Virology 327 (2004) 196 – 205
www.elsevier.com/locate/yviro
Subgenomic RNA as a riboregulator: negative regulation of RNA
replication by Barley yellow dwarf virus subgenomic RNA 2
Ruizhong Shen, W. Allen Miller*
Interdepartmental Genetics Program and Department of Plant Pathology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, United States
Received 7 April 2004; accepted 15 June 2004
Available online 6 August 2004
Abstract
Barley yellow dwarf virus (BYDV) generates three 3V-coterminal subgenomic RNAs (sgRNAs) in infected cells. Translation of BYDV
genomic RNA (gRNA) and sgRNA1 is mediated by the BYDV cap-independent translation element (BTE) in the 3V untranslated region.
sgRNAs 2 and 3 are unlikely to be mRNAs. We proposed that accumulation of sgRNA2, which contains the BTE in its 5V UTR, regulates
BYDV replication by trans-inhibiting translation of the viral polymerase from genomic RNA (gRNA). Here, we tested this hypothesis and
found that: (i) co-inoculation of the BTE or sgRNA2 with BYDV RNA inhibits BYDV RNA accumulation in protoplasts; (ii) Brome mosaic
virus (BMV), engineered to contain the BTE, trans-inhibits BYDV replication; and (iii) sgRNA2 generated during BYDV infection transinhibits both GFP expression from BMV RNA and translation of a non-viral reporter mRNA. We conclude that sgRNA2, via its BTE,
functions as a riboregulator to inhibit translation of gRNA. This may make gRNA available as a replicase template and for encapsidation.
Thus, BYDV sgRNA2 joins a growing list of trans-acting regulatory RNAs.
D 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: sgRNA; Barley yellow dwarf virus; BTE
Introduction
Most RNA viruses replicate in the cytoplasm of their host
cells. Thus, translation rather than transcription is often the
major step at which viral gene expression is regulated. Many
viral translational control strategies are conferred by RNA
structures in cis (Gale et al., 2000; Macdonald, 2001;
Mazumder et al., 2003). In recent years, diverse regulatory
RNAs known as riboregulators have been discovered in
prokaryotes and eukaryotes (Lease and Belfort, 2000;
Rastinejad et al., 1993; Reinhart et al., 2000). Riboregulators function in trans, mainly post-transcriptionally. Only a
few trans-regulatory RNAs from RNA viruses have been
reported (Albarino et al., 2003; Eckerle and Ball, 2002; Sit
et al., 1998). Here, we show that subgenomic RNA 2
* Corresponding author. Interdepartmental Genetics Program and
Department of Plant Pathology, 351 Bessey Hall, Iowa State University,
Ames, IA 50011. Fax: +1 515 294 9420.
E-mail address: wamiller@iastate.edu (W.A. Miller).
0042-6822/$ - see front matter D 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.virol.2004.06.025
(sgRNA2) of Barley yellow dwarf virus (BYDV) acts as a
riboregulator to negatively regulate viral replication in
trans.
BYDV is the type member of genus Luteovirus in the
family Luteoviridae. BYDV RNA has a complex set of
primary and secondary structures that regulate many noncanonical translation events (Miller et al., 2002). These
include cap-independent translation (Guo et al., 2001; Wang
et al., 1997, 1999), 1 ribosomal frameshifting (Barry and
Miller, 2002; Paul et al., 2001), leaky scanning (Chay et al.,
1996), and stop codon readthrough (Brown et al., 1996).
BYDV has a positive sense RNA genome of 5677 nt that
encodes six open reading frames (ORFs) (Miller et al., 1997,
2002). Its genomic RNA (gRNA) and subgenomic RNAs
(sgRNAs) have no 5V-cap and no 3V-poly(A) tail (Allen et
al., 1999), yet they are translated efficiently. The 105-nt capindependent translation element (TE) in the 3V untranslated
region (UTR) of BYDV RNA facilitates efficient translation
initiation at the 5V-proximal AUG (Guo et al., 2000).
Similar structures are present in the 3V UTRs of necrovi-
R. Shen, W.A. Miller / Virology 327 (2004) 196–205
ruses (Meulewaeter et al., 2004; Shen and Miller, 2004) and
dianthoviruses (Mizumoto et al., 2003), so we now refer to
this element as a member of the BYDV-like class of TE, or
BTE (Shen and Miller, 2004).
The BTE (i) binds translation factors (E. Allen and E.
Pettit, personal communication) that presumably recruit the
ribosome, (ii) is brought into proximity with the 5V end by
direct base pairing to the 5V UTR (Guo et al., 2001), and
(iii) functions both in the 5V UTR and in the 3V UTR (Guo
et al., 2000). Most of the 869-nt 3V UTR of BYDV gRNA is
required for full cap-independent and poly(A) tail-independent translation in oat protoplasts (Guo et al., 2000;
Wang et al., 1999). sgRNA2 corresponds to the 869-nt 3V
UTR of BYDV RNA and the BTE is at the 5V end of
sgRNA2 (Fig. 1). sgRNA2 encodes a small ORF (ORF 6)
that varies from 4.3 to 7.2 kDa and is poorly conserved
between isolates. It is absent in BYDV-related Soybean
dwarf (Rathjen et al., 1994) and Bean leafroll (Domier et al.,
2002) viruses. After much effort to detect the product of
ORF 6 (P6) or translatability of sgRNA2, it appears that
ORF 6 is not translated in vivo (A. Rakotondrafara, personal
communication).
In addition to conferring cap-independent translation in
cis, the BTE inhibits translation in trans, in vitro (Wang et
al., 1997, 1999). In wheat germ extract, either the BTE
alone or full-length sgRNA2, which harbors the BTE at its
5V end, trans-inhibit translation of BYDV genomic RNA
(gRNA) and (to a much lesser extent) sgRNA1 (Wang et al.,
1999). The inhibition does not require translation of ORF 6,
but does require a functional BTE. Based on these in vitro
data, we proposed that in later stages of the virus replication
cycle, accumulation of sgRNA2 inhibits translation of
RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) from gRNA
while allowing translation of structural proteins from
sgRNA1. Thus, viral RNA replication would be inhibited
by sgRNA2 introduced prematurely in the replication cycle.
