Arabidopsis REIL proteins are cytosolic ribosomal 60S-biogenesis factors. After shift to 10 °C, reil mutants deplete and slowly replenish non-translating eukaryotic ribosome complexes of root tissue, while controlling the balance of non-translating 40S- and 60S-subunits. Reil mutations respond by hyper-accumulation of non-translating subunits at steady-state temperature; after cold-shift, a KCl-sensitive 80S sub-fraction remains depleted. We infer that Arabidopsis may buffer fluctuating translation by pre-existing non-translating ribosomes before de novo synthesis meets temperature-induced demands. Reil1 reil2 double mutants accumulate 43S-preinitiation and pre-60S-maturation complexes and alter paralog composition of ribosomal proteins in non-translating complexes. With few exceptions, e.g. RPL3B and RPL24C, these changes are not under transcriptional control. Our study suggests requirement of de novo synthesis of eukaryotic ribosomes for long-term cold acclimation, feedback control of NUC2 and eIF3C2 transcription and links new proteins, AT1G03250, AT5G60530, to plant ribosome biogenesis. We propose that Arabidopsis requires biosynthesis of specialized ribosomes for cold acclimation.
Ribosome biogenesis is essential for plants to successfully acclimate to low temperature. Without dedicated steps supervising the 60S large subunits (LSUs) maturation in the cytosol, e.g., Rei-like (REIL) factors, plants fail to accumulate dry weight and fail to grow at suboptimal low temperatures. Around REIL, the final 60S cytosolic maturation steps include proofreading and assembly of functional ribosomal centers such as the polypeptide exit tunnel and the P-Stalk, respectively. In consequence, these ribosomal substructures and their assembly, especially during low temperatures, might be changed and provoke the need for dedicated quality controls. To test this, we blocked ribosome maturation during cold acclimation using two independent reil double mutant genotypes and tested changes in their ribosomal proteomes. Additionally, we normalized our mutant datasets using as a blank the cold responsiveness of a wild-type Arabidopsis genotype. This allowed us to neglect any reil-specific effects that may happen due to the presence or absence of the factor during LSU cytosolic maturation, thus allowing us to test for cold-induced changes that happen in the early nucleolar biogenesis. As a result, we report that cold acclimation triggers a reprogramming in the structural ribosomal proteome. The reprogramming alters the abundance of specific RP families and/or paralogs in non-translational LSU and translational polysome fractions, a phenomenon known as substoichiometry. Next, we tested whether the cold-substoichiometry was spatially confined to specific regions of the complex. In terms of RP proteoforms, we report that remodeling of ribosomes after a cold stimulus is significantly constrained to the polypeptide exit tunnel (PET), i.e., REIL factor binding and functional site. In terms of RP transcripts, cold acclimation induces changes in RP families or paralogs that are significantly constrained to the P-Stalk and the ribosomal head. The three modulated substructures represent possible targets of mechanisms that may constrain translation by controlled ribosome heterogeneity. We propose that non-random ribosome heterogeneity controlled by specialized biogenesis mechanisms may contribute to a preferential or ultimately even rigorous selection of transcripts needed for rapid proteome shifts and successful acclimation.
In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.