SUMMARY
Translation initiation defines the identity and quantity of a synthesized protein. The process is dysregulated in many human diseases1,2. A key commitment step is when the ribosomal subunits join at a translation start site on a messenger RNA to form a functional ribosome. Here, we combined single-molecule spectroscopy and structural methods using an in vitro reconstituted system to examine how the human ribosomal subunits join. Single-molecule fluorescence revealed when universally-conserved eukaryotic initiation factors eIF1A and eIF5B associate with and depart from initiation complexes. Guided by single-molecule dynamics, we visualized initiation complexes that contained both eIF1A and eIF5B using single-particle electron cryo-microscopy. The resulting structure revealed how eukaryote-specific contacts between the two proteins remodel the initiation complex to orient the initiator aminoacyl-tRNA in a conformation compatible with ribosomal subunit joining. Collectively, our findings provide a quantitative and architectural framework for the molecular choreography orchestrated by eIF1A and eIF5B during human translation initiation.
Human protein synthesis initiates when ribosomal subunits identify a translation start site on messenger RNA (mRNA) and assemble a functional 80S ribosome. The multi-step process has been outlined biochemically and is mediated by numerous eukaryotic initiation factors (eIFs) and the initiator aminoacyl-tRNA (Met-tRNAiMet) 3-5. To begin, the 43S pre-initiation complex (43S PIC) – the small (40S) ribosomal subunit bound by eIFs 1, 1A, 3, 5, and the eIF2–GTP–Met-tRNAiMet complex – loads onto the mRNA, which is facilitated by eIF4 proteins bound near the m7G cap 6,7. Directional 5' to 3' movement of the now 48S initiation complex along the 5' untranslated region scans for translation start sites in favorable sequence contexts 8,9. A start codon (typically AUG) correctly placed at the ribosomal P site triggers remodeling of the complex from an ‘open’ scanning-permissive conformation to a ‘closed’ scanning-arrested one. The transition involves repositioning of the 40S head and Met-tRNAiMet, release of eIF1 and the eIF2-GDP complex, and relocation of eIF5 9,10. To complete initiation, the GTPase eIF5B catalyzes joining of the large (60S) ribosomal subunit to form the 80S ribosome 11-13. Subsequent GTP hydrolysis-dependent departure of eIF5B enables protein synthesis to commence 11,14.
What allows ribosomal subunits to join and form stable inter-subunit contacts remains unclear. One challenge is that the acceptor stem of Met-tRNAiMet must be slotted into the correct narrow channel on the incoming 60S subunit. Proper Met-tRNAiMet orientation avoids steric clashes and poises its aminoacylated 3' end for accommodation in the peptidyl transfer center. We hypothesized that universally-conserved eIF1A and eIF5B might play a central role in this process. eIF1A resides in the 40S ribosomal A site during initiation and mediates scanning and start codon recognition via its flexible N- and C-terminal tails 8,9. Although the eIF5B-bound 48S initiation complex has never been visualized, structures exist for the eIF5B-bound 80S complex 15-17. These snapshots suggest that eIF5B core domains (G, II, III) dock onto the 40S subunit outside the A site. Domain IV of the protein extends inward to latch onto the acceptor stem of Met-tRNAiMet. Complementary molecular and genetic studies further suggest that eukaryote-specific contacts between domain IV of eIF5B and the C-terminal tail of eIF1A facilitate 60S subunit joining 18-22. Yet, whether these two factors coordinate to allow ribosomal subunit joining by guiding formation of inter-subunit contacts or by actively remodeling initiation complexes is unknown.
To uncover how eIF5B and eIF1A mediate ribosomal subunit joining, we combined real-time single-molecule assays of human translation initiation with targeted structural analyses. We first performed in vitro reconstituted experiments where fluorescently-labeled ribosomal subunits, eIF1A, and eIF5B were monitored directly throughout initiation using single-molecule spectroscopy. Our assays revealed a transient state where both eIF1A and eIF5B are bound just prior to 60S subunit joining. Using single-particle electron cryo-microscopy (cryo-EM), we characterized structurally this hitherto elusive intermediate, which established the structural basis for eIF5B-catalyzed ribosomal subunit joining.
RESULTS
Direct monitoring of human initiation
We established a real-time single-molecule assay to monitor human translation initiation directly (Extended Data Fig. 1a,b). β-globin mRNA was tethered to an imaging surface within zero-mode waveguides (ZMWs), which enable four-color fluorescence detection in real time (Extended Data Fig. 1c) 23. Saturating concentrations of eIF4 proteins (4A, 4B, 4E, 4G), ATP, and GTP were then added to the tethered mRNA. Separately, the 43S PIC was preassembled and contained 40S subunits labeled with cyanine-3 dye (Cy3, green signal) on the N-terminus of uS19. Upon start of data acquisition at 30 °C, a mixture with 5 nM 43S PIC (by 40S-Cy3), 1 μM eIF5B, and 100 nM 60S subunits labeled with cyanine-5 dye (Cy5, red signal) on the C-terminus of uL18 was added to the imaging surface. When excited by a 532 nm laser, appearance of Cy3 fluorescence indicated that the 40S subunit loaded onto the mRNA. Subsequent appearance of Cy3(donor)-Cy5(acceptor) FRET indicated successful joining of the 60S subunit (FRET efficiency, EFRET = 0.65 ± 0.01) (Extended Data Fig. 1d-g) 24. As expected, 40S subunit loading onto mRNA was dependent on the presence of eIF4 proteins (kon,40S = 0.049 ± 0.002 s−1 at 5 nM; ≈ 10 μM−1 s−1) (Extended Data Fig. 1h,i). Consistent with the low nanomolar equilibrium dissociation constants of the eIFs for the initiation complex 25, the majority of loaded 43S PICs progressed to 60S subunit joining (kon,60S = 0.033 ± 0.001 s−1 at 100 nM), which was dependent on the presence of eIF4 proteins and eIF5B (Extended Data Fig. 1h,i). The mean elapsed time from 40S subunit loading to 60S subunit joining we observed (~ 30 s) agreed well with initiation timescales obtained in cells (20-30 s) 26.
eIF5B binds after eIF2 release
We next tracked fluorescently-labeled eIF5B as it mediates 60S subunit joining. N-terminally truncated eIF5B was labeled on its N-terminus with a Cy3.5 dye via a fused ybbR peptide tag, which was functional in bulk translation (Extended Data Fig. 2a,b). After the eIF4-mRNA complex was tethered in ZMWs, a mixture of the 43S PIC (10 nM by 40S-Cy3, green), eIF5B-Cy3.5 (orange), and 60S-Cy5 subunits (red) was added (Fig. 1a). Fluorescent signals were monitored in real time upon excitation by a 532 nm laser, with the presence of eIF5B on initiation complexes determined by direct excitation of the Cy3.5 dye. The predicted distance between eIF5B and 40S subunit labeling sites was incompatible with FRET-based signals (Extended Data Fig. 2c) 16,17.
We observed sequential association of the 40S subunit, eIF5B, and the 60S subunit, which was followed by rapid departure of eIF5B (Fig. 1b,c and Extended Data Fig. 2d). Unlike transient eIF5B sampling previously observed on yeast 48S complexes 14, human eIF5B stably associated in a concentration-independent manner with 48S complexes prior to 60S subunit joining (kon,5B ≈ 0.1 s−1 at 20 and 40 nM) (Fig. 1d and Extended Data Fig. 2e). The apparent concentration-independent association of eIF5B suggests the presence of a slow upstream step that limits its binding. Nevertheless, once eIF5B bound, the 60S subunit joined in a concentration- and temperature-dependent manner (kon,60S ≈ 0.14 ± 0.004 s−1 at 200 nM, 30 °C; ≈ 0.7 μM−1s−1) (Fig. 1d and Extended Data Fig. 2e,f). Formation of the 80S initiation complex triggered rapid and temperature-dependent departure of eIF5B (koff,5B ≈ 1.2 ± 0.1 s−1 at 30 °C), which was prevented by substitution of the catalytic histidine to block GTP hydrolysis (koff,5B-H706E < 0.01 s−1 at 30 °C) (Fig. 1d and Extended Data Fig. 2e-g).
