|
Advertisement | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 3:478-489, 2004.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Despite the powerful information obtained, documentation of a transcriptome provides only the inventory that is available for a cell to draw upon for translation under certain physiological conditions. Proteins are the effectors of cell phenotype, and their levels and activities do not necessarily correlate with mRNA levels (912). One source of this lack of correlation is discrepancies in protein half-lives. A second arises from the fact that the synthesis of individual protein species is regulated, not only by transcript level, but by cis elements that confer unique translational properties on individual mRNA molecules (13). In light of this latter point, it would be valuable to supplement mRNA expression patterns with estimates of translation efficiencies of individual transcripts.
Translation occurs on ribosomes, and variable numbers of ribosomes are loaded onto actively translated mRNAs, forming polysomes of various sizes. The density of ribosome packing on transcripts is proportional to the rate of synthesis of the protein products (14, 15). Several groups have carried out polysome fractionation prior to transcript analysis (1620), but in these approaches fractions from sucrose-gradient centrifugation were combined into pools before transcript analysis, thereby losing the rich information associated with the mRNA distributions across these fractions. In the present study, we undertook a "high resolution" analysis of transcript distributions across these polysome profiles, defining ribosome-loading parameters for each detectable mRNA species. Selective, quantitatively significant changes in translation of the yeast transcriptome were found in response to the mating pheromone
-factor. Groups of functionally related genes were found to be co-regulated by a combination of altered transcript levels and translational efficiencies; these observations were supplemented by proteome analysis.
| EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
his3 ::TRP1
upf3 ::LEU2. For the genome-wide experiments, BY2125 cells were grown at 25 °C in rich-glucose medium (1% yeast extract, 2% peptone, 2% glucose) to mid-log phase (
1 x 107 cells/ml). For pheromone induction, cells were treated with 10 µg/ml (7 µM)
-factor (United Biochemical Research, Inc., Seattle, WA) for 30 min (<30% of a cell cycle under these conditions).
Polysome Fractionation and RNA Isolation
Polysomes were prepared and fractionated by modification of a previously described method (21, 22) that employed detergent extraction of cell lysates and centrifugation through sucrose gradients in high salt to disrupt inactive 80S monomers (see supplemental materials).
After centrifugation (see Fig. 2a), fractions from identical gradients were pooled on ice and adjusted to 0.5% SDS after addition of three artificial mRNAs to monitor recovery and integrity after purification (Universal ScoreCard control poly(A)+-RNAs; Amersham Biosciences, Sunnyvale, CA). These "utility control" RNAs were added at 0.075, 0.75, or 15 pg per pooled fraction before precipitation of RNA at 70 °C with 2.5 volumes 100% ethanol. RNA samples from each of the 25 pooled fractions were purified using Qiagen RNeasy midi-kits, and the eluted RNA was precipitated with 1/10 volume of 10 M LiCl, resuspended in 25 µl of RNase-free H2O, quantitated by absorbance at 260 nm, and stored at 70 °C.
|
Specific transcripts were quantitated with quantitative real-time PCR (Q-PCR)1 using an iCycler (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA) and SYBR-green detection of products (according to Bio-Rads specifications). Primers for the reactions were designed to amplify regions of 75200 nucleotides near the 3' end of the coding region. Q-PCR data were normalized with one of the artificial utility control RNAs added before purification of RNA in the gradient fractions (see above).
Microarray Hybridization and Quantitation
For target generation, 80 µg of total RNA from the peak fraction in the polysome region of the gradient and the equivalent volume from all other fractions was converted to fluorescently labeled cDNA using Cy3-labeled dCTP (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Uppsala, Sweden) and primed with oligo-dT25 with a G/C/A 3' anchor as described previously (20). For each reaction, 31 µl of the "Test spike mix" of Universal ScoreCard control RNAs was added to monitor labeling and hybridization efficiencies, as well as to generate a standard curve determining the linear range of the signal intensity. Similarly, 2 mg of unfractionated total RNA was converted to Cy5-labeled cDNA target after addition of the "Reference spike mix" of Universal ScoreCard controls. The yield of the Cy3-labeled target for the peak fraction was 52 pmol of product; for each fraction, the entire Cy3-labeled target was mixed with 31 pmol of Cy5-labeled target from unfractionated RNA, then taken to dryness and resuspended in 80 µl of hybridization buffer (50% formamide, 5x SSC, 5x Denhardts solution, 0.1% SDS).
