Selected article for: "frameshift efficiency and ribosome frameshifting"

Author: Mouzakis, Kathryn D.; Lang, Andrew L.; Vander Meulen, Kirk A.; Easterday, Preston D.; Butcher, Samuel E.
Title: HIV-1 frameshift efficiency is primarily determined by the stability of base pairs positioned at the mRNA entrance channel of the ribosome
  • Document date: 2012_12_15
  • ID: ix8du1er_29
    Snippet: It has been hypothesized that during frameshifting, the mechanical force of translocation causes a build-up of tension that is transmitted through the spacer region ( Figure 1A ) and sensed at the anticodon-codon level (5, 49) . We therefore investigated the influence of nt deletions and insertion in the spacer region ( Figure 4 ). The WT construct was compared to a version with an adenosine insertion that increases the spacer length by 1 nt (MS1.....
    Document: It has been hypothesized that during frameshifting, the mechanical force of translocation causes a build-up of tension that is transmitted through the spacer region ( Figure 1A ) and sensed at the anticodon-codon level (5, 49) . We therefore investigated the influence of nt deletions and insertion in the spacer region ( Figure 4 ). The WT construct was compared to a version with an adenosine insertion that increases the spacer length by 1 nt (MS13) (Figure 4) . Additionally, we created spacers with a single nt deletion (MS14) and 2-nt deletions (MS15-17) (Figure 4 ). The resulting frameshift efficiencies were measured ( Figure 4D ). Interestingly, MS15 shows a large increase in frameshift efficiency. This cannot be due to the 2-nt deletion, since MS16 and MS17 have the same spacers yet display WT-levels of frameshifting. We hypothesized that the 2-nt deletion in the spacer of MS15 increased frameshift efficiency by altering the base pairs in the stem-loop encountered by the ribosome during frameshifting. In other words, by deleting 2 nt in the spacer, a ribosome footprint may extend 2 nt further into the stem. In support of this hypothesis, a very stable set of base pairs are located 2 nt from the base of the stem (5 0 -GGC-3 0 /5 0 -GCC-3 0 ). In MS16 and MS17, we replaced these base pairs with the less stable base pairs normally found at the base of the stem (5 0 -CUG-3 0 /5 0 -CAG-3 0 ) ( Figure 4C ). Indeed, when these changes are made, the frameshifting efficiency is indistinguishable from WT, despite the apparent 2-nt spacer deletion ( Figure 4D) . Interestingly, the overall stability of MS17 is increased relative to MS16 ( Figure 4C ), yet the frameshift efficiency is unaltered ( Figure 4D ). These data indicate that changes in the spacer region correspondingly alter the base pairs encountered by the ribosome when it is engaged with the slippery site.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • base pair and frameshifting efficiency: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
    • base pair and mechanical force: 1, 2
    • base pair and nt deletion: 1
    • base pair and overall stability: 1, 2
    • base pair and result frameshift efficiency: 1
    • frameshift efficiency and hypothesis support: 1
    • frameshift efficiency and large increase: 1
    • frameshift efficiency and mechanical force: 1, 2
    • frameshift efficiency and nt deletion: 1
    • frameshift efficiency and overall stability: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
    • frameshift efficiency and result frameshift efficiency: 1
    • frameshift efficiency increase and large increase: 1
    • frameshift efficiency large increase and large increase: 1
    • frameshifting efficiency and large increase: 1
    • frameshifting efficiency and mechanical force: 1, 2, 3, 4
    • frameshifting efficiency and overall stability: 1
    • frameshifting level and ribosome encounter: 1
    • hypothesis support and large increase: 1, 2
    • hypothesis support and overall stability: 1