Here, we tested this hypothesis. We found that both
Fig. 1. BYDV genome organization. Boxes represent open reading frames
(ORFs) with the sizes of encoded proteins indicated in kilodaltons (K).
Black lines represent genomic RNA (gRNA) and subgenomic RNAs
(sgRNAs). The 3V UTR needed for full cap- and poly(A)-independent
translation in vivo is located between two dashed lines. Gray boxes
represent the in vitro-defined BTE.
197
replicating and nonreplicating RNAs containing the BTE
inhibit BYDV RNA accumulation in trans. sgRNA2
generated during BYDV infection trans-inhibits translation
of a reporter gene and gene expression from BMV RNA,
which suggests that BYDV sgRNA2 inhibits viral replication via inhibition of translation. We also showed that the
BTE in cis increases translation of capped RNA. Our data
suggest that sgRNA2, via its BTE, functions as a
riboregulator to negatively control translation of the viral
RdRp, thus replication of BYDV RNA.
Results
Nonreplicating BTE and sgRNA2 RNAs trans-inhibit
accumulation of BYDV RNAs in infected plant cells
In wheat germ extract, both the 105-nt BTE and
sgRNA2, which harbors the BTE at its 5V end, trans-inhibit
the translation of BYDV genomic RNA (gRNA) and
sgRNA1 (Wang et al., 1999). In natural infection, the molar
ratio of sgRNA2 to sgRNA1 and gRNA is similar to the
ratio that strongly inhibits translation of gRNA and weakly
inhibits translation of sgRNA1 in vitro. Thus, we predict
that addition of excess BTE or sgRNA2 during inoculation
with BYDV RNA should inhibit BYDV replication via
premature inhibition of translation of the RdRp from
genomic RNA. To test this prediction, we co-inoculated
oat protoplasts with the 105-nt BTE (TE105) or the 109-nt
nonfunctional mutant BTE (TEBF) transcripts and wild-type
infectious BYDV transcript, PAV6. TEBF contains a GAUC
duplication in the BamHI4837 site that completely abolishes
cap-independent translation mediated by the BTE in cis
(Wang et al., 1997). The accumulated BYDV gRNA and
sgRNA levels at 24 h post-inoculation (hpi) were detected
by northern blot hybridization. When co-inoculated with
PAV6 RNA into oat protoplasts, nonreplicating TE105 RNA
trans-inhibited BYDV RNA accumulation including the
sgRNAs (Fig. 2A, lanes 1 and 3). The defective mutant
TEBF did not inhibit PAV6 replication (Fig. 2A, lane 4).
The trans-inhibitory effects of the BTE were dosedependent (Fig. 2B, lanes 3–7). As low as 2.5-fold excess
BTE RNA reduced BYDV RNA accumulation (Fig. 2B,
lane 3). Ten-fold excess BTE almost abolished BYDV RNA
accumulation (Fig. 2A, lanes 1 and 3; Fig. 2B, lane 5). Fulllength sgRNA2 and its counterpart containing the TEBF
mutation, sgRNA2BF, had similar effects as TE105 and
TEBF RNAs, respectively, when co-electroporated with
PAV6 (data not shown). Thus, up to a 10-fold excess of
nonreplicating BTE or sgRNA2 trans-inhibited accumulation of BYDV RNA as predicted. However, we were
surprised to find that when we increased the molar ratio of
BTE/PAV6 to z20:1, replication of BYDV RNA was
partially recovered (Fig. 2B, lanes 6 and 7). These results
were highly reproducible in many experiments using
different RNA and protoplast preparations.
198
R. Shen, W.A. Miller / Virology 327 (2004) 196–205
monitor gene expression and to avoid complications caused
by encapsidation, the BMV coat protein ORF was replaced
with that of GFP (Fig. 3). The BTE or TEBF sequence from
BYDV was inserted into the intergenic region between the
3a and coat protein genes of BMV RNA 3, just upstream of
the GFP ORF start codon (Fig. 3). This places the BTE in
the 3V UTR of the 3a gene on RNA 3 and in the 5V UTR of
the GFP-encoding subgenomic RNA 4. The resulting
viruses were designated BMV.TEGFP and BMV.TEBFGFP
(Fig. 3).
We inoculated oat protoplasts simultaneously with
BYDV PAV6, and BMV RNAs 1 + 2 combined with
various RNA 3 transcripts (Fig. 3) that harbor the BTE or its
nonfunctional counterpart, TEBF. BMV RNAs 1, 2, and 3
Fig. 2. Effects of nonreplicating BTE on BYDV RNA accumulation. Fulllength infectious BYDV transcripts from pPAV6 were co-inoculated with in
vitro transcripts of BTE or TEBF (BTE with a BamHI fill-in mutation)
RNA into oat protoplasts. After 24-h incubation, total RNA was extracted
and analyzed by Northern blot hybridization. gRNA and sgRNAs are
indicated. (A) Effects of a 10-fold molar excess of BTE or TEBF on BYDV
RNA accumulation. Inoculum in lanes 1 and 3: PAV6 + 10-fold excess
BTE; lane 2: PAV6 only; lane 4: PAV6 + 10-fold excess TEBF RNA. The
bottom panel shows an ethidium bromide-stained gel to indicate amount of
total RNA loaded in each lane. (B) Effects of increasing molar ratios of
BTE on PAV6 replication. Inoculum in lane 1: no RNA; lane 2: PAV6; lanes
3–7: PAV6 + 2.5-, 5-, 10-, 20-, and 40-fold molar excess BTE, respectively.
Replicating BTE trans-inhibits accumulation of BYDV RNA
We next examined the trans-effects of the BTE in a
replicating context, but still isolated from other potential
regulatory elements in BYDV RNA. To do this, we
developed an expression system from an unrelated virus,
Brome mosaic virus (BMV). BMV is a tripartite RNA virus
in the Bromoviridae family with three genomic RNAs. Only
RNAs 1 and 2 are required for viral RNA replication. RNA3
encodes two ORFs including the coat protein gene. The coat
protein mRNA, subgenomic RNA 4, is generated from
RNA3 during infection (Miller et al., 1985). All BMV
RNAs are capped (Dasgupta et al., 1975), so BMV has no
apparent need for a cap-independent translation element. To
Fig. 3. Genome organization of Brome mosaic virus constructs. Boxes
represent ORFs with the gene names indicated above. CP, coat protein;
GFP, green fluorescent protein. Black ovals indicate 5V cap. Cloverleaves
indicate the 3V tRNA-like structure. Arrows show synthesis of the
subgenomic RNA (RNA 4). Gray boxes indicate the inserted BTE of
BYDV. The sequence of BMV subgenomic core promoter, the secondary
structure of the BTE, and start codon of GFP gene (underlined) are shown
in the dotted box. The GAUC that is duplicated in the BamHI fill-in
mutation is boxed.
