Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, June 2000, p. 3965-3976, Vol. 20, No. 11
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Identification of Domains and Residues within the
Subunit of Eukaryotic Translation Initiation Factor 2B (eIF2B
)
Required for Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Reveals a Novel Activation
Function Promoted by eIF2B Complex Formation
Edith
Gomez and
Graham D.
Pavitt*
Department of Anatomy and Physiology, Medical
Sciences Institute, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
Received 18 January 2000/Accepted 15 March 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2B (eIF2B) is the guanine
nucleotide exchange factor for protein synthesis initiation factor 2 (eIF2). Composed of five subunits, it converts eIF2 from a GDP-bound
form to the active eIF2-GTP complex. This is a regulatory step of
translation initiation. In vitro, eIF2B catalytic function can be
provided by the largest (epsilon) subunit alone (eIF2B
). This
activity is stimulated by complex formation with the other eIF2B
subunits. We have analyzed the roles of different regions of eIF2B
in catalysis, in eIF2B complex formation, and in binding to eIF2 by
characterizing mutations in the Saccharomyces cerevisiae gene encoding eIF2B
(GCD6) that impair the essential
function of eIF2B. Our analysis of nonsense mutations indicates that
the C terminus of eIF2B
(residues 518 to 712) is required for both catalytic activity and interaction with eIF2. In addition, missense mutations within this region impair the catalytic activity of eIF2B
without affecting its ability to bind eIF2. Internal, in-frame deletions within the N-terminal half of eIF2B
disrupt eIF2B complex formation without affecting the nucleotide exchange activity of eIF2B
alone. Finally, missense mutations identified within this region do not affect the catalytic activity of eIF2B
alone or its
interactions with the other eIF2B subunits or with eIF2. Instead, these
missense mutations act indirectly by impairing the enhancement of the
rate of nucleotide exchange that results from complex formation between
eIF2B
and the other eIF2B subunits. This suggests that the
N-terminal region of eIF2B
is an activation domain that responds to
eIF2B complex formation.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Eukaryotic translation initiation
factor 2B (eIF2B) is a guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) that
converts its substrate, eIF2, from an inactive eIF2-GDP binary complex
to eIF2-GTP. This active complex binds charged initiator
tRNAMet (Met-tRNAiMet) forming a ternary
complex that interacts with eIF3 and the 40S ribosomal subunit.
Following addition of mRNA, associated initiation factors, and the 60S
ribosomal subunit, the G-protein cycle is completed by hydrolysis of
eIF2-bound GTP and the release of eIF2-GDP from the ribosome (reviewed
in references 14, 31, and 42). Thus, the functions of eIF2 and eIF2B are believed to be similar to
those of the small GTPases and exchange factors, respectively, of the
RAS superfamily (4). Recent three-dimensional structure determinations have demonstrated that while the nucleotide binding domains of the G proteins are very similar, GEF structures differ markedly from one another, each employing different amino acid motifs
to drive the release of GDP (8, 41).
eIF2 and eIF2B are complex proteins of three (
to
) and five (
to
) nonidentical subunits, respectively. The subunit complexity of
eIF2B reflects, at least in part, its novel mechanism of regulation. Four protein kinases, called PKR, HCR (HRI), PERK (PEK), and GCN2, specifically phosphorylate the seryl residue at position 51 of the
subunit of eIF2 (eIF2
) under different stress conditions (12,
23, 40). Phosphorylation of eIF2
at this site converts eIF2
from a substrate into an inhibitor of eIF2B (33, 38), thus
inhibiting global translation initiation. In the yeast
Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the protein kinase GCN2
phosphorylates eIF2
in response to amino acid or purine starvation.
Under moderate amino acid starvation conditions, the level of
phosphorylated eIF2 produced is not sufficient to inhibit total protein
synthesis; however, it specifically enhances translation of
GCN4 mRNA, which encodes a transcriptional regulator of
amino acid biosynthetic genes (24). GCN4
translation is inversely coupled to ternary complex concentration and
thus to eIF2B activity by the presence of inhibitory short open reading
frames in the 5' leader of its mRNA. Recently, homologues of GCN2 have
been identified in Drosophila melanogaster (32) and mammals (2), indicating that this kinase may be
universally conserved in eukaryotes.
By using both genetic and biochemical methods, it has been demonstrated
that three subunits of S. cerevisiae eIF2B (
,
, and
encoded by GCN3, GCD7, and GCD2,
respectively) act together to mediate regulation of eIF2B activity in
response to phosphorylation of its substrate, eIF2 (33, 34,
43). We also found that the
subunit of eIF2B, encoded by
GCD6 in yeast, is a catalytic subunit of eIF2B: the ability
of extracts from yeast cells overexpressing eIF2B
alone to
dissociate GDP from eIF2-GDP binary complexes was higher than that of
nonoverexpressing cell extracts (33). Interestingly,
eIF2B
catalyzed nucleotide exchange at a reduced rate compared with
that of the five-subunit eIF2B complex. Others have obtained similar
results expressing mammalian eIF2B
cDNA in insect cells
(18). In addition, we showed that the
and
subunits
can form an eIF2B catalytic subcomplex in the absence of the other
three subunits. This 
catalytic subcomplex promoted release of
GDP from eIF2-GDP at a higher rate than
alone and could also bind
stably to eIF2 (33), but in contrast to the full
five-subunit complex, nucleotide exchange and binding of this
subcomplex to eIF2 were not affected by the phosphorylation of eIF2
.
In this study, we decided to follow up on our observation that eIF2B
showed catalytic activity to determine what regions or residues of this
polypeptide are important for its GEF activity. Examination of the
primary sequence of eIF2B
reveals no significant sequence identity
with any other GEF. However, eIF2B
does share significant sequence
similarity with eIF2B
(5, 35) (see Fig. 1), to which it
binds, forming the eIF2B catalytic subcomplex (33). In
addition, eIF2B
and eIF2B
both share extended sequence similarity
with two other protein families found mainly in bacteria-nucleoside triphosphate (NTP)-hexose pyrophosphorylases and acyltransferases (see
Fig. 1A). It has been proposed that the region of similarity with the
bacterial NTP-hexose pyrophosphorylase family represents a nucleotide
binding domain composed of a modified P-loop and magnesium ion
coordinating region (28), suggesting a role for nucleotide
binding by eIF2B in the guanine nucleotide exchange reaction. Finally,
it has been shown recently that the sequence motif shared between the
extreme C termini of eIF2B
and eIF5 (a potential GTPase-activating
protein for eIF2) (28) provides a binding site in both
proteins for the
subunit of their common substrate eIF2
(1).
We show here that the C-terminal region of eIF2B
is responsible for
binding to the substrate eIF2 and contains the catalytic domain for GEF
activity. Missense alleles in which single conserved amino acids within
this region were changed dramatically reduce the GEF activity of
eIF2B
without affecting eIF2 binding, indicating that different
residues are responsible for these two functions. In contrast, the
N-terminal half of eIF2B
is required for its interactions with the
other eIF2B subunits. Missense alleles, where single conserved residues
have been altered, in this region of the gene affect the stimulation of
eIF2B activity observed upon eIF2B complex formation without detectably
altering binding to eIF2. The implications of these results for eIF2B
function are discussed.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
S. cerevisiae strains and genetic methods.
Standard genetic methods were used to construct yeast strains and to
characterize the phenotypes conferred by the gcd6 mutations described here (20). Transformation of yeast strains with
plasmids was done by the lithium acetate method (26).
Plasmid shuffling employing 5-fluoro-orotic acid was done as described
previously (3). Yeast strain GP3751 (MAT
leu2-3
leu2-112 ura3-52::[HIS4-lacZ ura3-52] ino1
gcd6
gcn2
::hisG [GCD6 CEN6
LEU2]) was constructed by transformation of strain KAY16
(1) with pJB102 (6) followed by plasmid shuffling
to lose pJB5. Yeast strain GP3667 (MAT
leu2-3 leu2-112
trp1-
63 ura3-52 gcn2
GAL2+) was constructed by
deletion of GCN2 in strain H1511 (19) using plasmid p1144 as previously described (15).
Plasmids.
Standard methods were used to construct all
plasmids (39). pAV1427 is a 2µm URA3 plasmid
derived from pEMBL-yex4 (7) and was used to overexpress
hexahistidine and FLAG double-tagged eIF2B
(GCD6) from a
galactose-inducible GAL-CYC hybrid promoter. pAV1427 was
constructed by modifying the coding region of GCD6 in
plasmid pJB85 (GCD6 CEN URA3) (6) to position an
MluI restriction site immediately upstream of the AUG start
codon, move an NcoI site from codon 15 to the start codon,
