindquist and Craig 1988; de Nadal et al. 2011) and several of these newly synthesized heat shock mRNA molecules were found to have m6A residues in the untranslated residues near the 5′ end (Meyer et al. 2015; Mitchell and Parker 2015; Zhou et al. 2015). The new m6A methylated mRNAs are translated at elevated temperature likely because of the demonstrated attraction of the eukaryotic initiation factor 3 (eif 3) for the methylated residues. It is NOT known where in the cell this m6A is added in these mRNAs, but it is known that some heat shock mRNAs are newly transcriptionally induced and could acquire the m6A as nascent pre-mRNA.

Recently reported is a second m6A modification exactly at the 5′ end of an mRNA that controls stability. Decades ago it was found that the first nucleotide Pol II incorporated in a pre-mRNA can be adenylic acid (∼40% of the time). This residue is, of course, acted upon by several enzymes to create a 5′ cap and is also frequently methylated in the N6 position (Furuichi et al. 1975a,b; Wei et al. 1975). Mauer et al. (2017) have now found that this N6 methylated adenosine (m6Am) cap residue can be stable on specific mRNAs. The demethylase FTO (and not ALKBH5) will remove this m6Am residue in vitro. Further, in these in vitro experiments the FTO was more active on the m6A in the cap than on the m6A in the body of the mRNA. Also, this enzyme is required to carry out this demethylation in the cell, upon which the mRNA is destabilized and turns over using the decapping pathway of turnover (Wang et al. 2002). Of interest, the FTO demethylase was much less effective on the m6A residues in the body of the mRNA in the cell than the ALKBH5 enzyme in vitro. The knockout of the ALKBH5 enzyme in mice shows a requirement for spermiogenesis and has no other reported effect, strong testimony that no obligatory methylation/demethylation is widely used in most cells (Zheng et al. 2013a).

The FTO action on m6Am is the first known specific demethylase removal of a specific adenosine methylation and at present the only direct evidence of a function for modification of a single m6A residue. The removal of the cap m6Am is assumed to be cytoplasmic but the addition of the methyl groups is likely nuclear. Also, the 5′ heat shock-stimulated m6A addition discussed above may well occur during the formation of a new RNA molecule in the nucleus.

Role and cellular location of other demethylations

What is known about any larger role of demethylation of m6A in pre-mRNA or mRNA? The recognition that the FTO gene product contains an amino acid sequence similar to active domains in DNA demethylases spurred the hypothesis and subsequent demonstration by the C. He group that the protein is indeed an RNA N6 adenosine demethylase (Jia et al. 2011). This group then made the in silico recognition of ALKBH5 as a likely second RNA m6A demethylase which proved to be true (Fu et al. 2010; Zheng et al. 2013a,b). The presence of both RNA methylases (so-called “writers”) and demethylases (so-called “erasers”) then led to the oft-repeated, as yet unfounded, speculation that the m6A methylation–demethylation represents a “dynamic epigenetic” regulatory system that underlies an important previously unrecognized regulatory circuit for the general control of information flow from DNA to mRNA (see the title of Zheng et al. 2013b and Fu et al. 2014).

This speculation of RNA epigenetics was first announced in 2010 (He 2010), modeled after the known and proven “epigenetic” changes in histone modification that take part in governing pre-mRNA transcription. The idea continues to be presented in the title of a 2014 review/speculation/proposal: “Gene expression regulation mediated through reversible m6A RNA methylation” (Fu et al. 2014). To quote from the 2010 paper: “Given the rich layers of epigenetic regulation that result from targeted modifications of DNA and proteins, reversible RNA modification might (emphasis added) represent another realm for biological regulation in the form of ‘RNA epigenetics’.” (He 2010). This same point of view continues in Fu et al. (2014) (see Abstract, the final sentence of which is “This reversible RNA methylation adds a new dimension to the developing picture of post-transcriptional regulation of gene expression.”)

This idea has been so frequently repeated in published papers, largely by the C. He group and by “science writers” in leading journals (Willyard 2017), that it has caused this speculation to seem in some quarters to be established as fact (Fu et al. 2014; Wang and He 2014; Cao et al. 2016; Dominissini et al. 2016; Gilbert et al. 2016; Roundtree et al. 2017).

C. He and colleagues have published a number of substantial findings on mRNA methylation: Of particular note is recognition of RNA demethylases (Jia et al. 2011; Zheng et al. 2013a,b); proof that the demethylases act only on single-stranded nucleic acids (Jia et al. 2011); the binding of the YTHDF2 protein to m6A methylated mRNA thought to be connected to mRNA turnover (Wang et al. 2014); and in cataloging and proving several other base modifications on mRNA (Roundtree et al. 2017). But upon critical examination of what is now known about m6A residues in mammalian pre-mRNA and RNA, the central notion of an “RNA epigenetics” paralleling DNA methylation and demethylation and especially histone methylation/demethylation and phosphorylation/desphosphorylation and the effects on gene expression is only a speculation and hence as put forth, seriously misleading to uncritical readers. The reversibility (forward or backward) attached to a specific event/capacity is missing (see Allis et al. 2008 for DNA methylation and also refer to Meyer and Jaffrey 2017).

Our data show that in HeLa cells the m6A sites in nucleoplasmic and cytoplasmic mRNA are already methylated in nascent chromatin-associated specific pre-mRNA transcripts (Ke et al. 2017). If there were active cytoplasmic m6A mRNA methylases or demethylases, they would necessarily be constrained to target the same sites as in nascent pre-mRNA. The m6A residues in steady-state cytoplasmic mRNAs show no specific new sites or detectable demethylation of specific m6A residues that were added to the nascent RNA in the nucleus.

Our conclusion is that the methylation of m6A in nascent pre-mRNAs on particular residues remains on these residues until the mRNA turns over in the cytoplasm and is NOT subject to “epigenetic” changes. Fu et al. (2014) lament the lack of evidence of cytoplasmic demethylation in their 2014 review; however, they conclude: “Although both FTO and ALKBH5 are mainly found in the nucleus, the possibility that both proteins could translocate to the cytoplasm under certain circumstances should not be ruled out. Cytoplasmic RNA may also be demethylated by these enzymes or by other currently unknown demethylases.”

Several papers dealing with demethylases have shown (mainly with fluorescent antibodies) that these proteins may be largely nuclear (Jia et al. 2011; Zheng et al. 2013a). However, the authors are at great pains to direct the reader's attention to the fact that specific demethylase antibodies show a high concentration of these proteins in “nuclear speckles.” They infer activity on nuclear RNA of the demethylases because of this location. But it has long been established that “speckles” contain many molecules, e.g., factors known to act in splicing, that are not active in splicing while in the speckles (Spector and Lamond 2011). Splicing occurs on nascent RNA on chromatin (for review, see Darnell 2013). In contrast, speckles are storehouses for processing proteins (recognized earlier as intra-chromatin granules). The pre-mRNA processing almost certainly occurs on what are referred to by electron microscopists as perichromatin filaments NOT in the nuclear speckles (see Spector and Lamond 2011).

Did we learn anything enlightening about nuclear demethylation? Perhaps. We found in HeLa cells ∼3600 out of ∼30,000 m6A sites scattered throughout pre-mRNA exons that did not survive when these molecules are processed, released, and reach the nucleoplasm. Further, these “disappearing” m6A sites were in ∼10% of specific pre-mRNAs (Ke et al. 2017). It is possible that this m6A loss could be due to the previously mentioned m6A demethylases (Jia et al. 2011; Zheng et al. 2013a). Even if it is true that specific pre-mRNA nascent molecules undergo partial demethylation in the nucleus before completion of processing, this nuclear demethylation is hardly evidence of a “dynamic” methylation–demethylation in the cell at large especially on mRNA. There is no credible evidence of a meaningful “on and off” m6A reversibility let alone any proof of a regulatory event. Rather, such likely nuclear demethylation as described above is possible on specific nascent transcripts in HeLa cells and represents a necessary removal of a methylation for the correct nuclear processing and/or function of that particular mRNA when it reaches the cytoplasm. The possible function of this small set of nuclear methylations and apparent demethylations surely requires additional investigation. But the present results are hardly the foundation for a regulatory “RNA epigenetics” that is “dynamic.”

Time for biochemistry of mRNA turnover mediated by the internal m6A residues in mRNA

Biochemists have known for years that different mRNAs in eukaryotic cells exhibit different turnover times (Parker and Song 2004; Garneau et al. 2007; Song et al. 2010; Schoenberg and Maquat 2012; Wu and Brewer 2012). The main function for most of the m6A residues in mRNA in mammalian cells appears to be increasing mRNA turnover since a higher m6A content in an mRNA molecule correlates with faster turnover (Ke et al. 2017). The m6A residues are concentrated in about half of mRNAs (56% have two or more); 17% have only a single m6A, and 27% have no m6A residues. Perhaps clusters or m6A in near neighbors in an mRNA play a role in turnover. Finally, it is important to reiterate that approximately a quarter of mRNAs in HeLa cells have no m6A residues but these molecules also have a range of half-lives similar to the range in m6A-containing mRNAs (Ke et al. 2017). Considerable progress has been made in recent times on the enzymes involved in mRNA turnover (Parker and Song 2004; Garneau et al. 2007). It seems likely that one or more of these pathways may rely on m6A to promote turnover of some methylated mRNAs.

Wang et al. (2014) demonstrated that methylated mRNAs can be bound by YTHDF2 proteins, to which they assign a role in turnover because this protein presumably with its mRNA cargo in tow is found in cytoplasmic P bodies, which are known to contain proteins (decapping and deadenylation enzymes) active in mRNA turnover. There is an obvious need to learn what role the m6A plays in cooperation with the mRNA turnover machinery and why a higher content of m6A plays a role in the turnover rate of specific mRNA. Some highly methylated mRNAs show clusters but this clustering is not always present (Ke et al. 2017).

There are a few specifically identified functions of m6A residues in mRNAs that reside in the 5′ end. m6A methylations are required in the 5′ UTR for translation of newly induced heat shock mRNAs (Meyer et al. 2015; Zhou et al. 2015). Second, some mRNAs contain m6A on the initiating and capped adenosine residue stabilizing that mRNA. Removal by the FTO methylase leads to turnover of such mRNAs (Mauer et al. 2017). These two findings indicate that some m6A residues can have a role in translation and in protecting mRNAs to be translated. No more general role in translation has been demonstrated but could yet be discovered.

CONCLUSION

m6A residues are scattered throughout mammalian mRNA but concentrated in the last exon and 3′ UTR. These methylations are definitely added to exons in the nucleus. After pre-mRNA conversion to mRNA, the great majority of these methylations remain in place in the cytoplasm and somehow contribute directly to the turnover of mRNA in the cytoplasm. The biochemical basis for this participation in cytoplasmic mRNA turnover is unknown.

While m6A demethylases exist and appear to erase specific m6A groups on a limited set of nascent pre-mRNAs, no clear function at the cytoplasmic mRNA level has yet been assigned to this demethylation. Two quite different single m6A methylations at or near the 5′ end of mRNAs affect mRNA translation in one case and mRNA stability in the other. There is at the present time no evidence for functional addition/removal, i.e., a reversible m6A regulatory pathway, in the majority of mRNA molecules of mammalian cells.

Footnotes

Freely available online through the RNA Open Access option.

3

A very thorough and illuminating review of the m6A field was just published online (Meyer and Jaffrey 2017) that concurs with our major conclusion that the “RNA epigenetics” proposal is at best premature. Quote: “The idea that m6A in mRNA is reversible has been an important concept. Conceivably, the activation of m6A demethylases could account for dynamic changes in m6A levels in mRNA. However, despite excitement around the concept, very few studies have explored this concept at the molecular level.”

REFERENCES

  1. Allis CD, Jenuwein T, Reinberg D, ed. 2008. Epigenetics. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bhatt DM, Pandya-Jones A, Tong AJ, Barozzi I, Lissner MM, Natoli G, Black DL, Smale ST. 2012. Transcript dynamics of proinflammatory genes revealed by sequence analysis of subcellular RNA fractions. Cell 150: 279–290. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bokar JA, Rath-Shambaugh ME, Ludwiczak R, Narayan P, Rottman F. 1994. Characterization and partial purification of mRNA N6-adenosine methyltransferase from HeLa cell nuclei. Internal mRNA methylation requires a multisubunit complex. J Biol Chem 269: 17697–17704. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bokar JA, Shambaugh ME, Polayes D, Matera AG, Rottman FM. 1997. Purification and cDNA cloning of the AdoMet-binding subunit of the human mRNA (N6-adenosine)-methyltransferase. RNA 3: 1233–1247. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cao G, Li HB, Yin Z, Flavell RA. 2016. Recent advances in dynamic m6A RNA modification. Open Biol 6: 160003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Chen-Kiang S, Nevins JR, Darnell JE Jr. 1979. N-6-methyl-adenosine in adenovirus type 2 nuclear RNA is conserved in the formation of messenger RNA. J Mol Biol 135: 733–752. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Darnell JE Jr. 2013. Reflections on the history of pre-mRNA processing and highlights of current knowledge: a unified picture. RNA 19: 443–460. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. de Nadal E, Ammerer G, Posas F. 2011. Controlling gene expression in response to stress. Nat Rev Genet 12: 833–845. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Desrosiers RC, Friderici KH, Rottman FM. 1975. Characterization of Novikoff hepatoma mRNA methylation and heterogeneity in the methylated 5′ terminus. Biochemistry 14: 4367–4374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Dominissini D, Moshitch-Moshkovitz S, Schwartz S, Salmon-Divon M, Ungar L, Osenberg S, Cesarkas K, Jacob-Hirsch J, Amariglio N, Kupiec M, et al. 2012. Topology of the human and mouse m6A RNA methylomes revealed by m6A-seq. Nature 485: 201–206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Dominissini D, He C, Rechavi G. 2016. RNA epigenetics. The Scientist Magazine 30: article no. 44873. [Google Scholar]
  12. Fu Y, Dai Q, Zhang W, Ren J, Pan T, He C. 2010. The AlkB domain of mammalian ABH8 catalyzes hydroxylation of 5-methoxycarbonylmethyluridine at the wobble position of tRNA. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 49: 8885–8888. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Fu Y, Dominissini D, Rechavi G, He C. 2014. Gene expression regulation mediated through reversible m6A RNA methylation. Nat Rev Genet 15: 293–306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Furuichi Y, Morgan M, Shatkin AJ, Jelinek W, Salditt-Georgieff M, Darnell JE. 1975a. Methylated blocked 5′ termini in HeLa cell MRNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci 72: 1904–1908. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Furuichi Y, Morgan M, Muthukrishnan S, Shatkin AJ. 1975b. Reovirus messenger RNA contains a methylated, blocked 5′-terminal structure: m-7G(5′)ppp(5′)G-MpCp-. Proc Natl Acad Sci 72: 362–366. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Garneau NL, Wilusz J, Wilusz CJ. 2007. The highways and byways of mRNA decay. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8: 113–126. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Geula S, Moshitch-Moshkovitz S, Dominissini D, Mansour AA, Kol N, Salmon-Divon M, Hershkovitz V, Peer E, Mor N, Manor YS, et al. 2015. Stem cells. m6A mRNA methylation facilitates resolution of naive pluripotency toward differentiation. Science 347: 1002–1006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Gilbert WV, Bell TA, Schaening C. 2016. Messenger RNA modifications: form, distribution, and function. Science 352: 1408–1412. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Harper JE, Miceli SM, Roberts RJ, Manley JL. 1990. Sequence specificity of the human mRNA N6-adenosine methylase in vitro. Nucl Acids Res 18: 5735–5741. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. He C. 2010. RNA epigenetics? Nat Chem Biol 6: 863–865. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Jia G, Fu Y, Zhao X, Dai Q, Zheng G, Yang Y, Yi C, Lindahl T, Pan T, Yang YG, et al. 2011. N6-methyladenosine in nuclear RNA is a major substrate of the obesity-associated FTO. Nat Chem Biol 7: 885–887. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Ke S, Endalkachew AA, Mertens C, Gantman EC, Fak JJ, Mele A, Haripal B, Zucker-Scharff I, Moore MJ, Park CY, et al. 2015. A majority of m6A residues are in the last exons, allowing the potential for 3′ UTR regulation. Genes Dev 29: 2037–2053. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Ke S, Pandya-Jones A, Saito Y, Fak JJ, Vågbø CB, Geula S, Hanna JH, Black DL, Darnell JE Jr, Darnell RB. 2017. m6A mRNA modifications are deposited in nascent pre-mRNA and are not required for splicing but do specify cytoplasmic turnover. Genes Dev 331: 990–1006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Licatalosi DD, Mele A, Fak JJ, Ule J, Kayikci M, Chi SW, Clark TA, Schweitzer AC, Blume JE, Wang X, et al. 2008. HITS-CLIP yields genome-wide insights into brain alternative RNA processing. Nature 456: 464–469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lindquist S, Craig EA. 1988. The heat-shock proteins. Annu Rev Genet 22: 631–677. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Mauer J, Luo X, Blanjoie A, Jiao X, Grozhik AV, Patil DP, Linder B, Pickering BF, Vasseur JJ, Chen Q, et al. 2017. Reversible methylation of m6Am in the 5′ cap controls mRNA stability. Nature 541: 371–375. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Meyer KD, Jaffrey SR. 2017. Rethinking m6A readers, writers, and erasers. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 33: 319–342. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Meyer KD, Saletore Y, Zumbo P, Elemento O, Mason CE, Jaffrey SR. 2012. Comprehensive analysis of mRNA methylation reveals enrichment in 3′ UTRs and near stop codons. Cell 149: 1635–1646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Meyer KD, Patil DP, Zhou J, Zinoviev A, Skabkin MA, Elemento O, Pestova TV, Qian SB, Jaffrey SR. 2015. 5′ UTR m6A promotes cap-independent translation. Cell 163: 999–1010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Mitchell SF, Parker R. 2015. Modifications on translation initiation. Cell 163: 796–798. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Munns TW, Sims HF. 1975. Methylation and processing of transfer ribonucleic acid in mammalian and bacterial cells. J Biol Chem 250: 2143–2149. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Pandya-Jones A, Black DL. 2009. Co-transcriptional splicing of constitutive and alternative exons. RNA 15: 1896–1908. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Pandya-Jones A, Bhatt DM, Lin CH, Tong AJ, Smale ST, Black DL. 2013. Splicing kinetics and transcript release from the chromatin compartment limit the rate of Lipid A-induced gene expression. RNA 19: 811–827. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Parker P, Song H. 2004. The enzymes and control of eukaryotic mRNA turnover. Nat Struct Mol Biol 11: 121–127. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Perry RP, Kelley DE. 1974. Existence of methylated messenger RNA in mouse L cells. Cell 1: 37–42. [Google Scholar]
  36. Roundtree IA, Evans ME, Pan T, He C. 2017. Dynamic RNA modifications in gene expression regulation. Cell 169: 1187–1200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Salditt-Georgieff M, Jelinek W, Darnell JE, Furuichi Y, Morgan M, Shatkin A. 1976. Methyl labeling of HeLa cell hnRNA: a comparison with mRNA. Cell 7: 227–237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Schoenberg DR, Maquat LE. 2012. Regulation of cytoplasmic mRNA decay. Nat Rev Genet. 13: 246–259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Sommer S, Salditt-Georgieff M, Bachenheimer S, Furuichi Y, Morgan M, Shatkin A. 1976. The methylation of adenovirus-specific nuclear and cytoplasmic RNA. Nucleic Acids Res 3: 749–766. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Sommer S, Lavi U, Darnell JE Jr. 1978. The absolute frequency of labeled N-6-methyladenosine in HeLa cell messenger RNA decreases with label time. J Mol Biol 124: 487–499. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Song MG, Li Y, Kiledjian M. 2010. Multiple mRNA decapping enzymes in mammalian cells. Mol Cell 40: 423–432. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Spector DL, Lamond AI. 2011. Nuclear speckles. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 3: a000646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Wang X, He C. 2014. Dynamic RNA modifications in posttranscriptional regulation. Mol Cell 56: 5–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Wang Z, Jiao X, Carr-Schmid A, Kiledjian M. 2002. The hDcp2 protein is a mammalian mRNA decapping enzyme. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99: 12663–12668. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Wang X, Lu Z, Gomez A, Hon GC, Yue Y, Han D, Fu Y, Parisien M, Dai Q, Jia G, et al. 2014. N6-methyladenosine-dependent regulation of messenger RNA stability. Nature 505: 117–120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Wei CM, Gershowitz A, Moss B. 1975. Methylated nucleotides block 5′ terminus of HeLa cell messenger RNA. Cell 4: 379–386. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Willyard C. 2017. A new twist on epigenetics. Nature 542: 406–408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Wu X, Brewer G. 2012. The regulation of mRNA stability in mammalian cells: 2.0. Gene 500: 10–21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Wuarin J, Schibler U. 1994. Physical isolation of nascent RNA chains transcribed by RNA polymerase II: evidence for cotranscriptional splicing. Mol Cell Biol 14: 7219–7225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Zheng G, Dahl JA, Niu Y, Fedorcsak P, Huang CM, Li CJ, Vågbø CB, Shi Y, Wang WL, Song SH, et al. 2013a. ALKBH5 is a mammalian RNA demethylase that impacts RNA metabolism and mouse fertility. Mol Cell 49: 18–29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Zheng G, Dahl JA, Niu Y, Fu Y, Klungland A, Yang YG, He C. 2013b. Sprouts of RNA epigenetics: the discovery of mammalian RNA demethylases. RNA Biol 10: 915–918. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Zhou J, Wan J, Gao X, Zhang X, Jaffrey SR, Qian SB. 2015. Dynamic m6A mRNA methylation directs translational control of heat shock response. Nature 526: 591–594. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from RNA are provided here courtesy of The RNA Society

RESOURCES