We hypothesized that departure of eIF2 was needed for eIF5B to bind initiation complexes since both proteins bind the acceptor stem of Met-tRNAiMet. We therefore monitored eIF5B association with initiation complexes upon a 20-fold reduction in eIF5 concentration (from 50 nM to 2.5 nM), as eIF5 activates GTP hydrolysis by eIF2 to enable eIF2 departure. When eIF5 was limiting, the apparent eIF5B association rate was reduced at least 10-fold (kon,5B ≈ 0.009 s−1 at 40 nM) (Fig. 1d and Extended Data Fig. 2e). We reasoned that pre-equilibration of 48S initiation complexes with a saturating concentration of eIF5 would allow eIF2 release and accelerate eIF5B association (Extended Data Fig. 3a). Indeed, eIF5B stably associated ~9-fold more rapidly and in a concentration-dependent manner with pre-equilibrated 48S complexes to mediate 60S subunit joining (kon,5B ≈ 20 μM−1 s−1) (Extended Data Fig. 3b-e). Conversely, addition of a limiting concentration of eIF5 (2.5 nM) simultaneously with labeled eIF5B to tethered 48S complexes equilibrated in the absence of eIF5 delayed eIF5B association nearly 50-fold (Extended Data Fig. 3c). eIF5B association also was nearly eliminated when departure of eIF2 was prevented by using the non-hydrolysable analog GDPNP (Extended Data Fig. 3f). Our findings therefore suggest that eIF2 must dissociate from initiation complexes before eIF5B binds.
eIF1A and eIF5B co-occupy complexes
We next directly tracked eIF1A-Cy5, labeled via an S102C substitution 25, throughout translation initiation. We added doubly labeled 43S PICs (40S-Cy3, eIF1A-Cy5), 1 μM unlabeled eIF5B, and 200 nM 60S subunits labeled with Cy5.5 dye (purple) to eIF4-mRNA complexes tethered within ZMWs at 30 °C (Fig. 2a). Nearly all loaded 43S PICs began in a 40S(donor)-to-eIF1A(acceptor) FRET state (90 ± 4 %, 158/175; EFRET = 0.42 ± 0.01), as predicted given the proximity of the labeling sites (~50 Å) (Fig. 2b,c and Extended Data Fig. 4a-d). Most complexes were joined by the 60S subunit during the first eIF1A binding event (56 ± 7 %, 88/158) (Extended Data Fig. 4b). Complexes with multiple eIF1A binding events also were competent for 60S subunit joining (87/175; k1A,reass. ≈ 1.5 ± 0.1 s−1 at 45 nM), which suggests the mRNA-loaded complexes can remodel dynamically (Extended Data Fig. 4c,e). While eIF1A bound stably to the 48S complex (koff ≈ 0.075 ± 0.003 s−1), the protein departed within a few hundred milliseconds after 60S subunit joining (koff > 10 s−1, mean lifetime < 0.2 s) (Fig. 2d and Extended Data Fig. 4f). eIF1A departure off the 80S complex was delayed at least 10-fold (koff ≈ 1.7 ± 0.1 s−1, mean lifetime = 3 ± 1.5 s) when GTP hydrolysis by eIF5B was prevented by using GDPNP (Fig. 2d and Extended Data Fig. 4f). Importantly, multiple lines of evidence confirmed that fluorescently-labeled eIF1A and eIF5B functionally substituted for the unlabeled proteins (Extended Data Fig. 4g,h). Thus, GTP hydrolysis by eIF5B accelerates eIF1A dissociation from 80S initiation complexes, and eIF1A release precedes eIF5B departure, consistent with prior findings in yeast 19,20,27.
As suggested above, eIF1A and eIF5B reside simultaneously on initiation complexes when the 60S subunit joins. Addition of 20 nM eIF5B-Cy3.5 and 10 nM eIF1A-Cy5 to doubly labeled 48S initiation complexes (40S-Cy3 and eIF1A-Cy5) tethered within ZMWs revealed complexes that contained both proteins (Extended Data Fig. 5a). The complexes not only had 40S(Cy3, donor)-to-eIF1A(Cy5, acceptor) FRET signals, but also displayed eIF5B(Cy3.5, donor)-to-eIF1A(Cy5, acceptor) FRET (Extended Data Fig. 5b,c). The latter signal is consistent with the proximity of eIF5B and eIF1A labeling sites predicted by crude structural comparisons (~70 Å) (Extended Data Fig. 5b). Whereas reassociation rates were similar, eIF1A dissociated from 48S complexes about 7-fold more slowly when eIF5B was present relative to when eIF5B was absent (koff,fast ≈ 0.059 ± 0.002 versus 0.41 ± 0.01 s−1) (Fig. 2d and Extended Data Fig. 5d). Simultaneous addition of doubly labeled 43S PICs (40S-Cy3, eIF1A-Cy5), eIF5B-Cy3.5, and 60S-Cy5.5 subunits to tethered mRNA revealed that nearly all 60S subunit joining events occurred when eIF1A and eIF5B were both present (90 ± 10 %) (Extended Data Fig. 5e-h).
eIF1A-eIF5B initiation complex structure
To understand how the two proteins collaborate to mediate 60S subunit joining, we used our single-molecule findings to design a vitrification strategy that captured on cryo-EM grids a 48S complex co-bound by eIF1A and eIF5B. Immediately prior to plunge freezing, pre-assembled 48S complexes were incubated with eIF5B for 1 min at 30 °C in the presence of ATP and GTP. At this time point, the 48S complex should be saturated with both eIF1A and eIF5B, and the complex is competent for 60S subunit joining (Extended Data Figs. 2e and 3c). Vitrified samples were analyzed by single-particle cryo-EM.
After data collection, image processing, and in-silico classifications, we identified a subset of ~190,000 particles that yielded a high-resolution map after refinement (overall resolution of ~3.2 Å) (Extended Data Fig. 6a,b and Table 1). This subset represents ~84% of all 40S particles. Consistent with our prediction above, robust density was visible for the 40S subunit, an aminoacylated tRNA near the ribosomal P site, eIF1A in the A site, and eIF5B (Fig. 3a). Peripheral regions of the map were heterogenous, such as the acceptor stem of Met-tRNAiMet and eIF5B domains located furthest from the 40S surface, namely domains G and IV. In these flexible areas, local resolution values were in the 4-6 Å range with sufficient quality to place secondary structure elements unambiguously (Extended Data Fig. 6c-e). Density attributable to other eIFs, including eIF3, was absent from cryo-EM maps in this class, even at low map thresholds. The lack of density for eIF3 may suggest that the factor is highly dynamic on or potentially has departed the initiation complex after eIF2 departure. A small subgroup of 40S particles (~2,100 or 0.65% of the dataset) presented density ascribable to eIF3, but the reduced number of particles precluded further interpretation.
eIF5B density corresponds to the GTP-bound state. The core superdomain of eIF5B, composed of domains G, II, and III, are present in the GTPase binding site on the 40S platform, which represents the largest interaction surface (~820 Å2) in the complex (Fig. 3a). The G domain of eIF5B is exposed to solvent, with no direct 40S contacts. It is positioned via interactions with domain III and the base of helix 12. Consistent with a GTP-bound state, switch I of the G domain is ordered and density for the γ-phosphate of GTP is apparent (Fig. 3b and Extended Data Fig. 6e). The catalytic histidine is maintained away from the γ-phosphate by a steric barrier formed by residues I664 of switch I and V640 of the P loop (Fig. 3b, right). These two residues form the prototypical hydrophobic gate that must be pierced by the catalytic histidine to catalyze GTP hydrolysis. The gate is aided by Y1063, as its position at the base of helix 12 interferes with the trajectory the catalytic histidine must follow to reach the γ-phosphate 28.
Domain IV of eIF5B directly interacts with Met-tRNAiMet and eIF1A. Mediated by rigid helix 12 that extends away from the G-II-III superdomain, eIF5B domain IV is latched onto the acceptor stem of Met-tRNAiMet. Strikingly, relative to its position in 80S initiation complexes 15-17, domain IV is rotated about 30 degrees along the helix 12 axis towards the ribosomal A site (Fig. 3c and Supplementary Video 1). This rotation positions the two eukaryote-specific, C-terminal alpha-helices of eIF5B (helices 13 and 14) to contact eIF1A directly, which is positioned identical to earlier initiation intermediates 29-39 (Extended Data Fig. 7a,b). The interaction interface is relatively small (~150 Å2) and nucleated around a cluster of hydrophobic residues (M50 of eIF1A, and I1219 of eIF5B) (Fig. 3d). Whereas the flexible N-terminal tail of eIF1A is disordered, we observed additional density proximal to W1207 on helix 14 of eIF5B that may correspond to I141 of the flexible eIF1A C-terminal tail (Extended Data Fig. 7a). Such contacts are consistent with prior NMR studies on the two proteins in isolation 40,41.
The rotation of eIF5B domain IV induced by eIF1A reorients the Met-tRNAiMet configuration to be compatible with 60S subunit joining. We compared our model to two earlier eIF2-bound intermediates, scanning-competent ‘open’ 37 or post-scanning ‘closed’ complexes 36, and to elongation-competent 80S ribosomes 42 (Extended Data Fig. 7b). In our eIF5B-bound complex, the 40S subunit head conformation is similar to both the post-scanning ‘closed’ and elongation-competent conformations (Extended Data Fig. 7c). In contrast, the Met-tRNAiMet configuration most closely resembles an elongation state; the anticodon stem loop (ASL) at the 40S P site is nearly identical to the final elongation state, and the acceptor stem and elbow region are almost perpendicular to the ASL (Extended Data Fig. 7d). In this position and mediated by eIF1A, eIF5B domain IV and the acceptor stem are aligned to slot directly into the ~35 Å channel formed by the central protuberance and helix 69 of the incoming 60S subunit (Fig. 4a,b). Thus, our structural analyses suggest that the 40S–eIF1A–eIF5B–acceptor-stem network of interactions are needed to funnel multiple conformations of Met-tRNAiMet towards a position compatible with 60S subunit joining.
We used our single-molecule assays to assess the role of residues in eIF5B that our cryo-EM-derived model suggested mediate contacts with Met-tRNAiMet or eIF1A in translation initiation. Contacts with the Met-tRNAiMet acceptor stem were disrupted by substitution of conserved R1105 and R1174 with alanine (RR/AA) (Fig. 4c and Extended Data Fig. 8a,b). Contacts with eIF1A were disrupted either by truncation of eIF5B prior to helix 14 (Δ-h14) or five targeted substitutions of residues in helices 13 and 14 that invert surface contacts with eIF1A (RQREI/ERERR) (Fig. 4c and Extended Data Fig. 8a,b). After the eIF4-mRNA complex was tethered in ZMWs, a mixture of the 43S PIC (with 40S-Cy3, green), wild-type or mutant eIF5B-Cy3.5 (orange), and 60S-Cy5 subunit (red) was added, and fluorescent signals were monitored in real time (Extended Data Fig. 8c-e). Relative to the wild-type protein, the three mutant eIF5B proteins were much more likely (5-7 fold) to sample the 48S complex (k5B,off ≈ 2-4 s−1) (Fig. 4c and Extended Data Fig. 8f,g). The destabilized mutant eIF5B proteins reduced the efficiency of 60S subunit joining, and when the 60S did join, it occurred at least 2-3 fold more slowly than with the wild-type protein (Fig. 4c and Extended Data Fig. 8h,i). Thus, the eIF5B–eIF1A–40S–Met-tRNAiMet interactions stabilize and remodel the 48S initiation complex to allow 60S subunit joining.
DISCUSSION
Our single-molecule and structural results suggest a model for how eIF1A and eIF5B mediate human ribosomal subunit joining (Fig. 4d and Supplementary Video 2). The eIF1A–40S subunit complex – presumably as the 43S PIC – loads onto the mRNA. eIF1A remains stably bound in the A site throughout scanning and start codon recognition, consistent with its key roles in those steps. Once eIF2 departs, eIF5B stably binds and forms the 40S late initiation complex (40S LIC). The delay from 40S subunit loading until eIF5B association (~ 10 s) therefore suggests an upper bound for the integrated timescale of scanning and start codon recognition on β-globin mRNA. Stable eIF5B association with the 40S LIC very likely provides the molecular basis for how eIF5B prevents reassociation of eIF2-GDP with Met-tRNAiMet 43. Furthermore, relative to yeast 14, the enhanced stability of human eIF5B on the 40S LIC provides new insight needed to understand how increased eIF5B abundance drives aberrant translation in lung adenocarcinomas 44.
For eIF5B to bind stably to the 40S LIC, domain IV of the protein must contact both eIF1A and Met-tRNAiMet. Loss of contacts with either led to a 100-fold decrease in eIF5B lifetime on the complex and inhibited 60S subunit joining. Thus, multiple relatively weak interactions likely stabilize this conformationally-flexible GTPase on the initiation complex in its active form. Intriguingly, previous structural analyses of the protein in isolation or bound to eIF1A have suggested that eIF5B adopts both extended and compact conformations, with domain IV either extended away from or adjacent to the G-II-III superdomain 40,41,45-47. In the context of initiation, contacts with eIF1A may enhance or stabilize extension of domain IV away from the G-II-III superdomain of eIF5B, as the compact conformation would clash sterically with eIF1A in the ribosomal A site.
Eukaryote-specific contacts between eIF1A and eIF5B reconfigure the Met-tRNAiMet acceptor stem, driven by rotation of eIF5B domain IV along the helix 12 axis. This surprising rotation – rather than a rigid, swing-like movement predicted by studies in prokaryotes 48 and archaea 45 – funnels the complex into a conformation that slots directly into the channel formed by the central protuberance and helix 69 of the 60S subunit. Formation of the 80S ribosome triggers hydrolysis of GTP by eIF5B to accelerate ejection of eIF1A by helix 69 of the 60S subunit (within ~100 ms), likely by accelerating back-rotation of the 40S subunit from a semi-rotated state to a classical non-rotated state, similar to prokaryotes 49-51. Indeed, inter-subunit back-rotation moves the apical loop of helix 69 by ~16 Å further into the ribosomal A site, where eIF1A resides. eIF1A departure frees eIF5B domain IV and the acceptor stem to rotate ~30 degrees toward the peptidyl transfer center. The rotation poises the aminoacylated end of the tRNA for its final accommodation upon eIF5B departure, which occurs within another few hundred milliseconds. Dynamic rotation of eIF5B domain IV mediated by eIF1A therefore plays a key role in the late steps of translation initiation.