and introduce a BspEI restriction site at codon 9 without
altering the sequence of the encoded protein. This was done by the
ligation of a pair of annealed complementary oligonucleotides of
sequence 5'-CGC GTG CCA TGC TGG AAA AAA GGG ACA AAA GAA ATC CGG ACT AGG
CAA T and 5'-CAT GAT TGC CTA GTC CGG ATT TCT TTT GTC CCT TTT TTC CAG
CAT GGC A between the upstream MluI site (beginning at
nucleotide
213) and the NcoI site at codon 15 to generate
plasmid pAV1426. This modified GCD6 was subcloned on a
2.3-kb MluI-to-SpeI fragment into plasmid
pGAL-GCN2FH digested with MluI and NheI. Plasmid
pGAL-GCN2FH (a gift from Jinsheng Dong and Alan Hinnebusch, National
Institutes of Health [NIH], Bethesda, Md.) is pEMBL-yex4 expressing
N-terminally FLAG- and hexahistidine-tagged GCN2. The subcloning
replaced the GCN2 DNA with the GCD6 sequence,
creating a galactose-inducible GCD6-expressing plasmid with N-terminal
FLAG and hexahistidine tags.
pAV1464 was derived from pAV1427 by partial digestion with
EcoRI and religation to generate an in-frame deletion
between residues A+274 and G+1074 of GCD6 (corresponding to
amino acids E93 and E358), termed gcd6
93-358. pAV1466 was
derived from pAV1427 by ClaI digestion and religation. This
resulted in an in-frame deletion between GCD6 residues C+429
and T+692 (corresponding to amino acids D144 and D230), termed
gcd6
144-230. Subcloning was used to introduce
gcd6 mutations (isolation described in the section below)
from the original pAV1427-derived plasmid into the low-copy-number URA3 plasmid pJB85, containing GCD6 under the
control of its own promoter and without epitope tags (5).
The DNA in these plasmids was sequenced to confirm the presence of the
mutation. Plasmids generated are pAV1514 (gcd6-T518D+9*), pAV1515
(gcd6-N249K), pAV1522 (gcd6
93-358), pAV1524
(gcd6-F250L), pAV1527 (gcd6
144-230), pAV1566 (gcd6-Q500*), pAV1582 (gcd6-T552I), pAV1586
(gcd6-S576N), and pAV1588 (gcd6-Q452*) where
asterisks indicate nonsense codons.
A high-copy-number
URA3 plasmid pRS426 (
9)
containing
GCD1 with C-terminal six-histidine and two copies
of the FLAG epitope,
called pAV1431, was created by using complementary
oligonucleotides
to introduce the amino acid sequence
SG
DYKDDDKDITG
DYKDDDKDITGHHHHHHTG
immediately prior to the stop codon of
GCD1. This
plasmid was
derived from the six-histidine-tagged
GCD1
plasmids described
previously (
33) by adding tandem copies
of oligonucleotides
specifying the FLAG tag (underlined) immediately 5'
to the hexahistidine
tag. The immediate parent of pAV1431 is pTK1.11,
containing
GCD6 and double-tagged
GCD1
(constructed by Thanuja Krishnamoorthy
and Alan Hinnebusch, NIH).
Double-tagged
GCD1 was subcloned on
a 2.4-kb
BamHI fragment into similarly cleaved pRS426 so that
the
GCD1 and
URA3 genes are transcribed in the same
direction
in pAV1431. Plasmids coexpressing FLAG- and
hexahistidine-tagged
GCD1 and different
GCD6
alleles were constructed by subcloning
each
GCD6 allele on a
2.5-kb
BamHI (made blunt ended with Klenow
polymerase)-to-
XhoI fragment from the low-copy-number
plasmids
described above into
SmaI- and
XhoI-cut
pAV1431 (
GCD1 2µm
URA3).
The plasmids created
are pAV1533 (
GCD1 GCD6), pAV1535 (
GCD1
gcd6-T518D+9*),
pAV1539 (
GCD1 gcd6-F250L), pAV1541
(
GCD1 gcd6-N249K), pAV1549
(
GCD1 gcd6
93-358),
pAV1551 (
GCD1 gcd6
144-230), pAV1574 (
GCD1 gcd6-S576N), pAV1576 (
GCD1 gcd6-Q500*), pAV1578
(
GCD1 gcd6-Q452*),
and pAV1580 (
GCD1 gcd6-T552I).
pAV1494 is a high-copy-number
LEU2 plasmid made by
subcloning
GCN3,
GCD2, and
GCD7 on a
8.1-kb
SacII-to-
SalI fragment from
p1871
(
43) into pRS425 (
9).
Isolation of mutations in GCD6 with reduced eIF2B
activity.
Plasmid pAV1427 was subjected to random mutagenesis
using the error-prone bacterial strain XL-1 Red (Stratagene), as
described by the supplier, to generate a pool of randomly mutated
plasmid DNA termed pAV1427M. Dominant mutations in GCD6 were
selected from this DNA pool. pAV1427M transformants of yeast strain
GP3667 (GCD6 gcn2
) were selected on synthetic minimal
medium containing 2% glucose (SD). Approximately 10,000 fast-growing
colonies were screened for slow growth (Slg
) following
replica plating to synthetic minimal medium containing 2% galactose
(SGal). Slg
cells were then tested for resistance to
3-aminotriazole (3ATr) on SD plates additionally
supplemented with 25 mM 3AT (Fluka). These phenotypes are dominant, as
they require that the mutant allele be incorporated into the eIF2B
complex in place of the chromosomally encoded wild-type allele. The
Slg
and 3ATr phenotypes screened for have
been associated with Gcd
alleles of eIF2B genes isolated
previously (22). Plasmid DNA was recovered from 109 candidates, and of these, only 9 retransformed to generate the original
phenotype. The GCD6 insert from each mutant was subjected to
automated dye terminator sequencing (ABI), and seven unique alleles
resulted, two being isolated twice each. The gcd6 alleles
are caused by the following nucleotide (protein) changes; T+747A
(N249K) in plasmid pAV1459, T+748C (F250L) in plasmid pAV1456, A+1484G
(N495S) and C+1655T (T552I) in pAV1460, G+1727A (S576N) in pAV1458 and
pAV1462, C+1354T (Q452*) in pAV1455, C+1498T (Q500*) in pAV1457 and
pAV1462, and A+1550AA (an insertion of an adenine residue to alter the
reading frame and induce a premature stop-T518D+KEKKNDVCQ* (abbreviated
T518D+9*) in pAV1554. Subcloning and nucleotide sequence confirmation
were used to separate the two residue changes in pAV1460, generating
plasmids pAV1603 (gcd6-N495S) and pAV1605
(gcd6-T552I). The results of phenotypic and biochemical
analyses of the resulting purified proteins demonstrated that the
mutant phenotype was entirely due to the T552I substitution (data not shown).
General protein methods.
Protein concentrations were
determined by the Bradford assay (Bio-Rad) using bovine serum albumin
(BSA) as a standard. eIF2 and eIF2B proteins were resolved by sodium
dodecyl sulfate-12.5% polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-12.5%
PAGE) (39) and detected by Western blotting as described
previously (16, 43) using appropriate rabbit polyclonal
primary antisera (6, 10, 11) with a horseradish peroxidase
(HRP)-conjugated anti-rabbit secondary antibody (HRP-conjugated protein
A was used for the experiment shown in Fig. 4C) and the enhanced
chemiluminescence system from Amersham.
Protein purification.
Yeast eIF2 was purified as described
previously (33). Wild-type and mutant eIF2B
proteins were
overexpressed in yeast and partially purified by nickel-affinity
chromatography as described below. Hexahistidine- and FLAG-tagged
eIF2B
was expressed from a galactose-inducible promoter in plasmid
pAV1427 using yeast strain GP3667. Yeast cells transformed with pAV1427
were grown overnight at 30°C in 160 ml of synthetic complete medium
containing 2% glucose but without uracil to maintain plasmid selection
(SC-URA). Cells were collected by centrifugation, resuspended in 1.6 liters of the same medium except that it contained a mixture of 0.4% glucose and 2% galactose as carbon sources and lacked uracil, leucine,
isoleucine, and valine supplements, and grown for an additional 24 h to allow growth and induction of GCD6 expression. Cells were then
collected by centrifugation, washed with water, and suspended in lysis
buffer (1 M KCl, 20 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.5], 3 mM MgCl2, 5%
glycerol, 5 mM
-mercaptoethanol, 5 mM NaF, 0.1% Triton X-100, 10 mM
imidazole, Complete EDTA-free protease inhibitor cocktail [Roche
Molecular Biochemicals]) to twice the volume of the cell pellet. Cells
were lysed at 4°C using acid-washed glass beads in 50-ml Falcon tubes
with vortexing (five times for 1 min each time) and 1-min cooling
intervals. Cell lysates were cleared by centrifugation, and eIF2B
was purified by use of Ni-nitrilotriacetic acid (Ni-NTA) agarose
(Qiagen). Cell lysates were incubated with Ni-NTA beads for 3 h at
4°C. Agarose beads were collected by low-speed centrifugation
(2,000 × g for 2 min) and washed three times in wash
buffer (same as lysis buffer but without any added Triton X-100)
containing 10 or 40 mM imidazole. Ni-NTA agarose-bound proteins were
then eluted by two incubations in the same buffer in the presence of
500 mM imidazole. After dialysis overnight in storage buffer (100 mM
KCl, 20 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.5], 5% glycerol, 5 mM
-mercaptoethanol,
5 mM NaF, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (PMSF), 1 mg leupeptin per
liter 0.7 mg of pepstatin per liter, and 1 mg of aprotinin per liter)
and concentration using Centricon 30,000 concentrators (Amicon),
proteins were aliquoted and stored at
80°C. Protein concentrations
were assessed by the Bradford assay (Bio-Rad), and the integrity and
purity of eIF2B
were confirmed by SDS-PAGE, Coomassie brilliant blue
staining, and Western blotting. The yield was typically ~1 mg of
eIF2B
from 10 g (wet weight) of yeast cells at 75% purity.
eIF2B
mutants were purified in exactly the same way as and in
parallel with the wild-type protein, only using strain GP3667
transformed with the appropriate plasmid derivative of pAV1427. The
final purity varied for each mutant.
Purification of five-subunit eIF2B was performed essentially as
described above for eIF2B

