The eukaryotic Ccr4/Caf1/Not complex is involved in deadenylation of mRNAs. The Caf1 and Ccr4 subunits both potentially have deadenylating enzyme activity. We investigate here the roles of Ccr4 and Caf1 in deadenylation in two organisms that separated early in eukaryotic evolution: humans and trypanosomes. In Trypanosoma brucei, we found a complex containing CAF1, NOT1, NOT2 and NOT5, DHH1 and a possible homologue of Caf130; no homologue of Ccr4 was found. Trypanosome CAF1 has deadenylation activity, and is essential for cell survival. Depletion of trypanosome CAF1 delayed deadenylation and degradation of constitutively expressed mRNAs. Human cells have two isozymes of Caf1: simultaneous depletion of both inhibited degradation of an unstable reporter mRNA. In both species, depletion of Caf1 homologues inhibited deadenylation of bulk RNA and resulted in an increase in average poly(A) tail length.

Removal of the poly(A) tail is the first step in the degradation of many eukaryotic mRNAs. In metazoans and yeast, the Ccr4/Caf1/Not complex has the predominant deadenylase activity, while the Pan2/Pan3 complex may trim poly(A) tails to the correct size, or initiate deadenylation. In trypanosomes, turnover of several constitutively-expressed or long-lived mRNAs is not affected by depletion of the 5′–3′ exoribonuclease XRNA, but is almost completely inhibited by depletion of the deadenylase CAF1. In contrast, two highly unstable mRNAs, encoding EP procyclin and a phosphoglycerate kinase, PGKB, accumulate when XRNA levels are reduced. We here show that degradation of EP mRNA was partially inhibited after CAF1 depletion. RNAi-targeting trypanosome PAN2 had a mild effect on global deadenylation, and on degradation of a few mRNAs including EP. By amplifying and sequencing degradation intermediates, we demonstrated that a reduction in XRNA had no effect on degradation of a stable mRNA encoding a ribosomal protein, but caused accumulation of EP mRNA fragments that had lost substantial portions of the 5′ and 3′ ends. The results support a model in which trypanosome mRNAs can be degraded by at least two different, partially independent, cytoplasmic degradation pathways attacking both ends of the mRNA.

Variations on the statement “the variant surface glycoprotein (VSG) coat that covers the external face of the mammalian bloodstream form of Trypanosoma brucei acts a physical barrier” appear regularly in research articles and reviews. The concept of the impenetrable VSG coat is an attractive one, as it provides a clear model for understanding how a trypanosome population persists; each successive VSG protects the plasma membrane and is immunologically distinct from previous VSGs. What is the evidence that the VSG coat is an impenetrable barrier, and how do antibodies and other extracellular proteins interact with it? In this review, the nature of the extracellular surface of the bloodstream form trypanosome is described, and past experiments that investigated binding of antibodies and lectins to trypanosomes are analysed using knowledge of VSG sequence and structure that was unavailable when the experiments were performed. Epitopes for some VSG monoclonal antibodies are mapped as far as possible from previous experimental data, onto models of VSG structures. The binding of lectins to some, but not to other, VSGs is revisited with more recent knowledge of the location and nature of N-linked oligosaccharides. The conclusions are: (i) Much of the variation observed in earlier experiments can be explained by the identity of the individual VSGs. (ii) Much of an individual VSG is accessible to antibodies, and the barrier that prevents access to the cell surface is probably at the base of the VSG N-terminal domain, approximately 5 nm from the plasma membrane. This second conclusion highlights a gap in our understanding of how the VSG coat works, as several plasma membrane proteins with large extracellular domains are very unlikely to be hidden from host antibodies by VSG.

Graphical abstractThe VSG coat of Trypanosoma brucei prevents access of antibodies to the VSG C-terminal domain.Research highlights▶ Antisera raised against recombinant VSG C-terminal domains. ▶ Anti-VSG C-terminal domain sera recognise fixed but not live cells. ▶ Support for model where diffusion barrier is at the base of the VSG N-terminal domain.