R. Shen, W.A. Miller / Virology 327 (2004) 196–205
199
were inoculated in a molar ratio of 1:1:2. To ensure that the
effects were conferred specifically by the BTE, we also
included tRNA and wild-type BMV.GFP RNA (no BTE) as
controls. When co-inoculated with BYDV PAV6,
BMV.TEGFP and BMV.TEBFGFP RNAs replicated similarly, as revealed in northern blot hybridization (Fig. 4A,
lanes 3,4). The BYDV-specific probe detected the engineered BMV RNA3 accumulation due to the presence of the
Fig. 5. (A) Effects of the BTE in cis on expression of GFP from BMV. GFP
fluorescence intensities were measured by using flow cytometry. Mock: oat
protoplasts were electroporated without RNA; hpi, hours post-inoculation.
Vertical bars indicate standard deviation. Each value is a mean of at least
three replicates. (B) Accumulation of recombinant BMV RNAs 3 and 4.
Total RNA was extracted from oat protoplasts 24 h after inoculation with
BMV.GFP, BMV.TEGFP, or BMV.TEBFGFP, and used for northern blot
hybridization. A 32P-labeled probe complementary to the full-length GFP
gene sequence was used to detect recombinant BMV RNAs 3 and 4. The
bottom panel shows the RNA loading control.
Fig. 4. Effects of BTE-containing BMV replication on BYDV RNA
accumulation. Northern blot analyses were done as in Fig. 2. BYDV gRNA
and sgRNAs are indicated. BMV RNAs 3 and 4 were also detected by the
BYDV-derived probe because they contain the BTE. Below each blot,
stained gels show relative loading of total RNA in each lane. Inoculum (A)
in lane 1: no RNA; lane 2: PAV6; lane 3: PAV6 + 4 Ag of BMV.TEGFP;
lane 4: PAV6 + 4 Ag of BMV.TEBFGFP; lane 5: PAV6 + 4 Ag of tRNA;
lane 6: PAV6 + 4 Ag of BMV.GFP. (B) Effects of increasing BMV RNA
inocula on BYDV RNA accumulation. Lane 1: PAV6; lanes 2–5: PAV6 + 1,
2, 4, and 8 Ag of BMV.TEGFP, respectively.
BTE or TEBF sequences. Replicating BMV.TEGFP
inhibited accumulation of BYDV RNA (Fig. 4A, lane 3),
whereas BMV.TEBFGFP (Fig. 4A, lane 4), tRNA (lane 5),
and BMV.GFP (lane 6) did not inhibit BYDV RNA
accumulation as much, if at all. The inhibitory effects
conferred by the BTE from replicating BMV.TEGFP were
dose-dependent (Fig. 4B). When the co-inoculated
BMV.TEGFP RNA was increased from 1 to 4 Ag, the
amounts of BYDV gRNA and sgRNAs decreased (Fig. 4B,
lanes 2–4). However, when co-inoculated with 8 Ag of
BMV.TEGFP, BYDV RNA accumulation was inhibited less
(Fig. 4B, lane 5).
Subgenomic RNA 2 produced during BYDV infection
trans-inhibits gene expression of BMV RNA containing or
lacking the BTE
Having established that the BTE and sgRNA2 transinhibit BYDV RNA replication in vivo, we set out to test the
200
R. Shen, W.A. Miller / Virology 327 (2004) 196–205
mechanism of the inhibition. Based on our in vitro data
(Wang et al., 1999), we proposed that BTE or sgRNA2,
when co-inoculated with BYDV RNA, attenuate replication
via premature inhibition of translation of the RdRp from
genomic RNA. Because of the difficulty of detecting RdRp,
we used BMV.GFP and BMV.TEGFP as sensors to test
whether sgRNA2 could trans-inhibit translation in vivo.
Unexpectedly, we found that the BTE enhanced BMV gene
expression in cis (Figs. 5A, 6C). By using flow cytometry
and UV microscopy, we found that GFP expression levels
from BMV.TEGFP were higher than those from BMV.GFP
(Figs. 5A, 6C). The TEBF leader, which differs from the
BTE by only four bases, reduced GFP expression to near
background levels (Fig. 5A). This may be caused by the
secondary structure in the TEBF impeding ribosome scanning to the start codon. BMV.TEGFP-infected cells fluoresced more brightly than BMV.GFP-infected cells (Fig. 6C),
and the BTE increased the number of cells expressing
detectable levels of GFP. The percentage of oat protoplasts
with green fluorescence was 6.5% (F3.3%) in BMV.
TEGFP-inoculated cells, 2.2% (F0.7%) in the BMV.GFPinoculated group, and 0.25% (F0.12%) in the BMV.
TEBFGFP-inoculated group. Standard deviations from at
least three independent experiments are included in parentheses. For each independent experiment, the GFP expression levels from BMV.TEGFP were 2- to 5-fold higher than
those from BMV.GFP.
The insertions of BTE and TEBF sequences had little
effect on BMV.GFP RNA replication and synthesis of BMV
RNA 4 (Fig. 5B). This result agrees with previous reports
that insertion of a foreign gene within 17 bases downstream
of the RNA 4 start site did not greatly affect subgenomic
RNA synthesis (French et al., 1986). Because presence of
the BTE had little effect on BMV RNA accumulation (Fig.
