Supporting Information

McLaughlin et al. 10.1073/pnas.0909777106

Fig. S1. Growth of the most resistant 15 deletion strains compared to the wild-type. The wild-type and the most resistant 15 deletion strains were grown in liquid YPD media for 20 h at 30 °C on different concentrations of Tcin.

McLaughlin et al. www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0909777106 1of9 Fig. S2. Viability of BY4743 and the most resistant 15 mutants. Serial dilutions were spotted on YPD plates containing 12 ␮M Tcin (A)or24␮M Tcin (B).

McLaughlin et al. www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0909777106 2of9 Fig. S3. Growth of the most resistant 15 strains in the presence of Tcin in YPD or YPG media. The most resistant 15 strains were grown on 2, 4, or 8 ␮M Tcin in liquid YPD or YPG media. Cells were incubated at 30 °C for 20 h in YPD media or for 48 h at 30 °C in YPG media. Relative growth was calculated as the ratio between the growth of treated cells to that of untreated cells with a ratio of 1.0, indicating no effect on growth.

McLaughlin et al. www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0909777106 3of9 Fig. S4. Relative growth of BY4743 and the top 15 Tcin-resistant mutants in the presence of cycloheximide or hygromycin. (A) Cells were grown in 0.5 ␮g/mL or 1 ␮g/mL cycloheximide. (B) Cells were grown in 10 ␮g/mL hygromycin B in either liquid YPD or YPG media. Relative growth was calculated as the ratio between growth of treated cells to that of untreated cells with a ratio of 1.0, indicating no effect on growth. Error bars, the standard error of two independent experiments with each experiment performed in triplicate.

McLaughlin et al. www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0909777106 4of9 Fig. S5. Growth of the 15 Tcin resistant strains in the presence of anisomycin in YPD or YPG media. The 15 Tcin resistant strains were grown in YPD or YPG liquid media containing 2.5, 5, or 7.5 ␮g/mL anisomycin. Cells in YPD media were incubated at 30 °C for 20 h, while cells in YPG media were grown for 48 h at 30 °C. Relative growth was calculated as the ratio between growth of treated cells to that of untreated cells with a ratio of 1.0, indicating no effect on growth.

McLaughlin et al. www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0909777106 5of9 Fig. S6. Effects of Tcin on total and mitochondrial in the most resistant 15 deletion strains. Total translation (A) and mitochondrial translation (B) for the wild-type and the most resistant 15 deletion mutants is shown. Samples were treated with 8 ␮M Tcin/OD600 of cells for1hasdescribed in the Materials and Methods. Each graph represents the mean of four independent experiments with error bars representing the standard deviation.

McLaughlin et al. www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0909777106 6of9 Fig. S7. Verification of the top 15 Tcin-resistant deletion strains and the BY4743 rho0 strain. (A) Each strain was verified by PCR amplification using specific cassette primers unique to each strain as described in the Materials and Methods. The amplification products were separated on a 1% agarose gel. MW denotes the molecular marker. The parental strain, BY4743, is included as the negative control. (B) Southern blot analysis of the BY4743 strain (rhoϩ) and a rho0 strain derived from the parental BY4743 strain using COX1 as a probe. The lower panel shows the ethidium bromide stained DNA separated on a 1% agarose gel, indicating equal loading of the samples.

McLaughlin et al. www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0909777106 7of9 Table S1. S. cerevisiae strains that showed resistance to 4 ␮M Tcin* GO Process term (s)