Collectively, our findings suggest that the eIF1A–eIF5B–Met-tRNAiMet network of interactions serves as a final fidelity checkpoint to ensure that initiation complexes are competent for the 60S subunit to join. They also demonstrate that eIF5B, mediated by contacts with eIF1A, actively remodels the 40S LIC to facilitate 60S subunit joining, rather than serving simply as a chaperone of inter-ribosomal subunit contacts. Almost immediately after formation of the 80S initiation complex, GTP hydrolysis by eIF5B catalyzes a series of events that clears the ribosomal A site and positions the aminoacylated end of Met-tRNAiMet in the peptidyl transfer center of the ribosome, which commits the ribosome to synthesize a protein.
METHODS
eIF5B cloning
N-terminally truncated (587-1220) eIF5B with an N-terminal ybbR-tag and relevant mutants were purchased as geneblocks from IDT and cloned into a vector purchased from the UC Berkeley QB3 MacroLab (vector 1B) using their standard protocol. Contacts with Met-tRNAiMet were disrupted by R1105A and R1174A substitution. Contacts with eIF1A were disrupted by truncation of eIF5B at Q1203 (Δ-helix 14) or five substitutions that inverted properties along the interaction interface (R1188E, Q1189R, R1199E, E1218R, I1219R). All sequences were verified by Sanger sequencing. The resulting plasmids encoded eIF5B(587-1220) tagged on the N-terminus with a 6-histidine tag fused to maltose-binding protein (MBP) followed by a TEV protease cleavage site, a short NA linker, and the ybbR peptide tag (NH2-6His–MBP–TEV–NA–ybbR–eIF5B-COOH).
β-globin mRNA
A synthetic DNA was purchased from IDT that contained a 5' flanking sequence (pUC19 backbone sequence), a T7 promoter (TAATACGACTCACTATAG), the human β-globin transcript 1 (NM_000518.5, 628 nts), eight (8) non-templated adenosines, and a 3' flanking sequence (pUC19 backbone sequence). Linear DNA templates were amplified using NEB Phusion polymerase and a 5' primer (TGACCATGATTACGCCAAGC) that annealed upstream of the T7 promoter and a 3' primer (TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTttgcaatgaaaataaatgttttttattagg) that annealed to the 3' end of β-globin transcript and encoded a poly(A)30 tail. The mRNA was in vitro transcribed using the T7 Megascript kit (Invitrogen, AM1334) and standard conditions. Transcribed RNAs were purified using the GeneJET RNA Purification Kit (ThermoFisher, #K0732). The 3'-terminus was biotinylated by potassium periodate oxidation followed by reaction with biotin-hydrazide, as described 52. The 5'-terminus was capped with a type I 7-methylguanosine cap (m7G) using the Vaccinia Capping System (NEB, M2080S) and 2'-O-methyltransferase (NEB, M0366), following the one step protocol. 5'-capped and 3'-biotinylated β-globin mRNA was purified using the GeneJET RNA Purification Kit and stored at −20 °C until use.
Purification and fluorescent labeling of ybbR-tagged eIF5B
All wild-type and mutant ybbR-eIF5B expression plasmids were transformed into Rosetta2 cells purchased from the UC Berkeley QB3 MacroLab and grown overnight at 37 °C on LB agar plates supplemented with 50 μg/mL kanamycin. Liquid cultures of single colonies were grown to OD600 ≈ 0.5 at 37 °C in LB supplemented with kanamycin. Cultures were shifted to 18 °C for 30 minutes, 0.5 mM IPTG was added, and cultures were grown for 16-20 h at 18 °C. Cells were harvested by centrifugation at 5,000 x g for 15 min at 4 °C in a Fiberlite F9 rotor (ThermoFisher, cat. # 13456093). Cells were lysed by sonication in lysis buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.0, 300 mM NaCl, 10% (v/v) glycerol, 20 mM imidazole, and 5 mM β-mercaptoethanol), and lysates were cleared by centrifugation at 38,000 x g for 30 min at 4 °C in a Fiberlite F21 rotor followed by filtration through a 0.22 μm syringe filter. Clarified lysate was loaded onto a Ni-NTA gravity flow column equilibrated in lysis buffer, washed with 20 column volumes (CV) of lysis buffer, 20 CV of wash buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.0, 1 M NaCl, 10% (v/v) glycerol, 40 mM imidazole, and 5 mM β-mercaptoethanol), and 10 CV of lysis buffer. Recombinant proteins were eluted with five sequential CV of elution buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.0, 300 mM NaCl, 10% (v/v) glycerol, 300 mM imidazole, and 5 mM β-mercaptoethanol). Fractions with recombinant protein were identified by SDS-PAGE analysis. The relevant fractions were dialyzed overnight at 4 °C into TEV cleavage buffer (50 mM HEPES-KOH pH 7.5, 200 mM NaCl, 10% (v/v) glycerol, and 1 mM DTT) in the presence of excess TEV protease. Fluorescent labeling via the ybbR tag was performed essentially as described 52,53. Briefly, ~10 μM ybbR-eIF5B was supplemented with 10 mM MgCl2 and incubated at 37 °C for 90 min in the presence of 2-4 μM Sfp synthase enzyme and 20 μM of Cy3.5-CoA substrate. Free dye was removed via purification over 10DG-desalting columns (Bio-Rad, cat.# 7322010) equilibrated in TEV cleavage buffer supplemented with 20 mM imidazole. TEV protease, Sfp synthase, and the cleaved 6His tag were removed via a subtractive Ni-NTA gravity column equilibrated in TEV buffer, with the flow-through collected. Labeled proteins were purified using size exclusion chromatography (SEC) on a Superdex 75 or 200 column (23 mL) equilibrated in SEC (storage) buffer (20 mM HEPES-KOH pH 7.5, 150 mM KOAc, 10% (v/v) glycerol, and 1 mM DTT). Fractions containing eIF5B proteins were concentrated using a 30 kD MWCO Amicon Ultra centrifugal filter, aliquoted, flash frozen on liquid N2, and stored at −80 °C.
in vitro extract-based translation assays
The nanoluciferase GAPDH reporter mRNA was prepared as described 24. Standard HeLa cell-free translation (ThermoFisher, #88882) reactions were programed with a final mRNA concentration of 100 nM and 840 nM of the indicated eIF5B protein. An equal volume of eIF5B SEC (storage) buffer (without protein) was added to a control reaction to account for buffer effects on IVT activity. IVT reactions were incubated at 37°C for 45 min and then immediately transferred to an ice water bath and diluted 1:1 with cold Glo Lysis Buffer (Promega, #E2661). All samples were brought to room temperature and mixed with a 1:1 volume of nGlow solution (Promega, #N1110). Samples (90% of total volume) were loaded into non-adjacent wells of a 384-well plate. Sample luminescence was measured 11 min post nGlow solution addition using a BioTek Neo2 multi-mode plate reader (25°C, 114LUM1537 filter, gain of 135). Luminescence signal was monitored for an additional 30 min at 3 min intervals to verify luminesce signal of all samples decayed at the same rate. Prism8 (Graphpad) was used for all analyses.
Purification of human eIFs, Met-tRNAiMet, and ribosomal subunits.
Recombinant eIF1 54, eIF1A 54, eIF3j 54, eIF4AI 54,55, eIF4E 55,56, and eIF5 57 proteins were purified as described. Recombinant eIF4B was purified essentially as described 54,55, except cells were lysed solely by sonication and a subtractive Ni-NTA step was added prior to ion exchange chromatography (heparin). Coding sequence for eIF4G(165-1599) was inserted into 6His-tagged pFASTBAC1 vector and purified similar to a described protocol 56, with the following modifications: 15 μM leupeptin was added to growth media 24 hrs prior to harvest, cells were lysed by sonication, and a subtractive Ni-NTA step was added, which was followed by ion exchange chromatography (heparin) and concentration into SEC buffer with 300 mM KOAc. Native human eIF2 and eIF3 (lacking 3j) were purified as described 54,58. Human Met-tRNAiMet was in vitro transcribed and aminoacylated as described 24. eIF1A(S102C) was purified and fluorescently labeled with Cy5 dye as described 25. Human 40S and 60S ribosomal subunits were purified from the appropriately edited HEK293T cell lines and labeled with fluorescent dyes as described 24,52. Cell line identities were confirmed by PCR assays, Sanger sequencing, western blotting, and fluorescence gels (after labeling), as described 24. Cells were not tested for mycoplasma contamination.
