Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

1 nanoCAGE reveals 5’UTR features that define specific modes of of

2 functionally related MTOR-sensitive mRNAs

3 Valentina Gandin1,2,3,4*, Laia Masvidal5*, Laura Hulea1,2*, Simon-Pierre Gravel4,6, Marie

4 Cargnello1,2, Shannon McLaughlan1,2, Yutian Cai1,4, Preetika Balanathan7, Masahiro

5 Morita4,6, Arjuna Rajakumar1, Luc Furic7, Michael Pollak1,2,3, John A. Porco, Jr.8, Julie

6 St-Pierre4,6, Jerry Pelletier2,4,6,, Ola Larsson5** and Ivan Topisirovic1,2,3,4**

7 1Lady Davis Institute, SMBD Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Canada; Departments

8 of 2Oncology, 3Experimental Medicine, and 4Biochemistry McGill University, Montreal,

9 Canada; 5Department of Oncology-Pathology, Science for Life Laboratory, Karolinska

10 Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; 6Goodman Cancer Research Centre, McGill University,

11 Montreal, Canada; 7Cancer Program, Biomedicine Discovery Institute and Department of

12 Anatomy & Developmental Biology, Monash University, VIC, Australia, 8Center for

13 Chemical Methodology and Library Development, Boston University, 590

14 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, United States

15

16 *equally contributing

17

18 Correspondence: Ola Larsson, Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet

19 Tomtebodavägen 23A, 171 65 Solna Sweden Tel: +46 (0)8 524 81 228; Email:

20 [email protected] & Ivan Topisirovic, Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Office

21 E-445; 3755 Côte Ste-Catherine Road, Montreal, Quebec H3T 1E2, Canada; Tel: (514)

22 340-8222 ext 3146; Email: [email protected]

23 Running title: 5’UTR features of MTOR-sensitive mRNAs.

1 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

24 Key words: nanoCAGE, mRNA translation, MTOR, EIF4E, EIF4A1

25 Abstract

26 The diversity of MTOR-regulated mRNA translation remains unresolved. Whereas 27 -profiling suggested that MTOR almost exclusively stimulates translation of 28 TOP (terminal oligopyrimidine motif) and TOP-like mRNAs, polysome-profiling 29 indicated that MTOR also modulates translation of mRNAs without 5’TOP motif (non- 30 TOP mRNAs). We demonstrate that in ribosome-profiling studies detection of MTOR- 31 dependent changes in non-TOP mRNA translation was obscured by low sensitivity and 32 methodology biases. Transcription start site profiling using Nano-Cap Analysis of 33 Expression (nanoCAGE) revealed not only do many MTOR-sensitive mRNAs lack 34 5’TOP motif but that 5’UTR features distinguish two functionally, and translationally 35 distinct subsets of MTOR-sensitive mRNAs: i) mRNAs with short 5’UTR enriched for 36 mitochondrial functions, that require EIF4E, but are less EIF4A1-sensitive and ii) long 37 5’UTRs mRNAs encoding proliferation- and survival-promoting , that are both 38 EIF4E- and EIF4A1-sensitive. Selective inhibition of translation of mRNAs harboring 39 long 5’UTRs via EIF4A1 suppression leads to sustained expression of proteins involved 40 in respiration but concomitant loss of those protecting mitochondrial structural integrity, 41 resulting in apoptosis. Conversely, simultaneous suppression of translation of both long 42 and short 5’UTR mRNAs, by MTOR inhibitors, results in metabolic dormancy and a 43 predominantly cytostatic effect. Thus, 5’UTR features define different modes of MTOR- 44 sensitive translation of functionally distinct subsets of mRNAs which may explain the 45 diverse impact of MTOR and EIF4A inhibitors on neoplastic cells. 46

47

48

49

50

51

2 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

52 Introduction:

53 Genome-wide studies have mostly focused on measuring ‘steady-state’

54 mRNA abundance that reflects alterations in transcription and mRNA stability (Piccirillo

55 et al. 2014). Changes in steady-state mRNA abundance do not, however, completely

56 mirror those occurring in the corresponding proteome (Gygi et al. 1999; de Sousa Abreu

57 et al. 2009; Larsson et al. 2012; Kristensen et al. 2013; Ly et al. 2014). Although still

58 debated (Li and Biggin 2015), these studies implicate post-transcriptional mechanisms,

59 including mRNA translation, as key influencers over the proteome (Schwanhausser et al.

60 2011; Vogel and Marcotte 2012; Kristensen et al. 2013; Li et al. 2014; Jovanovic et al.

61 2015).

62

63 Control of translation largely occurs at the initiation step, during which the mRNA is

64 recruited to the ribosome by the eIF4F complex (Hinnebusch 2014). This complex

65 consists of the mRNA cap-binding EIF4E, a large scaffolding protein EIF4G and

66 DEAD box EIF4A (Hinnebusch 2014). eIF4F complex assembly is regulated by

67 the mechanistic/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) complex 1 (mTORC1) which

68 phosphorylates and inactivates 4E-binding proteins (EIF4EBP1, 2 and 3) (von Manteuffel

69 et al. 1996; Hara et al. 1997; Burnett et al. 1998; Gingras et al. 1999; Gingras et al. 2001).

70 EIF4EBPs bind to EIF4E thereby preventing EIF4E:EIF4G association (Pause et al.

71 1994a). of EIF4EBPs leads to their dissociation from EIF4E, allowing

72 EIF4E:EIF4G interaction and eIF4F assembly (Gingras et al. 1999; Gingras et al. 2001).

73 Although EIF4E is required for cap-dependent translation of all nuclear-encoded

74 mRNAs, a subset of mRNAs characterized by long and complex 5’UTRs that encode

3 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

75 proliferation- (e.g. cyclins), survival- (e.g. BCL2 family members) and tumor-promoting

76 proteins (e.g. MYC) are thought to be particularly sensitive to EIF4E (Koromilas et al.

77 1992; Graff et al. 2008; Roux and Topisirovic 2012; Pelletier et al. 2015).

78

79 UTR features dictate translation efficiency (Sonenberg and Hinnebusch 2009). In

80 mammals, mRNAs with long, complex 5’UTRs exhibit a high EIF4A helicase

81 requirement for scanning of 43S complex towards the initiation codon (Svitkin et al.

82 2001). EIF4A processivity, as a single protein, is low (Pause et al. 1994b). EIF4A:EIF4G

83 interaction dramatically increases EIF4A processivity (Garcia-Garcia et al. 2015). EIF4E

84 recruits EIF4A to the eIF4F complex thereby bolstering EIF4A activity (Feoktistova et al.

85 2013). Recent ribosome-profiling studies indicate that the mTORC1/EIF4EBP/EIF4E

86 pathway almost exclusively regulates translation of mRNAs harboring 5’ terminal

87 oligopyrimidine (5’TOP) and related motifs (Hsieh et al. 2012; Thoreen et al. 2012).

88 5’TOP motif consists of a C immediately after the mRNA cap followed by 4-to-15

89 pyrimidines (Meyuhas and Kahan 2014). TOP mRNAs encode translational machinery

90 components, including ribosomal proteins and elongation factors (Meyuhas and Kahan

91 2014).

92

93 The generality of the conclusions that EIF4EBPs are major regulators of TOP mRNA

94 translation has been questioned since, under a number of conditions, translation of TOP

95 mRNAs, albeit MTOR-dependent, is EIF4EBP-independent (Miloslavski et al. 2014).

