4.6 Article

A Retroelement Modifies Pre-mRNA Splicing THE MURINE Glrbspa ALLELE IS A SPLICING SIGNAL POLYMORPHISM AMPLIFIED BY LONG INTERSPERSED NUCLEAR ELEMENT INSERTION

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 287, 期 37, 页码 31185-31194

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M112.375691

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [BE 1138/5-3]
  2. Bundesministerium fur Forschung und Bildung/Deutsch Israelische Projektkooperation [BMBF/DIP G3.2]
  3. NIH [GM083187]
  4. Fonds der Chemischen Industrie [160-43]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The glycine receptor-deficient mutant mouse spastic carries a full-length long interspersed nuclear element (LINE1) retrotransposon in intron 6 of the glycine receptor beta subunit gene, Glrb(spa). The mutation arose in the C57BL/6J strain and is associated with skipping of exon 6 or a combination of the exons 5 and 6, thus resulting in a translational frameshift within the coding regions of the GlyR beta subunit. The effect of the Glrb(spa) LINE1 insertion on pre-mRNA splicing was studied using a minigene approach. Sequence comparison as well as motif prediction and mutational analysis revealed that in addition to the LINE1 insertion the inactivation of an exonic splicing enhancer (ESE) within exon 6 is required for skipping of exon 6. Reconstitution of the ESE by substitution of a single residue was sufficient to prevent exon skipping. In addition to the ESE, two regions within the 5' and 3' UTR of the LINE1 were shown to be critical determinants for exon skipping, indicating that LINE1 acts as efficient modifier of subtle endogenous splicing phenotypes. Thus, the spastic allele of the murine glycine receptor beta subunit gene is a two-hit mutation, where the hypomorphic alteration in an ESE is amplified by the insertion of a LINE1 element in the adjacent intron. Conversely, the LINE1 effect on splicing may be modulated by individual polymorphisms, depending on the insertional environment within the host genome.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据