Fig. 6. Effects of subgenomic RNA2 (sgRNA2) expressed from BYDV, in trans, on expression of GFP from BMV. (A) BYDV RNA was co-inoculated with
BMV.GFP transcripts into oat protoplasts. At different time points post-inoculation, a portion of cells was collected and GFP fluorescence intensities were
measured by using flow cytometry. PAV6, wild-type BYDV; PAV6DSG2, one base mutation (G4810C) of PAV6 that knocks out sgRNA2 synthesis; hpi, hours
post-inoculation. Each point is the mean of at least three replicates. Vertical bars indicate standard deviation. (B) Accumulation of PAV6 and PAV6DSG2
progeny RNA in oat protoplasts. Cells were collected at the indicated time points post-inoculation, total RNA was extracted and used for northern blot
hybridization. gRNA and sgRNAs are indicated. The bottom panel shows the RNA loading. The decrease in viral RNA at 72 hpi is due to a decrease in viable
protoplasts. (C) Oat protoplasts infected with BMV.GFP, BMV.TEGFP alone, or with PAV6 or PAV6DSG2. Pictures were taken under UV microscopy 24 hpi.
(D) RNA accumulation of BMV.GFP and BMV.TEGFP in oat protoplasts. Total RNA was extracted from protoplasts in panel C at 24 hpi and used for Northern
blot hybridization. 32P-labeled probe complementary to full-length GFP gene sequence was used to detect recombinant BMV RNAs 3 and 4. The bottom panel
shows RNA loading control.
R. Shen, W.A. Miller / Virology 327 (2004) 196–205
5B), but increased GFP expression, these data indicate that
the insertion of the BTE in the 5V UTR of non-BYDV (i.e.
BMV) mRNA increased translation. Thus, in addition to
providing cap-independent translation, the BTE also
increases the translation of capped mRNAs.
To test whether sgRNA2 can trans-inhibit translation in
vivo, we co-inoculated BMV.GFP RNA with wild-type
BYDV infectious transcript PAV6, or with a mutant,
PAV6DSG2 RNA. PAV6DSG2 contains a point mutation
(G4810C) that knocks out sgRNA2 synthesis but has little
effect on accumulation of the other BYDV RNAs (Koev and
Miller, 2000). When co-inoculated with BMV.GFP RNA,
wild-type PAV6 reduced GFP expression from BMV.GFP
by 2- to 6-fold (Figs. 6A, C). PAV6DSG2 was less
inhibitory (Figs. 6A, C). The degrees of inhibition of GFP
expression by PAV6 were similar at different time points
(Fig. 6A). The reason for the reduced inhibition by
PAV6DSG2 was not due to reduced replication of
PAV6DSG2 relative to PAV6. Both PAV6DSG2 and PAV6
replicated similarly in the presence of BMV.GFP (Fig. 6B).
The experiments above show that sgRNA2 inhibits
expression of RNA lacking the BTE. To examine whether
sgRNA2 inhibits translation of BTE-containing RNA in a
BYDV infection, we co-inoculated oat protoplasts with
BMV.TEGFP RNA and either PAV6 or PAV6DSG2 RNA.
PAV6 reduced GFP expression from BMV.TEGFP substantially, whereas PAV6DSG2 only slightly reduced the
expression level of GFP (Fig. 6C). Northern blot hybridization revealed that PAV6 and PAV6DSG2 also inhibited
accumulation of RNAs 3 and 4 of BMV.GFP and
BMV.TEGFP (Fig. 6D), and that PAV6 showed higher
inhibitory effects than PAV6DSG2 did (Fig. 6D). Thus,
accumulated sgRNA2 in BYDV-infected cells trans-inhibits
GFP expression from BMV RNAs that contain or lack a
BTE. These experiments do not differentiate whether the
reduced GFP levels are due to inhibition of translation,
transcription, or replication of the GFP mRNA, or a
combination of these events.
Subgenomic RNA2 in BYDV-infected cells inhibits
translation of reporter mRNA
To determine whether the inhibition of gene expression
by BYDV sgRNA2 is at the level of translation, we tested
the effect of BYDV infection on translation of a nonreplicating reporter mRNA construct in oat protoplasts. A
two-step electroporation method was developed. First oat
protoplasts were inoculated with infectious BYDV PAV6 or
PAV6DSG2 RNA by electroporation. After 24-h incubation
to allow genomic RNA replication and accumulation of
sgRNAs, protoplasts were electroporated again with reporter
cap-fLuc-A(60). This is a capped and polyadenylated firefly
luciferase gene lacking any viral sequence. The firefly
luciferase activity was analyzed after another 4-h incubation. Inoculation of 1 pmol of PAV6 RNA in the first step
caused a 60% drop in translation of cap-fLuc-A(60), whereas
201
Fig. 7. (A) Differential effects of PAV6 and PAV6DSG2 replication on
translation of reporter construct cap-fLuc-A(60). Twenty-four hours after
inoculation of PAV6 or PAV6DSG2 RNA, oat protoplasts were reelectroporated with 1 pmol cap-fLuc-A(60) transcript. Luciferase activities
were analyzed 4 h later. (B) Northern blot analysis of replication of PAV6
and PAV6DSG2. Lane 1, PAV6. Lane 2, PAV6DSG2.
inoculation of PAV6DSG2 RNA in first step had no effect
on translation (Fig. 7A). Again, PAV6 and PAV6DSG2
RNAs accumulated to similar levels (Fig. 7B). Thus, the
inhibition of gene expression by BYDV sgRNA2 most
likely functions at the level of translation.
Discussion
Subgenomic RNA2 trans-inhibits the accumulation of BYDV
RNA
Subgenomic RNAs of positive-sense RNA viruses in
many plant virus families and the Nidovirales class and
Togaviridae and Nodaviridae families of animal viruses all
have been considered to be messenger RNAs required for
expression of 3V-proximal viral genes. In this report, we
show that sgRNA2 of BYDV has a different function, acting
as a trans-inhibitor of RNA replication via the BTE in its 5V
end. In three different contexts, nonreplicating 105-nt BTE
RNA, replicating BMV RNA, and expressed as sgRNA2 in
natural BYDV infection, the BTE inhibited viral RNA
accumulation in trans. RNAs containing the nonfunctional
TEBF sequence that differs from BTE by only a four base
202
R. Shen, W.A. Miller / Virology 327 (2004) 196–205
duplication did not inhibit in trans. In a natural infection,
the trans-function of BTE is fulfilled in the context of
sgRNA2, which is not detectable until about 10 hpi (data not
shown), after translation of RdRp from gRNA. Thus, we
propose that BYDV sgRNA2 trans-inhibits translation of
BYDV RNAs via its BTE to act as a switch that turns off
translation of gRNA. When introduced artificially at the
very beginning of infection (co-inoculated with gRNA),
sgRNA2 prevents the initial translation of gRNA, blocking
infection all together. These results reveal that viral
subgenomic RNAs do not always serve as mRNAs, and
instead can perform important regulatory functions.