96 Consistent with this view, the effects of serum deprivation on TOP mRNA translation

97 also appeared to be EIF4E-independent (Shama et al. 1995). In turn, LARP1 and

4 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

98 TIA1/TIAL1 (also known as TIAR) were reported to mediate effects of mTORC1 on

99 TOP mRNAs (Damgaard and Lykke-Andersen 2011; Tcherkezian et al. 2014; Fonseca et

100 al. 2015). Polysome-profiling showed that the mTORC1/EIF4EBP axis also regulates

101 translation of non-TOP mRNAs, including those encoding mitochondrial and survival-

102 and proliferation-promoting proteins (Larsson et al. 2012; Morita et al. 2013). In fact, it

103 appears that ribosome- and polysome-profiling studies provided strikingly different sets

104 of MTOR-sensitive mRNAs.

105

106 Elucidating the precise mechanisms that control mRNA translation also requires accurate

107 knowledge of transcription start sites (TSS). Despite substantial efforts to define TSS

108 using CAGE/nanoCAGE (Consortium et al. 2014) or TSS-seq (Suzuki and Sugano 2003;

109 Suzuki et al. 2015) there are no resources, which provide TSS information for most

110 commonly used model cell lines. Databases such as RefSeq or UCSC are thus routinely

111 used to infer the link between 5’UTR features and translation. These databases are

112 thought to contain numerous errors and for a more accurate understanding of the

113 relationship between the 5’UTR features and translational control both TSS and

114 translation efficiency should be determined in the same cell.

115

116 Results:

117 Simulating the impact of differences in polysome-association on performance of

118 ribosome- and polysome-profiling

119 We compared ribosome- and polysome-profiling for their ability to identify mRNAs

120 undergoing different shifts in translational efficiency. In polysome-profiling, translation

5 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

121 efficiency is directly determined by separating efficiently (commonly defined as mRNAs

122 associated with >3 ) and not efficiently translated mRNAs (defined as mRNAs

123 associated with 3 or less ribosomes) (Gandin et al. 2014). In contrast, with ribosome-

124 profiling translational efficiency is inferred based on the number of RNA sequencing

125 reads corresponding to ribosome-protected fragments (Gandin et al. 2014; Ingolia 2014;

126 King and Gerber 2014). TOP mRNAs are highly expressed (Fig. 1A-B), engage a

127 considerable proportion of cellular ribosomes when MTOR is active (Levy et al. 1991;

128 Meyuhas and Kahan 2014; Miloslavski et al. 2014) and show large shifts in translational

129 efficiency upon MTOR inhibition, as compared to mRNAs that do not contain 5’TOP

130 motif [non-TOP mRNAs; Sup. Fig. 1 (Levy et al. 1991; Miloslavski et al. 2014)].

131

132 We next determined performance of ribosome- vs. polysome-profiling in identifying

133 differentially translated mRNAs as a function of the size of shifts in translational

134 efficiency using simulation approach. Suitable parameters for simulation were obtained

135 by comparisons of modeled normal distributions of ribosome association converted to

136 sedimentation distances (Fig. 1C) to experimentally determined ribosome associations in

137 insulin vs. insulin+torin1 treated MCF7 cells (Sup. Fig. 2A-C). Using these parameters,

138 we then modeled a range of shifts in control vs. MTOR inhibition conditions (Fig. 1D)

139 and estimated the mean number of ribosomes per mRNA [i.e. ribosome-profiling (Ingolia

140 et al. 2009; Ingolia 2014)] or the proportion of the mRNAs that are associated with >3

141 ribosomes [i.e. polysome-profiling (Larsson et al. 2012)]. We calculated fold-change

142 differences (control vs. MTOR inhibition) for each shift, for both polysome- and

143 ribosome-profiling simulations. Because equal proportions of all shifts were represented

6 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

144 in the simulation, the proportion of each shift among the smallest p-values or largest fold-

145 changes is expected to be the same. Using p-value based ranking, polysome-profiling

146 appeared not to be affected by the size of the shift in polysome association, while

147 ribosome-profiling was biased toward identifying mRNAs that exhibit larger shifts (Fig.

148 1E-G). Similar bias was observed for polysome-profiling when fold-change analysis was

149 employed, but polysome-profiling still outperformed ribosome-profiling (Fig. 1H-I).

150 These analyses were stable inasmuch as modifying the simulation parameters did not

151 alter the outcome (Sup. Fig. 3).

152

153 Using the same approach we compared performance of ribosome- vs. polysome-profiling

154 in identifying changes of non-TOP vs. TOP mRNA translation as a function of MTOR

155 activity. Parameters were determined from experimentally tested TOP and non-TOP

156 mRNAs (Sup. Figs. 1-2). Shifts below sub 80s fractions cannot be modeled using normal

157 distributions, and were thus set to 1 ribosome. While polysome-profiling identified

158 expected equal proportions of TOP and non-TOP mRNAs among with the lowest

159 p-values, ribosome-profiling again favored identification of TOP mRNAs as

160 differentially translated (Sup. Fig. 4A). Analysis based on fold-changes showed bias for

161 identification of TOP mRNAs over non-TOP mRNAs as differentially translated for both

162 polysome- and ribosome-profiling, but the bias towards identifying TOP mRNAs as

163 differentially translated was still less pronounced for polysome-profiling (Sup. Fig. 4B-

164 C). Thus ribosome profiling shows a bias which favors identification of mRNAs that

165 exhibit larger shifts in polysomes as translationally regulated, which is the case for TOP

166 mRNAs after modulation of MTOR activity.

7 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

167

168 Gene expression is commonly quantified by relative rather than absolute measurements.

169 Accordingly, changes in each specific mRNA translation is measured in relation to the

170 mean effect on translation of all mRNAs. To account for this we performed simulations

171 using relative translation efficacies and included invariant mRNAs [i.e. those mRNAs

172 that did not appear to change significantly their translation in response to MTOR

173 inhibition in both ribosome- (Hsieh et al. 2012) and polysome-profiling studies (Larsson

174 et al. 2012), hereafter referred to as ‘non-movers’]. Simulation parameters for ribosome

175 association for non-movers were obtained by fitting a normal distribution to the

176 polysome-profile (Sup. Fig. 2A). Changes in translation were then simulated as described

177 above for TOP and non-TOP mRNAs while including non-movers. We assessed how

178 increasing the proportion of TOP mRNAs that changed their translation impacts predicted

179 fold-changes for TOP- and non-TOP mRNAs. This was done before and after

180 normalization by global centering (which is equivalent to an absolute and relative

181 assessment of effects on translation, respectively). For relative measurements, when an

182 increased proportion of TOP mRNAs were differentially translated, there was an

183 underestimation of the fold-changes for both TOP and non-TOP mRNAs (Fig. 1J). This

184 effect was more pronounced for ribosome-profiling e.g. if ~3.5% of all mRNAs are TOP

185 mRNAs and they changed translation, non-TOP mRNAs will show less than a 2-fold

186 difference which is a commonly used threshold.

187

188 As MTOR inhibition also involves a global downregulation of protein synthesis (Roux

189 and Topisirovic 2012), we assessed how this would impact on TOP and non-TOP mRNA

8 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

190 translation. For this simulation we used the parameters identified for abundance and

191 proportions of TOP mRNAs, non-TOP mRNAs and non-movers (Fig. 1A), and gradually

192 introduced a reduction in translation for non-mover mRNAs to simulate reduction in

193 global protein synthesis caused by MTOR inhibition (Fig. 1K). In this case, as above,

194 non-TOP mRNAs exhibited <2 fold-change when ribosome-profiling was simulated.