Custom yeast high-density microarrays spotted with PCR-amplified genomic DNAs corresponding to open reading frames (ORFs), with negative control artificial cDNAs, and with artificial cDNAs for the Universal ScoreCard control RNAs were produced by the Center for Expression Array Analysis at the University of Washington (ra.microslu.washington.edu). Each slide represents two arrays of
6000 ORFs comprising nearly the entire yeast genome.
The hybridization mixes of Cy3- and Cy5-labeled targets were heated at 96 °C for 3 min, cooled on ice for 30 s, and spun briefly. For each fraction, 40 µl was applied to each of two washed slides, followed by hybridization and washing as described previously (20).
Normalization and Analysis of Microarray Data
Initial processing of the raw data included correction based on negative control spots, calibration with internal standards, RNA recovery correction by utility controls, as well as filtering those genes of low abundance or with inconsistent Cy3:Cy5 ratios, as detailed below:
-factor dataset, two arrays from fraction 4 of the sucrose gradient were deleted because of poor quality.
Assumptions and Derivation of the Multiple Peak Model (MPM)
Transcripts with varying numbers of ribosomes, ranging from 0 up to an estimated 25 ribosomes, have different quantized weights, due to the large size of a ribosome relative to an mRNA. Using sucrose-gradient centrifugation and fractionation, we can separate this disparate pool of ribosome-bound mRNAs by weight, then identify and quantify each mRNA species by microarray technology. The individual mRNA profiles across the gradient provide the weight distribution for that molecule and hence insight on its translational properties.
The mathematical objective here is to model the weight distributions of all molecules. Let Yjk denote the abundance measurement for the jth transcript in the kth fraction. Let fk = k denote the fraction number, from 1 to 25. The fraction number is indicative of the weight of the mRNA-ribosome complex, which is denoted by wk. Conceptually, experimental data of relevance may be represented as in supplemental Table 1S. The abundance measurement Yjk is the averaged Cy3:Cy5 ratio for the four replicate arrays. Data have been normalized following the protocol described above. Because the modeling process is the same for all individual transcripts, we drop the subscript j for simplicity hereafter, unless noted otherwise.
To facilitate modeling, we make the following assumptions. First, for each mRNA, the mixture of mRNA complexes has at most four different particles: mRNP particles, monosomes, polysomes, and an uncharacterized, rapidly sedimenting component. The second assumption is that the weight of a specific particle distributes as a Gaussian distribution, centering on the actual weight of the particle population. This distribution results, at least in part, from diffusion theory. Let R take value 1, 2, 3, and 4 and denote four different populations of particles. Under this assumption, the distribution of abundance given the particle population R may be written by
![]() |
where µR is the mean and
R2 measures the spread of the peak.
Under these two assumptions, one can derive models for the observed expression levels in the kth fraction interval via the following steps. First, the abundance in the kth fraction is proportional to the total number of particles in the interval,
![]() |
where the summation is over all particles, indicator I(wk
Di < wk+1) for the particle in the kth fraction, N represents the total number of particles, and E[I(wk
Di < wk+1)] represents the expectation. Now the expectation may be computed as
![]() |
where g(D|R) represents a Gaussian distribution with mean µR and with the variance
R2. Resulting from the above derivation is the model for multiple peaks:
![]() |
where ßR is the peak height and quantifies the abundance of each particle, and
(.) is the cumulative distribution function of Gaussian distribution. The above representation, despite being motivated statistically, is actually connected with phenomenological theory of sedimentation processes in the ultracentrifuge (23). In fact, the mixture of Gaussian distributions, with appropriate re-parameterization, could approximate the solutions to the set of partial differential equations used to describe the consequences of sedimentation and diffusion in the ultracentrifuge.