proteins with the following modifications.
Yeast strain GP3667 was transformed with plasmid pAV1494 (2µm
LEU2 GCN3 GCD2 GCD7) and pAV1533 (2µm
URA3 GCD1
GCD6) or an equivalent
plasmid expressing the appropriate eIF2B

mutant. These cells
were grown in 2.4 liters of SC medium with dextrose
but without
uracil, leucine, isoleucine, and valine to
A600 of 2.5 to 4.5.
The yield was typically ~1
mg of eIF2B from 10 g (wet weight)
of yeast cells at ~85%
purity.
Guanine nucleotide exchange assays.
Binary complexes of
yeast eIF2 and [3H]GDP (Amersham) were formed exactly as
described previously (33). Displacement of
[3H]GDP from binary complexes was also measured as
described previously (33), except that the indicated amount
of eIF2B
or five-subunit eIF2B, purified as described above, was
used in place of extracts from cells overexpressing eIF2B subunits.
In vitro protein-protein interaction assays.
We performed a
binding assay using anti-FLAG M2 affinity resin to analyze the
interactions between purified eIF2 and FLAG- and hexahistidine
double-tagged wild-type and mutant eIF2B
proteins, either alone or
within the eIF2B complex. Purified eIF2B
proteins (200 nM), 100 nM
purified eIF2B complex, or an equivalent concentration of control FLAG
peptide was incubated with 20 µl (wet volume) of anti-FLAG M2
affinity resin (Eastman Kodak) with rotation for 2 h at 4°C in
100 µl of buffer A (100 mM KCl, 20 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.5], 2 mM
MgCl2, 5 mM
-mercaptoethanol, 0.1% Triton X-100) in the
presence of Complete EDTA-free protease inhibitor (Roche Diagnostics) and 10 µg of BSA. Beads were washed three times with 100 µl of buffer A. Purified eIF2 at concentrations of 0.625 to 40 nM (as indicated in the figure legends) was then added to the beads in 100 µl of buffer A in the presence of 10 µg of BSA and rotated for
2 h at 4°C. After three washes with 100 µl of buffer A, the beads were suspended in Laemmli sample buffer (29) and
incubated at 100°C for 5 min to elute proteins remaining bound to the resin.
In vivo immune precipitations.
Anti-FLAG immune
precipitations were performed from extracts of whole cells of strain
GP3667 cooverexpressing all five subunits of eIF2B from two plasmids
where GCD1 (eIF2B
) is FLAG tagged and using anti-FLAG M2
affinity gel. Cells in 100 ml of SC medium lacking uracil, leucine,
isoleucine, and valine were grown to A600 of 0.5 to 0.8. Cells were harvested by centrifugation, washed in water, and
resuspended in buffer A (see above) containing 1 mM PMSF, 1 µg of
leupeptin per ml, 0.7 µg of pepstatin per ml, and 1 µg of aprotinin
per ml. Cells were lysed using glass beads and cleared by
centrifugation at 14,000 × g. The resulting extract (250 µg) was incubated with 10 µl of prewashed M2 anti-FLAG resin (IBI Kodak) overnight with rotation at 4°C. Bound immune complexes were washed three times in the same buffer and eluted into Laemmli sample buffer by incubation at 100°C for 5 min.
Anti-GCD6 immune precipitations from extracts of whole cells were done
exactly as described previously (
1) using derivatives
of
strain GP3751 (as indicated in the legend to Fig.
4).
Preparation and gradient analysis of yeast ribosomes and
polysomes.
Cultures of GP3751 (gcd6
gcn2
) were
transformed and plasmid shuffled to have either pJB85 (GCD6)
or pAV1524 (gcd6-F250L) or pAV1586 (gcd6-S576N)
as the only source of eIF2B
. These cells were grown in rich medium
(YEPD [yeast extract-peptone-dextrose]) at 30°C. Cycloheximide was
added to 50 µg/ml, and the cells were harvested onto ice and lysed
exactly as described previously (30). Gradient analysis was
exactly as described previously (10, 19). Briefly, cell
extracts were layered on low-salt, 7 to 47% or 15 to 35% sucrose
gradients and sedimented at 39,000 rpm at 4°C in an SW41 rotor
(Beckman). The gradients were scanned at 254 nm while being
fractionated into 0.6-ml fractions on an ISCO gradient collector. A
20-µl portion of each fraction was analyzed by SDS-PAGE (12.5 or 15%
polyacrylamide) and Western blotting with the indicated antiserum.
Fractions containing 40S and 60S ribosomes were determined using a
rabbit polyclonal antibody raised against RPL30 that also reacts with
RPS2 (kindly supplied by Jonathan Warner).
 |
RESULTS |
eIF2B
mutations with reduced activity cluster within two
regions, one N terminal and one C terminal.
eIF2B
in the yeast
S. cerevisiae (GCD6) is the largest eIF2B subunit (81 kDa),
and we have shown previously that it possesses GEF activity in vitro
(33). We demonstrated higher GEF activity in extracts from
yeast cells overexpressing eIF2B
than in extracts from control
cells. To identify regions of eIF2B
that were important for
catalytic activity, we used computer programs to search public databases for similarities between the primary sequence of GCD6, other
known GEFs, and other proteins. These comparisons demonstrated similarities with other protein families, but not with GEFs
(28) (Fig. 1A),
indicating that a random
mutagenesis experiment to identify residues or regions important for
eIF2B
function would be more rewarding.

View larger version (58K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Genetic characterization of novel mutations in yeast
eIF2B . (A) eIF2B and eIF2B subunits encoded by yeast genes
GCD1 and GCD6 are shown schematically from N to C
termini. The patterns indicate regions of significant sequence
similarity both between these proteins and with other protein families
as shown in the key. The amino acids at the boundaries of these regions
are indicated by numbers. The relative positions and nature of missense
and nonsense mutations identified in GCD6 are indicated
below the eIF2B schematic. (B) A segment of a multiple-sequence
alignment of eIF2B and eIF2B proteins from diverse organisms. The
region around the mutations at N249 and F250 is shown. These mutant
changes are indicated with arrows pointing down. Residues identical in
all eIF2B sequences are shown in reverse type. Residues identical in
at least three eIF2B sequences are shaded, as are residues in
eIF2B sequences that are identical to those of any eIF2B
sequence. Other residues shared by three or more eIF2B sequences are
boxed. The sequences used are as follows (GenBank accession numbers
given in brackets): S. cerevisiae (S. cere)
GCD6 [Z68195] and GCD1 [Z75168],
Schizosaccharomyces pombe (S. pomb) eIF2B
( ) [P56287] and eIF2B ( ) [P56288], Arabidopsis
thaliana (A. thal) [AAC12836], Rattus
norvegicus (R. rat) [Q64350] and [P70541],
Caenorhabditis elegans (C. eleg) [CAA91063.1] and [P80361], and D. melanogaster
(D. melan) [AL021086]. The number after each sequence
abbreviation indicates the position in the protein of the first residue
of each sequence shown in the alignment. (C) The segment of the
multiple-sequence alignment of eIF2B proteins from the region around
the mutations at T552 and S576. All shading and other information are
as described above for panel B. (D) Rates of growth of cells
transformed with mutant alleles of GCD6. Rates of growth are
scored on a linear scale from 6+ (wild type, maximal growth rate)
to (no visible growth) for growth on SD or SGal. Medium
supplemented with 25 mM 3-aminotriazole (3AT) was used to assess
response to amino acid starvation. Growth tests were performed in three
genetic backgrounds. Columns 2 to 4 show results following
transformation of strain GP3667 (gcn2 ) with
galactose-inducible GCD6-only plasmids carrying the
indicated allele. Column 5 shows results of cooverexpressing mutant
alleles of GCD6 with all other eIF2B subunits from
high-copy-number (h.c.) plasmids transformed into strain GP3667. Column
6 shows the ability of low-copy-number (l.c.) GCD6-only plasmid-borne
alleles to complement a deletion of GCD6 in strain GP3751
(gcd6 gcn2 ).
|
|
We designed a genetic screen to identify amino acid residues of
eIF2B

important for catalytic activity.
GCD6 is an
essential
gene in yeast, so we expected that mutations reducing eIF2B
activity
would cause slow growth or be lethal. We therefore set up a
conditional
expression system to highly express eIF2B

from a plasmid
(pAV1427)
under the control of a galactose-inducible promoter (see
Materials
and Methods). Importantly, overexpression of
GCD6
alone apparently
does not increase eIF2B activity in vivo, as judged by
genetic
tests (
43), despite its enhanced catalytic activity
in vitro
(
33). Hence, we expected that only overexpressed
mutants that
compete with the chromosomally encoded eIF2B

for
inclusion into
the eIF2B complex would be identified by our
experimental approach.
We screened for conditional slow-growing or
conditional-lethal
mutants. As a secondary screen, we used the fact
that a reduction
in eIF2B activity will derepress translation of
GCN4 mRNA independently
of the upstream activating protein
kinase GCN2 (
24). This will
mimic the effects of amino acid
starvation, derepressing expression
of amino acid biosynthetic pathway
enzymes to allow
gcn2
yeast
cells to grow on medium
containing the 3AT, an inhibitor of histidine
biosynthesis
(
22).
Plasmid pAV1427 was mutated at random, and the resulting pool of
mutated DNA was transformed into the
gcn2
yeast strain
GP3667.
Colonies that grew well on SD medium were screened for poor
growth
on SGal medium and for induction of
GCN4 expression
by growth
on SD medium supplemented with 25 mM 3AT. Following further
genetic
tests and DNA sequencing (see Materials and Methods), seven
plasmid-dependent
mutant alleles were isolated: four missense mutations
each changing
a single amino acid residue clustered within two regions
of the
protein and three nonsense mutations that prematurely terminate
the
GCD6 open reading frame (Fig.
1A). The
gcd6-N249K and
gcd6-F250L mutations are within a
region conserved between eIF2B

and eIF2B
sequences. These
mutations change adjacent residues that are universally
conserved in
all known or predicted eIF2B

sequences from yeast
to mammals (Fig.
1B). Interestingly, the
N
249F
250D
251 residues are the only
three consecutive residues shared in all
eIF2B

sequences. The
gcd6-T552I and
gcd6-S576N mutations affect
residues in a region conserved only in the eIF2B

sequences (Fig.
1C). The three nonsense mutations each eliminate the region containing
these C-terminal missense alleles. Growth phenotypes associated
with
these new eIF2B

alleles are summarized in Fig.
1D. As expected
from
the isolation procedures, all mutations show no growth defect
on
glucose-containing medium when the mutated gene is poorly expressed
(Fig.
1D, column 2, SD) but cause a reduced growth rate relative
to the
wild-type control on galactose-containing medium (column
3, SGal) and
induce expression of
GCN4 in the absence of the protein
kinase GCN2 (column 4, SD+3AT). Interestingly, when these mutations
were combined with a deletion of the gene encoding eIF2B