195 Altogether, methodological features of ribosome-profiling introduce a bias that obscures

196 identification of changes in non-TOP mRNA translation. This is because non-TOP

197 mRNAs show smaller shifts and lower abundance, and are therefore more sensitive to

198 global changes in protein synthesis as compared to TOP mRNAs. This is likely a key

199 factor underpinning the discrepancies between the repertoires of MTOR-regulated

200 mRNAs observed in ribosome vs. polysome-profiling studies.

201

202 Low sensitivity limits the catalogue of MTOR-sensitive mRNAs identified by

203 ribosome-profiling.

204 Optimal RNA-seq depth under control conditions (i.e. vehicle or mock treated cells) is a

205 prerequisite to identify a reduction in translation induced by a treatment (Larsson and

206 Nadon 2013). We observed that less than 2,000 genes consistently had >256 ribosome-

207 profiling counts in the control condition (Sup. Fig. 5A) across the two replicates reported

208 in Hsieh et al. (Hsieh et al. 2012). Indeed, low read counts strongly influenced the signal

209 to variance relationship and the variance strongly increased at <64 reads (Sup. Fig. 5B,

210 Sup. Fig.6A). Using edgeR analysis (see below), we observed that the vast majority of

211 MTOR-sensitive mRNAs did not shift below <64 read threshold upon MTOR inhibition

212 (Fig. 2B). This suggests that only highly abundant mRNAs (e.g. TOP mRNAs [Fig. 1A-

9 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

213 B]) with signals substantially higher than 64 reads under control condition could be

214 identified as translationally suppressed by MTOR inhibitors (Sup. Fig. 5B). This

215 suggests that only abundant mRNAs [e.g. TOP mRNAs (Fig. 1A-B)] would be identified

216 as being translationally suppressed by MTOR inhibitors (MTOR-i) in this study (Hsieh et

217 al. 2012). Indeed, <10% of non-TOP mRNAs, identified as being MTOR-sensitive in

218 polysome-profiling study (Larsson et al. 2012) consistently obtained >256 ribosome-

219 profiling counts in the control condition in Hsieh et al. (Hsieh et al. 2012). Alternative

220 algorithms corroborated these findings (Sup. Fig. 6B). A second ribosome-profiling data

221 set investigating MTOR-sensitive translation (Thoreen et al. 2012) also suffered from this

222 type of low sensitivity and could not identify non-TOP mRNAs as being differentially

223 translated (Sup. Fig. 5C-D, Sup. Fig. 7A-B). Thus, despite the differences in cell lines

224 and conditions that were used in respective studies (Hsieh et al. 2012; Larsson et al. 2012;

225 Thoreen et al. 2012), discrepancies in the observed effects of MTOR-i on the translatome

226 between ribosome- and polysome-profiling studies appear to stem from technical biases

227 and the low sensitivity in ribosome-profiling studies, and our simulation analysis

228 indicates that in addition to TOP mRNAs, MTOR regulates translation of non-TOP

229 mRNAs.

230 nanoCAGE identifies subsets of MTOR-sensitive non-TOP mRNAs that differ in

231 5’UTR features and functions.

232 The above analysis indicates that other 5’UTR features beyond 5’TOP motifs must render

233 mRNA translation MTOR-sensitive. We employed nanoCAGE sequencing (Salimullah et

234 al. 2011) to map Transcription Start Sites (TSS) and 5’UTRs to investigate this

235 hypothesis (Fig. 2A). When we reached a sequencing ‘plateau’, where few additional

10 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

236 genes or TSSs were identified upon additional sequencing (Fig. 2B), we had obtained

237 5’UTR sequence information for ~12,000 RefSeqs, corresponding to ~6,500 genes in

238 MCF7 cells maintained under the control, mock treatment condition used when

239 examining MTOR-sensitive translation by polysome-profiling [Sup. Table 1 (Larsson et

240 al. 2012)]. Examination of a selection of TOP mRNAs showed that nanoCAGE

241 accurately captured TSS including when the TOP motif was suggested by RefSeq to be

242 located downstream of the TSS (Fig. 2C). TSS identified by nanoCAGE confirmed that

243 the most of MTOR-regulated mRNAs identified by polysome-profiling [(Larsson et al.

244 2012), PP242-sensitive] do not contain a 5’TOP motif (~90%, Fig. 2D).

245

246 Determination of 5’UTR lengths using most prevalent peak length (i.e. the length

247 suggested by the position with most RNA-seq reads) or the weighted mean length

248 (allowing all RNA-seq reads to contribute to a mean) revealed ~30% 5’UTRs identified

249 by nanoCAGE were half the length or shorter than those described in the RefSeq

250 database (Fig. 2E-F; Sup. Fig. 8A-B). Among the MTOR-sensitive mRNAs identified by

251 polysome-profiling, the TSS determined by nanoCAGE, but not RefSeq, represented a set

252 of transcripts with extremely short 5’UTRs (<30 nucleotides). This set was enriched in

253 mRNAs encoding proteins with mitochondrial functions (e.g. ATP5O, ATP5G1; Fig. 3A-

254 B) with one exception, RDH13, which had a long 5’UTR. Short 5’UTRs were in stark

255 contrast to cell cycle- and survival-promoting mRNAs with long 5’UTRs [e.g. CCND3,

256 ODC1, MCL1, BIRC5 (survivin) and MYC; Fig. 3C]. mRNAs with short 5’UTR,

257 encoding proteins with mitochondrial function, were enriched (4.7 fold enrichment,

258 p=0.03) for Translation Initiator of Short 5′UTR (TISU) elements (Elfakess et al. 2011)

11 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

259 (Fig. 3D-E). Thus, in addition to TOP mRNAs, MTOR-sensitive mRNAs include non-

260 TOP mRNAs with long 5’UTRs which encode proliferation- and survival-promoting

261 proteins and a subset of mRNAs with short (<30 nucleotides) 5’UTRs that were enriched

262 with TISU elements (Fig. 3A-E).

263 Expression of proteins encoded by a subset of MTOR-sensitive mRNAs harboring

264 short 5’UTRs requires EIF4E, but is largely unaffected by EIF4A1.

