4.4 Article

Identification of mRNAs that continue to associate with polysomes during hypoxia

期刊

RNA
卷 13, 期 7, 页码 1116-1131

出版社

COLD SPRING HARBOR LAB PRESS, PUBLICATIONS DEPT
DOI: 10.1261/rna.534807

关键词

hypoxia; polysomes; translation; gene expression; HIF-1 alpha

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA112086, R01 CA112086] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCRR NIH HHS [1 P20 RR16478-02, P20 RR016478, 2 P20 RR016478-04, P20 RR015564, 5 P20 RR15564-03] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tumors must adapt to the hypoxic environment in order to grow beyond a benign microscopic mass. In addition to transcriptional activation mediated by HIF-1 alpha, hypoxia has also been reported to inhibit translation. The degree of translational inhibition is dependent on the duration as well as the severity of the hypoxic insult. Anoxia (< 0.02% O-2) seems to have a more rapid and dramatic effect on translation as compared to hypoxia. We show here that prolonged hypoxia dramatically and reversibly inhibits translation in PC-3 cells. We also found that mTOR is inactivated and eIF-2 alpha is phosphorylated during hypoxic treatment but only the eIF-2a phosphorylation correlates with the translational repression. We further used polysome analysis and microarray technology to analyze the impact of this translational repression on gene expression. We found that 33 mRNAs were refractory to this translational repression and that there was no correlation between mRNA induction and the ability to recruit ribosomes during hypoxia. We also found that ribosomal protein encoding mRNAs are more sensitive to this translational repression as compared to the majority of mRNAs. Although other reports have analyzed the effect of translation inhibition on gene expression under anoxic conditions, we believe that this is the first report in hypoxic cells. Our results show that the translational repression that occurs during hypoxia does impact gene expression in the highly transformed prostate cancer cell line, PC-3.

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