FUS binds the CTD of RNA polymerase II and regulates its phosphorylation at Ser2

Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
Genes & development (Impact Factor: 12.64). 12/2012; 26(24):2690-5. DOI: 10.1101/gad.204602.112
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Mutations in the RNA-binding protein FUS (fused in sarcoma)/TLS have been shown to cause the neurodegenerative disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), but the normal role of FUS is incompletely understood. We found that FUS binds the C-terminal domain (CTD) of RNA polymerase II (RNAP2) and prevents inappropriate hyperphosphorylation of Ser2 in the RNAP2 CTD at thousands of human genes. The loss of FUS leads to RNAP2 accumulation at the transcription start site and a shift in mRNA isoform expression toward early polyadenylation sites. Thus, in addition to its role in alternative RNA splicing, FUS has a general function in orchestrating CTD phosphorylation during RNAP2 transcription.

  • Source
    • "Thus, altered ribostasis can alter both the biogenesis and function of mRNAs, potentially creating a positive-feedback loop in which abnormal RNAs and altered protein production lead to more misregulation of cellular processes, eventually leading to systemic inflammatory signaling and cell death. In addition, aberrant mRNP aggregates are expected to influence other aspects of RNA metabolism, as some of the aggregated proteins (e.g., FUS or TDP-43) can be required for transcription and/or small nuclear ribonucleic particles (snRNP) assembly (Ishihara et al., 2013; Schwartz et al., 2012). Aberrant mRNP aggregates are also likely to alter cell survival by affecting signaling pathways. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The molecular processes that contribute to degenerative diseases are not well understood. Recent observations suggest that some degenerative diseases are promoted by the accumulation of nuclear or cytoplasmic RNA-protein (RNP) aggregates, which can be related to endogenous RNP granules. RNP aggregates arise commonly in degenerative diseases because RNA-binding proteins commonly self-assemble, in part through prion-like domains, which can form self-propagating amyloids. RNP aggregates may be toxic due to multiple perturbations of posttranscriptional control, thereby disrupting the normal ‘‘ribostasis’’ of the cell. This suggests that understanding and modulating RNP assembly or clearance may be effective approaches to developing therapies for these diseases.
    Cell 08/2013; 154(4). DOI:10.1016/j.cell.2013.07.038 · 33.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Although the primary result of this paper is that RNA stimulates FUS assembly, an important question remaining is whether fibrous assemblies contribute to FUS-RNAP2 interactions in vivo. FUS affects RNAP2 recruitment, the efficiency of transcription, and the phosphorylation status on the CTD of RNAP2 (Yang et al., 2000; Schwartz et al., 2012, Kwon et al., 2013). An attractive model is that the efficiency of CTD recruitment to a FUS fibrous assembly would localize the polymerase to a greater extent than single FUS-CTD interactions. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Figure optionsView in workspaceDownload full-size imageDownload as PowerPoint slide
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal human neurodegenerative disease affecting primarily motor neurons. Two RNA-binding proteins, TDP-43 and FUS, aggregate in the degenerating motor neurons of ALS patients, and mutations in the genes encoding these proteins cause some forms of ALS. TDP-43 and FUS and several related RNA-binding proteins harbor aggregation-promoting prion-like domains that allow them to rapidly self-associate. This property is critical for the formation and dynamics of cellular ribonucleoprotein granules, the crucibles of RNA metabolism and homeostasis. Recent work connecting TDP-43 and FUS to stress granules has suggested how this cellular pathway, which involves protein aggregation as part of its normal function, might be coopted during disease pathogenesis.
    The Journal of Cell Biology 04/2013; 201(3):361-72. DOI:10.1083/jcb.201302044 · 9.69 Impact Factor
Show more