4.6 Article

Regulation of Hepatitis C Virus Genome Replication by Xrn1 and MicroRNA-122 Binding to Individual Sites in the 5′ Untranslated Region

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 89, 期 12, 页码 6294-6311

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.03631-14

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MOP-133458] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

miR-122 is a liver-specific microRNA (miRNA) that binds to two sites (S1 and S2) on the 5' untranslated region (UTR) of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) genome and promotes the viral life cycle. It positively affects viral RNA stability, translation, and replication, but the mechanism is not well understood. To unravel the roles of miR-122 binding at each site alone or in combination, we employed miR-122 binding site mutant viral RNAs, Hep3B cells (which lack detectable miR-122), and complementation with wild-type miR-122, an miR-122 with the matching mutation, or both. We found that miR-122 binding at either site alone increased replication equally, while binding at both sites had a cooperative effect. Xrn1 depletion rescued miR-122-unbound full-length RNA replication to detectable levels but not to miR-122-bound levels, confirming that miR-122 protects HCV RNA from Xrn1, a cytoplasmic 5'-to-3' exoribonuclease, but also has additional functions. In cells depleted of Xrn1, replication levels of S1-bound HCV RNA were slightly higher than S2-bound RNA levels, suggesting that both sites contribute, but their contributions may be unequal when the need for protection from Xrn1 is reduced. miR-122 binding at S1 or S2 also increased translation equally, but the effect was abolished by Xrn1 knockdown, suggesting that the influence of miR-122 on HCV translation reflects protection from Xrn1 degradation. Our results show that occupation of each miR-122 binding site contributes equally and cooperatively to HCV replication but suggest somewhat unequal contributions of each site to Xrn1 protection and additional functions of miR-122.

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

4.6
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