Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2019 Dec 11;14(12):e0224850. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224850

m6A minimally impacts the structure, dynamics, and Rev ARM binding properties of HIV-1 RRE stem IIB

Chia-Chieh Chu 1, Bei Liu 1, Raphael Plangger 2, Christoph Kreutz 2, Hashim M Al-Hashimi 1,3,*
Editor: Joanna Sztuba-Solinska4
PMCID: PMC6905585  PMID: 31825959

Abstract

N6-methyladenosine (m6A) is a ubiquitous RNA post-transcriptional modification found in coding as well as non-coding RNAs. m6A has also been found in viral RNAs where it is proposed to modulate host-pathogen interactions. Two m6A sites have been reported in the HIV-1 Rev response element (RRE) stem IIB, one of which was shown to enhance binding to the viral protein Rev and viral RNA export. However, because these m6A sites have not been observed in other studies mapping m6A in HIV-1 RNA, their significance remains to be firmly established. Here, using optical melting experiments, NMR spectroscopy, and in vitro binding assays, we show that m6A minimally impacts the stability, structure, and dynamics of RRE stem IIB as well as its binding affinity to the Rev arginine-rich-motif (ARM) in vitro. Our results indicate that if present in stem IIB, m6A is unlikely to substantially alter the conformational properties of the RNA. Our results add to a growing view that the impact of m6A on RNA depends on sequence context and Mg2+.

Introduction

N6-methyladenosine (m6A) is an abundant reversible epitranscriptomic modification found in coding and non-coding RNAs [14]. It plays important roles in RNA metabolism [58] and is implicated in a growing number of cellular processes [915]. m6A has also been found in viral RNAs where it is proposed to modulate host-pathogen interactions [1619].

A number of studies have reported m6A in the HIV-1 RNA genome [18, 20, 21]. One study examining HIV-1 infected human T cells [20] reported two m6A sites (A68 and A62, Fig 1) in the Rev response element (RRE) stem IIB. RRE is a ~350 nt cis-acting RNA element that is recognized by viral Rev protein to promote the export of unspliced or partially spliced viral RNA to express the structural proteins required for viral replication [2224]. The two m6A sites were found in stem IIB (RREIIB), which is the primary binding site for Rev [23, 2527]. Knocking down the methyltransferase complex (METTL3/METTL14) was shown to suppress Rev-RRE mediated RNA export and viral replication, and point substitution mutation of one of the two highly conserved adenines (A68) strongly suppressed viral replication (> 90%) [20]. It was proposed [20] that the methyl group of m6A68 may interact with Rev protein to stabilize Rev-RRE binding, and/or that m6A68 may alter the conformational properties of stem IIB to facilitate Rev recognition. Another different study employing distinct cell lines and mapping methods did not observe these m6A sites on RREIIB suggesting that m6A can enhance HIV-1 replication and mRNA expression through recruitment of the m6A reader proteins YTH-domain containing family (YTHDF) [21]. A third study found m6A in RRE but did not identify the specific site [18]. The study proposed that the YTHDF proteins inhibit HIV-1 replication and infection by blocking viral reverse transcription.

Fig 1. m6A has limited impact on the thermal stability of RREIIB stem loop.

Fig 1

(A) The secondary structure with the proposed N6-methyl modified A68 bulge (highlighted in red) of RREIIB native GS and two non-native ES1 and ES2. (B) Impact of m6A68 on the thermal stability of the RREIIB hairpins with and without 3 mM Mg2+. Shown are the free energy of annealing of the methylated and unmodified RREIIB with and without Mg2+. (C) RNA thermodynamic parameters from UV melting. Data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation of at least three independent measurements. Uncertainty in the calculated thermodynamic parameters were determined by error propagation as previously described [48].

Here, we asked whether methylation of RREIIB with m6A leads to changes in its conformational and Rev arginine rich motif (ARM) binding properties. We were driven to test this hypothesis because our recent studies showed that the internal loop region of RREIIB near the A68 bulge is highly flexible, and can adopt conformations with alternative secondary structures (Fig 1A) that have different export activities [28, 29]. By redistributing this dynamic ensemble of RREIIB, m6A could potentially impact the Rev-RRE interaction and RNA export. Prior studies have shown that m6A can reshape RNA-protein and RNA-RNA interactions by modulating RNA structure [30]. For example, a single m6A was shown to destabilize RNA duplexes by 0.5–1.7 kcal/mol [31, 32] thus enhancing the binding affinity of proteins to their single-stranded RNA targets [33]. The modification destabilizes A-U base pairs because hydrogen bonding requires that the N6-methyl group adopt the unfavorable anti conformation [34, 35]. m6A has also been shown to disrupt the non-canonical sheared G-A base pairs to block the assembly of the box C/D snoRNP complexes [36].

We find that modification of the A68 bulge has little effect on the stability, structure, dynamics, as well as the Rev-ARM binding properties of RREIIB. The results indicate that if RREIIB is m6A modified, it is unlikely to substantially change the conformational properties of RRE although we cannot rule out that small changes in the conformational properties could modulate Rev-RRE binding in vivo. The results also add to a growing view that the impact of m6A on RNA structure depends on sequence context and Mg2+ [31, 32, 36, 37]. For example, while m6A has been shown to destabilize canonical duplexes [31, 32], it can stabilize junctional A-U base pairs in a Mg2+ and secondary structure dependent manner [37] as well as in contexts in which the m6A is in a dangling end [32].

Materials and methods

Preparation of RNA samples for NMR studies

RREIIB and m6A modified RREIIB (RREIIBm6A68 and RREIIBm6A26m6A68) were chemically synthesized using an in-house oligo synthesizer (MerMade 6, BioAutomation) with solid-phase RNA synthesis using N-acetyl protected 2’-tBDSilyl-phosphoramidites (ChemGenes Corporation) and 1 μmol standard columns (1000 Å, BioAutomation) with 4,4’-dimethoxytrityl (DMT)-off synthesis followed by base and 2’-O deprotection (100 μmol DMSO, 125 μL TEA•3HF, heat at 65ºC for 2.5hrs), and ethanol precipitation[28]. A similar approach was used to synthesize site-labeled 15N3-U72-RREIIm6A68 three-way junction using 15N3-uridine phosphoramidites [38] and using DMT-off 2’-O deprotection to obtain cleaner NMR spectra.

All RNA samples were purified using 20% (w/v) denaturing polyacrylamide (29:1) gel within 8M urea, 20 mM Tris Borate and 1 mM ethylene-diaminetetraacetate (EDTA) TBE buffer followed by Elutrap electro-elution system (Whatmann, GE healthcare) with 40 mM Tris Acetate and 1 mM EDTA (TAE) buffer then ethanol precipitation. The RNA pellets were dissolved in water and annealed by heating at 95°C for 10 mins then rapidly cooling on ice. After measuring the concentration, the RNA samples were buffer-exchanged into NMR buffer (15 mM sodium phosphate, 25 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA, with or without 3 mM MgCl2 at pH = 6.4) three times using 3kDa Amicon Ultra centrifugal filters (EMD Millipore). The final RNA concentrations were ~1.3 mM and ~0.4 mM for RREIIB and RREII, respectively.

