Dataset Information

Translation control of TAK1 mRNA by hnRNP K modulates LPS-induced macrophage activation

ABSTRACT: Macrophage activation by bacterial lipopolysaccharides (LPS) is induced through Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4). The synthesis and activity of TLR4 downstream signalling molecules modulates the expression of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines. To address the impact of post-transcriptional regulation on that process, we performed RIP-Chip analysis. Differential association of mRNAs with heterogeneous ribonucleoprotein K (hnRNP K), an mRNA-specific translational regulator in differentiating haematopoietic cells, was studied in non-induced and LPS-activated macrophages. Analysis of interactions affected by LPS revealed an enrichment of mRNAs encoding TLR4 downstream kinases and their modulators. We focused on transforming growth factor β activated kinase-1 (TAK1), a central player in TLR4 signalling. HnRNP K interacts specifically with a sequence in the TAK1 mRNA 3' UTR in vitro. Silencing of hnRNP K does not affect TAK1 mRNA synthesis and stability, but enhances TAK1 mRNA translation, resulting in elevated TNF-alpha, IL-1beta and IL-10 mRNA expression. Our data suggest that the hnRNP K-3' UTR complex inhibits TAK1 mRNA translation in non-induced macrophages. LPS-dependent TLR4 activation abrogates translational repression and newly synthesised TAK1 initiates the inflammatory response of macrophages. In this dataset, we include expression data of RAW 264.7 cells comparing untreated cells and 6h Lipopolysaccharide treatment, and analyse RNAs co-precipitating with hnRNP K dependent on LPS treatment.

ORGANISM(S): Mus musculus

PROVIDER: GSE48463 | GEO | 2014/07/01

SECONDARY ACCESSION(S): PRJNA210235

REPOSITORIES: GEO

ACCESS DATA

Dataset's files

Source:

			Action	DRS
		Other

Items per page:

1 - 1 of 1

Similar Datasets

Project description:Siglec-E is a murine CD33-related siglec that functions as an inhibitory receptor and is expressed mainly on neutrophils and macrophage populations. Recent studies have suggested that siglec-E is an important negative regulator of LPS-TLR4 signalling and one report (Wu et al 2016) claimed that siglec-E is required for TLR4 endocytosis following uptake of Escherichia coli by macrophages and dendritic cells (DCs). Our attempts to reproduce these observations using cells from wildtype (WT) and siglec E deficient mice were unsuccessful. We used a variety of assays to determine if siglec-E expressed by different macrophage populations can regulate TLR-4 signalling in response to LPS, but found no consistent differences in cytokine secretion in vitro and in vivo, comparing 3 different strains of siglec-E-deficient mice with matched WT controls. No evidence was found that the siglec-E deficiency was compensated by expression of siglecs-F and –G, the other murine inhibitory CD33-related siglecs. Quantitative proteomics was used as an unbiased approach and provided additional evidence that siglec-E does not suppress inflammatory TLR4 signaling. Interestingly, proteomics revealed a siglec E dependent alteration in macrophage phenotype that could be relevant to functional responses in host defence. In support of this, siglec-E-deficient mice exhibited enhanced growth of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium in the liver following intravenous infection, but macrophages lacking siglec-E did not show altered uptake or killing of bacteria in vitro. Using various cell types including bone marrow derived DCs (BMDC), splenic DCs and macrophages from WT and siglec-E-deficient mice, we showed that siglec-E is not required for TLR4 endocytosis following E.coli uptake or LPS challenge. We failed to see expression of siglec-E by BMDC even after LPS-induced maturation, but confirmed previous studies that splenic DCs express low levels of siglec-E. Taken together, our findings do not support a major role of siglec-E in regulation of TLR4 signalling functions or TLR4 endocytosis in macrophages or DCs. Instead, they reveal that induction of siglec-E by LPS can modulate the phenotype of macrophages, the functional significance of which is currently unclear.

Project description:Regulation of gene expression at the post-transcriptional level plays an indispensable role during TGFbeta-induced EMT and metastasis. This regulation involves a transcript-selective translational regulatory pathway in which a ribonucleoprotein (mRNP) complex, consisting of heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein E1 (hnRNP E1) and eukaryotic elongation factor 1A1 (eEF1A1), binds to a 3M-bM-^@M-^Y-UTR regulatory BAT (TGFM-NM-2 activated translation) element and silences translation of Dab2 and ILEI mRNAs, two transcripts which are involved in mediating EMT. TGFbeta activates a kinase cascade terminating in the phosphorylation of hnRNP E1, by isoform-specific stimulation of protein kinase B/Akt2, inducing the release of the mRNP complex from the 3M-bM-^@M-^Y-UTR element, resulting in the reversal of translational silencing and increased expression of Dab2 and ILEI transcripts. We adopted a combinatorial approach involving polysome profiling and RIP-Chip analyses using hnRNP E1 and filtered the array data based on the regulatory mechanism of Dab2 and ILEI. This led to the identification and validation of a cohort of target mRNAs that follow the same pattern of regulation as Dab2 and ILEI. To identify potential target mRNA transcripts that are translationally regulated by hnRNP E1 in a TGF-beta-dependent manner, we adopted a combinatorial approach involving expression profiling analyses and RNA immunoprecipitation analysis (RIP-Chip). We performed a screen using: 1) total mRNA and 2) RNA isolated from monosomal (non-translating) versus polysomal (translating) fractions from TGF-beta-treated (24 h) and non-treated NMuMG cells and from the hnRNP E1 knockdown derivative (E1KD), that undergo constitutive EMT even in the absence of TGF-beta. In addition, we screened for transcripts that selectively interact with hnRNP E1 in NMuMG cells under unstimulated conditions and subsequently lose their temporal association following TGF-beta stimulation. The samples were individually hybridized to Affymetrix GeneChipM-BM-. Mouse Genome 430 2.0 arrays.