Applying the above model to gene expression analysis, we need to take into account mRNA baseline abundance and random fluctuation due to uncontrolled random variations. The revised model may now be written as
![]() |
where
j is the baseline abundance measurement for the jth transcript, and
jk is a random variable characterizing variations from all other sources. With the least-square technique, we can estimate all of the gene-specific parameters. Using the estimating equation theory, we can estimate standard errors for all estimated parameters.
Comparison of Polysome Profiles Between Microarray Experiments
From the MPM modeling, values were calculated for the percent of each transcript in polysomes and its ribosome density, as well as the relative transcript level (determined from the Cy5 signals). These values in each of the two experiments were then used to calculate the +/ratios (plus
-factor to minus
-factor) for transcript level, translation efficiency and predicted protein synthetic rate for each mRNA (see Fig. 4).
|
ICAT-labeled peptide mixtures were fractionated by strong cation exchange via high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) on a polysulfoethyl A column (200 x 4.6 mm, 5 µm, 300 Å; PolyLC) using an Integral HPLC instrument (PerSeptive Biosystems, Foster City, CA). Fractions (
30) with highest peptide content as indicated by A214 measurements were dried without heat under vacuum for 30 min to remove acetronitrile. Avidin chromatography was performed using manual syringe columns (Applied Biosystems) on each selected fraction according to the manufacturers recommendations. One-dimensional reversed-phase chromatography with on-line mass spectrometry was performed generally as described (24), but employing a 2-h binary gradient from 5 to 80% acetonitrile during which each mass spectrometry (MS) scan was followed by three MS/MS scans.
Tandem MS data were analyzed by Sequest software to determine protein identity and relative quantitation (25). Statistical robustness of peptide identifications was determined using Peptide Prophet software (26, 27), and relative quantitation of peptide pairs was further refined using ASAP software (28). Proteomic data was uploaded into the Institute for Systems Biology gene expression platform SBEAMS (Systems Biology Expression Analysis, which can be accessed at db.systemsbiology.net/sbeams/).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
For subsequent analyses, 379 transcripts with ORFs fewer than 400 nucleotides in length were omitted, because 60% represented either dubious genes or uncharacterized small ORFs. Peak 4 was also omitted from detailed analysis of the data, because it was not clear whether this material was actually associated with ribosomes. The proportion of transcripts in peak 4 averaged less than 10% across the entire transcriptome and showed no significant trend as a function of either transcript abundance or ORF length. Omitting these transcripts did not significantly affect the conclusions drawn here.
For validation, independent sucrose-gradient experiments were performed and mRNA profiles were examined gene-by-gene. Of 24 genes examined by Q-PCR or Northern blots, only one failed to validate the array results. The results from four of these genes are shown in Fig. 2b. Given that these results were from independent experiments and analyzed by quite different technologies, the strong agreement demonstrates the robustness of this approach to fractionation and analysis.
The transcriptome of steady-state growing yeast is, on average, well translated with the transcripts averaging nearly 80% association with polysomes (Fig. 3a). However, at the level of individual mRNA species, the proportion of a transcript located in peak 3 (polysomes) varies widely from gene to gene. The association of individual transcripts with polysomes ranges from 0 to 100% (Fig. 3b), with a slight tendency to decrease with the less-abundant transcripts.
|
We have also examined the relationship between codon adaptation index (CAI) (31) and ribosome density (supplemental Fig. 1S). Transcripts with more favorable CAI values (greater than 0.2) show a tendency toward higher ribosome densities, consistent with higher translational efficiency. Applying an index value (the AUG CAI or AUG Context Adaptation Index (32)) to the 12 nucleotides surrounding the AUG for all the ORFs in this database revealed no significant trend over the total compilation of data (not shown).