NMR experiments

NMR experiments were performed on Bruker Avance III 600 MHz or 700 MHz NMR spectrometers equipped with 5 mm triple-resonance cryogenic probes at 25°C. 2D [1H,13C] (C2/C6/C8-H2/H6/H8) and 2D [1H,15N] (N1/N3-H1/H3) heteronuclear single quantum coherence (HSQC) spectra were recorded in the absence or presence of 3 mM Mg2+ at 25 oC in NMR buffer with 10% D2O. All NMR data were analyzed using NMRPipe [39] and SPARKY (T.D. Goddard and D.G. Kneller, SPARKY 3, University of California, San Francisco). Unless stated otherwise, all NMR spectra were collected in the presence of Mg2+. Resonance intensities were measured using 2D [1H–13C] HSQC experiments. The intensity for each type of C–H spin was normalized to a value of 0.1 using A52-C8H8, A52-C2H2 and U56-C6H6, respectively.

UV melting experiments

Thermal melting experiments were performed on m6A modified and unmodified RREIIB using a PerkinElmer Lambda 25 UV/VIS spectrometer equipped with an RTP 6 Peltier Temperature Programmer and a PCB 1500 Water Peltier System. All RNA samples were buffer exchanged into NMR buffer. RNA samples (concentration ~ 1 mM) were then diluted (with NMR buffer) to 3 μM prior to UV melting measurement, which were performed in triplicate (or more) using a sample volume of 400 μL in a Teflon-stoppered 1 cm path length quartz cell. The absorbance at 260 nm was monitored while the temperature was varied between 15 and 95°C at a rate of 1C/min. Thermodynamic parameters were obtained by fitting the UV melting curves using nonlinear model fitting in Mathematica 10.0 (Wolfram Research) as previously described [37].

Fluorescence polarization binding assays

Fluorescence polarization (A) was measured using a CLARIOstar plate reader (BMG LABTECH) using 480 nm excitation and a 540 nm emission filter [28, 40]. Fluorescence polarization binding assays were carried out using 3’-end fluorescein labeled Rev-ARM peptide (Rev-Fl, TRQARRNRRRRWRERQRAAAACK-FITC, LifeTein LLC). The serially diluted RNA in the reaction buffer (30 mM HEPES, pH = 7.0, 100 mM KCl, 10mM sodium phosphate, 10 mM ammonium acetate, 10 mM guanidinium chloride, 2 mM MgCl2, 20 mM NaCl, 0.5 mM EDTA, and 0.001% (v/v) Triton-X100) was incrementally added into a 384-well plate containing 10 nM Rev-Fl [40]. The binding curves were fitted to single-site binding equation using least-squares methods implemented in Mathematica 10.0 (Wolfram Research).

A=Afree+(AbroundAfree)×[RT+LT+Kd(RT+LT+Kd)24RT×LT2RT]

where A is the measured fluorescence polarization; Afree is the polarization without Rev-Fl binding; Abound is the polarization with saturated Rev-Fl binding; RT is the total RNA concentration; LT is the total Rev-Fl concentration; Kd is the dissociation constant. The uncertainty in (A) was deduced based on the standard deviation over triplicate measurements.

Results

m6A68 does not alter the thermal stability of RREIIB

We first used optical melting experiments to examine whether methylation of A68 impacts the thermal stability of RREIIB. All experiments were performed in the presence of 3 mM Mg2+ unless stated otherwise. This is important given the impact of Mg2+ on RNA folding and dynamics [41] and also given recent studies showing that the impact of m6A on RNA structural dynamics and stability can depend on Mg2+ [37]. For these experiments, we used a stem IIB construct (Fig 1B) containing the wild-type sequence that was recently shown to recapitulate the conformation of stem IIB in the larger three-way junction context [28]. Prior X-ray [42, 43], NMR [44, 45], SAXS [46] as well as chemical probing data on larger fragments of the HIV genome (~350 nt) [47] indicate that RREII stem IIB adopts the predominant secondary structure shown in Fig 1A. In the dominant RREIIB ground state (GS) conformation, A68 adopts an unpaired bulged conformation. When located in bulged nucleotides, m6A has previously been shown to slightly destabilize RNA hairpins by 0.4–0.7 kcal/mol [37] most likely due to the disruption of stacking interactions in the flipped-in conformation. Based on the UV melting data, m6A68 had a negligible effect on RREIIB stability (Fig 1B and 1C). Interestingly, a small degree of destabilization (by ~0.4 kcal/mol) was observed in the absence of Mg2+, most likely because A68 adopts a partially flipped in conformation in the absence of Mg2+, and such a conformation could be more susceptible to destabilization by m6A [28]. Thus, the m6A effect is overridden by Mg2+. Indeed, Mg2+ stabilizes RREIIB by ~2 kcal/mol while m6A only destabilizes it by ~0.4 kcal/mol (Fig 1C).

m6A68 minimally affects structural and dynamic properties of the RREIIB ground state

We used NMR to examine whether methylation of A68 affects the conformation of RREIIB. A single resonance was observed for the N6-methyl group in 1D 1H NMR spectra of RREIIBm6A68, consistent with a single dominant conformation for m6A68 (Fig 2A). The 1D 1H imino spectrum of RREIIBm6A68 is virtually identical to its unmodified counterpart, indicating that the methylation does not alter the RREIIB secondary structure (Fig 2B). Very good agreement was also observed between the 2D [13C,1H] HSQC spectra of modified and unmodified RREIIB with only few residues in the internal loop region (A68, U66, G50, G46) showing minor chemical shift perturbations (Fig 2C). These results indicate that m6A68 modification does not substantially affect the structure of RREIIB GS.

Fig 2. The m6A modification has minor effects on RREIIB structure and dynamics.

Fig 2

(A) Secondary structure of RRE2Bm6A68, with the residues showing line-broadening with m6A, highlighted in red (with Mg2+) and blue (no Mg2+). Comparison of the 1D 1H NMR spectrum of RREIIBm6A68 with or without Mg2+ with the methyl peak indicated by arrows. The comparison of 1D imino spectra (B) and 2D [1H,13C]-HSQC spectra (C) of RREIIBm6A68 and RREIIB in the presence (red) and absence (blue) of 3 mM Mg2+. Resonances exhibiting shifting are indicated using arrows, and those with ambiguous assignments denoted using an asterisk. (D) Normalized resonance intensities in 2D [1H,13C]-HSQC spectra of RREIIBm6A68 and RREIIB in the presence (red) and absence (blue) of 3 mM Mg2+. A52-C8H8, A52-C2H2 and U56-C6H6 were used as a reference and normalized to 0.1. The sample conditions were 1.2–1.5 mM RREIIBm6A68 or RREIIB in 15 mM sodium phosphate, 25 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA, pH 6.4 with or without 3 mM MgCl2.