265 TISU elements render mRNA translation sensitive to MTOR but not to EIF4A inhibition

266 (Elfakess et al. 2011). We therefore depleted EIF4E or EIF4A1 in MCF7 and HEK293E

267 cells and monitored expression of proteins encoded by MTOR-sensitive mRNAs with

268 either long (CCND3, MCL1, BIRC5, and BCL2) or short (ATP5O, ATP5G1, NDUFS6,

269 and UQCC2) 5’UTRs. Whereas EIF4E depletion decreased expression of both subsets of

270 proteins, reduction in EIF4A1 selectively affected proteins encoded by long 5’UTR

271 mRNAs (Fig. 4A, Sup. Fig. 10A). We replicated these results using the active-site

272 MTOR-i torin1 and two chemically distinct EIF4A inhibitors (EIF4A-i), hippuristanol

273 and silvestrol (Bordeleau et al. 2005; Bordeleau et al. 2006; Bordeleau et al. 2008). As

274 expected, treatment with torin1 abolished mTORC1 signaling (Thoreen et al. 2009;

275 Galicia-Vazquez et al. 2012), whereas hippuristanol slightly induced mTORC1 activity as

276 illustrated by changes in EIF4EBP1 and RPS6 phosphorylation (Sup. Fig. 10B). Torin1

277 increased EIF4E:EIF4EBP1 and reduced EIF4E:EIF4G1 binding. In contrast

278 EIF4E:EIF4G1 association was unaffected by hippuristanol (Sup. Fig. 10C). Thus, as

279 noted following depletion of EIF4E, torin1 reduced expression of proteins encoded by

280 both short and long 5’UTR MTOR-sensitive mRNAs, whereas EIF4A-i selectively

281 downregulated proteins encoded by long 5’UTRs mRNAs (Sup. Fig. 10B). These effects

12 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

282 appeared to be mediated by the EIF4A1 isoform, as EIF4A2 depletion failed to decrease

283 expression of CCND3, which is encoded by a prototypical long 5’UTR mRNA (Sup. Fig.

284 10D). As observed previously, EIF4A1 depletion lead to an increase in EIF4A2 levels

285 (Sup. Fig. 10D) (Galicia-Vazquez et al. 2012). Collectively, these results demonstrate

286 that EIF4A1 regulates expression of proteins encoded by a subset of MTOR-sensitive

287 mRNAs harboring long, but not short 5’UTRs.

288

289 EIF4A1 affects translation of MTOR-sensitive mRNAs with long but not short

290 5’UTRs.

291 Depletion of EIF4E and EIF4A1 did not affect steady-state levels of mRNAs with either

292 long (CCND3, MCL1, BIRC5, and BCL2) or short (ATP5O, ATP5G1, NDUFS6, and

293 UQCC2) 5’UTRs (Fig. 4B). Under these conditions the effects of EIF4E or EIF4A1

294 depletion on global mRNA translation were comparable (Fig. 4C). Whereas EIF4E

295 downregulation decreased translation of both long and short 5’UTR mRNAs, EIF4A1

296 depletion decreased translation of mRNAs with long 5’UTRs, but only marginally altered

297 translation of mRNAs with short 5’UTRs (Fig. 4D, Sup. Fig. 11A). Neither EIF4A1 nor

298 EIF4E depletion altered distribution of MTOR-insensitive mRNAs, e.g. ACTB (beta

299 actin) and GAPDH mRNAs (Fig. 4D, Sup. Fig. 11A). Parallel results were obtained

300 using torin1 and hippuristanol (Sup. Fig. 11B-C).

301

302 To further identify 5’UTR features that render MTOR-sensitive mRNAs largely

303 insensitive to changes in EIF4A1 activity, HEK293E cells were co-transfected with a

304 renilla (control) and a variety of firefly (FF) luciferase reporters. FF reporters included

13 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

305 IRF7 5’UTR [IRF7(5’UTR)-FF], which is long and translated in an EIF4E-dependent

306 manner (Colina et al. 2008) (Fig. 5A), ATP5O 5’UTR [ATP5O(5’UTR)-FF] which

307 contains a 4 nucleotide portion of the TISU element upstream of the initiation codon (Fig.

308 5B) and ATP5O with a complete TISU element including a 5 nucleotide portion distal to

309 the initiation codon [ATP5O(TISU)-FF] (Fig. 5C). ATP5O(5’UTR)-FF therefore harbors

310 a disrupted TISU element whereby the TISU element sequence is substituted with

311 GAGAA (the first 5 nucleotides of FF luciferase ORF) downstream of the initiation

312 codon. EIF4E downregulation strongly decreased expression of all three FF reporters. In

313 contrast, while EIF4A1 depletion strongly repressed luciferase activity of IRF7-FF, it

314 only had a moderate effect on ATP5O(5’UTR)-FF (1.2 fold reduction vs. 6.6 fold

315 observed in EIF4E depleted cells), and did not significantly affect luciferase activity

316 driven by ATP5O(TISU)-FF (Fig. 5A-C). Similar results were obtained with torin1 and

317 hippuristanol (Sup. Fig. 12A-C). As TISU element integrity did not appear to exert a

318 major influence on EIF4A1- or EIF4E-sensitive translation (Fig. 5B-C; Sup. Fig. 12B-

319 C), we also monitored expression of FF luciferase driven by constructs harboring

320 UQCC2 5’UTR which does not contain a TISU and NDUFS6 5’UTR, which, similar to

321 ATP5O(5’UTR)-FF, only contains a portion TISU element upstream of the initiation

322 codon. In both cases results paralleled those observed using the ATP5O reporters (Fig.

323 5D-E). Increasing secondary structure and length by adding a stable stem loop structure

324 (ATP5O(5’UTR)-SL-FF) (Babendure et al. 2006) rendered the reporter both EIF4E and

325 EIF4A1-sensitive (Fig. 5F). Importantly, under all conditions listed above, control renilla

326 luciferase expression was largely insensitive to both EIF4E and EIF4A1 (Sup. Fig. 13-

327 14). These data demonstrate that translation of MTOR-sensitive mRNAs with short

14 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

328 5’UTR is strongly sensitive to EIF4E, but not EIF4A1, while there is no obligatory

329 requirement for an intact TISU element.

330

331 Effects of MTOR-i and EIF4A-i on translation are reflected by changes in

332 mitochondrial functions.

333 mTORC1/EIF4EBP1/EIF4E axis bolsters mitochondrial biogenesis and ATP production

334 by stimulating translation of nuclear-encoded mRNAs with mitochondrial functions,

335 including respiratory chain components e.g. ATP5O (Morita et al. 2013). Here,

336 nanoCAGE identified a subset of MTOR-sensitive mRNAs encoding mitochondria-

337 related proteins characterized by short 5’UTRs (Fig. 3B-D), which is consistent with the

338 findings that mRNAs encoding mitochondrial proteins frequently contain TISU elements

339 (Sinvani et al. 2015). As translation of mRNAs with short 5’UTRs is largely EIF4A-

340 independent, we postulated that short-term EIF4A1 inhibition would have a lesser impact

341 on mitochondrial number and function as compared to MTOR inhibition. To directly

342 compare the effects of MTOR-i vs. EIF4A-i, we selected concentrations of torin1 and

343 silvestrol that comparably suppressed HEK293E cell proliferation (~60% of control; Fig.

344 6A, left panel). After 16h [a time period we previously found to be suitable for detecting

345 the impact of MTOR inhibition on cell mitochondrial content and respiration (Morita et

346 al. 2013)], torin1, but not silvestrol, reduced mitochondrial content (Fig. 6A, right

347 panel).

348

349 In addition, although both torin1 (1.9 fold) and silvestrol (1.4 fold) reduced mitochondrial

350 respiration, the effect of torin1 was more substantial (Fig. 6B). Similar findings were

15 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

351 obtained using siRNA directed against EIF4E or EIF4A1 (Sup. Fig. 15A). Furthermore,

352 whereas EIF4A1 downregulation slightly elevated mitochondrial respiration relative to

353 the control, mitochondrial respiration was dramatically inhibited by EIF4E depletion

354 (Sup. Fig. 15B). Therefore, short-term treatment with MTOR-i suppresses mitochondrial

355 respiration more dramatically than EIF4A-i, which is consistent with the disparity of their

356 effects on translation of mRNAs harboring short 5’UTRs i.e. those encoding proteins

357 involved in mitochondrial respiration and functions.

