The classical view of the nucleolus as solely committed to ribosome biosynthesis has
been modified by recent studies pointing to additional roles for this nuclear domain.
These newly recognized features include the nucleolar presence of several nonribosomal
RNAs transcribed by RNA polymerase III, as well as nucleolar roles in gene silencing,
cell cycle progression, and cellular senescence. The signal recognition particle (SRP)
RNA, and several protein components of the SRP also recently have been detected in
the nucleolus. Thus, the large and small ribosomal subunits, the 5S rRNA–ribonucleoprotein
complex, and now the SRP, are known to be assembled in or pass through the nucleolus.
These findings, together with the recent observations that some transfer RNA precursor
molecules and the pretransfer RNA processing enzyme, RNase P, are also found in the
nucleolus, raise the possibility that these translational components are congressed
in the nucleolus in order to probatively interact with one another, perhaps as a test
of proper conformational fit. We hypothesize that such interactions may be an important
checkpoint during nucleolar assembly of the translational machinery at steps ranging
from the regulation of nascent transcript processing to a possible transient preassembly
of the entire translational apparatus.
Introduction
The nucleolus is a large and ultrastructurally complex intranuclear structure that
typically has the most concentrated mass per unit volume of any region in the cell
(Vincent 1955; Goessens 1984; Hadjiolov 1985). Nucleoli arise from the transcriptional
activity of the ribosomal RNA genes and contain a multitude of proteins and small
RNAs that mediate processing and modification of rRNA and ribonucleoprotein assembly
of nascent ribosomal subunits (Warner 1990; Bachellerie et al. 1995; Shaw and Jordan
1995; Maden and Hughes 1997; Scheer and Hock 1999; Weinstein and Steitz 1999). Although
the central role of the nucleolus in ribosome biosynthesis remains a resoundingly
confirmed principle of eukaryotic molecular cell biology, within two years the nucleolus
has been implicated in aspects of eukaryotic cell biology beyond rRNA biosynthesis,
i.e., gene silencing, cell cycle progression, and senescence (Pederson 1998a; Cockell
and Gasser 1999; Garcia and Pillus 1999). Moreover, it has been found that some RNAs
unrelated to rRNA biosynthesis, primarily RNA polymerase III transcripts, also traffic
through the nucleolus (Pederson 1998b). In this article, we summarize recent findings
that point to an additional important role for the nucleolus in the assembly, and
perhaps quality control, of the multiple ribonucleoproteins involved in protein synthesis,
rather than simply serving as a site for ribosome synthesis, per se.
The nucleolus was established as the site of ribosomal RNA synthesis in the 1960's
(Perry 1962; Birnstiel et al. 1963; Brown and Gurdon 1964; Lerman et al. 1964; Ritossa
and Spiegelman 1965) and soon thereafter the presence of ribosomal proteins and the
assembly of nascent ribosomes in the nucleolus was also revealed (Warner and Soeiro
1967; Liau and Perry 1969; Craig and Perry 1970; Pederson and Kumar 1971; Kumar and
Warner 1972). In addition to the high molecular weight RNAs of the large and small
ribosomal subunits (28S and 18S rRNA, respectively, in vertebrate cells), two smaller
ribosomal RNAs were discovered, 5S rRNA (Elson 1961; Rosset and Monier 1963; Galibert
et al. 1965) and 5.8S rRNA (Pene et al. 1968). The genes for 5S rRNA lie outside the
nucleolus in higher plant and animal cells, but 5.8S rRNA arises from processing of
the pre-rRNA primary transcript and ends up base-paired with 28S rRNA in the nucleolus
(Perry 1976; Calvet and Pederson 1981). In higher eukaryotes, newly synthesized 5S
rRNA moves into the nucleolus from its extranucleolar transcription sites, and a ribonucleoprotein
complex containing 5S rRNA and the ribosomal protein L5 has been implicated in both
the 3′ end processing and nucleolar localization of 5S rRNA (Steitz et al. 1988; Michael
and Dreyfuss 1996). A cytoplasmic 5S rRNA–ribonucleoprotein complex has also been
identified (Blobel 1971). Finally, the SRP, the ribonucleoprotein machine that facilitates
topologically correct protein synthesis into the ER, contains a small RNA and six
bound proteins (Walter and Johnson 1994). Thus, considered as ribonucleoproteins,
the translational machinery may be regarded to be comprised of four particles: the
large and small ribosomal subunits, the 5S rRNA–ribonucleoprotein complex, and the
SRP.