(
gcn3
),
no synthetic growth phenotype was seen (data not
shown). This
is in contrast to other previously characterized
gcd6 mutations
where loss of
GCN3 function
exacerbated the growth phenotypes
(
6,
13), indicating that
we have identified novel
gcd6 alleles.
One unexpected result of this mutational analysis was that the
mutations we had isolated were not within any of the regions
of
sequence similarity shared with NTP-hexose pyrophosphorylases
or
acyltransferases (Fig.
1A). We therefore created two additional
mutant
alleles defective in these regions.
gcd6
144-230 is an
in-frame internal deletion between two
ClaI restriction
sites
at amino acid residues 144 and 230. Similarly,
gcd6
93-358 is
an in-frame internal deletion between two
EcoRI restriction sites.
This largest deletion removes most
of the residues with sequence
similarity to NTP-hexose
pyrophosphorylases, a region shared with
eIF2B

and part of the
region that resembles acyltransferases.
When overexpressed from the
same galactose-inducible expression
system as employed above, these
mutants showed no detectable phenotype
(Fig.
1D). These results
suggested either that these regions were
dispensable for eIF2B

function or that the mutations were unable
to compete with the
endogenous wild-type GCD6 protein for eIF2B
complex formation (i.e.,
they are recessive mutations). The results
of further analysis of all
the mutations presented below lead
us to suggest that the regions of
eIF2B

that share sequence similarity
with NTP-hexose
pyrophosphorylases and acyltransferases are not
critical for the
nucleotide exchange function of eIF2B

.
The eIF2B
C terminus is required for catalytic activity.
To
assess directly the catalytic activity of the isolated mutations, we
first purified each mutant eIF2B
polypeptide in parallel with the
wild-type protein (see Materials and Methods). Levels of proteins
expressed were estimated by a combination of Coomassie brilliant
blue-stained gels (Fig. 2A), Western
blotting, and Bradford assay. Equivalent amounts of wild-type or mutant
eIF2B
proteins were then assayed for GEF activity in standard filter
binding assays. This set of experiments demonstrated clearly that
all mutations affecting the C-terminal region of eIF2B
either
dramatically reduced (missense mutations) or eliminated (nonsense
mutations) eIF2B
GEF activity (Fig. 2B and C). In contrast,
mutations affecting the N terminus, including the large internal
deletions, retained full in vitro activity.

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Purification and GEF activity of eIF2B mutants. (A)
SDS-12.5% polyacrylamide gel of the indicated nickel affinity
gel-purified eIF2B polypeptides (lanes 1 to 9) stained with
Coomassie brilliant blue. eIF2B polypeptides were added to the lanes
of the gel as follows; 2.5 µg was loaded in lanes 2, 5, and 6, while
1.25 µg was loaded in lanes 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 9. In lane 9, the
polypeptide corresponding to eIF2B 93-358 is indicated with an
arrow. All proteins were purified with Triton X-100 (0.1%) added to
the buffer, except for proteins shown in lanes 2 and 7. Lane 10 contains prestained molecular mass markers (M) (New England BioLabs)
with the approximate masses (in kilodaltons) indicated to the right.
(B) The initial rates of nucleotide exchange for the mutant
polypeptides are shown as a percentage of the wild-type protein
activity. Initial rates of [3H]GDP release were
determined from exponential curves fitted to the data using a computer
program (Cricketgraph 3.0) of time course nucleotide exchange assays
performed using a standard filter binding assay. The eIF2B 144-230
mutant was expressed very poorly, resulting in high copurification of
contaminating proteins. Partially purified cell extract (15 µg) was
used for its assay. It is likely that this mutant retains full
activity. (C) Nucleotide exchange assay results for selected purified
proteins. Some of the primary data used in panel B is shown. In these
experiments, 2.5-µg samples of nickel-purified extract were used,
except for the Q452* mutant where 5 µg was used. The wild-type and
buffer-only control curves are shown as broken lines, and the mutant
curves are shown as solid lines. Experiments were done in duplicate and
replicated two to eight times. Typical data are shown with error bars
indicating the standard deviation ( 3) where
3 5.65 for each time point. (D)
Western blot of eIF2B subunits in purified fractions from the wild type
(lanes 1 to 3) and gcd6 93-358 mutant (lanes 4 to 6).
Blots were probed with the antisera indicated to the right of each
panel to detect the eIF2B subunits indicated to the left. For eIF2B ,
62.5 ng (lanes 2 and 4) and 125 ng (lanes 3 and 5) were loaded. For
detection of eIF2B and - , 2.5 µg (lanes 1 and 4), 5 µg (lanes
2 and 5), and 7.5 µg (lanes 3 and 6) were loaded. For detection of
eIF2B and - , 1 µg (lanes 1 and 4), 1.5 µg (lanes 2 and 5),
and 2 µg (lanes 3 and 6) were loaded.
|
|
As the mutants were dominant when overexpressed, we expected them to
interact and copurify, at low level, with the other eIF2B
subunits that
had not been overexpressed. Western blotting of
each mutant with
antisera to each eIF2B subunit confirmed this
(data not shown). In
contrast to these results, we did find that
the purified proteins with
large N-terminal internal deletions
were free of detectable amounts of
other eIF2B subunits (Fig.
2D and data not shown) and still retained
full GEF activity (Fig.
2B). The findings shown in Fig.
2 demonstrate
that, in a purified
system, eIF2B

alone is a catalytic subunit of
eIF2B. They also
show that residues between 93 and 358 are not required
for eIF2B
catalytic activity, while residues between amino acids 518 and
712 are necessary for this
function.
The eIF2B
C terminus is required for interaction with eIF2 in
vitro.
We wished to determine whether the eIF2B
mutants had an
altered affinity for eIF2. We set up a binding assay using the
N-terminal FLAG epitope tags on purified eIF2B
proteins to measure
the relative binding affinities between eIF2B
and purified eIF2 in
immune precipitation assays with anti-FLAG M2 affinity gel. First, we examined the binding between a fixed concentration of eIF2B
(~200 nM) or FLAG peptide as a control (200 nM) and various concentrations of
eIF2. We detected concentration-dependent binding between eIF2 and
eIF2B
that saturated the detection system (Western blotting) at 20 to 40 nM eIF2 (Fig. 3A).
Next, we used saturating amounts of eIF2 (20 nM) to examine
binding with our panel of mutants (Fig. 3B). We found that all three
nonsense mutants showed dramatic reductions in stable binding to eIF2,
with the shortest polypeptide, eIF2B
-Q452*, exhibiting the most
defective binding (Fig. 3B, lane 11). In contrast, all the missense
mutants and the eIF2B
-
93-358 mutant bound eIF2 as the wild type
did. By using more limiting concentrations of eIF2, lower-affinity
interactions could result in reduced steady-state binding. However,
even when a lower concentration (5 nM) of eIF2 was used (Fig. 3C),
these mutants bound eIF2 in a manner indistinguishable from that of
wild-type eIF2B
. These data strongly suggest that the nonsense
mutants are defective for nucleotide exchange (Fig. 2B), because they
fail to bind to eIF2 (Fig. 3B). However, the T552I and S576N mutants
bind to eIF2 as well as wild-type eIF2B
did in this assay but
nonetheless are defective for nucleotide exchange activity, implying
that these mutations directly impair the catalytic function of eIF2B
and that these residues may be directly involved in catalysis.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
In vitro binding between eIF2 and eIF2B proteins. (A)
Titration of interaction between a fixed concentration (200 nM) of
FLAG-tagged eIF2B (even-numbered lanes) or 200 nM FLAG peptide as a
control (odd-numbered lanes) and the indicated concentration of eIF2.
Proteins remaining bound after washing were identified by SDS-PAGE and
Western blotting. Subunits indicated to the left of each panel were
identified with the antisera shown to the right. Pellet fractions
(33%) were loaded for probing with eIF2 antibodies, and 10% was used
for eIF2B . (B) Binding of mutants at saturating concentrations of
eIF2. Binding reactions were performed with a 200 nM concentration of
the indicated FLAG-tagged eIF2B protein (lanes 6 to 14) or 200 nM
control FLAG peptide (lane 5) and 20 nM eIF2. Proteins were visualized
as described above for panel A. Lanes 1 to 4 show decreasing
concentrations of input eIF2 (equivalent 20, 10, 5, and 2.5% of the 20 nM used in the reaction mixtures) and a single concentration input
eIF2B (5%) (lane 4). (C) Binding of mutants at limiting
concentrations of eIF2. Binding reactions were performed with a 200 nM
concentration of the indicated FLAG-tagged eIF2B protein (lanes 2 to
7) or 200 nM control FLAG peptide (lane 1) and 5 nM eIF2. Proteins were
visualized as described above for panel A.
|
|
The eIF2B
N terminus is important for interactions with other
eIF2B
subunits.
Having accounted for the mutant phenotypes
affecting the C terminus of eIF2B
, our attention turned to the
gcd6-N249K and gcd6-F250L mutants. These
mutations affect adjacent, absolutely conserved residues (Fig. 1B),
suggesting that they each impair the same function of eIF2B. However,
these mutations cause a reduction in eIF2B function in vivo, as
implicated by a slow-growth phenotype, without affecting the in vitro
biochemical functions of the epsilon subunit (substrate binding and GEF
activity [Fig. 2 and 3]). Similarly, the
93-358 mutant with a
large region of the protein deleted retains catalytic activity and eIF2
binding. However, this mutant protein failed to copurify with the other
eIF2B subunits (Fig. 2D). This suggested that the gcd6-N249K
and gcd6-F250L alleles might more subtly affect the
stability of the eIF2B complex to cause a mutant phenotype, so we
tested this idea. However, in the experiments described in the next
section, we could not detect any differences in association of these
mutants either with subunits of eIF2B or with eIF2 in vivo.
First, we subcloned the eIF2B

mutants onto high-copy-number plasmids
under the control of the normal
GCD6 promoter. These
plasmids cooverexpressed hexahistidine and FLAG epitope-tagged
eIF2

