4.8 Article

High-throughput RNA structure probing reveals critical folding events during early 60S ribosome assembly in yeast

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-00761-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust [091549, 096997]
  2. Wellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology [092076]
  3. short-term EMBO fellowship [ASTF 568-2012]
  4. Swedish Research Council
  5. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [RGPIN 386315-MO]
  6. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [PTJ-153313]
  7. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
  8. European Research Council [336935]
  9. NERC [R8/H10/56]
  10. MRC [MR/K001744/1]
  11. BBSRC [BB/J004243/1]
  12. MRC [MR/K001744/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  13. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [1433234, 1096650] Funding Source: researchfish
  14. Medical Research Council [MR/K001744/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While the protein composition of various yeast 60S ribosomal subunit assembly intermediates has been studied in detail, little is known about ribosomal RNA (rRNA) structural rearrangements that take place during early 60S assembly steps. Using a high-throughput RNA structure probing method, we provide nucleotide resolution insights into rRNA structural rearrangements during nucleolar 60S assembly. Our results suggest that many rRNA-folding steps, such as folding of 5.8S rRNA, occur at a very specific stage of assembly, and propose that downstream nuclear assembly events can only continue once 5.8S folding has been completed. Our maps of nucleotide flexibility enable making predictions about the establishment of protein-rRNA interactions, providing intriguing insights into the temporal order of protein-rRNA as well as long-range inter-domain rRNA interactions. These data argue that many distant domains in the rRNA can assemble simultaneously during early 60S assembly and underscore the enormous complexity of 60S synthesis.

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