The inhibitory effects of the BTE and sgRNA2 on
BYDV replication and transcription were dose-dependent
(Figs. 2B, 4B). The dose dependency up to 10-fold excess
supports our hypothesis that BTE and sgRNA2 transinhibited translation of capped and uncapped mRNAs by
competing for translation initiation factor(s) (Wang et al.,
1997). The BTE inhibits translation of capped, polyadenylated non-viral RNA in vitro (Wang et al., 1997) and in vivo
(Fig. 7). Added eIF4F reversed the trans-inhibition effect
caused by BTE in vitro (Wang et al., 1997), and the BTE
specifically binds eIF4F and eIFiso4F (E. Allen, E. Pettit,
and W.A. Miller, unpublished data). Moreover, our preliminary data suggest that sgRNA2 (via its BTE) inhibits
translation of cellular mRNAs (R. Shen, W. Staplin,
unpublished data).
Surprisingly, the replication of BYDV was not inhibited
as much when the molar ratio of BTE/PAV6 was increased to
20:1 and 40:1. One possible explanation for this result is that,
at these higher concentrations, the BTE may base pair to the
viral 5VUTR by the kissing stem-loop interaction in trans
instead of in cis. Thus, high concentrations of added BTE
may stimulate translation by delivering translation factors to
the 5VUTR in trans. This process would be possible only if
the BTE in the 105 nt or sgRNA2 5V UTR context has a
higher affinity for factors than the BTE in the 3V UTR
context, so that at the highest concentrations of added BTE,
there are still free factors available to bind BTE105 but
which are too low in concentration to bind the BTE within
BYDV genomic RNA to stimulate translation in cis.
A second possibility for the decreased inhibition at high
BTE/sgRNA2 is that, at the highest concentrations, the BTE
may not fold into a functional secondary structure, preventing trans-inhibition that occurs at lower concentrations.
It is noteworthy that the dose–response curve resembles
the bbell-shapedQ double-stranded RNA activated PKR
antiviral response in mammals. dsRNA induces the
response, but excessively high concentrations of dsRNA
prevent dimerization of PKR necessary for autophosphorylation to initiate shut-off of translation (Davis and Watson,
1996; Hunter et al., 1975). A PKR system may also exist in
plants (Bilgin et al., 2003) so we cannot rule out the
possibility that the BTE may induce a PKR-like translational
shutdown, as is the case for the highly structured 3V UTRs of
some tumor-suppressing genes (Nussbaum et al., 2002).
Subgenomic RNA 2 trans-inhibits gene expression from
RNAs containing or lacking the BTE
Wild-type PAV6 trans-inhibited GFP expression from an
unrelated virus, BMV with or without the BTE, whereas
PAV6DSG2 did not (Figs. 6A and C). Thus, the decreased
expression levels of GFP were caused by BYDV sgRNA2.
There are at least two explanations for the differential effect
of PAV6 and PAV6DSG2 on the translation of GFP from
BMV. The first is that specific BTE secondary structure
present only in the sgRNA2 context, but not gRNA and
sgRNA1 due to position effect, and is required for the transinhibition function. A more likely reason for the lack of transinhibition by the BTE in the gRNA and sgRNA1 contexts
(PAV6DSG2) is that gRNA and sgRNA1 are normally
present at N10-fold lower concentrations than sgRNA2.
Furthermore, most gRNA may be sequestered in virions.
Feedback regulation of BYDV gene expression by its
sgRNA2
The correlation between the stimulatory function of the
BTE in cis and ability to inhibit virus replication in trans
provides strong evidence that the same factors are used in
trans-inhibition and cis-stimulation of translation. Competition studies showed that both sgRNA2 and the BTE transinhibited translation of gRNA in vitro (Wang et al., 1999).
Here, we showed that sgRNA2 trans-inhibited translation of
reporter mRNA (Fig. 7) and GFP expression from BMV in
vivo (Fig. 6). These data suggest that the BTE and sgRNA2
trans-inhibit BYDV RNA replication and transcription by
inhibiting translation of genomic RNA which prevents the
production of the RdRp. However, we cannot rule out the
possibility that sgRNA2 may also trans-inhibit RNA
replication or transcription directly.
Combined with previously reported results, we propose a
feedback regulation mechanism (Fig. 8): in the earliest stage
of BYDV infection, viral RdRp is translated via BTEmediated cap-independent translation of gRNA (Stage 1,
Fig. 8). The RdRp then carries out viral RNA replication
and sgRNA synthesis (Stage 2, Fig. 8). Viral RNAs
accumulate with sgRNA2 becoming particularly abundant.
Accumulated sgRNA2, via its 5V BTE, trans-inhibits
translation of BYDV RdRp from gRNA (Stage 3, Fig. 8).
This switches gRNA from its mRNA function to its
replicase template function and also allows it to be
encapsidated, that is, gRNA is available for replication by
the existing RdRp and for encapsidation (Stage 4, Fig. 8).
It is noteworthy that BYDV RNA accumulates in the
absence of sgRNA2 (Figs. 6B, 7B, PAV6DSG2), thus
sgRNA2 is not essential for virus replication at least for
72 h in protoplasts. Moreover, the mechanism requires
replication before the sgRNA2-mediated switch-off of
translation. Thus, sgRNA2 may serve subtle regulatory
roles, such as enhancing a different translational switch-off
mechanism mediated by the replicase itself, that was
R. Shen, W.A. Miller / Virology 327 (2004) 196–205
Fig. 8. Model for feedback regulation of BYDV gene expression. In the
early stage of BYDV infection, viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase
(RdRp) is produced via BTE-mediated cap-independent translation of
gRNA (stage 1). The RdRp then carries out viral RNA replication and
sgRNA synthesis (stage 2). Viral RNAs accumulate with sgRNA2 being
particularly abundant. Accumulated sgRNA2, via its BTE, trans-inhibits
translation of RdRp from gRNA (stage 3). Genomic RNA switches from
translation to replication and encapsidation, that is, gRNA is available for
replication by the existing RdRp and for encapsidation (stage 4). ORF 1 and
2: RdRp. ORF 3: coat protein (CP). ORF 4: movement protein. ORF 5:
readthrough domain (RT).
proposed previously (Barry and Miller, 2002). The effect of
sgRNA2 on fitness of BYDV in plants and in the field
remain to be tested.