358 EIF4A-i more dramatically induces apoptosis compared to MTOR-i.

359 Inhibition of the mTORC1/EIF4EBP1/EIF4E axis coincides with downregulation of

360 proteins implicated in mitochondrial respiratory function (e.g. ATP5O, ATP5G1,

361 UQCC2, NDUFS6) as well as in the maintenance of the integrity of the mitochondrial

362 outer membrane (e.g. BCL2, MCL1 and BIRC5) (Fig. 4A). In contrast, suppression of

363 EIF4A1 activity selectively affects proteins that maintain mitochondrial outer membrane

364 integrity (Fig. 4A). This explains why MTOR inhibitors mostly have a cytostatic effect

365 (Morita et al. 2015), and suggests that prolonged EIF4A1 inhibition may trigger

366 mitochondrial mediated apoptosis by disrupting the coordinated expression of proteins

367 with mitochondrial metabolic functions from those regulating mitochondrial structural

368 integrity. We therefore treated HEK293E cells with torin1 or silvestrol for 72h and

369 measured mitochondrial membrane potential using TMRE (tetramethylrhodamine, ethyl

370 ester), a cell-permeant dye that accumulates in active but not depolarized mitochondria

371 (Scaduto and Grotyohann 1999). As a positive control, cells were treated with carbonyl

372 cyanide 4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenylhydrazone (FCCP), a compound that depolarizes

373 mitochondria (Fig. 7A). Exposure to silvestrol (72h) markedly induced depolarization of

16 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

374 mitochondria (Fig. 7A) and this correlated with induction of apoptosis as compared to

375 control or torin1 treated cells (Fig. 7B). Similar results were observed in nutrient-

376 deprived cells depleted of EIF4E or EIF4A1 (Sup. Fig. 15C-D). These observations

377 indicate that suppression of translation of both long and short 5’UTR MTOR-sensitive

378 mRNAs by torin1 yields a predominantly cytostatic outcome, whereas suppression of

379 EIF4A1 function induces apoptosis by exclusively inhibiting translation of mRNAs with

380 long 5’UTRs encoding proteins that maintain mitochondrial structural integrity.

381

382 MTOR inhibition increases autophagy (Kim and Guan 2015) which eliminates

383 depolarized mitochondria (Elmore et al. 2001; Narendra et al. 2008; Twig et al. 2008). To

384 determine whether EIF4A1 inhibition affects autophagy, we monitored autophagic flux

385 by treating HEK293E cells with torin1 or silvestrol in the presence of chloroquine.

386 Chloroquine prevents autophagosome-lysosome fusion causing accumulation of the

387 autophagic markers MAP1LC3A-II (LC3A-II) and MAP1LC3B-II (LC3B-II) (Klionsky

388 et al. 2012). While torin1 induced autophagy as evidenced by elevated levels of both

389 MAP1LC3A-II and MAP1LC3B-II (Fig. 7C), silvestrol prevented accumulation of

390 MAP1LC3A-II and MAP1LC3B-II induced by chloroquine (Fig. 7C). By inhibiting the

391 lysosomal pH gradient, chloroquine impairs mTORC1 activation (Settembre et al.

392 2012) as illustrated by the decrease in the phosphorylation of EIF4EBP1 and RPS6 after

393 16h (Fig. 7C). mTORC1 inhibition by chloroquine was partially reversed by silvestrol

394 (Fig. 7C). This is consistent with induction of mTORC1 in response to EIF4A1 inhibition

395 [Sup. Fig. 10B; (Galicia-Vazquez et al. 2012)]. Therefore, in addition to inducing

17 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

396 mitochondrial depolarization by altering mRNA translation, EIF4A-i prevent induction of

397 autophagy and elimination of depolarized mitochondria.

398

399 Discussion

400 The advantage of ribosome- over polysome-profiling is that ribosome-profiling allows

401 determination of ribosome positioning on mRNA at single-nucleotide resolution (Ingolia

402 et al. 2009). However, there are a number of challenges regarding interpretation of

403 ribosome-profiling (Guttman et al. 2013; Gerashchenko and Gladyshev 2014; King and

404 Gerber 2014; Lareau et al. 2014; Pelechano et al. 2015). The relative performance of

405 ribosome- vs. polysome-profiling to study changes in translation efficiency also remains

406 unclear. mRNAs exhibit different translation properties, in part conferred by their 5’UTR

407 features (Lodish 1974; Pelletier and Sonenberg 1985; Koromilas et al. 1992; Graff et al.

408 2008; Sonenberg and Hinnebusch 2009). We show that ribosome-profiling studies should

409 be interpreted with caution when simultaneously studying subclasses of mRNAs with

410 disparate translation properties. Ribosome-profiling efficiently identifies changes in

411 translation of highly abundant mRNAs that show large shifts in polysome-association

412 (“class A mRNAs”) but is far less sensitive in detecting less abundant mRNAs that shift

413 less (“class B mRNAs”). TOP mRNAs, upon MTOR inhibition, shift from heavy

414 polysomes to sub-polysomal fractions (i.e. “class A mRNAs”), whereas the majority of

415 non-TOP mRNAs transit from intermediate-heavy to light polysomes [i.e. “class B

416 mRNAs” (Sup. Fig. 1]. In contrast, polysome-profiling captures the translational changes

417 in both classes of mRNAs. This may explain discrepancies between the catalogs of

418 MTOR-regulated mRNAs between ribosome- (Hsieh et al. 2012; Thoreen et al. 2012) vs.

18 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

419 polysome-profiling (Larsson et al. 2012) studies. Consistently, while ribosome-profiling

420 led to the conclusion that the mTOR/EIF4EBP1/EIF4E axis exclusively controls TOP and

421 TOP-like mRNA translation (Hsieh et al. 2012), the same group found that EIF4E

422 predominantly affects translation of non-TOP mRNAs implicated in ROS clearance using

423 polysome-profiling (Truitt et al. 2015).

424

425 Length, and plausibly other 5’UTR features, distinguish two separate sub-groups of

426 MTOR-sensitive non-TOP mRNAs which are functionally distinct. Firstly, there are

427 those mRNAs harboring long 5’UTRs that encode survival and proliferation promoting

428 factors and are strongly affected by EIF4E and EIF4A1. Secondly, there are mRNAs that

429 harbor short 5’UTRs/TISU elements, translated in EIF4E but not EIF4A1-sensitive

430 manner, enriched in those encoding mitochondria-related proteins. In mammals, EIF4A1

431 selectively stimulates translation of mRNAs that encode survival-promoting proteins (e.g.

432 BCL2, MCL1 and BIRC5) without altering translation of mitochondria-related short

433 5’UTRs mRNAs (Rubio et al. 2014; Wolfe et al. 2014; Modelska et al. 2015). In yeast,

434 Ded1 (the orthologue of DDX3X in mamals) rather than EIF4A seems to act as a major

435 helicase that resolves secondary 5’UTR structures (Sen et al. 2015). Accordingly, in

436 yeast, changes in EIF4A activity uniformly affect translation of most mRNAs, while

437 modulation of Ded1 primarily affects those with complex 5’UTRs (Sen et al. 2015).

