4.5 Article

Functional Consequences of Shifting Transcript Boundaries in Glucose Starvation

期刊

MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOLOGY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10985549.2023.2270406

关键词

fission yeast; glucose starvation; transcriptome; direct RNA sequencing; transcript isoforms

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glucose starvation triggers complex regulatory mechanisms in gene expression, affecting both transcript and protein levels. The boundaries of transcripts and the length of poly(A) tails undergo changes, leading to functional consequences in stress response proteins.
Glucose is a major source of carbon and essential for the survival of many organisms, ranging from yeast to human. A sudden 60-fold reduction of glucose in exponentially growing fission yeast induces transcriptome-wide changes in gene expression. This regulation is multilayered, and the boundaries of transcripts are known to vary, with functional consequences at the protein level. By combining direct RNA sequencing with 5'-CAGE and short-read sequencing, we accurately defined the 5'- and 3'-ends of transcripts that are both poly(A) tailed and 5'-capped in glucose starvation, followed by proteome analysis. Our results confirm previous experimentally validated loci with alternative isoforms and reveal several transcriptome-wide patterns. First, we show that sense-antisense gene pairs are more strongly anticorrelated when a time lag is taken into account. Second, we show that the glucose starvation response initially elicits a shortening of 3'-UTRs and poly(A) tails, followed by a shortening of the 5'-UTRs at later time points. These result in domain gains and losses in proteins involved in the stress response. Finally, the relatively poor overlap both between differentially expressed genes (DEGs), differential transcript usage events (DTUs), and differentially detected proteins (DDPs) highlight the need for further study on post-transcriptional regulation mechanisms in glucose starvation.

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

4.5
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