ZMW-based single-molecule spectroscopy
All real-time imaging was conducted using a modified Pacific Biosciences RSII DNA sequencer and the Maggie software (v. 2.3.0.3.154799), which were described previously 59. All experiments were performed at 30 °C (unless otherwise noted) using a 532 nm excitation laser at 0.32 μW/μm2, which directly excited Cy3 and Cy3.5 dyes. Cy5 and Cy5.5 dyes were excited via FRET as indicated. Four-color fluorescence emission (Cy3, Cy3.5, Cy5, and Cy5.5) was detected at 10 frames per second for 600 s. ZMW chips were purchased from Pacific Biosciences, which were passivated by reaction with polyvinylphosphonic acid to form a covalent Al-polyphosphonate coating 60. Prior to imaging, all ZMW chips were washed with 0.2% Tween-20 and TP50 buffer (50 mM Tris-OAc pH 7.5, 100 mM KCl). Washed chips were coated with neutravidin by a 5 min incubation with 1 μM neutravidin diluted in TP50 buffer supplemented with 0.7 mg mL−1 UltraPure BSA and 1.3 μM of pre-annealed DNA blocking oligos (CGTTTACACGTGGGGTCCCAAGCACGCGGCTACTAGATCACGGCTCAGCT) and (AGCTGAGCCGTGATCTAGTAGCCGCGTGCTTGGGACCCCACGTGTAAACG). The imaging surface then was washed with TP50 buffer at least four times.
Real time initiation single-molecule assays
For all single-molecule assays, the ‘initiation reaction buffer’ was: 20 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 7.3, 70 mM KOAc, 2.5 mM Mg(OAc)2, 0.25 mM spermidine, 0.2 mg mL−1 creatine phosphokinase, 1 mM ATP•Mg(OAc)2, and 1 mM GTP•Mg(OAc)2. The ‘imaging buffer’ was the initiation reaction buffer supplemented with casein (62.5 μg mL−1) and an oxygen scavenging system 61: 2 mM TSY, 2 mM protocatechuic acid (PCA), and 0.06 U/μL protocatechuate-3,4-dioxygenase (PCD).
To prepare the eIF2–GTP–Met-tRNAiMet ternary complex (TC), 3.3 μM eIF2 was incubated in initiation reaction buffer (excluding ATP•Mg(OAc)2) for 10 min at 37 °C to saturate eIF2 with GTP. The eIF2–GTP complex then was incubated with 2.3 μM Met-tRNAiMet for 5 min at 37 °C to form TC. In a few instances, GTP was replaced with a non-hydrolyzable analog (GDPNP) during formation of TC, which prevents GTP hydrolysis and subsequent departure of eIF2 from the initiation complex.
To prepare the 43S pre-initiation complex (43S PIC), 1 μM eIF1, 1 μM eIF1A, 500 nM TC (by eIF2), 1.2 μM eIF5, 400 nM eIF3, 1.2 μM eIF3j, and 240 nM 40S-Cy3 subunits were incubated for 5 min at 37 °C in initiation reaction buffer. In experiments with doubly labeled 43S PICs (40S-Cy3, eIF1A-Cy5), unlabeled eIF1A was substituted for an equal concentration (by Cy5) of eIF1A(S102C)-Cy5.
In all full real-time single-molecule initiation assays, β-globin mRNA with a 5' m7G cap, poly(A)30 tail, and 3'-terminal biotin moiety was tethered to a prepared and neutravidin-coated ZMW imaging surface. Immediately after tethering and washing the surface with imaging buffer, a mixture of 2 μM eIF4A, 440 nM eIF4B, 260 nM eIF4G, and 320 nM eIF4E in 20 μL of imaging buffer was added to the surface. The surface and reaction mixture were incubated at room temperature for 5-10 minutes as the instrument initialized. At the start of data acquisition, a 20 μL mixture of 10-20 nM 43S PIC (by 40S-Cy3), 2 μM eIF5B, and 200-400 nM 60S-Cy5/5.5 subunits in imaging buffer was added to the surface. In experiments with fluorescently-labeled eIF5B, unlabeled eIF5B was replaced with 40-80 nM eIF5B-Cy3.5. Importantly, addition of this second reaction mixture to the surface doubled the total reaction volume (to 40 μL, since 20 μL with eIF4 proteins was already present); thus, final concentrations of all components during data collection are halved from the values reported above. Final concentrations for labeled components in particular figures are reported in the legends and text.
In a few instances, the 48S initiation complex was pre-equilibrated and tethered to the imaging surface. To do this, 90 nM 43S PIC (by 40S-Cy3), 90 nM of β-globin mRNA, 2 μM eIF4A, 1.1 μM eIF4B, 650 nM eIF4G, and 800 nM eIF4E was incubated for 15 min at 37 °C in initiation reaction buffer. The resulting complex was diluted 1:12.5, immediately added to a prepared and neutravidin-coated ZMW imaging surface, and incubated for 10 min at room temperature to tether the complex to the surface. After washing the surface with imaging buffer, a 20 μL mixture of 1 μM eIF1A, 2 μM eIF4A, 440 nM eIF4B, 260 nM eIF4G, and 320 nM eIF4E in 20 μL of imaging buffer was added to the surface. At the start of data acquisition, a 20 μL mixture of 40-80 nM eIF5B ± 200 nM 60S-Cy5 subunits in imaging buffer was added to the surface. In experiments with labeled eIF1A, a 20 μL mixture with 20 nM eIF1A-Cy5 and 40 nM eIF5B-Cy3.5 was added to the imaging surface with a tethered and doubly labeled 48S PIC (where unlabeled eIF1A was replaced with labeled eIF1A). As above, final concentration of all components during data collection are halved from the reported values.
To probe the role of GTP hydrolysis by eIF5B, the GTP in the imaging buffer was replaced with an equal concentration of the non-hydrolyzable analog GDPNP. In this experimental setup, TC would remain in the GTP-bound state, as GTP dissociates very slowly from TC 62,63.
Data analysis.
Experimental movies that captured fluorescence intensities over time were processed using MATLAB R2018-b as described previously 23,24,52. In all analyses, ZMWs with the desired fluorescence signals were identified by filtering for the desired signals.
To determine EFRET, fluorescence data from individual ZMWs with the desired fluorescence signals (e.g., 40S-60S FRET) were background corrected using SPARTAN 3.7.0 64, with single molecules indicated by single-step photobleach events of the donor fluorophore. FRET on and off states were assigned automatically using vbFRET (version june10) 65, which were visually inspected and manually corrected as needed. An EFRET threshold of 0.1 was used in all experiments. EFRET was defined as:
Where ID and IA represent fluorescence intensities of the donor and acceptor fluorophores. EFRET values observed across all events and molecules were binned (50 bins, −0.2 to 1.2) and fit to gaussian functions to determine the mean and standard deviations.
To determine association and dissociation kinetics, binding events of individual components (e.g., 40S, eIF5B, and 60S) were assigned manually based on the appearance and disappearance of the respective fluorescence signals. The observed times for an event to occur from 100-200 individual molecules (i.e., ZMWs) were used to calculate cumulative probability functions of the observed data (cdfcalc, MATLAB), which were fit to single- or double-exponential functions in MATLAB (cftool, non-linear least squares method) as described 23,66. All derived association rates, median association times, lifetimes, and the number of molecules examined are reported in the relevant figures and legends. The exponential function was defined as:
where t is time (in s), b and c rates, and d an adjustment factor. If a parameter yielded a phase that represented less than 10% of the population, only a single phase was used to derive the respective rate and reported (i.e., single-exponential function).
Statistical analyses.
To calculate errors for the efficiency of a given binding event, bootstrap analyses (n = 10,000) were performed to calculate 95% confidence intervals (C.I.) for the observed proportions using R (4.1.2) and RStudio (Ghost Orchid release) (mosaic library, rflip approach). To calculate errors for median association times and lifetimes, bootstrap analyses (n = 10,000) were performed to calculate 95% C.I. of the observed median using MATLAB (bootstrp and bootci functions). Reported errors for derived rates represent 95% C.I. yielded from fits to linear, single-exponential, or double-exponential functions, as indicated.
Formation of the eIF5B-bound 48S initiation complex for cryo-EM analysis
The eIF2–GTP–Met-tRNAiMet ternary complex was formed as above. To prepare the 43S PIC, 1.5 μM eIF1, 1.5 μM eIF1A, 1 μM TC (by eIF2), 1.5 μM eIF5, 800 nM eIF3, and 600 nM 40S-Cy3 subunits were incubated for 5 min at 37 °C in initiation reaction buffer. The 43S PIC was incubated on ice. In parallel, 200-mesh Quantifoil R2/1 grids (Electron Microscopy Sciences, Q250AR1) were glow-discharged for 25 s in a PELCO EasiGlow glow discharger (Ted Pella, Inc., conditions: negative charge, 15 mA, 0.4 mBar, 25 s). After grids were prepared, 300 nM 43S PIC (by 40S), 500 nM of β-globin mRNA, 1 μM eIF4A, 1 μM eIF4B, 650 nM eIF4G, and 800 nM eIF4E were incubated for 3 min at 37 °C in initiation reaction buffer. Immediately after, 1 μM eIF5B was added and the resulting reaction mixture was incubated for ~55 s at 30 °C. A 3 μL sample from the mixture was applied to each grid at 21 °C and 95% humidity. The total time elapsed after eIF5B addition until application to the grid was ~60 s, and the final concentration of 40S subunit was 250 nM. The sample was vitrified by plunging into liquid ethane after 2.5 s blotting using a Leica EM GP (Leica Microsystems) plunger.
Cryo-EM data collection, image processing, and structure determination
Vitrified grids were screened for ice thickness and intactness on a Glacios microscope (ThermoFisher) equipped with a Gatan K2 Summit direct electron detector. High-resolution data were collected on a Titan Krios equipped with a BioQuantum-K3 imaging system operated in super-resolution mode with pixel size 0.42Å/pixel and fluence of 20 e/A2/s using SerialEM software (version 3.9beta5). The defocus range was set between −0.5 and −2 micrometers. Image processing was done using Relion3.1 67 with ctf estimation via a wrapper to CtfFind4 68. After 2 times binning in motion correction and ctf estimation, a laplacian autopicking job identified 2 million particles in the dataset. Initial particle extraction was performed with a binned size of 8 and a 2D classification job (200 classes, tau fudge 4 and the subset option deactivated) was used to discard bad particles or poorly aligned ones. The selected particles were subjected to a 3D refinement job using as initial model a volume obtained by stochastic gradient descent. After 3D refinement, particles were re-extracted at bin 8 with the recenter option activated. Next, a 3D classification job using a soft mask around the factors and the tRNA and without alignment (20 classes, tau-fudge parameter set to 3) found a major population with clear features for the tRNA and the factors. Particles belonging to this class (~190,000) were selected, re-extracted to bin 2 and re-refined at this pixel size. This reconstruction reached ~4 Å resolution which was further improved by refinement of the ctf parameters and Bayesian polishing of the beam induced particle movements. The final subset of "shiny" particles was re-refined and reached an overall resolution of 3.2 Å after post-processing. Map exploration revealed features compatible with the reported resolution, like clear side chain density, especially for tyrosine, phenylalanine, leucine and tryptophan residues. Final postprocessed maps were used for model building in Coot (v. 0.8.9.1)69. Good general density, especially for bulky residues, allowed proper tracing of the polypeptide of human eIF5B and eIF1A. Modelling of eIF5B was aided by the AlphaFold prediction 70, which domain wise, fit the experimental maps accurately. Only minor manual, rigid-body adjustments of individual domains were necessary to fully account for the experimental density prior to stereochemical model refinement. The final model was refined in real space with Phenix (v. 1.14) imposing secondary structure and Ramachandran restraints 71. This refined model was checked in Coot, corrected in problematic areas, and re-refined in the reciprocal space with Refmac (v. 5.8), using secondary structure restraints computed in ProSmart (v. 0.8) 72. The quality of the final model was monitored by Molprobity (v. 4.5) 73. Pymol (v. 2.4) and ChimeraX-1.3 74 were used for analysis of the structure and figure making.
Extended Data
Extended Data Table 1.
(EMDB-26067) (PDB 7TQL) |
|
---|---|
Data collection and processing | |
Magnification | 135,000 |
Voltage (kV) | 300 |
Electron exposure (e−/Å2) | 47.38 |
Defocus range (μm) | −0.5/Å2 |
Pixel size (Å) | 0.852 |
Symmetry imposed | C1 |
Initial particle images (no.) | 2M |
Final particle images (no.) | 190K |
Map resolution (Å) | 3.2 |
FSC threshold | 0.143 |
Map resolution range (Å) | 3-5 |
Refinement | |
Initial model used (PDB code) | 5LZS |
Model resolution (Å) | 3.6 |
FSC threshold | 0.5 |
Model resolution range (Å) | 3.2-6 |
Map sharpening B factor (Å2) | −89 |
Model composition | |
Non-hydrogen atoms | 80954 |
Protein residues | 7241 |
Ligands | 32 |
B factors (Å2) | |
Protein | 122 |
Ligand | 132 |
R.m.s. deviations | |
Bond lengths (Å) | 0.002 |
Bond angles (°) | 1.23 |
Validation | |
MolProbity score | 1.24 |
Clashscore | 1.1 |
Poor rotamers (%) | 0.25 |
Ramachandran plot | |
Favored (%) | 93.62 |
Allowed (%) | 99.61 |
Disallowed (%) | 0.39 |
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgements:
We are grateful to Michael Lawson, Jan Carette, and other members of the Puglisi and Carette labs for helpful guidance, discussions, and feedback. We thank Peter Sarnow and the Sarnow lab for sharing cell culture equipment. Some of this work was performed at the Stanford-SLAC Cryo-EM Facilities, supported by Stanford University, SLAC and the National Institutes of Health S10 Instrumentation Programs. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Funding:
C.P.L. was a Damon Runyon Fellow supported by the Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation (DRG-#2321-18); C.A. was supported by a Stanford Bio-X Fellowship; J.W. was supported by a postdoctoral scholarship from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation (KAW 2015.0406). This work was funded, in part, by the National Institutes of Health (GM011378 and AG064690 to J.D.P.; GM092927 to C.S.F.; K99GM144678 to C.P.L.) and by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health (to T.E.D.)
Footnotes
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Data availability
All single-molecule data are included in the manuscript. Raw files are available upon request to J.D.P. The cryo-EM map and final model of the late 40S initiation complex described within are deposited in the Electron Microscopy Data Bank (EMDB, EMD-26067) and Protein Data Bank (PDB, 7TQL), respectively.