438 Several features that distinguish yeast and mammalian EIF4A may explain these

439 distinctions. This includes differences in the apparent stability of the eIF4F complex, as

440 EIF4E:EIF4G but not EIF4E:EIF4G:EIF4A complexes can be purified from yeast

441 (Merrick 2015). Moreover, MTOR-regulated auxiliary factor EIF4B (Raught et al. 2004)

19 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

442 significantly bolsters RNA-dependent ATPase activity of mammalian, but not yeast

443 EIF4A (Merrick 2015). It is also plausible that thought to be required to unwind

444 exceptionally strong 5’UTRs secondary structures [e.g. DHX29 and DDX3X; (Parsyan et

445 al. 2011)] provide an additional level of diversity to MTOR-dependent translational

446 regulation. However, the signaling mechanisms that regulate DHX29 and DDX3X

447 function remain to be established.

448

449 Translation of TISU mRNAs is 5’ cap-dependent, resistant to glucose deprivation but not

450 to rapamycin, and requires EIF1:EIF4G1 interaction (Sinvani et al. 2015). We

451 demonstrate that MTOR-i or EIF4E depletion, but not inhibition of EIF4A1, suppresses

452 translation of short 5’UTR mRNA (<30 nucleotides). This suggests that EIF4E is key for

453 translation of mRNAs containing short 5’UTRs and TISU elements, which is postulated

454 to occur by facilitating recruitment of EIF4G1, and which does not appear to be affected

455 by EIF4A-i (Sup. Fig. 10C). Moreover, MTOR and EIF4E seem to regulate translation of

456 ATP5O mRNAs independently of the TISU element downstream of the initiation codon,

457 as well as translation of UQCC2 mRNA that comprises a short 5’UTR without a TISU

458 (Fig 5B-D). This suggests that the length of 5’UTR, rather than the presence of a TISU, is

459 the primary factor that determines EIF4E- versus EIF4A1-sensitivity.

460

461 mTORC1 modulates translation of TOP mRNAs via LARP1 (Tcherkezian et al. 2014;

462 Fonseca et al. 2015), whereas synthesis of mitochondrial, proliferation- and survival-

463 promoting proteins is controlled by the EIF4EBP/EIF4E pathway (Larsson et al. 2012;

464 Morita et al. 2013). 5’UTR features further separate non-TOP MTOR-sensitive mRNAs

20 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

465 in two distinctive groups that differ in their EIF4A1-sensitivity. MTOR-i prevent

466 translation of short and long 5’UTR mRNAs diminishing mitochondrial functions,

467 accompanied by metabolic quiescence and cytostasis, whereas selective suppression of

468 translation of a subset of long but not short 5’UTR mRNAs by EIF4A-i leads to

469 mitochondrial depolarization and apoptosis (Fig. 7D). These findings suggest that

470 mTORC1 deploys distinct effectors to modulate translation of a variety of functional

471 groups of mRNAs far beyond TOP mRNAs to regulate cellular homeostasis in response

472 to a variety of extracellular stimuli and intracellular cues.

473

474 In addition to the differential effects of MTOR-i and EIF4A-i on translation, it is likely

475 that these compounds exert opposing metabolic effects. MTOR-i reduce mitochondrial

476 ATP production while suppressing ATP consumption by anabolic processes and

477 stimulating autophagy which facilitates replenishment of a variety of cellular building

478 blocks (Morita et al. 2013; Albert and Hall 2014; Shimobayashi and Hall 2014).

479 Although EIF4A-i may also decrease ATP consumption by the translational machinery,

480 they are likely to stimulate other anabolic processes via increasing mTORC1 activity

481 [Sup. Fig. 10B; (Galicia-Vazquez et al. 2012)]. Contrary to previous reports, the effects

482 of silvestrol on tumor cell viability cannot be accounted for by modulation of p-EIF4E

483 status (Chu et al. 2015). EIF4A-i may therefore avoid compensatory effects seen with

484 MTOR-i, resulting in a more effective precipitation of mitochondrial dysfunction and cell

485 death. Indeed, unlike MTOR-i, silvestrol attenuated autophagy, which is considered a

486 major mechanism for nutrient replenishment and clearance of depolarized mitochondria

487 (Elmore et al. 2001; Narendra et al. 2008; Twig et al. 2008).

21 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

488

489 In conclusion, important 5’UTR mRNA variations determine MTOR-sensitivity. Current

490 databases do not always accurately reflect the 5’UTR features while certain analytical

491 biases currently limit the accuracy of ribosome-profiling techniques for monitoring

492 changes in translational efficiency. Finally, two functionally distinct subgroups of non-

493 TOP MTOR-sensitive mRNAs provide molecular basis for the superior anti-neoplastic

494 effects of EIF4A-i over MTOR-i.

495 Methods:

496 Simulations

497 Distributions of ribosome associations were obtained by sampling from a normal

498 distribution. These were then converted to mean number of ribosomes (equivalent to

499 ribosome-profiling) or proportions of mRNAs associated with >3 ribosomes (equivalent

500 to polysome-profiling) followed by calculation of fold-changes and p-values that were

501 compared across polysome- and ribosome-profiling. Detailed protocols for simulations

502 are provided in the supplement.

503 Preparation of nanoCAGE libraries and analysis of nanoCAGE data

504 NanoCAGE libraries were prepared and analyzed as described (Salimullah et al. 2011)

505 but with a number of modifications that are described in detail in the supplement.

506 Cell culture, inhibitors, antibodies and RNAi

507 HEK293E and MCF7 cells (ATCC) were maintained in Dulbecco modified Eagle

508 medium (DMEM; Wisent, St-Bruno, Quebec, Canada) and RPMI-1640 (Wisent)

509 respectively, supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (Wisent), 1%

22 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

510 penicillin/streptomycin (Wisent) and 1% L-Glutamine (Wisent). Where indicated, cells

511 were treated with 250nM torin1 (Tocris, Bristol, United Kingdom), 1μM hippuristanol,

512 25nM silvestrol or the same volume of vehicle (DMSO). Lists of siRNAs, shRNAs

513 antibodies and dilutions that were used in Western blots are provided in the supplement.

514 Polysome profiles and RT-qPCR

515 MCF7 cells were seeded in a 15cm Petri dish, harvested at 80% confluency and lysed in

516 hypotonic lysis buffer (5mM Tris HCl pH7.5, 2.5mM MgCl2, 1.5mM KCl, 100 μg/ml

517 cycloheximide, 2mM DTT, 0.5% Triton, 0.5% Sodium Deoxycholate). Polysome-

518 profiling was carried out as described (Gandin et al. 2014). RT-qPCR was performed as

519 previously described (Miloslavski et al. 2014). Fractions were collected as described in

520 (Gandin et al. 2014) and RNA was extracted using TRIzol according to manufacturer’s

521 instructions. RT and qPCR were performed by SuperScript III Reverse Transcriptase and

522 Fast SYBR Green Mastermix (Invitrogen), respectively. Experiments were done at least

523 in independent duplicates (n=2) whereby every sample was analyzed in a technical

524 triplicate. Analyses were carried out using relative standard curve method as described in

525 http://www3.appliedbiosystems.com/cms/groups/mcb_support/documents/generaldocum

526 ents/cms_040980.pdf. Primers are listed in the supplement.

527 Statistical analysis

528 We performed 1-way or 2-way ANOVA in R (R Core Team 2014) as indicated in the

529 figure legends.

530

531 Data access

532 nanoCAGE data have been deposited at the Gene Expression Omnibus (GSE77033).

23 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

533

534 Acknowledgments:

535 This work is dedicated to the memory of Colin Lister. We thank Alvin Kuate Defo for

536 assistance, Drs. J. Timmons, L. Lindqvist, O. Meyuhas, C. Plessy and R. Dikstein for

537 editing and critical input, suggestions on nanoCAGE sequencing, and TISU element

538 search, respectively. We acknowledge support from Science for Life Laboratory, the

539 Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, the National Genomics Infrastructure funded by

540 the Swedish Research Council, and Uppsala Multidisciplinary Center for Advanced

541 Computational Science for assistance with massively parallel sequencing and access to

542 the UPPMAX computational infrastructure. LDI flow cytometry facility supported in part

543 by MSSS and CFI (223964). This research was supported by the Swedish Research

544 Council, the Swedish Childhood Cancer Foundation, the Swedish Cancer Society, the

545 Cancer Society in Stockholm, the Wallenberg Academy Follows Program and

546 STRATCAN grants (OL), grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP-

547 115195 to IT, MOP-115126 to JP and MOP-106603 to JSt-P), Terry Fox Research

548 Institute (TFF 116128) to IT, JSt-P, and MP, and NIH R01 grant (GM073855, JAP, Jr).

549 Research in the BU-CMD was supported by NIH grant GM067041, Swedish foundation

550 for international cooperation in research and higher education (STINT) OL, IT and LF. IT

551 is a CIHR New Investigator and recipient of FRQS establishment award. J.St-P. is a

552 FRQS scholar. LM is supported by a post-doc fellowship from the Swedish Childhood

553 Cancer Foundation. MC and YC hold fellowships from the CIHR/FRQS training grant in

554 cancer research FRN53888 of the McGill Integrated Cancer Research Training Program.

555 IT is indebted to Prof. R. McInnes for allowing him to focus on science and not nonsense.

24 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

556 Disclosure declarations:

557 Authors have no conflicts to report.

558 Figure legends:

559 Figure 1. Biases in polysome- and ribosome-profiling studies of translation

560 efficiency. (A-B) Mean expression levels and densities according to data from poly(A)+

561 RNA for mRNAs identified as differentially translated by ribosome-profiling (Hsieh et al.

562 2012; Thoreen et al. 2012), which include ~60-70% TOP mRNAs; polysome-profiling

563 (Larsson et al. 2012), which includes ~10% TOP mRNAs; and non-movers. Percentage

564 of mRNAs and mean reads per kilobase per million mapped reads (Rpkm) per subset is

565 indicated. (C) Calculated relationship between number of bound ribosomes and

566 sedimentation in a 5-50% sucrose gradient. (D) Simulated distributions of ribosome

567 association under a condition when MTOR is inhibited (black) and a range of ribosome

568 association under the control condition. (E, H) Proportions of differentially translated

569 mRNAs identified by polysome or ribosome-profiling simulations from analyzed shifts in

570 polysome-association. Genes were ranked by p-value (E) or fold-change (H). (F, I)

571 Observed bias (i.e. obtained percentage of genes from each shift compared to expected

572 percentage) across all shifts. (G). Sums of bias across all shifts for each technology and

573 analysis approach. (F,G,I). Means and standard deviations from 4 replicated simulations

574 are shown. (J-K) Observed absolute or relative fold-changes using polysome or

575 ribosome-profiling for TOP and non-TOP mRNAs under conditions when an increasing

576 proportion of TOP mRNAs change their translation (J) or when global translation is

577 affected (K).

578

25 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

579

580 Figure 2. Transcription start site analysis using nanoCAGE confirms that MTOR

581 regulates translation of non-TOP mRNAs. (A) The nanoCAGE procedure to identify

582 transcription start sites (TSS; BC=barcode; SP=spacer; MS-RanN6=random hexamer;

583 MS-Dir1R/F=primers for semi-suppressive PCR; MS-Dir2R/F=primers for adaptor

584 PCR). (B) A comparison of the number of identified peaks (>5 reads; left) and RefSeq

585 mRNAs (>50 reads; right) under increasing number of sampled nanoCAGE sequencing

586 reads. (C) TSS revealed by nanoCAGE in two TOP mRNAs. The UTR-lengths suggested

587 by the 3 major TSS peaks are indicated together with the 5’UTR region according to

588 RefSeq and the position of the 5’TOP motif. (D). The proportion of MTOR-sensitive (by

589 polysome-profiling) mRNAs with TOP elements according to nanoCAGE. (E-F). A

590 comparison between 5’UTR lengths according to RefSeq and nanoCAGE mean lengths

591 for all RefSeq mRNAs detected (E) and MTOR-sensitive genes (F). Green lines indicate

592 a 2-fold difference in 5’UTR length.

593

594 Figure 3. Mitochondria related transcripts are enriched among MTOR-sensitive

595 mRNAs with extremely short 5’UTRs. (A) Enrichment of biological processes in

596 MTOR-sensitive mRNAs (from polysome-profiling) depending on nanoCAGE or RefSeq

597 5’UTR lengths. Colors represent false discovery rates for enrichments among short (blue)

598 or long (yellow) 5’UTRs. Both mean and largest peak 5’UTR lengths from nanoCAGE

599 were used as input. (B) A table of genes from the mitochondria-related functions

600 (identified in [A]) and their peak 5’UTR lengths as determined by nanoCAGE. (C) A

601 comparison of 5’UTR lengths of MTOR-sensitive mitochondrial function or cell

26 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

602 cycle/survival related genes. (D) Comparison of 5’UTR lengths and the presence of TISU

603 element in the indicated subsets of MTOR-sensitive mRNAs. (E) ATP5O is a subunit of

604 Complex V of the electron transport chain (ATP synthase) and is encoded by mRNA with

605 a putative TISU motif and an extremely short 5’UTR (plot as in Fig. 2C)

606

607 Figure 4. Expression of proteins encoded by mRNAs with long 5’UTR, but not those

608 harboring short 5’UTRs/TISU elements, is dependent on EIF4A1. (A) HEK293E and

609 MCF7 cells were mock transfected or transfected with siRNA targeting EIF4A1 (si-

610 EIF4A1), EIF4E (si-EIF4E) or scrambled control siRNA (Scr). Levels of indicated

611 proteins were determined 48h post-transfection by Western blotting. ACTB served as a

612 loading control. Experiments were carried out in independent triplicate and quantified

613 using densitometry (Sup. Fig 9). (B) Total levels of indicated mRNAs isolated from cells

614 described in (A) were determined by RT-qPCR. Data were log2 transformed and values

615 obtained for indicated mRNAs were normalized to those obtained for ACTB, and to the

616 mean expression per gene. (C) Sub-polyosmal, light polysome and heavy polysome

617 fractions were obtained from cytosolic extracts from cells described in (A) by

618 ultracentrifugation using 5-50% sucrose gradients. During fractionation, UV absorbance

619 at 254nm (Abs 254nm) was continuously monitored to obtain absorbance tracings.

620 Position of 40S and 60S ribosomal subunits, monosome (80S) and polysomes are

621 indicated. (D) Amount of indicated mRNAs in sub-polyosmal, light polysome and heavy

622 polysome fractions isolated from cells described in (C) were determined by RT-qPCR.

623 Experiments in panels (B) and (D) were carried out in independent duplicates each

624 consisting of a triplicate. Data are expressed as a percentage of a given mRNA in each

27 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

625 fraction. Bars represent SD values. P-values from 1-way ANOVAs for heavy polysomes

626 are indicated.

