2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2020.06.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

eIF3 Associates with 80S Ribosomes to Promote Translation Elongation, Mitochondrial Homeostasis, and Muscle Health

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
58
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 74 publications
11
58
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Importantly, we found that, compared with unselected 40S, eIF2::40S and each of the eIF3::40S are less enriched in the start codon region relative to the 5′ UTR ( Figures 3 G–3I, S5 B–S5D, S6 B, and S6C), supporting the assumption that both eIFs dissociate from PICs during late stages of AUG recognition. The fact that this enrichment is significantly more pronounced for eIF2::40Ss than eIF3::40Ss ( Figures 3 L, S5 E, S6 E, and S6F) indicates that some PICs at start codons still contain eIF3 but not eIF2, which is consistent with the model that eIF2 leaves the PIC upon AUG recognition ( Hinnebusch, 2017 , Shirokikh and Preiss, 2018 , Valášek et al., 2017 ), whereas eIF3 lingers during the initial elongation cycles ( Mohammad et al., 2017 ; see also the related papers in this issue of Molecular Cell , Bohlen et al., 2020 and Lin et al., 2020 ). In support, we observed markedly increased coverage of yeast and human eIF3::80 FPs over unselected 80S FPs within the first ∼20–25 codons past the AUG ( Figures 3 M and S6 J).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Importantly, we found that, compared with unselected 40S, eIF2::40S and each of the eIF3::40S are less enriched in the start codon region relative to the 5′ UTR ( Figures 3 G–3I, S5 B–S5D, S6 B, and S6C), supporting the assumption that both eIFs dissociate from PICs during late stages of AUG recognition. The fact that this enrichment is significantly more pronounced for eIF2::40Ss than eIF3::40Ss ( Figures 3 L, S5 E, S6 E, and S6F) indicates that some PICs at start codons still contain eIF3 but not eIF2, which is consistent with the model that eIF2 leaves the PIC upon AUG recognition ( Hinnebusch, 2017 , Shirokikh and Preiss, 2018 , Valášek et al., 2017 ), whereas eIF3 lingers during the initial elongation cycles ( Mohammad et al., 2017 ; see also the related papers in this issue of Molecular Cell , Bohlen et al., 2020 and Lin et al., 2020 ). In support, we observed markedly increased coverage of yeast and human eIF3::80 FPs over unselected 80S FPs within the first ∼20–25 codons past the AUG ( Figures 3 M and S6 J).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Mechanistically, RBPMS predominantly associates with translation initiation complexes, and its loss leads to the aberrant retention of translation initiation factors eIF2A, -3H, and -3E, on ribosomal complexes. All these factors have been reported to be involved in translation specialization (Choudhuri et al, 2013;Lin et al, 2020;Shah et al, 2016;Wek, 2018). Importantly, RBPMS loss severely depletes the translation apparatus of the key 'surveillance' factor eIF5A.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The RPL5 transcript and protein were upregulated in the ribosomes of NIL-723, and RP protein mediates selective translation 35 , suggesting that RPL5 may be necessary for the translation of specific glutenins. EIF3 is the most complex translation initiation factor and plays a role in translation elongation and enhances the synthesis of proteins associated with membrane function in protein synthesis 36 . EIF3.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%