4.5 Article

Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 3 (eIF3) and eIF2 can promote mRNA binding to 40S subunits independently of eIF4G in yeast

Journal

MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOLOGY
Volume 26, Issue 4, Pages 1355-1372

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/MCB.26.4.1355-1372.2006

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Intramural NIH HHS Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recruitment of the eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2 (eIF2)-GTP-Met-tRNA(i)(Met) ternary complex to the 40S ribosome is stimulated by multiple initiation factors in vitro, including eIF3, eIF1, eIF5, and eIF1A. Recruitment of mRNA is thought to require the functions of eIF4F and eIF3, with the latter serving as an adaptor between the ribosome and the 4G subunit of eIF4F. To define the factor requirements for these reactions in vivo, we examined the effects of depleting eIF2, eIF3, eIF5, or eIF4G in Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells on binding of the ternary complex, other initiation factors, and RPL41A mRNA to native 43S and 48S preinitiation complexes. Depleting eIF2, eIF3, or eIF5 reduced 40S binding of all constituents of the multifactor complex (MFC), comprised of these three factors and eIF1, supporting a mechanism of coupled 40S binding by MFC components. 40S-bound mRNA strongly accumulated in eIF5-depleted cells, even though MFC binding to 40S subunits was reduced by eIF5 depletion. Hence, stimulation of the GTPase activity of the ternary complex, a prerequisite for 60S subunit joining in vitro, is likely the rate-limiting function of eIF5 in vivo. Depleting eIF2 or eIF3 impaired mRNA binding to free 40S subunits, but depleting eIF4G led unexpectedly to accumulation of mRNA on 40S subunits. Thus, it appears that eIF3 and eIF2 are more critically required than eIF4G for stable binding of at least some mRNAs to native preinitiation complexes and that eIF4G has a rate-limiting function at a step downstream of 48S complex assembly in vivo.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available