Signal Recognition Particle Components in the Nucleolus
During the course of investigations on the traffic and localization of various species
of RNA within the nucleus of living mammalian cells (Wang et al. 1991; Jacobson et
al. 1995, Jacobson et al. 1997; Jacobson and Pederson 1998a) it was found that microinjected
SRP RNA rapidly became localized in nucleoli and subsequently appeared to depart from
the nucleoli and enter the cytoplasm (Jacobson and Pederson 1998b). These results
were confirmed by in situ hybridization experiments (Politz et al. 1998, Politz et
al. 2000) and biochemical fractionation studies (Chen et al. 1998; Mitchell et al.
1999), which showed that endogenous SRP RNA is also present in the nucleolus. Additional
microinjection experiments showed that the specific domains in the SRP RNA molecule
that were essential for nucleolar localization included known SRP protein binding
sites (Jacobson and Pederson 1998b). Each of the four SRP-specific proteins (Walter
and Johnson 1994) was tagged with the green fluorescent protein (GFP) and their intranuclear
localization investigated after transfection into mammalian cells. Three of the four
proteins, SRP19, SRP68, and SRP72, displayed nucleolar localization, as well as cytoplasmic
localization as expected (Politz et al. 2000). In contrast, the fourth SRP-specific
protein, SRP54, did not display nucleolar localization, nor did a human autoantibody
specific for endogenous SRP54 stain nucleoli, although cytoplasmic SRP54 was detected
as expected. In vitro SRP assembly studies had revealed that SRP54 does not bind SRP
RNA until SRP19 has first bound (Walter and Johnson 1994) and thus the in vivo studies
suggested that SRP54 may bind to a partially assembled SRP particle outside the nucleolus.
The finding that three SRP proteins and SRP RNA visit the nucleolus suggests that
an essential step in the overall pathway of SRP assembly may occur there.
Genomic Organization of Loci for RNAs of the Translational Machinery
The extranucleolar transcription of 5S rRNA in higher eukaryotes, followed by its
traffic to the nucleolus is intriguing since, at first thought, 5S rRNA could ostensibly
be exported (perhaps as a ribonucleoprotein complex) from its nonnucleolar transcription
sites directly to the cytoplasm and there join with ribosomes. Indeed, given the crowded
and dynamic molecular landscape of rRNA processing and its multitude of attendant
cofactors in the nucleolus (Bachellerie et al. 1995; Scheer and Hock 1999; Weinstein
and Steitz 1999), it might seem more efficient for 5S rRNA to exit the nucleus and
then assemble with finished ribosomes in the cytoplasm. Why then does 5S rRNA traffic
to the nucleolus? Interestingly, in contrast to the case in higher eukaryotes, the
5S rRNA genes of Dictyostelium and fungi (and Escherichia coli) are interspersed with
the large and small ribosomal subunit RNA genes (Maizels 1976; Maxam et al. 1977;
Nomura and Post 1980), suggesting that the earliest nucleoli spatially coproduced
and coassembled the two ribosomal subunits and the 5S ribonucleoprotein particle.
It may be, then, that 5S rRNA moves to the nucleolus in higher eukaryotes not merely
to interact with the nascent 60S ribosomal subunit (which, as mentioned above, could
seemingly take place just as well in the cytoplasm), but in fact to also participate
in an obligatory step of the overall rRNA processing and/or assembly pathway. In support
of this idea is the recent observation that the presence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae
5S rRNA in nucleoli is essential for the efficient completion of accurate processing
of the large subunit rRNA (Dechampesme et al. 1999).