Prior studies showed that m6A can impact RNA conformation in a Mg2+ dependent manner [37]. Interestingly, the modification had a larger impact on NMR spectra of RREIIB recorded in the absence of Mg2+. Multiple resonances are observed for the N6-methyl group, indicating the co-existence of multiple conformations (Fig 2A). The methylation also induced larger perturbations at A52-U66 base pair near the m6A68 bulge (Fig 2B). In 2D [1H, 13C] HSQC spectra, the modification induced severe line broadening [49] for resonances belonging to residues G47, G48, G50, A68, C69, G71 and U72 in the internal loop, consistent with enhanced dynamics at the micro-to-millisecond timescales, where only G50 resonance shows broadening in the presence of Mg2+ (Fig 2C and 2D). It is likely that the m6A induced line broadening in the absence of Mg2+ is due to a changes in ES kinetics or populations. The UV melting data showing that m6A68 destabilizes RREIIB GS in the absence of Mg2+ suggests that the enhanced ES dynamics could arise from destabilization of the GS in the absence of Mg2+. Similar NMR results were obtained for a double m6A modified RREIIB (RREIIBm6A62m6A68) (S1 Fig).

m6A68 minimally affects the structural and dynamic properties of the excited states in the more native RREII three-way junction

We recently showed that RREII transiently adopts two low-abundance alternative secondary structures (‘excited states’, ES) referred to as ES1 and ES2 (Fig 3A). A68 remains as a bulge in ES1 while forms a G50-A68 mismatch in ES2. The combined m6A effects to A68 bulge in ES1 and to the specific G(anti)-A(anti) mismatch in ES2 remain unknown. We therefore examined whether methylation of A68 impacts the dynamics between the GS and ESs in more native RREII three-way junction. This conformational exchange can in principle be measured quantitatively with the use of NMR R relaxation dispersion (RD) data [28, 5052]. However, in practice, severe line-broadening and resonance overlap in NMR spectra of the more native three-way junction (RREII) in the presence of Mg2+ complicates measurements [28]. We therefore turned to an alternative approach which we recently developed which uses site-specific stable isotope labeling to directly observe the low-populated ES that form under slow exchange kinetics [28]. With this approach, we were previously able to directly observe imino resonances belonging to ES1 and ES2 in RREII, which slows down the exchange kinetics relative to RREIIB (Fig 3A) [28]. In particular, by site-specifically labeling 15N3-U72, we observed the G48-U72 mismatch, which uniquely forms in both ES1 and ES2, based on the characteristic imino chemical shift of G-U mismatches (Fig 3A) [28].

Fig 3. Selective site-labeling strategy to probe conformational exchange in larger RREIIm6A68 three-way junction.

Fig 3

(A) Proposed secondary structure for ES1 and ES2 in RREII based on ESs observed in RREIIB. Nucleotides that experience exchange due to ES1 and ES2 are colored green and blue, respectively. (B) The comparison of 1D imino spectrum of RREIIm6A68 and RREII. (C) 2D [1H,15N]-HSQC spectra of site-specifically labeled 15N3-U72-RREIIm6A68 and 15N3-U72-RREII at 25°C showing a single imino resonance at the characteristic chemical shift region (~11.6 ppm) expected for a G-U in ESs. The sample conditions were 0.3–0.5 mM RNA in 15 mM sodium phosphate, 25 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA at pH 6.4 with 3 mM MgCl2.

We used the above strategy to examine how methylation of A68 impacts the GS-ES exchange in RREII. Samples of m6A68 modified and unmodified RREII were chemically synthesized with site-labeled 15N3-U72 (15N3-U72-RREIIm6A68 and 15N3-U72-RREII, respectively). The 1D 1H imino spectra of modified and unmodified RREII were very similar (Fig 3B) indicating that the modification minimally impacts the GS secondary structure even in the more native three-way junction context. The 2D [1H,15N] HSQC spectrum of RREIIm6A68 includes a resonance characteristic of the ES G48-U72 mismatch, and it shows excellent overlap with the corresponding resonance observed in unmodified RREII (Fig 3C). No other resonances were observed indicating that m6A does not lead to stabilization of alternative conformations in which U72 is base paired. Similar results were obtained in the absence of Mg2+ (S2 Fig). These results indicate that m6A68 does not significantly impact structural properties of the GS or the populations of the ESs in the native three-way junction both in the presence and absence of Mg2+. Note that we cannot entirely rule out that m6A destabilizes ES2 or ES1 and that the observed G48-U72 mismatch reflects either ES1 or ES2, respectively.

m6A68 has a negligible effect on Rev-RRM binding to RREIIB

We used a fluorescence polarization binding assay to examine whether methylation of A68 impacts binding of fluorescein labeled Rev-ARM peptide (Rev-Fl) to RREIIB (Fig 4) [28, 40]. Unmodified RREIIB binds to Rev-ARM peptide with apparent Kd = 30.6 ± 5.8 nM, in agreement with prior studies [44, 53]. The binding affinity decreased two-fold (Kd = 62.2 ± 23.8 nM) for the modified RREIIBm6A68, indicating that the binding affinity for m6A modified was only slightly weakened relative to unmodified RREIIB especially when considering the uncertainty.

Fig 4. Measurement of the binding affinity of Rev-ARM peptide to m6A modified or unmodified RREIIB using fluorescence polarization.

Fig 4

Normalized anisotropy values measured for RREIIBm6A68 and RREIIB fitted with one-site binding model (see ‘Materials and Methods‘ section). The anisotropy value observed in the absence of RNA was normalized to 0.1. Uncertainty reflects the standard deviation from three independent measurements. Buffer conditions: 30 mM HEPES, pH = 7.0, 100 mM KCl, 10mM sodium phosphate, 10 mM ammonium acetate, 10 mM guanidinium chloride, 2 mM MgCl2, 20 mM NaCl, 0.5 mM EDTA and 0.001% (v/v) Triton-X100. Concentration of Rev-Fl peptide was 10 nM.

Discussions

Methylation of RREIIB can promote Rev-RRE interaction by changing the RREIIB conformation so as to favorably bind to Rev or by promoting Rev-RRE binding through direct interaction involving the methyl group. Our results argue against a significant impact on RREIIB structure, as might be expected given placement of m6A68 in the bulge. In addition, the modification slightly weakened binding of the Rev-ARM, and this is consistent with prior NMR [54] and X-ray crystallography [55] studies showing that A68 bulge interacts with Rev protein through non-specific Van Der Waals contacts, and that deleting A68 has minor effects on Rev or Rev-ARM binding affinity to RRE stem IIB [26, 56]. Our data cannot rule out that the exposed and accessible m6A enhances binding in the context of full-length Rev and RRE or promotes RNA export through the recruitment of other host export factors, and that this in turn gives rise to the reported ~2–3 fold decrease in HIV viral RNA pull down using Rev when knocking down METTL3/METTL14 responsible for producing m6A [20]. It is also possible that the structural and dynamic properties of m6A modified RREIIB differ in vivo relative to in vitro. A recent study [29] showed that the key dynamic properties of unmodified RREIIB are similar in vitro and in cells. Further studies are needed to address these possibilities.