. When cotransformed into a yeast strain with a plasmid
overexpressing
the eIF2B

, -

, and -

subunits, all mutants grew
as well as the
wild type did (Fig.
1D, column 5). This confirmed that
eIF2B function
was no longer limiting when all five subunits were
overexpressed.
Next, anti-FLAG immune precipitation reactions were
performed
using extracts from these eIF2B-overexpressing cells. Western
blotting showed that similar amounts of eIF2B subunits and eIF2
coimmune precipitated with the FLAG-eIF2B

from wild-type cells
and
eIF2B
N249K- and eIF2B
F250L-overexpressing
cells (Fig.
4A, compare lane 5 with lanes
7 and
8). In contrast to these results but in agreement with the
protein
purification experiments, eIF2B


93-358 failed to associate
with
FLAG-eIF2B

(Fig.
4A, lane 6). It is noteworthy that the eIF2B
regulatory subcomplex of

,

, and

subunits also failed to
interact
with FLAG-eIF2B

here. This indicates that the N terminus of
eIF2B
is required to stabilize the interaction between eIF2B

and
the
regulatory subcomplex to form the intact eIF2B complex.

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
In vivo analysis of eIF2B mutants. (A)
Immunoprecipitation of FLAG-tagged eIF2B and associated eIF2B
subunits from extracts of yeast strain GP3667 overexpressing all five
subunits of wild-type or mutant eIF2B as indicated. Cell extract (10 µg) was loaded in the input lanes (lanes 1 to 4), and the equivalent
of 20 µg was loaded in the immune precipitated (IP) lanes (lanes 5 to
8) and unbound supernatant (SUP) lanes (lanes 9 to 12). Proteins were
visualized as described in the legend to Fig. 3. (B) Three missense
mutations complement a deletion of GCD6. Low-copy-number
plasmids bearing the indicated alleles of GCD6 were
introduced into strain GP3751 (gcd6 ), and plasmid
shuffling was used to make the indicated alleles the only source of
GCD6. Growth on rich medium YPD is shown. (C)
Immunoprecipitation of eIF2B and associated eIF2B and eIF2
polypeptides from extracts of cells shown in panel B using anti-GCD6
( GCD6) antiserum. Pellets from 300 µg of cell extract were loaded
in each lane.
|
|
We next subcloned the eIF2B

mutants onto yeast low-copy-number
plasmids and plasmid shuffled them into a yeast strain with
the
chromosomal
GCD6 gene deleted. We found that only three
mutants
could support growth (F250L, T552I, and S576N) but at reduced
rates (Fig.
1D, column 6, and 4B). Because in these cells no genes
are
tagged or overexpressed, we performed an experiment to precipitate
eIF2B and eIF2 proteins from whole-cell extracts using antisera
directed against eIF2B

(as previously described
[
1]). Consistent
with all previous experiments using
tagged or overexpressed proteins,
we found no differences in the
expression levels or complex-forming
abilities of these three mutants
in vivo that could account for
their phenotypes (Fig.
4C).
The F250L mutation impairs translation initiation.
To
determine whether the gcd6-F250L mutation resulted in a
defect in translation initiation or some other (unknown) function of
eIF2B, we performed low-salt 7 to 47% sucrose density gradient centrifugation to resolve ribosomal and polyribosomal fractions. We
used extracts of cells containing this mutant and compared the
resulting pattern to the patterns seen for wild-type cells and cells
containing the gcd6-S576N mutation. We chose the
gcd6-S576N strain as a control, because its rate of growth
was almost identical to that for the isogenic strain with the
gcd6-F250L mutation (Fig. 4B) and because we had determined
that its eIF2B activity was impaired (Fig. 2B and C). Figure
5A shows that extracts from both the
gcd6-F250L and gcd6-S576N mutant strains (center
and right panels) each display increased 80S monosome peaks and reduced polysome size when compared with the wild-type gradient control (left
panel). These features are indicative of a translation initiation defect as seen before for other mutants affecting translation initiation factors including eIF2B subunits (10, 19) and
confirm that the F250L mutation does impair a function of eIF2B in
translation initiation.

View larger version (55K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Analysis of polysome profiles from gcd6
mutant yeast strains using low-salt sucrose density gradient
centrifugation. (A) Extracts prepared from cells grown in YPD medium at
30°C were centrifuged on low-salt 7 to 47% sucrose gradients.
Gradients were fractionated while scanning at 254 nm, and the resulting
profiles are shown. The positions of ribosomal subunits, 80S monosomes,
and polysomes are indicated. The ratio of polysomes to 80S monosomes
was determined by measuring the area under the peaks using NIH Image
software. (B) Extracts from the same yeast strains were centrifuged on
low-salt 15 to 35% sucrose gradients. This provides greater separation
of the top portion of the gradient. Proteins collected in fractions
from the gradients were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and Western blotting using
the antisera indicated to the right.
|
|
We next went on to examine the association of different translation
factors with these fractions. This was achieved by repeating
the
sucrose density gradients using 15 to 35% sucrose to better
separate
the 40S, 60S, and 80S region. eIF2, as monitored by antibodies
to
eIF2

, migrated mainly as a ribosome-free complex and concentrated
in
fractions 2 to 4 (Fig.
5B, left panel). This migration pattern
has been
observed previously for yeast eIF2 in wild-type cells
(
6).
Similarly, eIF2B migrated as a ribosome-free complex primarily
in
fraction 5. The behavior of eIF2

was unaffected by the eIF2B
mutations. However, in both mutants tested, but not in the wild-type
gradients, eIF2B

itself appeared to dissociate partially from
the
other eIF2B subunits so that a significant portion of eIF2B
was
localized to fraction 2 (Fig.
5B, center and right panels).
This
suggests that during gradient centrifugation the mutant eIF2B
complexes
partially dissociate, although the significance of this
is unclear.
Consistent with the reduction in translation initiation
deduced from
the profiles, the fraction of eIF3p90 apparently
associated with 40S
subunits was reduced in both mutants compared
with the wild type. This
analysis revealed no differences between
the two eIF2B mutants
examined, despite marked differences in
GEF activity in vitro. This
suggested to us that although the
catalytic activity of the

subunit
alone remained intact in the
F250L mutant, the activity of the
five-subunit eIF2B complex might
be
impaired.
The N249K and F250L mutations impair nucleotide exchange activity
of the five-subunit eIF2B complex.
From the results of the
experiments described in the section above (Fig. 5), it seemed most
likely that the gcd6-N249K and gcd6-F250L
mutations impair the GEF activity of eIF2B, rather than some other
novel eIF2B function. To test this idea directly, we purified
five-subunit eIF2B (wild-type and both eIF2B
N249K and
eIF2B
F250L mutant forms) from cells overexpressing all
five subunits from high-copy-number plasmids and assayed GEF activity
in vitro. We used our plasmids encoding FLAG and hexahistidine
epitope-tagged eIF2B
and partially purified eIF2B by nickel affinity
chromatography (see Materials and Methods). Using just one purification
step, eIF2B was purified to ~85% homogeneity, as assessed by
Coomassie brilliant blue staining, and free from contaminating eIF2 as
judged by Western blotting (data not shown). Consistent with previous experiments using cell extracts as a source of eIF2B, we found that the
five-subunit eIF2B complex promoted nucleotide exchange at a higher
rate than that for the epsilon subunit alone (Fig. 6A). When compared on a molar basis, the
wild-type eIF2B complex was found to be 11-fold more active than
eIF2B
alone (Fig. 6B). However, greatly reduced rates of nucleotide
exchange relative to that for wild-type eIF2B were observed when the
eIF2B
N249K and eIF2B
F250L mutant
complexes were assayed (6- and 4-fold reductions, respectively) (Fig.
6A and B), demonstrating that these mutants are defective for eIF2B
activity within the full five-subunit complex.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
In vitro analysis of purified mutant eIF2B five-subunit
complexes. (A) Nucleotide exchange assays comparing activities for
mutant eIF2B complexes containing N249K (filled triangle) and F250L
(filled circle) alleles of eIF2B with wild-type eIF2B
(eIF2Bwt) (filled square) (1 µg each) and eIF2B alone
(2.5 µg, open diamond). Assays were done in triplicate, with a
standard deviation of less than 2.5 for each time point. (B) Analysis
of rates of nucleotide exchange activity for mutant eIF2B complexes and
isolated eIF2B subunits relative to wild-type eIF2B activity
(percent initial activity). Analysis was performed as described in the
legend to Fig. 2. (C) Analysis of binding between the indicated
concentration of purified eIF2 and FLAG-tagged wild-type eIF2B complex
(lanes 7 to 10) or eIF2B F250L (lanes 11 to 14). Also
shown are control lanes using FLAG peptide (lane 4) or wild-type
eIF2B alone (lanes 5 and 6) in place of eIF2B. Lanes 1 to 3 contain
inputs; 5% of each eIF2B preparation used in the reaction mixtures was
loaded and 6.25 ng of eIF2 was also loaded in lane 3 (representing 10%
of 5 nM used in the reaction mixtures). Detection as described in the
legend to Fig. 3, with 33% of each reaction pellet loaded to probe for
eIF2 and 10% loaded to probe for each eIF2B subunit.
|
|
To analyze further how eIF2B complex formation enhances eIF2B activity,
we examined the binding between purified eIF2 and
purified five-subunit
eIF2B complexes in vitro using our anti-FLAG
immunoprecipitation assay.
This analysis shows that five-subunit
eIF2B has a greatly enhanced
binding affinity for eIF2 than that
for eIF2B