Transcripts in Monosomes and mRNP Particles
Because many of the well-established mechanisms of translational control involve sequestration of mRNAs into mRNP particles (peak 1) or monosomes (peak 2) (13, 15, 33, 34), transcripts enriched in these compartments are likely candidates for translational control. For example, the transcripts of the GCN4 and HAC1 genes (supplemental Fig. 2S) both have well-established mechanisms of translational regulation (35, 36), and in steady-state growing cells they are found 85 and 80%, respectively, in the combined mRNP and monosome compartments, far above the average value of 10% (Fig. 3a). The transcripts over-represented in the mRNP and monosome compartments tend to be low abundance (supplemental Fig. 3S), suggesting that translational control occurs more frequently with the less-abundant proteins. No RNA structural feature was found to correlate with appearance in this fraction, including CAI, AUG CAI, and estimated lengths of 5' and 3' untranslated regions (data not shown).
The RPL41A transcript has an ORF of only 78 nucleotides and occurs primarily in monosomes, with a small fraction in disomes (supplemental Fig. 2S). This represents maximum loading of this short mRNA (37). In this case, the monosome is actively translating the encoded protein and, contrasting RPL41A with GCN4, it is apparent that caution must be exercised in interpreting monosome peaks.
Changes in Gene Expression During the Response of Yeast to Pheromone
Because translation state array analysis (TSAA) provides simultaneous measurements of the level and translational efficiency of any detectable transcript, it is possible to globally compare gene expression between cells with different phenotypes. As a test, we examined the changes in gene expression in yeast after acute exposure to mating pheromone. Ratios of treated to untreated cells were calculated for transcript levels, translational efficiencies, and estimated protein synthesis rates, providing a global view of changes in gene expression across the entire transcriptome (Fig. 4). Out of 3874 transcript profiles from TSAA that could be modeled with an R2 of at least 0.5 under both conditions, 3058 showed less than a 2-fold change in estimated rate of protein production (gray data points, shown without drop lines). Of 816 genes that were altered at least 2-fold in estimated protein expression, the change was driven solely by transcript level in 76% (617 transcripts, red data points on the diagonal at translation efficiency = 0.52.0). The remaining 24% of these transcripts showed at least a 2-fold alteration in translational efficiency; 163 were translationally up-regulated (blue data points) and 36 were down-regulated (green data points). As can be seen from Fig. 4, many of the translationally controlled genes also changed in transcript level. Customary transcript array analysis would have ignored those that were regulated solely at the translational level and would have erred quantitatively with those transcripts that showed mixed regulation (see "Discussion").
It is also of note in Fig. 4 that very few transcripts show opposing changes in transcript level and ribosome loading in response to
-factor. These homodirectional changes in transcript level and translation are consistent with what was found recently in response to two other external stimuli (38).
Functional Classification of Regulated Genes Revealed from Comparing Quantitative Proteomic Analysis with TSAA
A quantitative comparison of the proteomes of steady-state growing yeast before and after treatment with
-factor was carried out using the ICAT methodology (39). From a total of 607 tagged proteins that provided reliable data for identification and quantitation, 47 were found to be up-regulated and 79 down-regulated by the criteria used in Table I. After independently clustering the results of TSAA and ICAT analysis by function, those functional groups that were significantly over-represented in both datasets are listed in Table I along with the corresponding p values.
|
-factor and clustered with highly favorable p values (Table I). Two of these genes were identified by both TSAA and ICAT. This category was dominated by genes involved specifically in amino acid transport (19 out of the 25). The entire gene list from TSAA was searched for additional genes in amino acid transport, and six more were identified and added. Two of the genes in the general carboxylic acid transport category identified from the ICAT analysis were eliminated because they did not specifically function in amino acid transport. The TSAA and ICAT results for the complete set of amino acid transport genes are plotted in Fig. 5a. The entire category shows a strong bias toward down-regulation and, of the six additional transcripts added to the dataset based solely on functional category, only one, AGP3, showed a predicted increase in expression rate, while the other five followed the overall trend of this category.