The modification had a greater effect on the stability and conformation of RREIIB in the absence of Mg2+. We previously showed that Mg2+ redistributes the RREIIB ensemble by stabilizing the GS and ES1 relative to ES2 [28]. Our results indicate that Mg2+ has a larger effect on the relative stability of these different conformations as compared to the methylation. This underscores the importance of studying the impact of m6A modifications in the presence of Mg2+ as in a more physiological conditions.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. The double m6A modifications have minor effects on RREIIB structure and dynamics in the presence of Mg2+.

(A) Secondary structure of RRE2Bm6A62,68. Resonances exhibiting line-broadening and perturbations in 2D [1H, 13C] aromatic HSQC spectra are shown in orange (with Mg2+) and green (no Mg2+), respectively. The comparison of 1D imino spectra (B) and 2D [1H,13C]-HSQC spectra (C) of RREIIBm6A62m6A68 and RREIIB in the presence (orange) and absence (green) of 3 mM Mg2+. Arrows indicate chemical shift perturbations while ambiguous assignments are denoted using an asterisk.

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Selective site-labeling strategy to probe conformational exchange in larger 3-way junction RREIIm6A68 in the absence of Mg2+.

(A) The comparison of 1D imino spectrum of RREIIm6A68 and RREII without Mg2+. (B) 2D [1H,15N]-HSQC spectra of site-specifically labeled 15N3-U72-RREIIm6A68 and 15N3-U72-RREII without Mg2+ at 25°C showing a single imino resonance at the characteristic chemical shift region (~11.6 ppm) expected for a G-U bp in ES1 and ES2. The sample conditions were 0.3–0.5 mM RNA in 15 mM sodium phosphate, 25 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA at pH 6.4.

(TIF)

Acknowledgments

We thank Atul Kaushik Rangadurai for critical comments and Dr. Richard Brennan in Duke University for providing the UV-Vis spectrophotometer. We acknowledge the Duke Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Center for supporting NMR experiments, and thank Duke Center of RNA Biology for supporting fluorescence polarization measurements.