alone (compare lanes 5 and 6 with lanes 7 to 10 in
Fig.
6C). One explanation for the reduced
GEF activity of the
eIF2B
N249K and
eIF2B
F250L mutant complexes could be that binding of
mutant eIF2B to eIF2
is impaired. However, in accord with our previous
in vivo results
(Fig.
4C), we found no defect in eIF2 binding for
the eIF2B
F250L mutant (Fig.
6C, compare lanes 7 to
10 with lanes 11 to 14) or
for eIF2B
N249K (data not
shown). These results suggest that eIF2B complex formation
both
enhances eIF2 binding and stimulates the rate of nucleotide
exchange
and that only the latter function is impaired by the
N249K and F250L
mutations in eIF2B

.
 |
DISCUSSION |
eIF2B is a complex GEF composed of five subunits that is required
to promote and regulate protein synthesis initiation in eukaryotes. To
gain insight into its function, we have examined the roles of eIF2B
in catalysis of guanine nucleotide exchange and in the formation of
complexes with other eIF2B subunits and with its substrate, eIF2. Our
analysis here involved a directed genetic screen to isolate mutations
in eIF2B
with reduced catalytic activity. Following purification of
mutant eIF2B
proteins, each was analyzed for guanine nucleotide
exchange function and protein-protein interaction properties. These
studies have established the likely biochemical defect of the mutant
phenotypes observed. We find that regions within the C terminus of
eIF2B
are responsible for both substrate (eIF2) binding and
nucleotide exchange activity, while regions within the N-terminal half
are necessary for interactions with the other eIF2B subunits. We show
by using our purified system, and in agreement with previous results
(18, 33), that complex formation enhances eIF2B activity. We
find that this increased activity may in part be caused by an increased
affinity for the substrate, eIF2. However, missense mutations at
universally conserved residues within the N-terminal half of eIF2B
(gcd6-N249K and gcd6-F250L) retain the high
binding affinity for eIF2 mediated by eIF2B complex formation without
enhancing GEF activity. The implications of these results for the
function of eIF2B are discussed below.
eIF2B
is the principal catalytic subunit of eIF2B, and its
N-terminal region is required for interactions with other eIF2B
subunits.
Previously, we used extracts from yeast cells
overexpressing different combinations of eIF2B subunits as a source of
eIF2B in our in vitro nucleotide exchange assays (33). From
this analysis we concluded that eIF2B
was the principal catalytic
subunit. To prove this, we set out to purify the epsilon subunit free
from other contaminating eIF2B subunits. In our initial experiments, recombinant yeast eIF2B
protein expressed and purified from
Escherichia coli was catalytically inactive (our unpublished
observations), so we set up the yeast expression system described in
Materials and Methods. In this system, the other eIF2B subunits always
copurified with wild-type hexahistidine-tagged eIF2B
at a low level
through several different chromatographic columns (Fig. 2D and data not shown). As the activity we measured for our purified eIF2B
was approximately 11-fold lower than that for the purified eIF2B complex (Fig. 6B), this raised doubts as to whether eIF2B
was indeed the
catalytic subunit. Was the activity we were measuring due to the
low-level copurifying eIF2B complex? Two mutants we constructed with
large deletions of the N terminus of eIF2B
(gcd6
93-358 and gcd6
144-230) allowed us to answer this question.
These N-terminal deletion mutants failed to associate stably with the
other eIF2B subunits in vivo (Fig. 4A) and were purified by a single
step free from the other eIF2B subunits, as determined by Western
blotting (Fig. 2D). The largest deletion, eIF2B
93-358, exhibited
the same activity as purified wild-type eIF2B
in our in vitro assay (Fig. 2B), demonstrating that eIF2B
is indeed a catalytic subunit and that a large section of the N terminus of this polypeptide is not
required for this activity.
This analysis further shows that elements within the deleted N-terminal
region, residues 93 to 358, are necessary for assembly
of eIF2B

(Fig.
2D) and eIF2B

(Fig.
4A) into the eIF2B complex.
Both deletions
in the N terminus remove some of the region of
similarity with
NTP-hexose pyrophosphorylases (residues 27 to
159) and either part
(
gcd6
144-230) or the entire region
(
gcd6
93-358)
that shows similarity with eIF2B

(residues 160 to 330). In addition,
the deletion in
gcd6
93-358 removes some IGXXXX repeat sequences
also
found in acyltransferases (residues 330 to 470) (
36). The
region homologous to NTP-hexose pyrophosphorylases was proposed
to
contain a potential nucleotide binding domain composed of a
modified
P-loop and Mg
2+ binding site (
28), so we thought
that this region in eIF2B
might be important for binding GDP and/or
GTP to promote catalysis
of guanine nucleotide exchange. Following our
analysis described
here, a direct role for this region in the catalysis
of nucleotide
exchange now seems unlikely. Instead, our analysis of the
gcd6
93-358 mutation suggests that one or more of these
regions of similarity
in eIF2B

and eIF2B

are important for
mediating the protein-protein
interactions required for eIF2B complex
formation.
The C terminus of eIF2B
contains the catalytic domain and
regions for interaction with eIF2.
In agreement with the finding
that the N-terminal region of eIF2B
between residues 93 and 358 is
dispensable for catalytic activity, we found that the C terminus is
necessary for this function. All three nonsense mutants that
prematurely terminate the GCD6 open reading frame show a
dramatic reduction in binding to eIF2, with the binding of the shortest
polypeptide (Q452*) being almost undetectable (Fig. 3B, lane 11). Not
surprisingly, given this dramatic binding defect, all three mutants
show no guanine nucleotide exchange function in vitro (Fig. 2B) and
fail to complement a deletion of GCD6 (gcd6
)
in vivo (Fig. 1D). These results suggest that sequences C terminal to
residue 517, the last unchanged residue in our longest nonsense mutant
gcd6-T518D+9*, are essential for GEF activity.
Asano et al. (
1) showed recently that a motif in the extreme
C terminus of eIF2B

, called the AA-box as it is rich in aromatic
and
acidic residues that is shared with eIF5 (the potential
GTPase-activating
protein for eIF2) was important in both factors for
mediating
binding to eIF2. By changing all seven conserved residues of
this
motif between residues 696 and 706 (out of 712 residues in the
protein) to alanine residues, the
gcd6-7A allele was made.
This
mutant showed reduced binding to eIF2 in several assays but
impaired
the guanine nucleotide exchange activity only modestly in vivo
(sufficient to induce translation of
GCN4) (
1).
The activity
of this mutant was not impaired in in vitro assays
(G. D. Pavitt,
K. Asano, and A. G. Hinnebusch, unpublished
observations). The
results of Asano et al. (
1) are in
agreement with those presented
here. Both studies show that the C
terminus of eIF2B

is an important
determinant for eIF2B binding to
eIF2.
We isolated and characterized two missense mutations that change single
residues within the region between residues 518 to
696 essential for
eIF2B GEF function. Our analysis of these mutants
suggests they may be
directly involved in the catalytic mechanism
of nucleotide exchange.
Both the T552I and S576N mutations do
not detectably affect eIF2B

binding to eIF2 in vitro (Fig.
3B,
lanes 9 and 10, and C, lanes 5 and
6) or in vivo (Fig.
4C, lanes
3 and 4). However, they do dramatically
reduce but not eliminate
the guanine nucleotide exchange activity of
the purified mutant
epsilon subunit (Fig.
2B). These mutations fall
within a 44-amino-acid
region between residues 543 and 586 that has
been well conserved
through evolution among eIF2B

subunits. Five
residues in this
region are invariant in the eIF2B

sequences shown
in Fig.
1C,
and several other residues are highly conserved.
Three-dimensional
structures for other GEFs complexed with their
G-protein partner
show direct interactions between residues surrounding
the nucleotide
binding pocket of the G protein and residues of the GEF
that alter
the structure of this pocket. These interactions are
believed
to displace the bound nucleotide (GDP), thus forming a
nucleotide-free
complex that can then bind GTP (reviewed in references
8 and
41). If these observations
also apply to eIF2 and eIF2B interactions,
this implies a direct
interaction between eIF2