In light of the colinear arrangement of 5S rRNA genes and the large and small rRNA
genes in fungi and mycetozoa (Dictyostelium), as well as the recent finding that SRP
RNA and SRP proteins traffic through the nucleolus of mammalian cells, one might ask
if, like the 5S rRNA genes, the SRP RNA gene(s) might also have once coresided with
the large and small rRNA genes, in a primordial form of today's nucleolus. In at least
two cases, the answer is yes. In the archaebacteria Methanobacterium thermoautotrophicum
and Methanothermus fervidus the single SRP RNA gene resides together with a 5S rRNA
gene and two tRNA genes within one of the organism's rRNA operons (Østergaard et al.
1987; Haas et al. 1990). Parenthetically, it is also interesting to recall that both
tRNA and SRP RNA are associated with retroviral genomes. Indeed, the association of
SRP RNA (then called 7S RNA) with retrovirus genomic RNA was the basis of its original
discovery (Bishop et al. 1970; Walker et al. 1974). The tRNA molecule is now known
to serve as a primer for reverse transcription of the RNA genome into proviral DNA,
but the role of the SRP RNA bound to the retroviral genomic RNA remains unknown.
The Nucleolus as a Staging Site for Assembly of the Translational Ribonucleoproteins
These considerations raise the question of whether the nucleolus may stage some sort
of a “preassembly” step during the production of the translational apparatus. According
to this idea, a supramolecular assembly of the translational machinery would occur
in the nucleolus, perhaps transiently, through the association of 5S rRNA and SRP
with nascent ribosomal subunits. Such preassembly of the translational apparatus in
the nucleolus could allow for a quality control step during the synthesis and processing
of the various translational components. As mentioned, it already appears that this
may be the case in yeast: the nucleolar presence of 5S rRNA is required for proper
processing of the large subunit rRNA (Dechampesme et al. 1999). If a nucleolar preassembly
were generally important as a checkpoint for potential functionality, other translation-related
factors might also be expected to be present in the nucleolus to interact with this
complex. One such potential factor is transfer RNA.
When the first radioisotopic studies of RNA biosynthesis in eukaryotic cells were
being undertaken there were numerous indications that some labeled transfer RNA was
present in nucleoli (Birnstiel et al. 1961; Perry 1962; Comb and Katz 1964; Birnstiel
et al. 1965; Sirlin et al. 1966; Halkka and Halkka 1968; Sirlin and Loening 1968),
even though the tRNA genes themselves were found to reside in the nonnucleolar chromatin
(Woods and Zubay 1965; Ritossa et al. 1966; Wimber and Steffensen 1970). The notion
that the biosynthesis of tRNA might involve a nucleolar stage has recently been reactivated
by the detection of several pre-tRNAs in the nucleolus by in situ hybridization (Bertrand
et al. 1998). An apparently complementary finding is the presence in nucleoli of both
the RNA and protein subunits of RNase P, the ribonucleoprotein enzyme that mediates
5′ processing of pre-tRNAs (Jacobson et al. 1997; Bertrand et al. 1998; Jarrous et
al. 1999). In addition, a Saccharomyces cerevisiae tRNA base modification enzyme has
also been localized in nucleoli (Tolerico et al. 1999). Other potentially relevant
observations are the findings that some tRNA aminoacylation occurs in the nucleus
of frog oocytes (Arts et al. 1998; Lund and Dahlberg 1998) and an intriguing preliminary
report that an aminoacylated tRNA is found specifically in the nucleolus (Ko, Y.G.,
Y.-S. Kang, E.-K. Kim, W. Seol, J.E. Kim, and S. Kim. 1999. Mol. Biol. Cell. 10:438a).
Taken together, these various observations add up rather provocatively. Not only do
all four translational ribonucleoproteins arise in or visit the nucleolus, some tRNAs,
perhaps even aminoacylated tRNAs, are also localized there. Although this may simply
be a chance spatial coincidence, it seems more likely that there is a functional significance
to this congression of translational components. As mentioned above, a plausible explanation
is that the four translational ribonucleoproteins interact with one another in some
sort of quality control step during synthesis, processing, and/or assembly. The four
ribonucleoproteins might undergo interparticle surface interactions to probatively
eliminate misshaped partners arising from errors in ribonucleoprotein assembly. Such
interactions might or might not be stoichiometric with respect to the four ribonucleoproteins;
topological testing could be confined to transient dimeric heterotypic particle interactions
or, at the other extreme, the entire tetrapartite ribonucleoprotein translational
ensemble might form, with attendant binding of tRNA and other nucleolus-associated
translation factors (e.g., Jiménez-García et al. 1993). Presumably any tRNA species
in the nucleolus, including the aminoacylated form (vide supra), could probe the assembled
60S ribosomal subunit's tRNA entry site, but it is particularly interesting to note
that the first (albeit preliminary) report of an aminoacylated tRNA in the nucleolus
involves methioninyl tRNA (Ko, Y.G., Y.-S. Kang, E.-K. Kim, W. Seol, J.E. Kim, and
S. Kim. 1999. Mol. Biol. Cell. 10:438a).
Although one might even expect mRNA to be involved in such a quality control step,
there are few reports showing the presence of mRNA in the nucleolus (although, see
Bond and Wold 1993). However, detection of specific mRNAs in the nucleolus by in situ
hybridization would be expected to be difficult, so the absence of such reports does
not rule out the presence of some nucleolar mRNA. In this regard, it should be mentioned
that, although considerable doubt has long existed as to whether protein synthesis
occurs in isolated nuclei (Goldstein 1970; Pederson 1976), there does exist rather
convincing evidence for amino acid incorporation into isolated nucleoli (Birnstiel
and Hyde 1963; Birnstiel and Flamm 1964; Maggio 1966). Whatever the level of possible
cytoplasmic contamination of the initial nuclear preparations in these studies, what
is now understood of the cell fractionation protocols employed would suggest that
cytoplasmic contaminants of the nuclei would have been significantly reduced in the
subsequent nucleolar fraction (Maggio et al. 1963a,Maggio et al. 1963b; Bhorjee and
Pederson 1973), which nonetheless displayed a tenfold higher rate of amino acid incorporation
than nuclei (Maggio 1966). Although the significance of these observations is still
unclear, they do not allow us to rule out the (unfashionable) possibility that some
peptide bond formation is catalyzed by a translation preassembly complex in the nucleolus.
A final question is whether the putative interparticle associations within this preassembly
complex persist during nucleocytoplasmic transport. Does there exist the possibility
of coexport of two or more of the four translational ribonucleoproteins out of the
nucleolus (and the nucleus)? Most of the available evidence suggests that the large
and small ribosomal subunits are typically exported as separate particles, although
there have been occasional suggestions of nuclear export of intact 76S ribosomes (e.g.,
Khanna-Gupta and Ware 1989). In either case, it appears that 5S rRNA typically exits
minimally as part of the 60S ribosomal subunit in somatic cells. At present, nothing
is known about the nucleolar exit of SRP as regards piggybacking on ribosomal particles.
As we have pointed out (Jacobson and Pederson 1998b; Politz et al. 2000), it is conceivable
that SRP is coexported with the large ribosomal subunit, since there is a known affinity
of the SRP for nontranslating ribosomes (Ogg and Walter 1995). However, coexport would
not be expected to necessarily be stoichiometric with respect to SRP because SRP is
typically present in cells at lower concentrations than ribosomes (Reddy and Busch
1988).
Conclusion
It now appears that the eukaryotic cell stages the assembly of the two ribosomal subunits,
the 5S rRNP and the SRP in the nucleolus, probably in the presence of other translational
elements, such as tRNA. The biological rationale for this common intranuclear site
of assembly is not clear at present, and indeed, each of the four translational ribonucleoproteins
may simply independently assemble in the nucleolus. However, there exists the possibility
that these four translational ribonucleoproteins interact with one another while congressed
in the nucleolus. Effective interaction between these components could be required
as an essential checkpoint during the production of the translational apparatus. In
this way, the nucleolus may provide a preassembly site to verify the potential functionality
of the machines of protein synthesis. This idea is a testable hypothesis and hopefully
will help to catalyze future work on the full functional repertoire of the nucleolus.