4.6 Article

Regulation of Coronaviral Poly(A) Tail Length during Infection

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 8, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070548

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Council (NSC) of Republic of China [NSC 101-2313-B005-010-MY3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The positive-strand coronavirus genome of similar to 30 kilobase in length and subgenomic (sg) mRNAs of shorter lengths, are 5' and 3'-co-terminal by virtue of a common 5'-capped leader and a common 3'-polyadenylated untranslated region. Here, by ligating head-to-tail viral RNAs from bovine coronavirus-infected cells and sequencing across the ligated junctions, it was learned that at the time of peak viral RNA synthesis [6 hours postinfection (hpi)] the 3' poly(A) tail on genomic and sgmRNAs is similar to 65 nucleotides (nt) in length. Surprisingly, this length was found to vary throughout infection from similar to 45 nt immediately after virus entry (at 0 to 4 hpi) to similar to 65 nt later on (at 6 h to 9 hpi) and from similar to 65 nt (at 6 h to 9 hpi) to similar to 30 nt (at 120-144 hpi). With the same method, poly(U) sequences of the same lengths were simultaneously found on the ligated viral negative-strand RNAs. Functional analyses of poly(A) tail length on specific viral RNA species, furthermore, revealed that translation, in vivo, of RNAs with the longer poly(A) tail was enhanced over those with the shorter poly(A). Although the mechanisms by which the tail lengths vary is unknown, experimental results together suggest that the length of the poly(A) and poly(U) tails is regulated. One potential function of regulated poly(A) tail length might be that for the coronavirus genome a longer poly(A) favors translation. The regulation of coronavirus translation by poly(A) tail length resembles that during embryonal development suggesting there may be mechanistic parallels.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available