4.6 Article

LINE-1 ORF1 protein enhances Alu SINE retrotransposition

Journal

GENE
Volume 419, Issue 1-2, Pages 1-6

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2008.04.007

Keywords

Alu; LINE-1; L1 ORF1 protein; retroelement; SINE amplification; retrotransposition

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [P20RR020152, P20 RR020152-01, P20 RR020152, P20 RR020152-02] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01GM45668, R01 GM079709, R01 GM045668-15, R01GM79709, R01 GM079709-01A1, R01 GM045668] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Retroelements have contributed over one third of the human genome mass. The currently active LINE-1 (L1) codes for two proteins (ORF1p and ORF2p), both strictly required for retrotransposition. In contrast, the non-coding parasitic SINE (Alu) only appears to need the L1 ORF2p for its own amplification. This requirement was previously determined using a tissue culture assay system in human cells (HeLa). Because HeLa are likely to express functional L1 proteins, it is possible that low levels of endogenous ORF1p are necessary for the observed tagged Alu mobilization. By individually expressing ORF1 and ORF2 proteins from both human (L1(RP) and LRE3) and rodent (L1(A102) and L1(spa)) L1 sources, we demonstrate that increasing amounts of ORF1 expressing vector enhances tagged Alu mobilization in HeLa cells. In addition, using chicken fibroblast cells as an alternate cell culture source, we confirmed that ORF1p is not strictly required for Alu mobilization in our assay. Supporting our observations in HeLa cells, we find that tagged Alu retrotransposition is improved by supplementation of ORF1p in the cultured chicken cells. We postulate that L1 ORF1p plays either a direct or indirect role in enhancing the interaction between the Alu RNA and the required factors needed for its retrotransposition. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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