The yeast [PSI(+)] element represents an aggregated form of release factor Sup35p and is inherited by a prion mechanism. A "species barrier" prevents crosstransmission of the [PSI(+)] state between heterotypic Sup35p "prions." Kluyveromyces lactis and Yarrowia lipolytica Sup35 proteins, however, show interspecies [PSI(+)] transmissibility and susceptibility and a high spontaneous propagation rate. Cross-seeding was visualized by coaggregation of differential fluorescence probes fused to heterotypic Sup35 proteins. This coaggregation state, referred to as a "quasi-prion" state, can be stably maintained as a heritable [PSI(+)] element composed of heterologous Sup35 proteins. K. lactis Sup35p was capable of forming [PSI(+)] elements not only in S. cerevisiae but in K. lactis. These two Sup35 proteins contain unique multiple imperfect oligopeptide repeats responsible for crosstransmission and high spontaneous propagation of novel [PSI(+)] elements.

Translation termination in eukaryotes requires a codon-specific (class-I) release factor, eRF1, and a GTP/GDPdependent (class-II) release factor, eRF3. The model of "molecular mimicry between release factors and tRNA" predicts that eRF1 mimics tRNA to read the stop codon and that eRF3 mimics elongation factor EF-Tu to bring eRF1 to the A site of the ribosome for termination of protein synthesis. In this study, we set up three systems, in vitro affinity binding, a yeast two-hybrid system, and in vitro competition assay, to determine the eRF3-binding site of eRF1 using the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe proteins and creating systematic deletions in eRF1. The in vitro affinity binding experiments demonstrated that the predicted tRNA-mimicry truncation of eRF1 (Sup45) forms a stable complex with eRF3 (Sup35). All three test systems revealed that the most critical binding site is located at the C-terminal region of eRF1, which is conserved among eukaryotic eRF1s and rich in acidic amino acids. To our surprise, however, the C-terminal deletion eRF1 seems to be sufficient for cell viability in spite of the severe defect in eRF3 binding when expressed in a temperature-sensitive sup45 mutant of the budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae. These results cannot be accounted for by the simple "eRF3-EF-Tu mimicry" model, but may provide new insight into the eRF3 function for translation termination in eukaryotes.

Translation termination requires two codonspecific polypeptide release factors in prokaryotes and one omnipotent factor in eukaryotes. Sequences of 17 different polypeptide release factors from prokaryotes and eukaryotes were compared. The prokaryotic release factors share residues split into seven motifs. Conservation of many discrete, perhaps critical, amino acids is observed in eukaryotic release factors, as well as in the C-terminal portion of elongation factor (EF) G. Given that the C-terminal domains of EF-G interacts with ribosomes by mimicry of a tRNA structure, the pattern of conservation of residues in release factors may reflect requirements for a tRNA-mimicry for binding to the A site of the ribosome. This mimicry would explain why release factors recognize stop codons and suggests that all prokaryotic and eukaryotic release factors evolved from the progenitor of EF-G. domain motifs and is involved in omnipotent suppression of nonsense codons (for a review, see ref. 11).Can the current computer programs used for sequence comparison, as designed, predict conserved amino acids at discrete positions in comparisons of multiple random sequences? It seems unlikely to us that the currently used computer programs would recognize single conserved amino acids when the number and diversity of protein sequences is increased, because the algorithms used are essentially based on one-to-one comparison of letters or words of finite length. Here, we approach this problem by identifying first "by computer" the conserved amino acids in prokaryotic RFs, and then asking "by eye" whether these residues are also present in eukaryotic RFs. This approach provided us with clues that lead to universally conserved motifs in RFs, part of which may reflect requirements for molecular mimicry of a tRNA structure.

Translation termination in eukaryotes requires a stop codon-responsive (class-I) release factor, eRF1, and a guanine nucleotide-responsive (class-II) release factor, eRF3. Schizosaccharomyces pombe eRF3 has an N-terminal polypeptide similar in size to the prion-like domain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae eRF3 in addition to the EF-1a-like catalytic domain. By in vivo two-hybrid assay as well as by an in vitro pull-down analysis using purified proteins of S. pombe as well as of S. cerevisiae, eRF1 bound to the C-terminal one-third domain of eRF3, named eRF3C, but not to the N-terminal two-thirds, which was inconsistent with the previous report by Paushkin et al. (1997, Mol Cell Biol 17:2798-2805). The activity of S. pombe eRF3 in eRF1 binding was affected by Ala substitutions for the C-terminal residues conserved not only in eRF3s but also in elongation factors EF-Tu and EF-1a. These single mutational defects in the eRF1-eRF3 interaction became evident when either truncated protein eRF3C or C-terminally altered eRF1 proteins were used for the authentic protein, providing further support for the presence of a C-terminal interaction. Given that eRF3 is an EF-Tu/EF-1a homolog required for translation termination, the apparent dispensability of the N-terminal domain of eRF3 for binding to eRF1 is in contrast to importance, direct or indirect, in EF-Tu/EF-1a for binding to aminoacyl-tRNA, although both eRF3 and EF-Tu/EF-1a share some common amino acids for binding to eRF1 and aminoacyl-tRNA, respectively. These differences probably reflect the independence of eRF1 binding in relation to the G-domain function of eRF3 (i.e., probably uncoupled with GTP hydrolysis), whereas aminoacyl-tRNA binding depends on that of EF-Tu/EF-1a (i.e., coupled with GTP hydrolysis), which sheds some light on the mechanism of eRF3 function.