(GDP- or GTP-binding
subunit)
(
17) and eIF2B

.
Missense mutations in the N-terminal region reveal an activation
domain that responds to eIF2B complex formation.
The observations
that the missense mutations N249K and F250L do not affect the intrinsic
activity of the isolated epsilon subunit (Fig. 2B and C) but do
eliminate the enhancement of GEF activity observed with the intact
five-subunit complex (Fig. 6A and B) is intriguing and was quite
unexpected. These mutations do not alter the affinity between eIF2B and
eIF2 either in vivo (Fig. 4) or in vitro (Fig. 6C and data not shown
for eIF2B
N249K), suggesting that the effects of the
mutations are not exerted through changes in eIF2 binding. Instead, the
results suggest that these mutations affect residues critical for
enhancing further the intrinsic GEF function of eIF2B
upon complex
formation and further suggest that this activation is an important
consequence of eIF2B complex formation. This may be a major reason that
the genes encoding three of the four other subunits of eIF2B are
essential in yeast (GCD7, GCD1, and
GCD2 encoding the
to
subunits, respectively).
We found previously that cooverexpression of eIF2B

with eIF2B

led
to the formation of a subcomplex of these two subunits
and that
extracts prepared from these cells had higher GEF activity
than that of
extracts from cells overexpressing eIF2B

alone (
33).
The
simplest interpretation of these experiments was that eIF2B
acted to
enhance the activity of eIF2B

in this system, as eIF2B
had no
activity alone, and the subcomplex was termed the catalytic
subcomplex.
A speculative extension of this idea is to predict
that the N249K and
F250L mutations in eIF2B

disrupt the stimulatory
function of
eIF2B

. While this may be true, we were unable to
confirm this
idea experimentally. We tried to extend our earlier
results using a
purified system as we had done for both eIF2B
alone and five-subunit
eIF2B. Using purified eIF2B

, we confirmed
that this subunit has no
GEF activity (data not shown). We then
purified the eIF2B

and
eIF2B

subcomplex and analyzed its GEF
activity. Activity of the
subcomplex was identical to that with
eIF2B

alone, i.e., not
enhanced by eIF2B

. At this time, we are
unable to explain the
difference observed between the GEF activity
of cell extracts
overexpressing the catalytic subcomplex and that
of the purified
subcomplex. Therefore, we cannot conclude whether
the enhanced activity
of the purified five-subunit eIF2B complex
is due to the action of
eIF2B

alone or whether other subunits
(i.e. eIF2B

and/or -

)
are also
required.
Because complex formation between eIF2B subunits enhances binding of
eIF2B