|
-factor. Not surprisingly, one of the most common groups of genes detected by TSAA comprised those in the pheromone response category (Table I). This group was not highly represented in the results of the ICAT analysis (compare with the protein catabolism category). Because many pheromone response genes have regulatory functions, it is likely that the levels of their encoded proteins are generally low, making reliable detection difficult.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The rate of synthesis of a particular protein can be expressed as the number of translationally active transcripts times the translational efficiency (number of completed protein molecules produced per mRNA per unit time) (15). Because, with a few exceptions, the macroscopic rate of nascent peptide elongation seems to be constant across the transcriptome of a cell (15), the linear ribosome density (ribosomes per 1000 nucleotides) should provide a good comparison of rates of peptide completion between transcripts (discussed further below). To test the validity of this approach, we employed two transcripts that produced the same protein (His3p) with different translational efficiencies. As expected, the better translated transcript was loaded on average with five to seven ribosomes, while the poorly translated mRNA was located on monosomes and small polysomes (Fig. 1d). The ribosome density was calculated in each fraction, multiplied by the quantity of the transcript in the corresponding fraction and summed. From these calculations, the rate of His3p synthesis from the mRNA lacking the uORF was estimated to be
5-fold higher than the poorly translated transcript. Given the necessary assumptions, this is a reasonable agreement with the experimental observation of a 12-fold difference in translational efficiency (Fig. 1c). These assumptions were: 1) one ribosome on each transcript containing the uORF is stalled at termination of the uORF (40) and not actively engaged in translation of His3p, and 2) with an ORF length for HIS3-HA of 759 nucleotides, most of these transcripts are bound by fewer than 10 ribosomes (13 ribosomes per 1000 nucleotides; see Fig. 3c). The average signal in fractions 2025 for the uORF-containing construct (Fig. 1d) therefore provided a baseline value that was subtracted from all fractions of both gradients.
One of the striking features of the two datasets reported here is the extraordinary diversity in translation state across a transcriptome. Transcripts can vary from being localized nearly 100% in untranslated mRNP particles to essentially complete association with polysomes. In addition, the linear density of ribosomes along an mRNA was found to range from a maximum of approximately one ribosome per 30 nucleotides, which is the length of mRNA protected by a single eukaryotic ribosome from nuclease digestion (41), to less than one per 1000 nucleotides. Ribosome density is determined by the relative rates of initiation (ribosome loading) and peptide chain elongation (ribosome movement). Although translation is generally controlled at initiation (15), fluctuations in observed ribosome density for some transcripts could arise in principle from variations in elongation rate. Also, it should be underscored that these values are average densities across a transcript and that, for some mRNAs, changes either in elongation rate along the length of the message or in termination rate could result in localized regions of altered ribosome density.
This study of yeast cultures responding to
-factor demonstrated several features of the TSAA methodology. First and foremost, analysis of translation state appears to be robust and reproducible from sample to sample. This is clearly illustrated by the fact that only a fraction of the transcripts evaluated (325 out of 3874) showed significant differences in translation state between the extracts from treated and untreated cells. Second, because independent analysis of these cells by TSAA and ICAT yielded overlapping functional groups of co-regulated genes, it seems that the assumptions that went into estimating protein synthesis rate from ribosome loading onto transcripts were warranted, at least for those proteins and transcripts that were detected by both methods. In comparing TSAA estimates of changes in rates of synthesis with proteome measurements, the ICAT ratios were usually smaller. This was expected because estimates of ribosome loading reflect the instantaneous rate of protein synthesis, while proteome measurements integrate the balance between synthesis and degradation over the course of the experiment. Therefore, except for proteins with very short half-lives, one would anticipate only qualitative agreement between the two measurements. Examples of wide discrepancy between the two approaches would suggest instances of regulated protein stability.