Code availability
All custom codes used in this study to process and analyze single-molecule data are available publicly under an open-source license at: https://github.com/puglisilab/Lapointe-2022-Nature. All software used to collect and analyze cryo-EM data were previously described and available publicly.
REFERENCES
- 1.Tahmasebi S, Khoutorsky A, Mathews MB & Sonenberg N Translation deregulation in human disease. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology 19, 791–807, doi: 10.1038/s41580-018-0034-x (2018). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Robichaud N, Sonenberg N, Ruggero D & Schneider RJ Translational Control in Cancer. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology 11, a032896, doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a032896 (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Pain VM Initiation of Protein Synthesis in Eukaryotic Cells. European Journal of Biochemistry 236, 747–771, doi: 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1996.00747.x (1996). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Merrick WC & Pavitt GD Protein Synthesis Initiation in Eukaryotic Cells. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 10, doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a033092 (2018). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Hershey JWB, Sonenberg N & Mathews MB Principles of Translational Control. Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology 11, doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a032607 (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Aitken CE & Lorsch JR A mechanistic overview of translation initiation in eukaryotes. Nature Structural and Molecular Biology 19, 568–576, doi: 10.1038/nsmb.2303 (2012). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Sokabe M & Fraser CS Toward a Kinetic Understanding of Eukaryotic Translation. Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology 11, doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a032706 (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Hinnebusch AG The scanning mechanism of eukaryotic translation initiation. Annual Review of Biochemistry 83, 779–812, doi: 10.1146/annurev-biochem-060713-035802 (2014). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Hinnebusch AG Structural Insights into the Mechanism of Scanning and Start Codon Recognition in Eukaryotic Translation Initiation. Trends in biochemical sciences 42, 589–611, doi: 10.1016/j.tibs.2017.03.004 (2017). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Hashem Y & Frank J The Jigsaw Puzzle of mRNA Translation Initiation in Eukaryotes: A Decade of Structures Unraveling the Mechanics of the Process. Annual review of biophysics 47, 125–151, doi: 10.1146/annurev-biophys-070816-034034 (2018). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Pestova TV et al. The joining of ribosomal subunits in eukaryotes requires eIF5B. Nature 403, 332–335, doi: 10.1038/35002118 (2000). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Lee JH et al. Initiation factor eIF5B catalyzes second GTP-dependent step in eukaryotic translation initiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99, 16689–16694, doi: 10.1073/pnas.262569399 (2002). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Shin BS et al. Uncoupling of initiation factor eIF5B/IF2 GTPase and translational activities by mutations that lower ribosome affinity. Cell 111, 1015–1025, doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(02)01171-6 (2002). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Wang J et al. eIF5B gates the transition from translation initiation to elongation. Nature 573, 605–608, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1561-0 (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Fernández IS et al. Molecular architecture of a eukaryotic translational initiation complex. Science 342, 1240585, doi: 10.1126/science.1240585 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Wang J et al. Structural basis for the transition from translation initiation to elongation by an 80S-eIF5B complex. Nature Communications 11, doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-18829-3 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Yamamoto H et al. Structure of the mammalian 80S initiation complex with initiation factor 5B on HCV-IRES RNA. Nature Structural and Molecular Biology 21, 721–727, doi: 10.1038/nsmb.2859 (2014). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Choi SK et al. Physical and Functional Interaction between the Eukaryotic Orthologs of Prokaryotic Translation Initiation Factors IF1 and IF2. Molecular and Cellular Biology 20, 7183–7191, doi: 10.1128/mcb.20.19.7183-7191.2000 (2000). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Olsen DS Domains of eIF1A that mediate binding to eIF2, eIF3 and eIF5B and promote ternary complex recruitment in vivo. The EMBO Journal 22, 193–204, doi: 10.1093/emboj/cdg030 (2003). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Acker MG, Shin B-S, Dever TE & Lorsch JR Interaction between Eukaryotic Initiation Factors 1A and 5B Is Required for Efficient Ribosomal Subunit Joining. Journal of Biological Chemistry 281, 8469–8475, doi: 10.1074/jbc.m600210200 (2006). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Fringer JM, Acker MG, Fekete CA, Lorsch JR & Dever TE Coupled Release of Eukaryotic Translation Initiation Factors 5B and 1A from 80S Ribosomes following Subunit Joining. Molecular and Cellular Biology 27, 2384–2397, doi: 10.1128/mcb.02254-06 (2007). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Pisareva VP & Pisarev AV eIF5 and eIF5B together stimulate 48S initiation complex formation during ribosomal scanning. Nucleic Acids Research 42, 12052–12069, doi: 10.1093/nar/gku877 (2014). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Chen J et al. High-throughput platform for real-time monitoring of biological processes by multicolor single-molecule fluorescence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 664–669, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1315735111 (2014). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Lapointe CP et al. Dynamic competition between SARS-CoV-2 NSP1 and mRNA on the human ribosome inhibits translation initiation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118, e2017715118, doi: 10.1073/pnas.2017715118 (2021). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Sokabe M & Fraser CS Human eukaryotic initiation factor 2 (eIF2)-GTP-Met-tRNAi ternary complex and eIF3 Stabilize the 43 S preinitiation complex. Journal of Biological Chemistry 289, 31827–31836, doi: 10.1074/jbc.M114.602870 (2014). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Koch A, Aguilera L, Morisaki T, Munsky B & Stasevich TJ Quantifying the dynamics of IRES and cap translation with single-molecule resolution in live cells. Nat Struct Mol Biol 27, 1095–1104, doi: 10.1038/s41594-020-0504-7 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Acker MG et al. Kinetic Analysis of Late Steps of Eukaryotic Translation Initiation. Journal of Molecular Biology 385, 491–506, doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2008.10.029 (2009). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Huang BY & Fernández IS Long-range interdomain communications in eIF5B regulate GTP hydrolysis and translation initiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 117, 1429–1437, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1916436117 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Passmore LA et al. The eukaryotic translation initiation factors eIF1 and eIF1A induce an open conformation of the 40S ribosome. Molecular cell 26, 41–50, doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.03.018 (2007). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Hashem Y et al. Structure of the mammalian ribosomal 43S preinitiation complex bound to the scanning factor DHX29. Cell 153, 1108–1119, doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.04.036 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Lomakin IB & Steitz TA The initiation of mammalian protein synthesis and mRNA scanning mechanism. Nature 500, 307–311, doi: 10.1038/nature12355 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Weisser M, Voigts-Hoffmann F, Rabl J, Leibundgut M & Ban N The crystal structure of the eukaryotic 40S ribosomal subunit in complex with eIF1 and eIF1A. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 20, 1015–1017, doi: 10.1038/nsmb.2622 (2013). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Hussain T et al. Structural changes enable start codon recognition by the eukaryotic translation initiation complex. Cell 159, 597–607, doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.10.001 (2014). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Des Georges A et al. Structure of mammalian eIF3 in the context of the 43S preinitiation complex. Nature 525, 491–495, doi: 10.1038/nature14891 (2015). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Simonetti A et al. eIF3 Peripheral Subunits Rearrangement after mRNA Binding and Start-Codon Recognition. Mol Cell 63, 206–217, doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.05.033 (2016). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Llácer JL et al. Translational initiation factor eIF5 replaces eIF1 on the 40S ribosomal subunit to promote start-codon recognition. eLife 7, 1–33, doi: 10.7554/eLife.39273 (2018). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Brito Querido J et al. Structure of a human 48S translational initiation complex. Science (New York, N.Y.) 369, 1220–1227, doi: 10.1126/science.aba4904 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Simonetti A, Guca E, Bochler A, Kuhn L & Hashem Y Structural Insights into the Mammalian Late-Stage Initiation Complexes. Cell reports 31, 107497–107497, doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.03.061 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Kratzat H et al. A structural inventory of native ribosomal ABCE1-43S pre-initiation complexes. EMBO J 40, e105179, doi: 10.15252/embj.2020105179 (2021). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Nag N et al. eIF1A/eIF5B interaction network and its functions in translation initiation complex assembly and remodeling. Nucleic Acids Research, gkw552, doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw552 (2016). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Marintchev A, Kolupaeva VG, Pestova TV & Wagner G Mapping the binding interface between human eukaryotic initiation factors 1A and 5B: A new interaction between old partners. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100, 1535–1540, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0437845100 (2003). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Shao S et al. Decoding Mammalian Ribosome-mRNA States by Translational GTPase Complexes. Cell 167, 1229–1240.e1215, doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.10.046 (2016). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Pisarev AV et al. Specific functional interactions of nucleotides at key −3 and +4 positions flanking the initiation codon with components of the mammalian 48S translation initiation complex. Genes Dev 20, 624–636, doi: 10.1101/gad.1397906 (2006). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Suresh S et al. eIF5B drives integrated stress response-dependent translation of PD-L1 in lung cancer. Nature cancer 1, 533–545, doi: 10.1038/s43018-020-0056-0 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Roll-Mecak A, Cao C, Dever TE & Burley SK X-Ray Structures of the Universal Translation Initiation Factor IF2/eIF5B. Cell 103, 781–792, doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)00181-1 (2000). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Kuhle B & Ficner R eIF5B employs a novel domain release mechanism to catalyze ribosomal subunit joining. The EMBO Journal 33, 1177–1191, doi: 10.1002/embj.201387344 (2014). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Zheng A et al. X-ray structures of eIF5B and the eIF5B–eIF1A complex: the conformational flexibility of eIF5B is restricted on the ribosome by interaction with eIF1A. Acta Crystallographica Section D Biological Crystallography 70, 3090–3098, doi: 10.1107/s1399004714021476 (2014). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Kaledhonkar S et al. Late steps in bacterial translation initiation visualized using time-resolved cryo-EM. Nature 570, 400–404, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1249-5 (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Marshall RA, Aitken CE & Puglisi JD GTP Hydrolysis by IF2 Guides Progression of the Ribosome into Elongation. Molecular Cell 35, 37–47, doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2009.06.008 (2009). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Ling C & Ermolenko DN Initiation factor 2 stabilizes the ribosome in a semirotated conformation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 15874–15879, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1520337112 (2015). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Sprink T et al. Structures of ribosome-bound initiation factor 2 reveal the mechanism of subunit association. Sci Adv 2, e1501502, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1501502 (2016). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
ADDITIONAL REFERENCES
- 52.Johnson AG et al. RACK1 on and off the ribosome. RNA, rna.071217.071119–rna.071217.071119, doi: 10.1261/rna.071217.119 (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Yin J, Lin AJ, Golan DE & Walsh CT Site-specific protein labeling by Sfp phosphopantetheinyl transferase. Nature Protocols 1, 280–285, doi: 10.1038/nprot.2006.43 (2006). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Fraser CS, Berry KE, Hershey JWB & Doudna JA eIF3j Is Located in the Decoding Center of the Human 40S Ribosomal Subunit. Molecular Cell 26, 811–819, doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.05.019 (2007). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Özeş AR, Feoktistova K, Avanzino BC & Fraser CS Duplex unwinding and ATPase activities of the DEAD-box helicase eIF4A are coupled by eIF4G and eIF4B. J Mol Biol 412, 674–687, doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2011.08.004 (2011). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Feoktistova K, Tuvshintogs E, Do A & Fraser CS Human eIF4E promotes mRNA restructuring by stimulating eIF4A helicase activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110, 13339–13344, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1303781110 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Sokabe M, Fraser CS & Hershey JW The human translation initiation multi-factor complex promotes methionyl-tRNAi binding to the 40S ribosomal subunit. Nucleic Acids Res 40, 905–913, doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr772 (2012). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Damoc E et al. Structural characterization of the human eukaryotic initiation factor 3 protein complex by mass spectrometry. Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP 6, 1135–1146, doi: 10.1074/mcp.M600399-MCP200 (2007). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Chen J et al. High-throughput platform for real-time monitoring of biological processes by multicolor single-molecule fluorescence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111, 664–669, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1315735111 (2014). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Korlach J et al. Selective aluminum passivation for targeted immobilization of single DNA polymerase molecules in zero-mode waveguide nanostructures. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105, 1176–1181, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0710982105 (2008). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Aitken CE, Marshall RA & Puglisi JD An oxygen scavenging system for improvement of dye stability in single-molecule fluorescence experiments. Biophysical Journal 94, 1826–1835, doi: 10.1529/biophysj.107.117689 (2008). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Erickson FL & Hannig EM Ligand interactions with eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2: role of the gamma-subunit. EMBO J 15, 6311–6320 (1996). [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Kapp LD & Lorsch JR GTP-dependent recognition of the methionine moiety on initiator tRNA by translation factor eIF2. J Mol Biol 335, 923–936, doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2003.11.025 (2004). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Juette MF et al. Single-molecule imaging of non-equilibrium molecular ensembles on the millisecond timescale. Nature Methods 13, 341–344, doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3769 (2016). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Bronson JE, Fei J, Hofman JM, Gonzalez RL & Wiggins CH Learning rates and states from biophysical time series: a Bayesian approach to model selection and single-molecule FRET data. Biophys J 97, 3196–3205, doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2009.09.031 (2009). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Lawson MR et al. Mechanisms that ensure speed and fidelity in eukaryotic translation termination. Science 373, 876–882, doi: 10.1126/science.abi7801 (2021). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Zivanov J, Nakane T & Scheres SHW Estimation of high-order aberrations and anisotropic magnification from cryo-EM data sets in. IUCrJ 7, 253–267, doi: 10.1107/S2052252520000081 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Rohou A & Grigorieff N CTFFIND4: Fast and accurate defocus estimation from electron micrographs. J Struct Biol 192, 216–221, doi: 10.1016/j.jsb.2015.08.008 (2015). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Casañal A, Lohkamp B & Emsley P Current developments in Coot for macromolecular model building of Electron Cryo-microscopy and Crystallographic Data. Protein Sci 29, 1069–1078, doi: 10.1002/pro.3791 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Jumper J et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 596, 583–589, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 (2021). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Afonine PV et al. Real-space refinement in PHENIX for cryo-EM and crystallography. Acta Crystallogr D Struct Biol 74, 531–544, doi: 10.1107/S2059798318006551 (2018). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Nicholls RA, Long F & Murshudov GN Low-resolution refinement tools in REFMAC5. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 68, 404–417, doi: 10.1107/S090744491105606X (2012). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Williams CJ et al. MolProbity: More and better reference data for improved all-atom structure validation. Protein Sci 27, 293–315, doi: 10.1002/pro.3330 (2018). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Goddard TD et al. UCSF ChimeraX: Meeting modern challenges in visualization and analysis. Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society 27, 14–25, doi: 10.1002/pro.3235 (2018). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
All single-molecule data are included in the manuscript. Raw files are available upon request to J.D.P. The cryo-EM map and final model of the late 40S initiation complex described within are deposited in the Electron Microscopy Data Bank (EMDB, EMD-26067) and Protein Data Bank (PDB, 7TQL), respectively.
All custom codes used in this study to process and analyze single-molecule data are available publicly under an open-source license at: https://github.com/puglisilab/Lapointe-2022-Nature. All software used to collect and analyze cryo-EM data were previously described and available publicly.