A new regulatory role for a viral subgenomic RNA
We show here that RNA harboring the BTE transinhibits translation of other BTE-containing RNAs in vivo,
as well as translation of RNA lacking the BTE. Thus, the
BTE serves as a riboregulator, as proposed from previous in
vitro translation experiments (Wang et al., 1999). Substantial evidence indicates that sgRNA2 is not translatable in
vivo (A. Rakotondrafara, personal communication). In vitro
data also showed that inhibition of translation by sgRNA2
does not require expression of ORF 6 (Wang et al., 1999).
Thus, if sgRNA2 is not translatable, it must serve a nonmRNA function, such as a riboregulator.
Other trans-regulatory RNAs of RNA viruses have been
reported. A 34-nt sequence in RNA2 of Red clover necrotic
mosaic virus trans-activates synthesis of sgRNA from
RNA1 by base pairing to RNA1 (Sit et al., 1998).
Replication of FHV RNA2 is dependent on the synthesis
of subgenomic RNA from RNA1 (Albarino et al., 2003;
Eckerle and Ball, 2002). FHV RNA2 then down-regulates
synthesis of the subgenomic RNA from RNA1 (Zhong and
Rueckert, 1993).
With regard to trans-regulation of translation, Adenovirus virus-associated (VA) RNAs (Mathews and Shenk,
1991) and Epstein–Barr virus EBER RNAs (Bhat and
203
Thimmappaya, 1983; Clarke et al., 1990) protect against
dsRNA-activated inhibitor (DAI)-mediated phosphorylation
of eIF-2a by binding DAI (Sharp et al., 1993). Like BYDV
sgRNA2, VA and EBER RNAs are nontranslated. As a 3V
UTR-derived trans-inhibitor of translation, sgRNA2
sequence resembles the cellular tumor suppressor genes
for which the term riboregulator was first coined. The 3V
UTRs of alpha-tropomyosin (Rastinejad et al., 1993) and
other (Manjeshwar et al., 2003) mRNAs alone have tumor
suppressor activity. The former acts by PKR-mediated
inhibition of translation (Davis and Watson, 1996). More
recently, large classes of noncoding microRNAs (miRNA)
have been found that regulate gene expression either by
inducing mRNA degradation (RNAi) or by blocking translation (Bartel, 2004; Carrington and Ambros, 2003).
Recently, Epstein–Barr virus has been shown to express
miRNAs that target both host and viral mRNAs (Pfeffer et
al., 2004). While its mechanism of action remains to be fully
elucidated, sgRNA2 of BYDV appears to be a new example
of a trans-regulatory RNA.
Materials and methods
Plasmids
Infectious BYDV-PAV genomic RNA was transcribed
from the full-length clone, pPAV6 (Di et al., 1993). The
sgRNA2 knockout mutant clone of BYDV-PAV,
pPAV6DSG2, referred to previously as SG2G/C (Koev and
Miller, 2000), differs from pPAV6 by a G to C mutation at
position 4810, which prevents sgRNA2 synthesis. pTE and
pTEBF are clones for T7 transcription of the 105-nt BTE
RNA (TE105) and its nonfunctional mutant TEBF (Wang et
al., 1997). pSG2 and pSG2BF allow T7 transcription of the
869-nt sgRNA2 and its nonfunctional mutant sgRNA2BF,
respectively (Wang et al., 1999). Both pTEBF and pSG2BF
contain a GATC duplication in the BamHI site in the BTE.
This duplication destroys the cap-independent translation
function of the BTE (Wang et al., 1997, 1999).
BMV RNA clones were kindly provided by A.L.N. Rao
(University of California, Riverside). pT7B1, pT7B2, and
pT7B3 are clones for T7 transcription of BMV RNA1,
RNA2, and RNA3, respectively (Dreher et al., 1989).
pT7B3EGFP is a clone of BMV RNA3 with the coat protein
gene replaced by an enhanced green fluorescent protein
(GFP) gene (Rao, 1997). To construct pT7B3TEGFP for T7
transcription of BMV.TEGFP RNA3, the 109-nt fragment
corresponding to the BTE (nt 4809–4918) was amplified
from pPAV6 by PCR using the upstream primer, 5VG G A G AT C TAT G T C C TA AT T C A G C G TAT TA ATA GTGAAGACAACACCA-3V, and the downstream primer,
5V-CCTGAAGTCGAC ATTCGGCCAAACACAATACGATA-3V. The PCR products were cut with BglII and SalI
(restriction sites are in italics), then ligated with pT7B3EGFP
that had also been digested with BglII and SalI. The same
204
R. Shen, W.A. Miller / Virology 327 (2004) 196–205
32
strategy was used to clone pT7B3TEBFGFP, except the
template for PCR was pSG2BF. The pT7B3TEGFP and
pT7B3TEBFGFP constructs were verified by sequencing at
the DNA Sequencing and Synthesis Nucleic Acid Facility of
Iowa State University on an ABI377 sequencer (Applied
Biosystems, Foster City, CA).
P-labeled probe complementary to the full-length GFP
gene sequence RNA to detect recombinant BMV RNAs 3
and 4.
RNA preparation and infection of protoplasts
The authors thank A.L.N. Rao for providing pT7B3EGFP
and infectious clones of BMV, and Andy Ball for helpful
discussion. This research was funded by grants from USDA/
NRI (2001-35319-10011) and NIGMS (GM067104).
The capped and uncapped RNAs were synthesized by in
vitro transcription by using the T7 mMESSAGE mMACHINE or MegaScript kits (Ambion, Austin, TX) as per
manufacturer’s instructions. For transcription of infectious
RNAs, BYDV constructs were linearized with SmaI to give a
perfect genomic 3V end. pT7B1, pT7B2, pT7B3GFP,
pT7B3TEGFP were linearized with BamHI. pT7B3TEGFP
was linearized with Tth111I. Oat (Avena sativa cv. Stout)
protoplasts were prepared and inoculated with RNA as
described by Dinesh-Kumar and Miller (1993). Except when
explicitly stated otherwise, 10 Ag of RNA transcript was used
for BYDV inoculation and 4 Ag of BMV RNAs 1, 2, and 3 in a
molar ratio of 1:1:2 were used for BMV inoculation.