Project description:Lipid A (a hexaacylated 1,4 bis-phosphate) is a potent immune stimulant for TLR4/MD-2. Upon lipid A ligation, the TLR4/MD-2 complex dimerizes and initiates signal transduction. Historically, studies also suggested the existence of TLR4/MD-2-independent LPS signaling. Here we define the role of TLR4 and MD-2 in LPS signaling by using genome wide expression profiling in TLR4- and MD-2-deficient macrophages after stimulations with peptidoglycan-free LPS and synthetic E.coli lipid A. Of the 1,396 genes found significantly induced or repressed by any one of the treatments in the wildtype macrophages, none was present in the TLR4- or MD-2-deficient macrophages, confirming that the TLR4/MD-2 complex is the only receptor for endotoxin, and are both absolutely required for responses to LPS. Using a molecular genetics approach, we investigated the mechanism of TLR4/MD-2 activation by combining the known crystal structure of TLR4/MD-2 with computer modeling. We used lipid IVa, a defined lipid A mimetic to model the activation of mouse TLR4/MD2. The two phosphates on lipid A were predicted to interact extensively with the two positively charged patches mouse TLR4 according to our dimeric murine TLR4/MD-2/lipid IVa model. These two patches are composed of K263, R337, and K360 (Positive Patch 1), and K367 and R434 (Positive Patch 2). When either Positive Patch was abolished by mutagenesis into Ala, the responses to LPS and lipid A were almost abrogated. Thus, ionic interactions between the two phosphates on lipid A and the two positively charged patches on murine TLR4 appear to be essential for LPS receptor activation. The gene expression profile of macrophages from C57BL/6 and MD-2-deficient mice following either 10 ng LPS /mL, 100 ng lipid A/mL or 10 nM Pam2 stimulation for 2 hours were compared to PBS-stimulated control cells . In vitro differentiated macrophages from two individual WT and MD-2-deficient mice were cultured and stimulated with agonists separately, comparing the gene expression to PBS-stimulated control cells from the same mouse. Comparisons of PBS-stimulated WT cells to PBS-stimulated MD-2-deficient cells were performed to directly compare basal gene expression in the two genotypes.

Project description:Lipid A (a hexaacylated 1,4 bis-phosphate) is a potent immune stimulant for TLR4/MD-2. Upon lipid A ligation, the TLR4/MD-2 complex dimerizes and initiates signal transduction. Historically, studies also suggested the existence of TLR4/MD-2-independent LPS signaling. Here we define the role of TLR4 and MD-2 in LPS signaling by using genome wide expression profiling in TLR4- and MD-2-deficient macrophages after stimulations with peptidoglycan-free LPS and synthetic E.coli lipid A. Of the 1,396 genes found significantly induced or repressed by any one of the treatments in the wildtype macrophages, none was present in the TLR4- or MD-2-deficient macrophages, confirming that the TLR4/MD-2 complex is the only receptor for endotoxin, and are both absolutely required for responses to LPS. Using a molecular genetics approach, we investigated the mechanism of TLR4/MD-2 activation by combining the known crystal structure of TLR4/MD-2 with computer modeling. We used lipid IVa, a defined lipid A mimetic to model the activation of mouse TLR4/MD2. The two phosphates on lipid A were predicted to interact extensively with the two positively charged patches mouse TLR4 according to our dimeric murine TLR4/MD-2/lipid IVa model. These two patches are composed of K263, R337, and K360 (Positive Patch 1), and K367 and R434 (Positive Patch 2). When either Positive Patch was abolished by mutagenesis into Ala, the responses to LPS and lipid A were almost abrogated. Thus, ionic interactions between the two phosphates on lipid A and the two positively charged patches on murine TLR4 appear to be essential for LPS receptor activation. Bone marrow-derived macrophages were pooled from four individual WT or TLR4-deficient mice and stimulated with either 10 ng LPS /mL, 100 ng lipid A/mL or 10 nM Pam2 for 2 hours and compared to PBS-stimulated control cells. We also compared PBS-stimulated WT cells directly to PBS-stimulated TLR4-deficient cells to compare the basal expression of genes in the two genotypes. This experiment was repeated once in its entirety.

Dataset Information

Translation control of TAK1 mRNA by hnRNP K modulates LPS-induced macrophage activation

Dataset's files

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets