4.8 Article

Differential expression of human tRNA genes drives the abundance of tRNA-derived fragments

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1821120116

Keywords

tRNA gene expression; tRNA fragments; piRNA; tRNA sequencing; tissue-specific expression

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [BIO2015-64572-R, BIO2014-61411-EXP]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The human genome encodes hundreds of transfer RNA (tRNA) genes but their individual contribution to the tRNA pool is not fully understood. Deep sequencing of tRNA transcripts (tRNA-Seq) can estimate tRNA abundance at single gene resolution, but tRNA structures and posttranscriptional modifications impair these analyses. Here we present a bioinformatics strategy to investigate differential tRNA gene expression and use it to compare tRNA-Seq datasets from cultured human cells and human brain. We find that sequencing caveats affect quantitation of only a subset of human tRNA genes. Unexpectedly, we detect several cases where the differences in tRNA expression among samples do not involve variations at the level of isoacceptor tRNA sets (tRNAs charged with the same amino acid but using different anticodons), but rather among tRNA genes within the same isodecoder set (tRNAs having the same anticodon sequence). Because isodecoder tRNAs are functionally equal in terms of genetic translation, their differential expression may be related to noncanonical tRNA functions. We show that several instances of differential tRNA gene expression result in changes in the abundance of tRNA-derived fragments (tRFs) but not of mature tRNAs. Examples of differentially expressed tRFs include PIWI-associated RNAs, tRFs present in tissue samples but not in cells cultured in vitro, and somatic tissue-specific tRFs. Our data support that differential expression of tRNA genes regulate noncanonical tRNA functions performed by tRFs.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available