Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow Print PDF (99K) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Commercial Re-use Guidelines
for Open Access NAR Content
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Poot, R.
Right arrow Articles by van Duin, J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Poot, R.
Right arrow Articles by van Duin, J
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nucleic Acids Research, Vol 24, Issue 19 3670-3676, Copyright © 1996 by Oxford University Press

ARTICLES

The central pseudoknot in 16S ribosomal RNA is needed for ribosome stability but is not essential for 30S initiation complex formation

RA Poot, CW Pleij and J van Duin
Leiden Institute of Chemistry, Department of Biochemistry, Gorlaeus Laboratories, Leiden University, The Netherlands.

To examine the function of the central pseudoknot in 16S rRNA, we have studied Escherichia coli 30S subunits with the A18 mutation in this structure element. Previously, this mutation, which changes the central base pair of helix 2, C18--G917, to an A18xG917 mismatch, was shown to inhibit translation in vivo and a defect in initiation was suggested. Here, we find that the mutant 30S particles are impaired in forming 70S tight couples and predominantly accumulate as free 30S subunits. Formation of a 30S initiation complex, as measured by toeprinting, was almost as efficient for mutant 30S subunits, derived from the tight couple fraction, as for the wild-type control. However, the A18 mutation has a profound effect on the overall stability of the subunit. The mutant ribosomes were inactivated by affinity chromatography and high salt treatment, due to easy loss of ribosomal proteins. Accordingly, the particles could be reactivated by partial in vitro reconstitution with 30S ribosomal proteins. Mutant 30S subunits from the free subunit fraction were already inactive upon isolation, but could also be reactivated by reconstitution. Apparently, the inactivity in initiation of these mutant 30S subunits is, at least in part, also due to the lack of essential ribosomal proteins. We conclude that disruption of helix 2 of the central pseudoknot by itself does not affect the formation of a 30S initiation complex. We suggest that the in vivo translational defect of the mutant ribosomes is caused by their inability to form 70S initiation complexes.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RNAHome page
S. Smit, K. Rother, J. Heringa, and R. Knight
From knotted to nested RNA structures: A variety of computational methods for pseudoknot removal
RNA, March 1, 2008; 14(3): 410 - 416.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RNAHome page
F. BELANGER, G. THEBERGE-JULIEN, P. R. CUNNINGHAM, and L. BRAKIER-GINGRAS
A functional relationship between helix 1 and the 900 tetraloop of 16S ribosomal RNA within the bacterial ribosome
RNA, June 1, 2005; 11(6): 906 - 913.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.