Translation MRP21, FES1, CBP6, MRPL36, MRPS5, MRPL37, MRPL27, MRPL32, SLM5, IMG1, IMG2, MTF2, MRP10, MRPL28, RSM18, RPL29, RPL1B, RSM27, MRPL9, RRF1, MSR1, MRPL6, MEF2, RPL39, RSM26, MRP17, MRPL13, SLS1, TMA7, MRPL15, MRPL4, AEP1, MTG1, MRP7, MSK1, SWS2, MRPL10, IFM1, MSD1, MRP51, MRPL40, MSF1, MRPL51, MRP2 RNA metabolic process SLM5, MTF2, MBP1, MHR1, ARO80, RAI1, MSR1, NUC1, TOF2, DCS1, DSS1, HER2, MSK1, MRM1, VTS1, AEP3, SKS1, SGF11, RLM1, MSD1, MSF1 Transport MDM10, ERV46, YMC2, YSY6, MCH1, ATP17, AFG3, GLO3, FLC3, PCP1,YAP1802, OCT1, MMM1, ATP14, MSK1, MDM12, SKS1, ATP15 Generation of energy COX9, ATP17, QCR7, ABC1, COX6, PET10, SLS1, ATP14, COQ5, NDI1, PPA2, HER2, PCL8, ATP15, MRPL51 Lipid metabolic process CEM1, FAB1, ICT1, UPS1, LCB5, IZH4, SUR1, YDC1 Transcription MBP1, MHR1, ARO80, RAI1, TOF2, SKS1, SGF11, RLM1 DNA metabolic process RIM1, MBP1, RAD57, HFM1, NUC1, MGM101, IRC19, HMI1, MET7 Cellular amino acid metabolic process SLM5, ARO80, MSR1, HER2, MSK1, MSD1, ICL2, MSF1 Membrane organization MDM10, FZO1, GLO3, YAP1802, MMM1, MDM12 biogenesis MRH4, RAI1, MRPL9, MTG1, MRM1 Response to stress TPS1, RAD57, MGM101, LCB5, YDC1 Cell cycle MBP1, RAD57, HFM1, SPO13, TOF2 Vesicle-mediated transport ERV46, GLO3, YAP1802 Carbohydrate metabolism TPS1, ANP1, CEM1, SKS1, SUR1, YPL088W, PCL8, ICL2 Signal transduction LCB5, RLM1 modification process YSY6, COX9, ATP17, FPR2, QCR7, HSP31, ANP1, AFG3, PET117, FAB1, ABC1, PCP1, YAP1802, OCT1, VTS1, SKS1, MSF1, PBA1, OAZ1 Biological process unknown YBR144C, DEM1, YDL050C, PAR32, YDR157W, HRQ1, YDR509W, FPR2, HSP31, AIM10, CUE3, YGL218W, YGR219W, YGR283C, YJL119C, YJL132W, YJL152W, YJL193W, YKR012C, YMR187C, YMR310C, YNL011C, GEP3, CIR2, LCL1, YPL080C, YPR116W

*The deletion strains were clustered based on their GO Process term using the GO Slim Mapper function at SGD. Mitochondria-associated are underlined and were identified from both the GO cellular component term clustering and the growth phenotype when plated on YPDG (0.2% dextrose, 3% glycerol).

McLaughlin et al. www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0909777106 8of9 Table S2. Rank list of deletion mutants resistant to Tcin* ORF Gene name 4 ␮M ratio 8 ␮M ratio 12 ␮M ratio 24 ␮M ratio Ratio sum

BY4743 0.08 (0.15) 0.05 (0.09) 0.06 (0.32) 0.03 (0.31) 0.22 YHR014W SPO13 0.74 (0.37) 0.8 (0.01) 0.84 (0.11) 0.64 (0.15) 3.02 YLR193C UPS1 0.9 (0.09) 0.9 (0.07) 0.6 (0.05) 0.5 (0.78) 2.90 YLR262C-A TMA7 1.02 (0.07) 0.94 (0.05) 0.98 (0.01) 0.46 (0.47) 3.40 YKR010C TOF2 0.98 (0.14) 0.98 (0.04) 0.71 (0.09) 0.27 (0.76) 2.94 YLR099C ICT1 0.9 (0.21) 0.88 (0.01) 0.78 (0.09) 0.18 (0.7) 2.74 YNL011C YNL011C 0.99 (0.01) 0.93 (0.06) 0.62 (0.1) 0.13 (0.85) 2.67 YGR241C YAP1802 0.96 (0.12) 0.98 (0.12) 0.9 (0.08) 0.09 (1.54) 2.93 YDL054C MCH1 1.09 (0.06) 0.99 (0.03) 0.83 (0.03) 0.06 (0.74) 2.97 YOL101C IZH4 0.96 (0.02) 0.91 (0.03) 0.71 (0.45) 0.04 (0.37) 2.62 YMR187C YMR187C 0.84 (0.31) 0.94 (0.03) 0.73 (0.23) 0.02 (0.41) 2.53 YGL110C CUE3 0.92 (0.04) 0.85 (0.03) 0.71 (0.04) 0.02 (0.31) 2.50 YPL219W PCL8 0.89 (0.07) 0.87 (0.02) 0.56 (0.74) 0.01 (0.24) 2.33 YLR199C PBA1 0.94 (0.11) 0.91 (0.02) 0.63 (0.56) 0.01 (0.09) 2.49 YGL139W FLC3 0.98 (0.02) 0.84 (0.04) 0.62 (0.37) 0.01 (0.21) 2.46 YDL173W PAR32 0.92 (0.12) 0.94 (0.01) 0.59 (0.48) 0.01 (0.3) 2.45

*Liquid culture (OD600) growth ratios (toxin treatment divided by the control treatment) of the top 15 Tcin resistant deletion strains and the parental strain (BY4743) grown at four different concentrations of Tcin. The ratio sum score was calculated by summing the growth ratios across the different concentrations of Tcin. The ratio sum score provides an indication of the overall resistance of the strain and was used to rank resistance between strains. The coefficient of variation is presented in the parentheses.

McLaughlin et al. www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0909777106 9of9