Data Availability

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

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the US National Institutes of Health [P50 GM103297 to H.M.A.]; Austrian Science Fund [P28725 and P30370 to C.K.] and Austrian Research Promotion Agency FFG (West Austrian BioNMR, 858017 to C.K.). Funding for open access charge: US National Institutes of Health [P50 GM103297]. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Meyer KD, Saletore Y, Zumbo P, Elemento O, Mason CE, Jaffrey SR. Comprehensive analysis of mRNA methylation reveals enrichment in 3' UTRs and near stop codons. Cell. 2012;149(7):1635–46. 10.1016/j.cell.2012.05.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Dominissini D, Moshitch-Moshkovitz S, Schwartz S, Salmon-Divon M, Ungar L, Osenberg S, et al. Topology of the human and mouse m(6)A RNA methylomes revealed by m(6)A-seq. Nature. 2012;485(7397):201–U84. 10.1038/nature11112 WOS:000303799800033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Desrosiers R, Friderici K, Rottman F. Identification of Methylated Nucleosides in Messenger-Rna from Novikoff Hepatoma-Cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1974;71(10):3971–5. 10.1073/pnas.71.10.3971 WOS:A1974U614000040. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Li X, Xiong X, Yi C. Epitranscriptome sequencing technologies: decoding RNA modifications. Nat Methods. 2016;14(1):23–31. 10.1038/nmeth.4110 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Wang X, Zhao BS, Roundtree IA, Lu ZK, Han DL, Ma HH, et al. N-6-methyladenosine Modulates Messenger RNA Translation Efficiency. Cell. 2015;161(6):1388–99. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.014 WOS:000355935000017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Wang X, Lu ZK, Gomez A, Hon GC, Yue YN, Han DL, et al. N-6-methyladenosine-dependent regulation of messenger RNA stability. Nature. 2014;505(7481):117–+. 10.1038/nature12730 WOS:000329163300035. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Zhao X, Yang Y, Sun BF, Shi Y, Yang X, Xiao W, et al. FTO-dependent demethylation of N6-methyladenosine regulates mRNA splicing and is required for adipogenesis. Cell Res. 2014;24(12):1403–19. 10.1038/cr.2014.151 WOS:000345894800006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Xiao W, Adhikari S, Dahal U, Chen YS, Hao YJ, Sun BF, et al. Nuclear m(6)A Reader YTHDC1 Regulates mRNA Splicing. Molecular cell. 2016;61(4):507–19. 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.01.012 WOS:000372326300005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Zhao BXS, Roundtree IA, He C. Post-transcriptional gene regulation by mRNA modifications. Nat Rev Mol Cell Bio. 2017;18(1):31–42. 10.1038/nrm.2016.132 WOS:000393267500008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Roundtree IA, Evans ME, Pan T, He C. Dynamic RNA Modifications in Gene Expression Regulation. Cell. 2017;169(7):1187–200. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.045 WOS:000403332400009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Meyer KD, Jaffrey SR. Rethinking m(6)A Readers, Writers, and Erasers. Annu Rev Cell Dev Bi. 2017;33:319–42. 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100616-060758 WOS:000413584700015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Deng XL, Su R, Feng XS, Wei MJ, Chen JJ. Role of N-6-methyladenosine modification in cancer. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2018;48:1–7. 10.1016/j.gde.2017.10.005 WOS:000428232100002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Chen T, Hao Y-J, Zhang Y, Li M-M, Wang M, Han W, et al. m6A RNA Methylation Is Regulated by MicroRNAs and Promotes Reprogramming to Pluripotency. Cell stem cell. 2015;16(3):289–301. 10.1016/j.stem.2015.01.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Weng Y-L, Wang X, An R, Cassin J, Vissers C, Liu Y, et al. Epitranscriptomic m6A Regulation of Axon Regeneration in the Adult Mammalian Nervous System. Neuron. 2018;97(2):313–25.e6. 10.1016/j.neuron.2017.12.036 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gokhale NS, McIntyre ABR, McFadden MJ, Roder AE, Kennedy EM, Gandara JA, et al. N6-Methyladenosine in Flaviviridae Viral RNA Genomes Regulates Infection. Cell Host Microbe. 2016;20(5):654–65. Epub 2016/10/25. 10.1016/j.chom.2016.09.015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Gokhale NS, McIntyre ABR, McFadden MJ, Roder AE, Kennedy EM, Gandara JA, et al. N6-Methyladenosine in Flaviviridae Viral RNA Genomes Regulates Infection. Cell Host Microbe. 2016;20(5):654–65. 10.1016/j.chom.2016.09.015 WOS:000389472000014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Lichinchi G, Zhao BS, Wu YA, Lu ZK, Qin Y, He C, et al. Dynamics of Human and Viral RNA Methylation during Zika Virus Infection. Cell Host Microbe. 2016;20(5):666–73. 10.1016/j.chom.2016.10.002 WOS:000389472000015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Tirumuru N, Zhao BS, Lu WX, Lu ZK, He C, Wu L. N-6-methyladenosine of HIV-1 RNA regulates viral infection and HIV-1 Gag protein expression. eLife. 2016;5. ARTN e15528 10.7554/eLife.15528. WOS:000380858000001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Hesser CR, Karijolich J, Dominissini D, He C, Glaunsinger BA. N-6-methyladenosine modification and the YTHDF2 reader protein play cell type specific roles in lytic viral gene expression during Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus infection. Plos Pathog. 2018;14(4). ARTN e1006995 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006995. WOS:000431135400036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Lichinchi G, Gao S, Saletore Y, Gonzalez GM, Bansal V, Wang Y, et al. Dynamics of the human and viral m6A RNA methylomes during HIV-1 infection of T cells. Nature Microbiology. 2016;1 10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.11 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Kennedy EM, Bogerd HP, Kornepati AVR, Kang D, Ghoshal D, Marshall JB, et al. Posttranscriptional m(6)A Editing of HIV-1 mRNAs Enhances Viral Gene Expression. Cell Host Microbe. 2016;19(5):675–85. 10.1016/j.chom.2016.04.002 WOS:000375595500017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Malim MH, Hauber J, Le SY, Maizel JV, Cullen BR. The HIV-1 rev trans-activator acts through a structured target sequence to activate nuclear export of unspliced viral mRNA. Nature. 1989;338(6212):254–7. 10.1038/338254a0 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Malim MH, Tiley LS, McCarn DF, Rusche JR, Hauber J, Cullen BR. HIV-1 structural gene expression requires binding of the Rev trans-activator to its RNA target sequence. Cell. 1990;60(4):675–83. 10.1016/0092-8674(90)90670-a . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Malim MH, Cullen BR. HIV-1 structural gene expression requires the binding of multiple Rev monomers to the viral RRE: implications for HIV-1 latency. Cell. 1991;65(2):241–8. 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90158-u . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Bartel DP, Zapp ML, Green MR, Szostak JW. HIV-1 Rev regulation involves recognition of non-Watson-Crick base pairs in viral RNA. Cell. 1991;67(3):529–36. 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90527-6 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Heaphy S, Finch JT, Gait MJ, Karn J, Singh M. Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 regulator of virion expression, rev, forms nucleoprotein filaments after binding to a purine-rich "bubble" located within the rev-responsive region of viral mRNAs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1991;88(16):7366–70. 10.1073/pnas.88.16.7366 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Huang XJ, Hope TJ, Bond BL, McDonald D, Grahl K, Parslow TG. Minimal Rev-response element for type 1 human immunodeficiency virus. Journal of virology. 1991;65(4):2131–4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Chu CC, Plangger R, Kreutz C, Al-Hashimi HM. Dynamic ensemble of HIV-1 RRE stem IIB reveals non-native conformations that disrupt the Rev-binding site. Nucleic acids research. 2019;47(13):7105–17. 10.1093/nar/gkz498 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Ganser LR, Chu C-C, Bogerd HP, Kelly ML, Cullen BR, Al-Hashimi HM. Probing RNA conformational equilibria within the functional cellular context. bioRxiv. 2019:634576 10.1101/634576 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Spitale RC, Flynn RA, Zhang QC, Crisalli P, Lee B, Jung JW, et al. Structural imprints in vivo decode RNA regulatory mechanisms. Nature. 2015;519(7544):486–90. 10.1038/nature14263 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Kierzek E, Kierzek R. The thermodynamic stability of RNA duplexes and hairpins containing N6-alkyladenosines and 2-methylthio-N6-alkyladenosines. Nucleic acids research. 2003;31(15):4472–80. 10.1093/nar/gkg633 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Roost C, Lynch SR, Batista PJ, Qu K, Chang HY, Kool ET. Structure and thermodynamics of N6-methyladenosine in RNA: a spring-loaded base modification. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2015;137(5):2107–15. 10.1021/ja513080v [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Liu N, Dai Q, Zheng G, He C, Parisien M, Pan T. N6-methyladenosine-dependent RNA structural switches regulate RNA–protein interactions. Nature. 2015;518:560 10.1038/nature14234 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Roost C, Lynch SR, Batista PJ, Qu K, Chang HY, Kool ET. Structure and Thermodynamics of N6-Methyladenosine in RNA: A Spring-Loaded Base Modification. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2015;137(5):2107–15. 10.1021/ja513080v [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Kierzek E, Kierzek R. The thermodynamic stability of RNA duplexes and hairpins containing N-6-alkyladenosines and 2-methylthio-N-6-alkyladenosines. Nucleic acids research. 2003;31(15):4472–80. 10.1093/nar/gkg633 WOS:000184532900031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Huang L, Ashraf S, Wang J, Lilley DM. Control of box C/D snoRNP assembly by N(6)-methylation of adenine. EMBO Rep. 2017;18(9):1631–45. 10.15252/embr.201743967 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Liu B, Merriman DK, Choi SH, Schumacher MA, Plangger R, Kreutz C, et al. A potentially abundant junctional RNA motif stabilized by m(6)A and Mg(2). Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):2761 10.1038/s41467-018-05243-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Neuner S, Santner T, Kreutz C, Micura R. The "Speedy" Synthesis of Atom-Specific (15)N Imino/Amido-Labeled RNA. Chemistry. 2015;21(33):11634–43. 10.1002/chem.201501275 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Delaglio F, Grzesiek S, Vuister GW, Zhu G, Pfeifer J, Bax A. NMRPipe: a multidimensional spectral processing system based on UNIX pipes. Journal of biomolecular NMR. 1995;6(3):277–93. 10.1007/bf00197809 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Luedtke NW, Tor Y. Fluorescence-based methods for evaluating the RNA affinity and specificity of HIV-1 Rev-RRE inhibitors. Biopolymers. 2003;70(1):103–19. 10.1002/bip.10428 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Draper DE, Grilley D, Soto AM. Ions and RNA folding. Annu Rev Bioph Biom. 2005;34:221–43. 10.1146/annurev.biophys.34.040204.144511 WOS:000230099600010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Ippolito JA, Steitz TA. The structure of the HIV-1 RRE high affinity rev binding site at 1.6 A resolution. Journal of molecular biology. 2000;295(4):711–7. 10.1006/jmbi.1999.3405 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Hung LW, Holbrook EL, Holbrook SR. The crystal structure of the Rev binding element of HIV-1 reveals novel base pairing and conformational variability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2000;97(10):5107–12. 10.1073/pnas.090588197 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Battiste JL, Tan R, Frankel AD, Williamson JR. Binding of an HIV Rev peptide to Rev responsive element RNA induces formation of purine-purine base pairs. Biochemistry. 1994;33(10):2741–7. 10.1021/bi00176a001 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Peterson RD, Bartel DP, Szostak JW, Horvath SJ, Feigon J. 1H NMR studies of the high-affinity Rev binding site of the Rev responsive element of HIV-1 mRNA: base pairing in the core binding element. Biochemistry. 1994;33(18):5357–66. 10.1021/bi00184a001 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Fang X, Wang J, O'Carroll IP, Mitchell M, Zuo X, Wang Y, et al. An unusual topological structure of the HIV-1 Rev response element. Cell. 2013;155(3):594–605. 10.1016/j.cell.2013.10.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Bai Y, Tambe A, Zhou K, Doudna JA. RNA-guided assembly of Rev-RRE nuclear export complexes. eLife. 2014;3:e03656 10.7554/eLife.03656 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Siegfried NA, Metzger SL, Bevilacqua PC. Folding cooperativity in RNA and DNA is dependent on position in the helix. Biochemistry. 2007;46(1):172–81. 10.1021/bi061375l WOS:000243157300018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Getz MM, Andrews AJ, Fierke CA, Al-Hashimi HM. Structural plasticity and Mg2+ binding properties of RNase P P4 from combined analysis of NMR residual dipolar couplings and motionally decoupled spin relaxation. Rna. 2007;13(2):251–66. Epub 2006/12/30. 10.1261/rna.264207 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Palmer AG 3rd, Massi F. Characterization of the dynamics of biomacromolecules using rotating-frame spin relaxation NMR spectroscopy. Chem Rev. 2006;106(5):1700–19. 10.1021/cr0404287 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Korzhnev DM, Orekhov VY, Kay LE. Off-resonance R(1rho) NMR studies of exchange dynamics in proteins with low spin-lock fields: an application to a Fyn SH3 domain. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2005;127(2):713–21. 10.1021/ja0446855 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Rangadurai A, Szymaski ES, Kimsey IJ, Shi H, Al-Hashimi HM. Characterizing micro-to-millisecond chemical exchange in nucleic acids using off-resonance R1rho relaxation dispersion. Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc. 2019;112–113:55–102. Epub 2019/09/05. 10.1016/j.pnmrs.2019.05.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Daugherty MD, D'Orso I, Frankel AD. A solution to limited genomic capacity: using adaptable binding surfaces to assemble the functional HIV Rev oligomer on RNA. Molecular cell. 2008;31(6):824–34. 10.1016/j.molcel.2008.07.016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Battiste JL, Mao H, Rao NS, Tan R, Muhandiram DR, Kay LE, et al. Alpha helix-RNA major groove recognition in an HIV-1 rev peptide-RRE RNA complex. Science. 1996;273(5281):1547–51. 10.1126/science.273.5281.1547 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Jayaraman B, Crosby DC, Homer C, Ribeiro I, Mavor D, Frankel AD. RNA-directed remodeling of the HIV-1 protein Rev orchestrates assembly of the Rev-Rev response element complex. eLife. 2014;3:e04120 10.7554/eLife.04120 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Kjems J, Calnan BJ, Frankel AD, Sharp PA. Specific binding of a basic peptide from HIV-1 Rev. The EMBO journal. 1992;11(3):1119–29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Joanna Sztuba-Solinska

5 Nov 2019

PONE-D-19-28951

m6A minimally impacts the structure, dynamics, and Rev ARM binding properties of HIV-1 RRE stem IIB

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hashim M. Al-Hashimi,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has great 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. Your manuscript has been revised by four reviewers with two of them indicating minor changes indicated below.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by December 06, 2019. When you are 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.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Joanna Sztuba-Solinska, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

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

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

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

1. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with your previous publication, which needs to be addressed:

- https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/47/13/7105/5519168

In your revision ensure you rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section.

2. Thank you for including your competing interests statement; "I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: H.M.A. is an advisor and holds an ownership interest in Nymirum Inc., an RNA- based drug discovery company. "

Please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests).  If there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include your updated Competing Interests statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

3. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

[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?

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

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: N/A

Reviewer #3: I Don't Know

Reviewer #4: 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.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

4. 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

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

5. 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 effect on structure of methylation of A68 in the stemloop IIB of the HIV RRE has been studied in this report using a variety of physical-chemical methods. All the experiments were conducted in vitro with purified RNA substrates. The study clearly shows that the methylation causes no significant change in any of the parameters measured in any of the studies. It also shows that greater effects of methylation can be seen when measurements are conducted in the absence of magnesium, underscoring the importance of carrying out measurements under more physiological conditions. Intriguingly, the authors did show a slight (2 fold) change in the binding of the Rev-ARM to the structure containing the methylation. Contrary to other reports the effect was actually a weakened binding. The authors point out that this is more consistent with what would be expected given the physical effects expected from the methylation. As the authors carefully point out, these cannot studies do not rule out that methylation may effect the full-length RRE struture, full-length Rev protein binding or the binding of other cellular factors differently. This is a weakness of this study but in so far as the authors address this issue clearly and the data presented here is sound, this study seems to fit the criteria needed to be acceptable for PLOS One.

Reviewer #2: The authors present evidence that methylation has minimal effects on the properties of stem IIB of HIV-1 RRE. They use several biophysical techniques in this analysis. This conclusion is interesting and potentially significant.

Reviewer #3: Chia-Chieh Chu and collaborators present a controversial article where they claim that m6A has little impact on the HIV-1 RRE stem IIB structure and in a viral protein binding proprieties. The authors conclude by three biophysical experiments: optical melting experiments, NMR and binding assays that the m6A modification in the position 68 of the the Rev response element is not sufficient to produce significant changes in its conformation. Chu et al, also analyze a functional motif in Rev, one of its best-known proteins that bind RRE and they conclude that m6A does not affect its binding properties. This is a very interesting research article that prevent from dogmas since contradicts some of the literature cited. However, authors need to consider that discarding or dismissing another study requires more evidence. They need to soften some or their conclusions due to the nature of their in vitro studies. They lack description of some important controls for example: in all experiments, how do they make sure the correct “natural” folding of the RRE RNA? How do they know that all the molecules are folded in the same way in vivo? Would it be necessary to consider in vivo crosslinked samples in controls to validate their hypothesis? How do they measure the Rev-RRE association? Finally, they emphasize that Mg+ and the sequence context impact on m6A-RRE RNA structure, but they did not perform any experiments related to the sequence context. More experiments in this matter are necessary to support this conclusion of a less strong sentence needs to be changed to soften this conclusion. In line 256 they establish that “…m6A slightly weakens binding to the Rev-ARM peptide.” Could it be that “slightly” difference in the cell is catalytically important? In my opinion, this paper contains well documented and reliable experiments, it is very well constructed, detailed and has a didactic approach. However strong affirmations i.e. line 286 “This underscores the importance of studying the impact

287 of m6A modifications under conditions that mimic the physiological cellular environment.” Are not congruent with the data presented and need to be state in an ease way.

