4.4 Article

A single inhibitory upstream open reading frame (uORF) is sufficient to regulate Candida albicans GCN4 translation in response to amino acid starvation conditions

期刊

RNA
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 559-567

出版社

COLD SPRING HARBOR LAB PRESS, PUBLICATIONS DEPT
DOI: 10.1261/rna.042267.113

关键词

translational regulation; upstream open reading frame; Gcn4; Candida albicans

资金

  1. Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Candida albicans is a major fungal pathogen that responds to various environmental cues as part of its infection mechanism. We show here that the expression of C. albicans GCN4, which encodes a transcription factor that regulates morphogenetic and metabolic responses, is translationally regulated in response to amino acid starvation induced by exposure to the histidine analog 3-aminotriazole (3AT). However, in contrast to the well-known translational control mechanisms that regulate yeast GCN4 and mammalian ATF4 expression via multiple upstream open reading frames (uORFs) in their 5 '-leader sequences, a single inhibitory uORF is necessary and sufficient for C. albicans GCN4 translational control. The 5 '-leader sequence of GCN4 contains three uORFs, but uORF3 alone is sufficient for translational regulation. Under nonstress conditions, uORF3 inhibits GCN4 translation. Amino acid starvation conditions promote Gcn2-mediated phosphorylation of eIF2 alpha and leaky ribosomal scanning to bypass uORF3, inducing GCN4 translation. GCN4 expression is also transcriptionally regulated, although maximal induction is observed at higher concentrations of 3AT compared with translational regulation. C. albicans GCN4 expression is therefore highly regulated by both transcriptional and translational control mechanisms. We suggest that it is particularly important that Gcn4 levels are tightly controlled since Gcn4 regulates morphogenetic changes during amino acid starvation conditions, which are important determinants of virulence in this fungus.

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

4.4
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