The combined TSAA and ICAT analysis revealed a strongly coordinated up-regulation of proteins of the proteasome, including components of both the 20S catalytic complex (the PRE and PUP genes) and the 19S regulatory complex (the RPN and RPT genes). There are several known examples of specific ubiquitination and degradation by proteasomes in S. cerevisiae that are related to pheromone response (4246). Perhaps the increased synthesis of proteasome subunits detected by ICAT and TSAA represents preparation for recovery from pheromone response, through degradation of key regulatory proteins such as Far1p (44, 45) and Ste7p (46), and re-entry into the mitotic cell cycle. Progression through the cell cycle is regulated in part by ubiquitin-proteasome proteolysis (47).
An extensive study of the response of transcript levels to
-factor has been published (48). With our current experimental paradigm, a robust dataset of transcript levels (Cy5 values) was created containing 100 replicas each in the presence and absence of
-factor. Using 3-fold increases or decreases in transcript level as a measure of biological significance, changes were seen in 376 genes of the 5227 where the Cy5 measurement was greater than background in at least one of the two conditions. Of these 376 transcripts, 101 were identified as changing in the previous study (48). In addition, 79 of these with altered transcript levels also changed at least 2-fold in translation efficiency. Of the 3874 transcripts for which ribosome loading was analyzed in this study, 325 showed at least a 2-fold change in translation efficiency but only 44 of these also had significant (3-fold) transcript changes.
The outcome of this study is clear: each species of mRNA is unique, not only with respect to the protein it encodes, but also in its interaction with the translational machinery. Translation of the transcriptome is highly diverse both qualitatively and quantitatively, and it is impossible to assume a simple, linear relationship between the level of an mRNA and the rate of synthesis of its encoded protein. Furthermore, although translational control seems to be quite selective, ribosome loading can change with physiological state and, together with altered protein stability, can produce dramatic discrepancies between transcript levels and apparent rates of protein synthesis.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Published, MCP Papers in Press, February 6, 2004, DOI 10.1074/mcp.M300129-MCP200
1 The abbreviations used are: Q-PCR, quantitative real-time PCR; ORF, open reading frame; ICAT, isotope-coded affinity tag; MS, mass spectrometry; uORF, upstream ORF; MPM, multiple peak model; CAI, codon adaptation index; TSAA, translation state array analysis. ![]()
* This work was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute (CA89807) and the National Human Genome Research Institute (HG02283). The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. ![]()
S The on-line version of this manuscript (available at http://www.mcponline.org) contains supplemental material. The original data from this work are deposited at tsaa.info. ![]()
|| To whom correspondence should be addressed: Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. Tel.: 206-543-1694; Fax: 206-543-4822; E-mail: dmorris{at}u.washington.edu
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2 and MAT
1 blocks their mutual destruction by the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway.
Cell
94, 217
227[CrossRef][Medline]
rpn9 mutation.