Two-step electroporation
In the first step, oat protoplasts were inoculated with
infectious BYDV PAV6 or PAV6 = C6SG2 RNA by electroporation as described by Dinesh-Kumar and Miller (1993),
except that voltage was 280V. After incubation for 24 h at
room temperature, cells were pelleted at 100 g for 4 min,
washed in electroporation buffer, centrifuged again at 100 g for 4 min, then electroporated in the presence of the
appropriate RNA at 280V.
Analysis of GFP expression
Oat protoplasts were analyzed for GFP expression 24, 48,
72, and 96 h after inoculation by flow cytometry by using an
ELITE ESP fluorescence-activated cell sorter (BeckmanCoulter, Anaheim, CA) at the Cell and Hybridoma Facility of
Iowa State University. All data presented in this report were
obtained from at least three independent experiments.
Northern blot hybridization
Total RNA was extracted from protoplasts by using the
RNeasy plant RNA isolation kit (QIAGEN, Los Angeles,
CA) as per manufacturer’s instructions. Protoplasts were
collected at indicated times post-inoculation, RNA extracted,
and analyzed by Northern blot as described previously (Koev
et al., 1999). A 32P-labeled probe complementary to the 1.5kb 3V-terminal sequence of BYDV-PAV RNA was used to
detect BYDV gRNA and sgRNAs (Koev et al., 1999).
Because of the low replication level of BMV RNAs 3 and 4
in oat protoplasts, we could hardly detect these two RNAs by
using BMV tRNA-like structure probe. Instead, we used a
Acknowledgments
References
Albarino, C.G., Eckerle, L.D., Ball, L.A., 2003. The cis-acting replication
signal at the 3V end of Flock House virus RNA2 is RNA3-dependent.
Virology 311, 181 – 191.
Allen, E., Wang, S., Miller, W.A., 1999. Barley yellow dwarf virus RNA
requires a cap-independent translation sequence because it lacks a 5V
cap. Virology 253, 139 – 144.
Barry, J.K., Miller, W.A., 2002. A programmed -1 ribosomal frameshift that
requires base-pairing across four kilobases suggests a novel mechanism
for controlling ribosome and replicase traffic on a viral RNA. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99, 11133 – 11138.
Bartel, D.P., 2004. MicroRNAs: genomics, biogenesis, mechanism, and
function. Cell 116, 281 – 297.
Bhat, R.A., Thimmappaya, B., 1983. Two small RNAs encoded by
Epstein–Barr virus can functionally substitute for the virus-associated
RNAs in the lytic growth of adenovirus 5. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
80, 4789 – 4793.
Bilgin, D.D., Liu, Y., Schiff, M., Dinesh-Kumar, S.P., 2003. P58(IPK), a
plant ortholog of double-stranded RNA-dependent protein kinase PKR
inhibitor, functions in viral pathogenesis. Dev. Cell. 4, 651 – 661.
Brown, C.M., Dinesh-Kumar, S.P., Miller, W.A., 1996. Local and distant
sequences are required for efficient read-through of the barley yellow
dwarf virus-PAV coat protein gene stop codon. J. Virol. 70, 5884 – 5892.
Carrington, J.C., Ambros, V., 2003. Role of microRNAs in plant and animal
development. Science 301, 336 – 338.
Chay, C.A., Gunasinge, U.B., Dinesh-Kumar, S.P., Miller, W.A., Gray,
S.M., 1996. Aphid transmission and systemic plant infection determinants of barley yellow dwarf luteovirus-PAV are contained in the coat
protein readthrough domain and 17-kDa protein, respectively. Virology
219, 57 – 65.
Clarke, P.A., Sharp, N.A., Arrand, J.R., Clemens, M.J., 1990. Epstein–Barr
virus gene expression in interferon-treated cells-implications for the
regulation of protein synthesis and the antiviral state. Biochim.
Biophys. Acta 1050, 167 – 173.
Dasgupta, R., Shih, D.S., Saris, C., Kaesberg, P., 1975. Nucleotide
sequence of a viral RNA fragment that binds to eukaryotic ribosomes.
Nature 256, 624 – 628.
Davis, S., Watson, J.C., 1996. In vitro activation of the interferon-induced,
double-stranded RNA-dependent protein kinase PKR by RNA from the
3V untranslated regions of human a-tropomyosin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 93, 508 – 513.
Di, R., Dinesh-Kumar, S.P., Miller, W.A., 1993. Translational frameshifting
by barley yellow dwarf virus RNA (PAV serotype) in Escherichia coli
and in eukaryotic cell-free extracts. Mol. Plant-Microb. Interact. 6,
444 – 452.
Dinesh-Kumar, S.P., Miller, W.A., 1993. Control of start codon choice on a
plant viral RNA encoding overlapping genes. Plant Cell 5, 679 – 692.
Domier, L.L., McCoppin, N.K., Larsen, R.C., D’Arcy, C.J., 2002.
Nucleotide sequence shows that Bean leafroll virus has a Luteoviruslike genome organization. J. Gen. Virol. 83, 1791 – 1798.
R. Shen, W.A. Miller / Virology 327 (2004) 196–205
Dreher, T.W., Rao, A.L., Hall, T.C., 1989. Replication in vivo of mutant
brome mosaic virus RNAs defective in aminoacylation. J. Mol. Biol.
206, 425 – 438.
Eckerle, L.D., Ball, L.A., 2002. Replication of the RNA segments of a
bipartite viral genome is coordinated by a transactivating subgenomic
RNA. Virology 296, 165 – 176.
French, R., Janda, M., Ahlquist, P., 1986. Bacterial gene inserted in an
engineered RNA virus: efficient expression in monocotyledonoous
plant cells. Science 231, 1294 – 1297.
Gale Jr., M., Tan, S.L., Katze, M.G., 2000. Translational control of viral gene
expression in eukaryotes. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 64, 239 – 280.
Guo, L., Allen, E., Miller, W.A., 2000. Structure and function of a capindependent translation element that functions in either the 3V or the 5V
untranslated region. RNA 6, 1808 – 1820.