to eIF2 and stimulates its catalytic activity,
it could be
that association of eIF2 with eIF2B is a rate-limiting
step in the
nucleotide exchange reaction. However, the eIF2B
N249K
and eIF2B
F250L mutant complexes show the same enhanced
binding affinity for
eIF2 as wild-type eIF2B does but without
conferring the same increased
rate of nucleotide exchange. This
implies, therefore, that a step
after the association of eIF2B with
eIF2 is rate limiting for
nucleotide exchange. This interpretation is
in agreement with
kinetic studies performed for other G proteins and
their GEFs.
For example, Klebe et al. (
27) showed that the
release of bound
nucleotide from a Ran-GDP-RCC1 ternary complex was
rate limiting.
The same step was proposed to be rate limiting for yeast
RAS2
and CDC25 (
21). However, for the bacterial translation
elongation
factor EF-Tu and its exchange factor EF-Ts, the
rate-limiting
step was shown to be the dissociation of EF-Ts from the
EF-Tu-GTP-EF-Ts
ternary complex (
25,
37). The tools
developed here will be
useful for the further structure-function and
kinetic studies
required for a more detailed understanding of the
function of
this important regulatory molecule in translation
initiation.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We are grateful to Jigna Patel for technical assistance in mutant
isolation; Katsura Asano, Jinsheng Dong, Thanuja Krishnamoorthy, and
Alan Hinnebusch (NIH) for providing plasmids and yeast strains; Ernie
Hannig (Dallas, Tex.) and Jonathan Warner (Einstein, New York) for
antibodies. We thank Christopher Proud and Gert Scheper for critical
reading of the manuscript.
This work was supported by an MRC career development award to G.D.P.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: MSI/WTB Complex,
University of Dundee, Dundee, DD1 5EH, United Kingdom. Phone: (44) 1382-344898. Fax: (44) 1382-345507. E-mail:
g.d.pavitt{at}dundee.ac.uk.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Asano, K.,
T. Krishnamoorthy,
L. Phan,
G. D. Pavitt, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1999.
Conserved bipartite motifs in yeast eIF5 and eIF2Bepsilon, GTPase-activating and GDP-GTP exchange factors in translation initiation, mediate binding to their common substrate eIF2.
EMBO J.
18:1673-1688[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Berlanga, J. J.,
J. Santoyo, and C. De Haro.
1999.
Characterization of a mammalian homolog of the GCN2 eukaryotic initiation factor 2alpha kinase.
Eur. J. Biochem.
265:754-762[Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Boeke, J. D.,
F. LaCroute, and G. R. Fink.
1984.
A positive selection for mutants lacking orotidine-5'-phosphate decarboxylase activity in yeast: 5-fluoro-orotic acid resistance.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
197:345-346[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Boguski, M. S., and F. McCormick.
1993.
Proteins regulating Ras and its relatives.
Nature
366:643-654[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Bushman, J. L.,
A. I. Asuru,
R. L. Matts, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1993.
Evidence that GCD6 and GCD7, translational regulators of GCN4 are subunits of the guanine nucleotide exchange factor for eIF-2 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:1920-1932[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Bushman, J. L.,
M. Foiani,
A. M. Cigan,
C. J. Paddon, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1993.
Guanine nucleotide exchange factor for eIF-2 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: interactions between the essential subunits GCD2, GCD6, and GCD7 and the regulatory subunit GCN3.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:4618-4631[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Cesareni, G., and J. A. H. Murray.
1987.
Plasmid vectors carrying the replication origin of filamentous single-stranded phages.
Genetic Eng.
9:135-154.
|
| 8.
|
Cherfils, J., and P. Chardin.
1999.
GEFs: structural basis for their activation of small GTP-binding proteins.
Trends Biochem. Sci.
24:306-311[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 9.
|
Christianson, T. W.,
R. S. Sikorski,
M. Dante,
J. H. Shero, and P. Hieter.
1992.
Multifunctional yeast high-copy-number shuttle vectors.
Gene
110:119-122[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Cigan, A. M.,
M. Foiani,
E. M. Hannig, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1991.
Complex formation by positive and negative translational regulators of GCN4.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11:3217-3228[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Cigan, A. M.,
E. K. Pabich,
L. Feng, and T. F. Donahue.
1989.
Yeast translation initiation suppressor sui2 encodes the alpha subunit of eukaryotic initiation factor 2 and shares sequence identity with the human alpha subunit.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
86:2784-2788[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Clemens, M. J.
1996.
Protein kinases that phosphorylate eIF2 and eIF2B, and their role in eukaryotic cell translational control, p. 139-172.
In
J. W. B. Hershey, M. B. Mathews, and N. Sonenberg (ed.), Translational control. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 13.
|
Cuesta, R.,
A. G. Hinnebusch, and M. Tamame.
1998.
Identification of GCD14 and GCD15, novel genes required for translational repression of GCN4 mRNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Genetics
148:1007-1020[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Dever, T. E.
1999.
Translation initiation: adept at adapting.
Trends Biochem. Sci.
24:398-403[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Dever, T. E.,
L. Feng,
R. C. Wek,
A. M. Cigan,
T. F. Donahue, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1992.
Phosphorylation of initiation factor 2 alpha by protein kinase GCN2 mediates gene-specific translational control of GCN4 in yeast.
Cell
68:585-596[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Dever, T. E.,
W. Yang,
S. Åström,
A. S. Byström, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1995.
Modulation of tRNAiMet, eIF-2, and eIF-2B expression shows that GCN4 translation is inversely coupled to the level of eIF-2 · GTP · Met-tRNAiMet ternary complexes.
Mol. Cell. Giol.
15:6351-6363.
|
| 17.
|
Erickson, F. L., and E. M. Hannig.
1996.
Ligand interactions with eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2: role of the -subunit.
EMBO J.
15:6311-6320[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Fabian, J. R.,
S. R. Kimball,
N. K. Heinzinger, and L. S. Jefferson.
1997.
Subunit assembly and guanine nucleotide exchange activity of eukaryotic initiation factor-2B expressed in Sf9 cells.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:12359-12365[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Foiani, M.,
A. M. Cigan,
C. J. Paddon,
S. Harashima, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1991.
GCD2, a translational repressor of the GCN4 gene, has a general function in the initiation of protein synthesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11:3203-3216[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Guthrie, C., and G. R. Fink (ed.).
1991.
Methods in enzymology, vol. 194. Guide to yeast genetics and molecular biology.
Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, Calif.
|
| 21.
|
Haney, S. A., and J. A. Broach.
1994.
Cdc25p, the guanine nucleotide exchange factor for the ras proteins of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, promotes exchange by stabilizing Ras in a nucleotide-free state.
J. Biol. Chem.
269:16541-16548[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Harashima, S., and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1986.
Multiple GCD genes required for repression of GCN4, a transcriptional activator of amino acid biosynthetic genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
6:3990-3998[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 23.
|
Harding, H. P.,
Y. Zhang, and D. Ron.
1999.
Protein translation and folding are coupled by an endoplasmic-reticulum-resident kinase.
Nature
397:271-274[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Hinnebusch, A. G.
1997.
Translational regulation of yeast GCN4. A window on factors that control initiator-tRNA binding to the ribosome.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:21661-21664[Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Huang, Y. W., and D. L. Miller.
1985.
A study of the kinetic mechanism of elongation factor Ts.
J. Biol. Chem.
260:11498-11502[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Ito, H.,
Y. Fukada,
K. Murata, and A. Kimura.
1983.
Transformation of intact yeast cells treated with alkali cations.
J. Bacteriol.
153:163-168[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Klebe, C.,
H. Prinz,
A. Wittinghofer, and R. S. Goody.
1995.
The kinetic mechanism of Ran-nucleotide exchange catalysed by RCC1.
Biochemistry
34:12543-12552[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 28.
|
Koonin, E. V.
1995.
Multidomain organization of eukaryotic guanine nucleotide exchange translation initiation factor eIF-2B subunits revealed by analysis of conserved sequence motifs.
Protein Sci.
4:1608-1617[Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Laemmli, U. K.
1970.
Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4.
Nature
227:680-685[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 30.
|
Marton, M. J.,
C. R. Vazquez de Aldana,
H. Qiu,
K. Chakraburtty, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1997.
Evidence that GCN1 and GCN20, translational regulators of GCN4, function on elongating ribosomes in activation of eIF2 kinase GCN2.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:4474-4489[Abstract].
|
| 31.
|
Merrick, W. C.
1992.
Mechanism and regulation of eukaryotic protein synthesis.
Microbiol. Rev.
56:291-315[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Olsen, D. E.,
B. Jordan,
D. Chen,
R. C. Wek, and D. R. Cavener.
1998.
Isolation of the gene encoding the Drosophila melanogaster homolog of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae GCN2 eIF-2 kinase.
Genetics
149:1495-1509[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Pavitt, G. D.,
K. V. Ramaiah,
S. R. Kimball, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1998.
eIF2 independently binds two distinct eIF2B subcomplexes that catalyze and regulate guanine-nucleotide exchange.
Genes Dev.
12:514-526[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Pavitt, G. D.,
W. Yang, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1997.
Homologous segments in three subunits of the guanine nucleotide exchange factor eIF2B mediate translational regulation by phosphorylation of eIF2.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:1298-1313[Abstract].
|
| 35.
|
Price, N. T.,
S. R. Kimball,
L. S. Jefferson, and C. G. Proud.
1996.
Cloning of cDNA for the gamma-subunit of mammalian translation initiation factor 2B, the guanine nucleotide-exchange factor for eukaryotic initiation factor 2.
Biochem. J.
318:631-636.
|
| 36.
|
Raetz, C. R. H., and S. L. Roderick.
1995.
A left-handed parallel helix in the structure of UDP-N-acetylglucosamine acyltransferase.
Science
270:997-1000[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 37.
|
Romero, G.,
V. Chau, and R. L. Biltonen.
1985.
Kinetics and thermodynamics of the interaction of elongation factor Tu with elongation factor Ts, guanine nucleotides, and aminoacyl-tRNA.
J. Biol. Chem.
260:6167-6174[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 38.
|
Rowlands, A. G.,
R. Panniers, and E. C. Henshaw.
1988.
The catalytic mechanism of guanine nucleotide exchange factor action and competitive inhibition by phosphorylated eukaryotic initiation factor 2.
J. Biol. Chem.
263:5526-5533[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 39.
|
Sambrook, J.,
E. F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis.
1989.
Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd ed.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 40.
|
Shi, Y.,
K. M. Vattem,
R. Sood,
J. An,
J. Liang,
L. Stramm, and R. C. Wek.
1998.
Identification and characterization of pancreatic eukaryotic initiation factor 2 -subunit kinase, PEK, involved in translational control.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:7499-7509[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 41.
|
Sprang, S. R., and D. E. Coleman.
1998.
Invasion of the nucleotide snatchers: structural insights into the mechanism of G protein GEFs.
Cell
95:155-158[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 42.
|
Trachsel, H.
1996.
Binding of initiator methionyl-tRNA to ribosomes, p. 113-138.
In
J. W. B. Hershey, M. B. Mathews, and N. Sonenberg (ed.), Translational control. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 43.
|
Yang, W., and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1996.
Identification of a regulatory subcomplex in the guanine nucleotide exchange factor eIF2B that mediates inhibition by phosphorylated eIF2.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:6603-6616[Abstract].
|
Molecular and Cellular Biology, June 2000, p. 3965-3976, Vol. 20, No. 11
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Wang, X., Proud, C. G.
(2008). A Novel Mechanism for the Control of Translation Initiation by Amino Acids, Mediated by Phosphorylation of Eukaryotic Initiation Factor 2B. Mol. Cell. Biol.
28: 1429-1442
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Maletkovic, J., Schiffmann, R., Gorospe, J. R., Gordon, E. S., Mintz, M., Hoffman, E. P., Alper, G., Lynch, D. R., Singhal, B. S., Harding, C., Amartino, H., Brown, C. M., Chan, A., Renaud, D., Geraghty, M., Jensen, L., Senbil, N., Kadom, N., Nazarian, J., Yuanjian Feng, , Zuyi Wang, , Hartka, T., Morizono, H., Vanderver, A.
(2008). Genetic and Clinical Heterogeneity in eIF2B-Related Disorder. J Child Neurol
23: 205-215
[Abstract]
-
Mohammad-Qureshi, S. S., Haddad, R., Hemingway, E. J., Richardson, J. P., Pavitt, G. D.
(2007). Critical Contacts between the Eukaryotic Initiation Factor 2B (eIF2B) Catalytic Domain and both eIF2{beta} and -2{gamma} Mediate Guanine Nucleotide Exchange. Mol. Cell. Biol.
27: 5225-5234
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Alone, P. V., Dever, T. E.
(2006). Direct Binding of Translation Initiation Factor eIF2{gamma}-G Domain to Its GTPase-activating and GDP-GTP Exchange Factors eIF5 and eIF2B{epsilon}. J. Biol. Chem.
281: 12636-12644
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Campbell, S. G., Hoyle, N. P., Ashe, M. P.
(2005). Dynamic cycling of eIF2 through a large eIF2B-containing cytoplasmic body: implications for translation control. JCB
170: 925-934
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Fogli, A., Schiffmann, R., Bertini, E., Ughetto, S., Combes, P., Eymard-Pierre, E., Kaneski, C. R., Pineda, M., Troncoso, M., Uziel, G., Surtees, R., Pugin, D., Chaunu, M. -P., Rodriguez, D., Boespflug-Tanguy, O.
(2004). The effect of genotype on the natural history of eIF2B-related leukodystrophies. Neurology
62: 1509-1517
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hardt, S. E., Tomita, H., Katus, H. A., Sadoshima, J.
(2004). Phosphorylation of Eukaryotic Translation Initiation Factor 2B{epsilon} by Glycogen Synthase Kinase-3{beta} Regulates {beta}-Adrenergic Cardiac Myocyte Hypertrophy. Circ. Res.
94: 926-935
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Li, W., Wang, X., van der Knaap, M. S., Proud, C. G.
(2004). Mutations Linked to Leukoencephalopathy with Vanishing White Matter Impair the Function of the Eukaryotic Initiation Factor 2B Complex in Diverse Ways. Mol. Cell. Biol.
24: 3295-3306
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Richardson, J. P., Mohammad, S. S., Pavitt, G. D.
(2004). Mutations Causing Childhood Ataxia with Central Nervous System Hypomyelination Reduce Eukaryotic Initiation Factor 2B Complex Formation and Activity. Mol. Cell. Biol.
24: 2352-2363
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Boesen, T., Mohammad, S. S., Pavitt, G. D., Andersen, G. R.
(2004). Structure of the Catalytic Fragment of Translation Initiation Factor 2B and Identification of a Critically Important Catalytic Residue. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 10584-10592
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Fogli, A., Dionisi-Vici, C., Deodato, F., Bartuli, A., Boespflug-Tanguy, O., Bertini, E.
(2002). A severe variant of childhood ataxia with central hypomyelination/vanishing white matter leukoencephalopathy related to EIF21B5 mutation. Neurology
59: 1966-1968
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Erickson, F. L., Nika, J., Rippel, S., Hannig, E. M.
(2001). Minimum Requirements for the Function of Eukaryotic Translation Initiation Factor 2. Genetics
158: 123-132
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
ASANO, K., PHAN, L., VALASEK, L., SCHOENFELD, L.W., SHALEV, A., CLAYTON, J., NIELSEN, K., DONAHUE, T.F., HINNEBUSCH, A.G.
(2001). A Multifactor Complex of eIF1, eIF2, eIF3, eIF5, and tRNAiMet Promotes Initiation Complex Assembly and Couples GTP Hydrolysis to AUG Recognition. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol
66: 403-416
[Abstract]
-
Nika, J., Rippel, S., Hannig, E. M.
(2001). Biochemical Analysis of the eIF2beta gamma Complex Reveals a Structural Function for eIF2alpha in Catalyzed Nucleotide Exchange. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 1051-1056
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Williams, D. D., Pavitt, G. D., Proud, C. G.
(2001). Characterization of the Initiation Factor eIF2B and Its Regulation in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 3733-3742
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Williams, D. D., Price, N. T., Loughlin, A. J., Proud, C. G.
(2001). Characterization of the Mammalian Initiation Factor eIF2B Complex as a GDP Dissociation Stimulator Protein. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 24697-24703
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Shalev, A., Valasek, L., Pise-Masison, C. A., Radonovich, M., Phan, L., Clayton, J., He, H., Brady, J. N., Hinnebusch, A. G., Asano, K.
(2001). Saccharomyces cerevisiae Protein Pci8p and Human Protein eIF3e/Int-6 Interact with the eIF3 Core Complex by Binding to Cognate eIF3b Subunits. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 34948-34957
[Abstract]
[Full Text]