Biochimie
83, 333
340[Medline]This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. A. Gilchrist, P. Shah, and R. Zaretzki Measuring and Detecting Molecular Adaptation in Codon Usage Against Nonsense Errors During Protein Translation Genetics, December 1, 2009; 183(4): 1493 - 1505. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Stones, A. Natali, R. Billeter, S. Harrison, and E. White Voluntary exercise-induced changes in {beta}2-adrenoceptor signalling in rat ventricular myocytes Exp Physiol, September 1, 2008; 93(9): 1065 - 1075. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Sehgal, B. T. Hughes, and P. J. Espenshade Oxygen-dependent, alternative promoter controls translation of tco1+ in fission yeast Nucleic Acids Res., April 1, 2008; 36(6): 2024 - 2031. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Gilchrist Combining Models of Protein Translation and Population Genetics to Predict Protein Production Rates from Codon Usage Patterns Mol. Biol. Evol., November 1, 2007; 24(11): 2362 - 2372. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. E. Neafsey and J. E. Galagan Dual Modes of Natural Selection on Upstream Open Reading Frames Mol. Biol. Evol., August 1, 2007; 24(8): 1744 - 1751. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. H. Beilharz and T. Preiss Widespread use of poly(A) tail length control to accentuate expression of the yeast transcriptome RNA, July 1, 2007; 13(7): 982 - 997. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. J. Del Prete, R. Vernal, H. Dolznig, E. W. Mullner, and J. A. Garcia-Sanz Isolation of polysome-bound mRNA from solid tissues amenable for RT-PCR and profiling experiments RNA, March 1, 2007; 13(3): 414 - 421. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. K. Esch, Y. Wang, and B. Errede Pheromone-Induced Degradation of Ste12 Contributes to Signal Attenuation and the Specificity of Developmental Fate Eukaryot. Cell, December 1, 2006; 5(12): 2147 - 2160. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y.-U. Park, H. Hur, M. Ka, and J. Kim Identification of Translational Regulation Target Genes during Filamentous Growth in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: Regulatory Role of Caf20 and Dhh1 Eukaryot. Cell, December 1, 2006; 5(12): 2120 - 2127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. S. Bickel and D. R. Morris Role of the Transcription Activator Ste12p as a Repressor of PRY3 Expression Mol. Cell. Biol., November 1, 2006; 26(21): 7901 - 7912. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Provenzani, R. Fronza, F. Loreni, A. Pascale, M. Amadio, and A. Quattrone Global alterations in mRNA polysomal recruitment in a cell model of colorectal cancer progression to metastasis Carcinogenesis, July 1, 2006; 27(7): 1323 - 1333. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Mukhopadhyay, Z. He, E. J. Alm, A. P. Arkin, E. E. Baidoo, S. C. Borglin, W. Chen, T. C. Hazen, Q. He, H.-Y. Holman, et al. Salt Stress in Desulfovibrio vulgaris Hildenborough: an Integrated Genomics Approach J. Bacteriol., June 1, 2006; 188(11): 4068 - 4078. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. S. T. Yuen, S.-K. Jo, M. K. Holly, X. Hu, and R. A. Star Ischemic and nephrotoxic acute renal failure are distinguished by their broad transcriptomic responses Physiol Genomics, May 16, 2006; 25(3): 375 - 386. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.-P. Yan, Q.-Y. Zhang, Z.-C. Tang, W.-A. Su, and W.-N. Sun Comparative Proteomic Analysis Provides New Insights into Chilling Stress Responses in Rice Mol. Cell. Proteomics, March 1, 2006; 5(3): 484 - 496. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Swaminathan, T. Masek, C. Molin, M. Pospisek, and P. Sunnerhagen Rck2 Is Required for Reprogramming of Ribosomes during Oxidative Stress Mol. Biol. Cell, March 1, 2006; 17(3): 1472 - 1482. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Qiu, E. O. List, and J. J. Kopchick Differentially Expressed Proteins in the Pancreas of Diet-induced Diabetic Mice Mol. Cell. Proteomics, September 1, 2005; 4(9): 1311 - 1318. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. C. Peck Update on Proteomics in Arabidopsis. Where Do We Go From Here? Plant Physiology, June 1, 2005; 138(2): 591 - 599. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Arava, F. E. Boas, P. O. Brown, and D. Herschlag Dissecting eukaryotic translation and its control by ribosome density mapping Nucleic Acids Res., April 28, 2005; 33(8): 2421 - 2432. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Kawaguchi and J. Bailey-Serres mRNA sequence features that contribute to translational regulation in Arabidopsis Nucleic Acids Res., February 16, 2005; 33(3): 955 - 965. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Beyer, J. Hollunder, H.-P. Nasheuer, and T. Wilhelm Post-transcriptional Expression Regulation in the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae on a Genomic Scale Mol. Cell. Proteomics, November 1, 2004; 3(11): 1083 - 1092. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Journal of Biological Chemistry |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |