Recent studies have indicated that tau, a protein involved in Alzheimer's disease and other neurodegenerative disorders, has a propensity to undergo liquid–liquid phase separation (LLPS). However, the mechanism of this process remains unknown. Here, we demonstrate that tau LLPS is largely driven by intermolecular electrostatic interactions between the negatively charged N-terminal and positively charged middle/C-terminal regions, whereas hydrophobic interactions play a surprisingly small role. Furthermore, our results reveal that, in contrast to previous suggestions, phosphorylation is not required for tau LLPS. These findings provide a foundation for understanding the mechanism by which phosphorylation and other posttranslational modifications could modulate tau LLPS in the context of specific physiological functions as well as pathological interactions.

No abstract

Among all enzymes in nature, RNase P is unique in that it can use either an RNA- or a protein-based active site for its function: catalyzing cleavage of the 5′-leader from precursor tRNAs (pre-tRNAs). The well-studied catalytic RNase P RNA uses a specificity module to recognize the pre-tRNA and a catalytic module to perform cleavage. Similarly, the recently discovered proteinaceous RNase P (PRORP) possesses two domains – pentatricopeptide repeat (PPR) and metallonuclease (NYN) – that are present in some other RNA processing factors. Here, we combined chemical modification of lysines and multiple-reaction monitoring mass spectrometry to identify putative substrate-contacting residues in Arabidopsis thaliana PRORP1 (AtPRORP1), and subsequently validated these candidate sites by site-directed mutagenesis. Using biochemical studies to characterize the wild-type (WT) and mutant derivatives, we found that AtPRORP1 exploits specific lysines strategically positioned at the tips of it's V-shaped arms, in the first PPR motif and in the NYN domain proximal to the catalytic center, to bind and cleave pre-tRNA. Our results confirm that the protein- and RNA-based forms of RNase P have distinct modules for substrate recognition and cleavage, an unanticipated parallel in their mode of action.

RNase P, an essential housekeeping endonuclease needed for 5 ′ ′ ′ ′ ′-processing of tRNAs, exists in two distinct forms: one with an RNA-and the other with a protein-based active site. The notion that the protein form of RNase P exists only in eukaryotes has been upended by the recent discovery of a protein-only variant in Bacteria and Archaea. The use of these two divergent scaffolds, shaped by convergent evolution, in all three domains of life inspires questions relating to the ancestral form of RNase P, as well as their origins and function(s) in vivo. Results from our analysis of publicly available bacterial and archaeal genomes suggest that the widespread RNA-based ribonucleoprotein variant is likely the ancient form. We also discuss the possible genetic origins and function of RNase P, including how the simultaneous presence of its variants may contribute to the fitness of their host organisms.

Two broad classes of RNase P trim the 5' leader of precursor tRNAs (pre-tRNAs): ribonucleoprotein (RNP)- and proteinaceous (PRORP)-variants. These two RNase P types, which use different scaffolds for catalysis, reflect independent evolutionary paths. While the catalytic RNA-based RNP form is present in all three domains of life, the PRORP family is restricted to eukaryotes. To obtain insights on substrate recognition by PRORPs, we examined the 5' processing ability of recombinant Arabidopsis thaliana PRORP1 (AtPRORP1) using a panel of pre-tRNASer variants and model hairpin-loop derivatives (pATSer type) that consist of the acceptor-T-stem stack and the T-/D-loop. Our data indicate the importance of the identity of N-1 (the residue immediately 5' to the cleavage site) and the N-1:N+73 base pair for cleavage rate and site selection of pre-tRNASer and pATSer. The nucleobase preferences that we observed mirror the frequency of occurrence in the complete suite of organellar pre-tRNAs in eight algae/plants that we analyzed. The importance of the T-/D-loop in pre-tRNASer for tight binding to AtPRORP1 is indicated by the 200-fold weaker binding of pATSer compared to pre-tRNASer, while the essentiality of the T-loop for cleavage is reflected by the near-complete loss of activity when a GAAA-tetraloop replaced the T-loop in pATSer. Substituting the 2'-OH at N-1 with 2'-H also resulted in no detectable cleavage, hinting at the possible role of this 2'-OH in coordinating Mg2+ ions critical for catalysis. Collectively, our results indicate similarities but also key differences in substrate recognition by the bacterial RNase P RNP and AtPRORP1: while both forms exploit the acceptor-T-stem stack and the elbow region in the pre-tRNA, the RNP form appears to require more recognition determinants for cleavage-site selection.