Guo, L., Allen, E., Miller, W.A., 2001. Base-pairing between untranslated
regions facilitates translation of uncapped, nonpolyadenylated viral
RNA. Mol. Cell. 7, 1103 – 1109.
Hunter, T., Hunt, T., Jackson, R.J., Robertson, H.D., 1975. The characteristics of inhibition of protein synthesis by double-stranded ribonucleic
acid in reticulocyte lysates. J. Biol. Chem. 250, 409 – 417.
Koev, G., Miller, W.A., 2000. A positive strand RNA virus with three very
different subgenomic RNA promoters. J. Virol. 74, 5988 – 5996.
Koev, G., Mohan, B.R., Miller, W.A., 1999. Primary and secondary
structural elements required for synthesis of barley yellow dwarf virus
subgenomic RNA1. J. Virol. 73, 2876 – 2885.
Lease, R.A., Belfort, M., 2000. A trans-acting RNA as a control switch in
Escherichia coli: DsrA modulates function by forming alternative
structures. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 97, 9919 – 9924.
Macdonald, P., 2001. Diversity in translational regulation. Curr. Opin. Cell.
Biol. 13, 326 – 331.
Manjeshwar, S., Branam, D.E., Lerner, M.R., Brackett, D.J., Jupe, E.R.,
2003. Tumor suppression by the Prohibitin gene 3V untranslated region
RNA in human breast cancer. Cancer Res. 63, 5251 – 5256.
Mathews, M.B., Shenk, T., 1991. Adenovirus virus-associated RNA and
translation control. J. Virol. 65, 5657 – 5662.
Mazumder, B., Seshadri, V., Fox, P.L., 2003. Translational control by the
3V-UTR: the ends specify the means. Trends Biochem. Sci. 28, 91 – 98.
Meulewaeter, F., Van Lipzig, R., Gultyaev, A.P., Pleij, C.W., Van Damme,
D., Cornelissen, M., Van Eldik, G., 2004. Conservation of RNA
structures enables TNV and BYDV 5V and 3V elements to cooperate
synergistically in cap-independent translation. Nucleic Acids Res. 32,
1721 – 1730.
Miller, W.A., Dreher, T.W., Hall, T.C., 1985. Synthesis of brome mosaic
virus subgenomic RNA in vitro by internal initiation on ( ) sense
genomic RNA. Nature 313, 68 – 70.
Miller, W.A., Brown, C.M., Wang, S., 1997. New punctuation for the
genetic code: luteovirus gene expression. Semin. Virol. 8, 3 – 13.
205
Miller, W.A., Liu, S., Beckett, R., 2002. Barley yellow dwarf virus:
Luteoviridae or Tombusviridae? Mol. Plant Pathol. 3, 177 – 183.
Mizumoto, H., Tatsuta, M., Kaido, M., Mise, K., Okuno, T., 2003. Capindependent translational enhancement by the 3V untranslated region of
red clover necrotic mosaic virus RNA1. J. Virol. 77, 12113 – 12121.
Nussbaum, J.M., Gunnery, S., Mathews, M.B., 2002. The 3V-untranslated
regions of cytoskeletal muscle mRNAs inhibit translation by activating
the double-stranded RNA-dependent protein kinase PKR. Nucleic
Acids Res. 30, 1205 – 1212.
Paul, C.P., Barry, J.K., Dinesh-Kumar, S.P., Brault, V., Miller, W.A., 2001. A
sequence required for -1 ribosomal frameshifting located four kilobases
downstream of the frameshift site. J. Mol. Biol. 310, 987 – 999.
Pfeffer, S., Zavolan, M., Grasser, F.A., Chien, M., Russo, J.J., Ju, J., John,
B., Enright, A.J., Marks, D., Sander, C., Tuschl, T., 2004. Identification
of virus-encoded mRNAs. Science 304, 734 – 736.
Rao, A.L., 1997. Molecular studies on bromovirus capsid protein: III.
Analysis of cell- to-cell movement competence of coat protein defective
variants of cowpea chlorotic mottle virus. Virology 232, 385 – 395.
Rastinejad, F., Conboy, M.J., Rando, T.A., Blau, H.M., 1993. Tumor
suppression by RNA from the 3V untranslated region of a-tropomyosin.
Cell 75, 1107 – 1117.
Rathjen, J.P., Karageorgos, L.E., Habili, N., Waterhouse, P.M., Symons,
R.H., 1994. Soybean dwarf luteovirus contains the third variant genome
type in the luteovirus group. Virology 198, 571 – 579.
Reinhart, B.J., Slack, F.J., Basson, M., Pasquinelli, A.E., Bettinger, J.C.,
Rougvie, A.E., Horvitz, H.R., Ruvkun, G., 2000. The 21-nucleotide let7 RNA regulates developmental timing in Caenorhabditis elegans.
Nature 403, 901 – 906.
Sharp, T.V., Schwemmle, M., Jeffrey, I., Laing, K., Mellor, H., Proud, C.G.,
Hilse, K., Clemens, M.J., 1993. Comparative analysis of the regulation
of the interferon-inducible protein kinase PKR by Epstein–Barr virus
RNAs EBER-1 and EBER-2 and adenovirus VAI RNA. Nucleic Acids
Res. 21, 4483 – 4490.
Shen, R., Miller, W.A., 2004. The 3Vuntranslated region of tobacco necrosis
virus RNA contains a Barley yellow dwarf virus-like cap-independent
translation element. J. Virol. 78, 4655 – 4664.
Sit, T.L., Vaewhongs, A.A., Lommel, S.A., 1998. RNA-mediated transactivation of transcription from a viral RNA. Science 281, 829 – 832.
Wang, S., Browning, K.S., Miller, W.A., 1997. A viral sequence in the 3Vuntranslated region mimics a 5V cap in facilitating translation of
uncapped mRNA. EMBO J. 16, 4107 – 4116.
Wang, S., Guo, L., Allen, E., Miller, W.A., 1999. A potential mechanism
for selective control of cap-independent translation by a viral RNA
sequence in cis and in trans. RNA 5, 728 – 738.
Zhong, W., Rueckert, R.R., 1993. Flock house virus: down-regulation of
subgenomic RNA3 synthesis does not involve coat protein and is
targeted to synthesis of its positive strand. J. Virol. 67, 2716 – 2722.