Reviewer #4: There is some controversy in the field regarding the role of m6A methylation in HIV replication. In particular, the role of m6A methylation sites within the HIV Rev response element (RRE) stem IIB, which have previously been suggested to enhance binding to the HIV REV protein, which in turn enhances REV-mediated viral mRNA nuclear export. Several studies have failed to identify these proposed m6A sites using m6A-seq approaches.

Chu et al., provide convincing evidence using a range of biophyisical approaches, such as UV melting and NMR-based approaches, to show that m6A methylation does not affect the structure of RREIIB. Moreover, flourescence aniosotrophy was used to suggest that m6A in this region actually weakens REV binding.

Specific comments.

1. The introduction could be extended to include other examples of how it can stabilise RNA structures and is implicated in various other RNA processing events.

2. There is no mention of m6A readers.

3. A better explanation of why Mg2+ is brought into the experiments and its significance is required throughout the paper.

4. Line 207 - needs amending

5. The flourescence aniosotrophy experiment is interesting, but very brief, this is a complete opposite to the original finding. Therefore, it needs a confirmatory experiment, as this is just based on a REV-ARM peptide to the RREIIB.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). 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 Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes: Gabriela Toomer

Reviewer #4: 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 be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2019 Dec 11;14(12):e0224850. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224850.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


24 Nov 2019

Reviewer #1:

“The effect on structure of methylation of A68 in the stemloop IIB of the HIV RRE has been studied in this report using a variety of physical-chemical methods. All the experiments were conducted in vitro with purified RNA substrates. The study clearly shows that the methylation causes no significant change in any of the parameters measured in any of the studies. It also shows that greater effects of methylation can be seen when measurements are conducted in the absence of magnesium, underscoring the importance of carrying out measurements under more physiological conditions. Intriguingly, the authors did show a slight (2 fold) change in the binding of the Rev-ARM to the structure containing the methylation. Contrary to other reports the effect was actually a weakened binding. The authors point out that this is more consistent with what would be expected given the physical effects expected from the methylation. As the authors carefully point out, these cannot studies do not rule out that methylation may effect the full-length RRE struture, full-length Rev protein binding or the binding of other cellular factors differently. This is a weakness of this study but in so far as the authors address this issue clearly and the data presented here is sound, this study seems to fit the criteria needed to be acceptable for PLOS One.”

We thank the reviewer for his/her comments.

Reviewer #2:

The authors present evidence that methylation has minimal effects on the properties of stem IIB of HIV-1 RRE. They use several biophysical techniques in this analysis. This conclusion is interesting and potentially significant.

We thank the reviewer for his/her comments.

Reviewer #3:

1) “Chia-Chieh Chu and collaborators present a controversial article where they claim that m6A has little impact on the HIV-1 RRE stem IIB structure and in a viral protein binding proprieties. The authors conclude by three biophysical experiments: optical melting experiments, NMR and binding assays that the m6A modification in the position 68 of the the Rev response element is not sufficient to produce significant changes in its conformation. Chu et al, also analyze a functional motif in Rev, one of its best-known proteins that bind RRE and they conclude that m6A does not affect its binding properties. This is a very interesting research article that prevent from dogmas since contradicts some of the literature cited. However, authors need to consider that discarding or dismissing another study requires more evidence. They need to soften some or their conclusions due to the nature of their in vitro studies. They lack description of some important controls for example: in all experiments, how do they make sure the correct “natural” folding of the RRE RNA? How do they know that all the molecules are folded in the same way in vivo? Would it be necessary to consider in vivo crosslinked samples in controls to validate their hypothesis? How do they measure the Rev-RRE association?”

The structure of RRE stem IIB has been the subject of numerous investigations in vitro by X-ray, NMR, SAXS and also more recently in the context of much larger RRE fragments using chemical probing data. In all cases, the structure of RREIIB has been determined to be the same as that observed under our NMR conditions as elaborated in ref 28. We have clarified this point on page 9 on line148 by stating that “Prior X-ray [ref 42, 43], NMR [ref 44, 45], SAXS [ref 46] as well as chemical probing data on larger fragments of the HIV genome (~350 nt) [ref 47] indicate that RREII stem IIB adopts the predominant secondary structure shown in Fig 1A.”

We agree with the reviewer that we cannot rule out that the binding properties may differ in vivo and this is why we noted in the original submission on line 292 that “Our data cannot rule out that the exposed and accessible m6A enhances binding in the context of full-length Rev and RRE or promotes RNA export through the recruitment of other host export factors.”

We agree with the reviewer that the structural and dynamic properties of RREIIB may differ in vivo. In a recent study [ref 29], we showed that the dynamic properties of RREIIB determined in vitro are very similar to the dynamic properties measured in cells. This argues against a major difference between the two environments at least for unmodified RREIIB. Nevertheless, to soften the language and emphasize this possibility, we added the following sentence to our discussion on page 16 on line 296, “It is also possible that the structural and dynamic properties of m6A modified RREIIB differ in vivo relative to in vitro. A recent study [ref 29] showed that the key dynamic properties of unmodified RREIIB are similar in vitro and in cells. Further studies are needed to examine the behavior of m6A modified RREIIB in cells. “

2) Finally, they emphasize that Mg+ and the sequence context impact on m6A-RRE RNA structure, but they did not perform any experiments related to the sequence context. More experiments in this matter are necessary to support this conclusion of a less strong sentence needs to be changed to soften this conclusion.

With regards to different sequence contexts, we were referring to other published studies cited in our manuscript [refs 31, 32, 36, 37] which showed that m6A has different effects on RNA stability depending on sequence context and in some cases on the presence/absence of Mg2+. We have clarified this by adding the following sentence at the end of the introduction: “For example, while m6A has been shown to destabilize canonical duplexes [ref 31, 32], it can stabilize junctional A-U base pairs in a Mg2+ and secondary structure dependent manner [ref 37] as well as in contexts in which the m6A is in a dangling end [ref 32].”

3) In line 256 they establish that “…m6A slightly weakens binding to the Rev-ARM peptide.” Could it be that “slightly” difference in the cell is catalytically important? In my opinion, this paper contains well documented and reliable experiments, it is very well constructed, detailed and has a didactic approach. However strong affirmations i.e. line 286 “This underscores the importance of studying the impact

287 of m6A modifications under conditions that mimic the physiological cellular environment.” Are not congruent with the data presented and need to be state in an ease way.

We appreciate the comment made by the reviewer. We agree that we need to be cautious not to over interpret the data measured in vitro as the behavior could change in vivo. In the original submission, we did acknowledge that the in vivo environment could alter the behavior. In the revised manuscript, we made additional changes to soften the language. In the abstract on line 22, we replaced “unlikely to substantially alter the RRE-Rev interaction” with “m6A is unlikely to substantially alter the conformational properties of the RRE.” so that the focus is on the impact of m6A on the conformational properties.

On line 65, we now note, “The results indicate that if RREIIB is m6A modified, it is unlikely to substantially change the conformational properties of RRE although we cannot rule out that small changes in the conformational properties could modulate Rev-RRE binding in vivo.”

In the revised manuscript, we also edited the following sentence in the discussion section on line 304 “This underscores the importance of studying the impact of m6A modifications in the presence of Mg2+ as in a more physiological conditions.”  

Reviewer #4:

There is some controversy in the field regarding the role of m6A methylation in HIV replication. In particular, the role of m6A methylation sites within the HIV Rev response element (RRE) stem IIB, which have previously been suggested to enhance binding to the HIV REV protein, which in turn enhances REV-mediated viral mRNA nuclear export. Several studies have failed to identify these proposed m6A sites using m6A-seq approaches.

Chu et al., provide convincing evidence using a range of biophyisical approaches, such as UV melting and NMR-based approaches, to show that m6A methylation does not affect the structure of RREIIB. Moreover, flourescence aniosotrophy was used to suggest that m6A in this region actually weakens REV binding.

Specific comments.

1. The introduction could be extended to include other examples of how it can stabilise RNA structures and is implicated in various other RNA processing events.

We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. We added text to refer to specific examples where m6A can stabilize RNA (see response to comment 2 by Reviewer 3).

2. There is no mention of m6A readers.

In the revised manuscript, we added the following sentence in the introduction on line 44 “Another study employing distinct cell lines and mapping methods did not observe these m6A sites on RREIIB suggesting that m6A can enhance HIV-1 replication and mRNA expression through recruitment of the m6A reader protein YTH-domain containing family (YTHDF) [ref 21]. A third study found m6A in RRE but did not identify the specific site [ref 18]. The study proposed that the YTHDF proteins inhibit HIV-1 replication and infection by blocking viral reverse transcription.”

3. A better explanation of why Mg2+ is brought into the experiments and its significance is required throughout the paper.

We thank the reviewer for the suggestions. In the revised manuscript, we added the following sentences on line 142 “All experiments were performed in the presence of 3 mM Mg2+ unless stated otherwise. This is important given the impact of Mg2+ on RNA folding and dynamics [ref 41] and also given recent studies showing that the impact of m6A on RNA structural dynamics and stability can depend on Mg2+ [ref 37].

4. Line 207 - needs amending

In the revised manuscript, we edited the following sentence in the result section in line 219 (previous line 207) “We recently showed that RREII transiently adopts two low-abundance alternative secondary structures (‘excited states’, ES) referred to as ES1 and ES2 (Fig 3A).”

5. The flourescence aniosotrophy experiment is interesting, but very brief, this is a complete opposite to the original finding. Therefore, it needs a confirmatory experiment, as this is just based on a REV-ARM peptide to the RREIIB.

The binding affinity for m6A modified was only slightly weakened relative to unmodified RREIIB especially when considering the uncertainty. So our results are best described not as opposite to what was reported previously in ref 20; rather we did not see any evidence for tighter binding with m6A modified RREIIB. We revised the manuscript to soften the language when making this point on page 14 on line 268, “the binding affinity for m6A modified was only slightly weakened relative to unmodified RREIIB especially when considering the uncertainty”.

In addition, we note that no Kd was measured in the prior study [ref 20]. Rather the tighter affinity was deduced based on ~2-3 fold decrease in pull down of RRE RNA when knocking down two subunits (METTL3/METTL14) from the methyltransferase complex responsible for producing m6A. To address the reviewer comment, we added the following sentence in the discussion on line 292, “Our data cannot rule out that the exposed and accessible m6A enhances binding in the context of full-length Rev and RRE or promotes RNA export through the recruitment of other host export factors, and that this in turn gives rise to the reported ~2-3 fold decrease in HIV viral RNA pull down using Rev when knocking down METTL3/METTL14 responsible for producing m6A [ref 20] ”.

Editorial

1. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with your previous publication, which needs to be addressed:

- https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/47/13/7105/5519168

In your revision ensure you rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section.

In the revised manuscript, we edited the text of fluorescence polarization assays in the methods section to avoid overlapping text.

2. Thank you for including your competing interests statement; "I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: H.M.A. is an advisor and holds an ownership interest in Nymirum Inc., an RNA- based drug discovery company. "

Please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests). If there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

In the revised manuscript, we included “This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” in Conflict of interest statement section.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Joanna Sztuba-Solinska

27 Nov 2019

m6A minimally impacts the structure, dynamics, and Rev ARM binding properties of HIV-1 RRE stem IIB

PONE-D-19-28951R1

Dear Dr. Al-Hashimi,

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

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and 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.

With kind regards,

Joanna Sztuba-Solinska, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Acceptance letter

Joanna Sztuba-Solinska

4 Dec 2019

PONE-D-19-28951R1

m6A minimally impacts the structure, dynamics, and Rev ARM binding properties of HIV-1 RRE stem IIB

Dear Dr. Al-Hashimi:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, 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.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Joanna Sztuba-Solinska

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. The double m6A modifications have minor effects on RREIIB structure and dynamics in the presence of Mg2+.

    (A) Secondary structure of RRE2Bm6A62,68. Resonances exhibiting line-broadening and perturbations in 2D [1H, 13C] aromatic HSQC spectra are shown in orange (with Mg2+) and green (no Mg2+), respectively. The comparison of 1D imino spectra (B) and 2D [1H,13C]-HSQC spectra (C) of RREIIBm6A62m6A68 and RREIIB in the presence (orange) and absence (green) of 3 mM Mg2+. Arrows indicate chemical shift perturbations while ambiguous assignments are denoted using an asterisk.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. Selective site-labeling strategy to probe conformational exchange in larger 3-way junction RREIIm6A68 in the absence of Mg2+.

    (A) The comparison of 1D imino spectrum of RREIIm6A68 and RREII without Mg2+. (B) 2D [1H,15N]-HSQC spectra of site-specifically labeled 15N3-U72-RREIIm6A68 and 15N3-U72-RREII without Mg2+ at 25°C showing a single imino resonance at the characteristic chemical shift region (~11.6 ppm) expected for a G-U bp in ES1 and ES2. The sample conditions were 0.3–0.5 mM RNA in 15 mM sodium phosphate, 25 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA at pH 6.4.

    (TIF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.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