4.8 Article

Engineering of a conditional allele reveals multiple roles of XRN2 in Caenorhabditis elegans development and substrate specificity in microRNA turnover

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 42, 期 6, 页码 4056-4067

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkt1418

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Union [241985]
  2. Novartis Research Foundation through the FMI
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation [SNF 31003A_127052, SNF 31003A_143313]
  4. Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds PhD fellowship
  5. European Research Council (ERC) [241985] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)
  6. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [31003A_143313, 31003A_127052] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although XRN2 proteins are highly conserved eukaryotic 5'-> 3' exonucleases, little is known about their function in animals. Here, we characterize Caenorhabditis elegans XRN2, which we find to be a broadly and constitutively expressed nuclear protein. An xrn-2 null mutation or loss of XRN2 catalytic activity causes a molting defect and early larval arrest. However, by generating a conditionally mutant xrn-2ts strain de novo through an approach that may be also applicable to other genes of interest, we reveal further functions in fertility, during embryogenesis and during additional larval stages. Consistent with the known role of XRN2 in controlling microRNA (miRNA) levels, we can demonstrate that loss of XRN2 activity stabilizes some rapidly decaying miRNAs. Surprisingly, however, other miRNAs continue to decay rapidly in xrn-2ts animals. Thus, XRN2 has unanticipated miRNA specificity in vivo, and its diverse developmental functions may relate to distinct substrates. Finally, our global analysis of miRNA stability during larval stage 1 reveals that miRNA passenger strands (miR*s) are substantially less stable than guide strands (miRs), supporting the notion that the former are mostly byproducts of biogenesis rather than a less abundant functional species.

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

4.8
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