Background:The mechanisms by which human PUF proteins repress target mRNAs remain unknown. Results: PUM1 and PUM2 reduce protein and mRNA levels of targets by recruiting the CNOT deadenylase complex and by a poly(A)-independent mechanism. Conclusion: PUMs employ deadenylation-dependent and -independent mechanisms of repression. Significance: Deadenylation is a conserved means of PUF repression but additional mechanism(s) contribute to mRNA regulation.

PUF proteins are potent repressors that serve important roles in stem cell maintenance, neurological processes, and embryonic development. These functions are driven by PUF protein recognition of specific binding sites within the 3 ′ untranslated regions of target mRNAs. In this study, we investigated mechanisms of repression by the founding PUF, Drosophila Pumilio, and its human orthologs. Here, we evaluated a previously proposed model wherein the Pumilio RNA binding domain (RBD) binds Argonaute, which in turn blocks the translational activity of the eukaryotic elongation factor 1A. Surprisingly, we found that Argonautes are not necessary for repression elicited by Drosophila and human PUFs in vivo. A second model proposed that the RBD of Pumilio represses by recruiting deadenylases to shorten the mRNA's polyadenosine tail. Indeed, the RBD binds to the Pop2 deadenylase and accelerates deadenylation; however, this activity is not crucial for regulation. Rather, we determined that the poly(A) is necessary for repression by the RBD. Our results reveal that poly(A)-dependent repression by the RBD requires the poly(A) binding protein, pAbp. Furthermore, we show that repression by the human PUM2 RBD requires the pAbp ortholog, PABPC1. Pumilio associates with pAbp but does not disrupt binding of pAbp to the mRNA. Taken together, our data support a model wherein the Pumilio RBD antagonizes the ability of pAbp to promote translation. Thus, the conserved function of the PUF RBD is to bind specific mRNAs, antagonize pAbp function, and promote deadenylation.

Background: Gene expression signatures define prognostically significant osteosarcoma phenotypes. Results: Deregulation of the RB-E2F pathway establishes more aggressive phenotype. Inhibitors of DNA and chromatin remodeling promote comparable transcriptional changes as genetic restoration of RB. Conclusion: Aberrant RB-E2F pathway alters epigenetic landscape and biological behavior of osteosarcoma. Significance: Epigenetic remodeling regulated by RB-E2F gives rise to patterns of gene expression that are associated with different biological behavior and progression of osteosarcoma.

No abstract

Summary In this chapter, we describe a method for purification and analysis of the enzymatic activity of deadenylase enzymes. Nearly all eukaryotic messenger RNAs are modified at the 3’ end by addition of an adenosine polymer: the poly-adenosine tail. The poly(A) tail plays a central role in protein expression and mRNA fate. The poly(A) tail promotes translation of the mRNA. Shortening of the poly(A) tail, referred to as deadenylation, reduces protein synthesis and initiates destruction of the mRNA. A specialized class of exoribonucleases, called deadenylase enzymes, carries out this process. Deadenylases are found throughout eukarya but their functions remain largely unexplored. We present a detailed protocol to analyze deadenylase activity in vitro. First, recombinant deadenylase enzyme is over-expressed and purified from bacteria. Next, labeled RNA substrate is prepared. Deadenylation reactions are performed and reaction products are analyzed by denaturing gel electrophoresis. Reaction rates are then determined quantitatively. Crucial controls and experimental parameters are described along with practical tips that promote success.