No abstract

The idea of internal initiation is frequently exploited to explain the peculiar translation properties or unusual features of some eukaryotic mRNAs. In this review, we summarize the methods and arguments most commonly used to address cases of translation governed by internal ribosome entry sites (IRESs). Frequent mistakes are revealed. We explain why "cap-independent" does not readily mean "IRES-dependent" and why the presence of a long and highly structured 5' untranslated region (5'UTR) or translation under stress conditions cannot be regarded as an argument for appealing to internal initiation. We carefully describe the known pitfalls and limitations of the bicistronic assay and artefacts of some commercially available in vitro translation systems. We explain why plasmid DNA transfection should not be used in IRES studies and which control experiments are unavoidable if someone decides to use it anyway. Finally, we propose a workflow for the validation of IRES activity, including fast and simple experiments based on a single genetic construct with a sequence of interest.

eIF4G2 (DAP5 or Nat1) is a homologue of the canonical translation initiation factor eIF4G1 in higher eukaryotes but its function remains poorly understood. Unlike eIF4G1, eIF4G2 does not interact with the cap-binding protein eIF4E and is believed to drive translation under stress when eIF4E activity is impaired. Here, we show that eIF4G2 operates under normal conditions as well and promotes scanning downstream of the eIF4G1-mediated 40S recruitment and cap-proximal scanning. Specifically, eIF4G2 facilitates leaky scanning for a subset of mRNAs. Apparently, eIF4G2 replaces eIF4G1 during scanning of 5′ UTR and the necessity for eIF4G2 only arises when eIF4G1 dissociates from the scanning complex. In particular, this event can occur when the leaky scanning complexes interfere with initiating or elongating 80S ribosomes within a translated uORF. This mechanism is therefore crucial for higher eukaryotes which are known to have long 5′ UTRs with highly frequent uORFs. We suggest that uORFs are not the only obstacle on the way of scanning complexes towards the main start codon, because certain eIF4G2 mRNA targets lack uORF(s). Thus, higher eukaryotes possess two distinct scanning complexes: the principal one that binds mRNA and initiates scanning, and the accessory one that rescues scanning when the former fails.

mRNAs lacking 5′ untranslated regions (leaderless mRNAs) are molecular relics of an ancient translation initiation pathway. Nevertheless, they still represent a significant portion of transcriptome in some taxons, including a number of eukaryotic species. In bacteria and archaea, the leaderless mRNAs can bind non-dissociated 70 S ribosomes and initiate translation without protein initiation factors involved. Here we use the Fleeting mRNA Transfection technique (FLERT) to show that translation of a leaderless reporter mRNA is resistant to conditions when eIF2 and eIF4F, two key eukaryotic translation initiation factors, are inactivated in mammalian cells. We report an unconventional translation initiation pathway utilized by the leaderless mRNA in vitro, in addition to the previously described 80S-, eIF2-, or eIF2D-mediated modes. This mechanism is a bacterial-like eIF5B/IF2-assisted initiation that has only been reported for hepatitis C virus-like internal ribosome entry sites (IRESs). Therefore, the leaderless mRNA is able to take any of four different translation initiation pathways in eukaryotes.

Poly(rC)-binding protein 2 (PCBP2, hnRNP E2) is one of the most abundant RNA-binding proteins in mammalian cells. In humans, it exists in seven isoforms, which are assumed to play similar roles in cells. The protein is shown to bind 3 ′ ′ ′ ′ ′-untranslated regions (3 ′ ′ ′ ′ ′-UTRs) of many mRNAs and regulate their translation and/or stability, but nothing is known about the functional consequences of PCBP2 binding to 5 ′ ′ ′ ′ ′-UTRs. Here we show that the PCBP2 isoform f interacts with the 5 ′ ′ ′ ′ ′-UTRs of mRNAs encoding eIF4G2 (a translation initiation factor with a yet unknown mechanism of action, also known as DAP5) and Cyclin I, and inhibits their translation in vitro and in cultured cells, while the PCBP2 isoform e only affects Cyclin I translation. Furthermore, eIF4G2 participates in a cap-dependent translation of the PCBP2 mRNA. Thus, PCBP2 and eIF4G2 seem to regulate one another's expression via a novel type of feedback loop formed by the translation initiation factor and the RNA-binding protein.