627

628 Figure 5. Translation of reporter mRNAs harboring short 5’UTRs is sensitive to

629 EIF4E, but not EIF4A1. HEK293E cells were transfected with a control (Scr), EIF4E

630 (si-EIF4E) or EIF4A1 (si-EIF4A1) siRNAs and then transfected with firefly (FF)

631 reporters harboring IRF7 5’UTR [IRF7(5’UTR)-FF] (A), ATP5O 5’UTR with a proximal

632 portion of TISU element before the initiation codon [ATP5O(5’UTR)-FF] (B), ATP5O

633 5’UTR with a full TISU element [ATP5O(TISU)-FF] (C), UQCC2 5’UTR

634 [UQCC2(5’UTR)-FF] (D), NDUFS6 5’UTR [NDUFS6(5’UTR)-FF] (E) or ATP5O

635 5’UTR followed by a stem-loop structure [ATP5O(5’UTR)-SL-FF]. As a control, cells

636 were co-transfected with a renilla reporter. Luminescence was monitored 48h post-

637 transfection. Data for firefly luminescence normalized to renilla luminescence were log2

638 transformed and normalized per replicate and to the mean of Scr. (see Sup. Fig. 14). Each

639 experiment was performed in independent triplicates each consisting of 3 replicates and

640 data are shown as a mean +/- SD. RLU, relative light units. Schematics of the FF

641 constructs are provided in the above histograms and the positions of TISU and ORF of FF

642 luciferase are indicated. P-values from 1-way ANOVAs are shown.

643

644 Figure 6. Short-term (16h) MTOR, but not EIF4A1 inhibition, decreases

645 mitochondrial number and respiration. (A) HEK293E cells were treated with torin1

646 (250nM), silvestrol (silv; 25nM) or a vehicle (DMSO) control for 16h. Cells were

647 counted to ensure that used concentrations of torin1 and silvestrol result in comparable

28 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

648 inhibition of proliferation (left panel) and mitochondrial mass was estimated by

649 monitoring mean fluorescence intensity of MitoTracker Green using flow cytometry

650 (right panel). Data were log2 transformed, normalized per replicate and to the mean of

651 DMSO, and are shown as means +/- SD (n=3). (B) HEK293E cells were treated with

652 torin1 (250nM), silvestrol (silv; 25nM) or DMSO for 16h. Mitochondrial respiration was

653 assessed using a Clark electrode and presented as oxygen consumption rate (OCR). Data

654 are shown as means of 4 independent experiments (n=4) +/- SD in linear scale. P-values

655 from 1-way ANOVAs calculated after log2 transformation and normalization per

656 replicate and to DMSO are indicated.

657

658 Figure 7. Prolonged (72h) inhibition of EIF4A1, but not MTOR compromises

659 mitochondrial integrity and leads to apoptosis (A) HEK293E cells were treated with

660 torin1 (250nM), silvestrol (silv; 25nM) or a vehicle (DMSO) for 72h. Mitochondrial

661 membrane potential (MMP) was analyzed by monitoring TMRE fluorescence intensity

662 by flow cytometry. As a control, cells were treated with FCCP (20μM; 10 minutes) to

663 induce mitochondrial membrane depolarization. Left panel: The flow cytometry

664 histogram profiles of unstained (control; black), and TMRE stained cells treated with

665 FCCP (blue), a vehicle (DMSO; red), torin1 (orange) or silvestrol (silv; green). Cells

666 harboring depolarized mitochondria (MMP-) were defined as those with TMRE signal

667 equal of less to TMRE signal observed in FCCP-treated cells. Middle panel: Mean

668 percentage (n=3) of MMP- and MMP+ cells out of total viable cells (DAPI positive dead

669 cells were excluded). Right panel: Overall TMRE emission expressed in arbitrary units

670 (a.u.). Results are presented as mean +/- SD (n=3). (B) HEK293E cells were treated as

29 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

671 described in (A) and apoptosis was measured by flow cytometry using a FITC-Annexin

672 V/PI staining. The fractions (%) of viable (Annexin V-/ PI-), early apoptotic (Annexin

673 V+/ PI-), late apoptotic (Annexin V+/PI low), and dead (Annexin V+/ PI high) cells are

674 shown relative to the total cell population. Results represent means +/- SD (n=3). P-

675 values from 1-way ANOVAs are shown. (C) HEK293E cells were treated with torin1

676 (250nM), silvestrol (silv; 25nM) in the presence or absence of chloroquine (CQ, 50µM)

677 for 4 and 16h. Autophagy induction was monitored by the detection of MAP1LC3A/B

678 lipidation (MAP1LC3A-II and MAP1LC3B-II) using appropriate antibodies. The levels

679 and phosphorylation status of indicated proteins were monitored by Western blotting.

680 ACTB served as a loading control. (D) Schematic representation of the model: In

681 addition to 5’TOP motif (TOP mRNAs), 5’UTR features define two distinct subsets of

682 non-TOP mRNAs whose translation is stimulated by MTOR (mTOR; green): i) mRNAs

683 with long 5’UTRs whose translation is sensitive to both EIF4E (blue) and EIF4A1 (red),

684 which encode pro-survival (e.g. BCL2) and proliferation-promoting (e.g. CCND3)

685 proteins and ii) mRNAs with short 5’UTRs whose translation is sensitive to EIF4E

686 (blue), but not EIF4A1 (red) that encode proteins with mitochondrial functions (e.g.

687 ATP5O). Whereas MTOR-i (mTOR-i;green) suppress translation of both subsets of

688 mRNAs (i and ii) leading to metabolic dormancy and cytostatic effect, EIF4A-i (red)

689 selectively inhibit translation of mRNAs with long 5’UTRs (i) leading to apoptosis.

690

691 References:

692 Albert V, Hall MN. 2014. mTOR signaling in cellular and organismal energetics. 693 Current opinion in cell biology 33C: 55-66. 694 Babendure JR, Babendure JL, Ding JH, Tsien RY. 2006. Control of mammalian 695 translation by mRNA structure near caps. RNA 12(5): 851-861.

30 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

696 Bordeleau ME, Matthews J, Wojnar JM, Lindqvist L, Novac O, Jankowsky E, 697 Sonenberg N, Northcote P, Teesdale-Spittle P, Pelletier J. 2005. Stimulation of 698 mammalian translation eIF4A activity by a small molecule 699 inhibitor of . Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102(30): 10460- 700 10465. 701 Bordeleau ME, Mori A, Oberer M, Lindqvist L, Chard LS, Higa T, Belsham GJ, Wagner 702 G, Tanaka J, Pelletier J. 2006. Functional characterization of IRESes by an 703 inhibitor of the RNA helicase eIF4A. Nat Chem Biol 2(4): 213-220. 704 Bordeleau ME, Robert F, Gerard B, Lindqvist L, Chen SM, Wendel HG, Brem B, Greger 705 H, Lowe SW, Porco JA, Jr. et al. 2008. Therapeutic suppression of translation 706 initiation modulates chemosensitivity in a mouse lymphoma model. J Clin 707 Invest 118(7): 2651-2660. 708 Burnett PE, Barrow RK, Cohen NA, Snyder SH, Sabatini DM. 1998. RAFT1 709 phosphorylation of the translational regulators p70 S6 kinase and 4E-BP1. 710 Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 95(4): 1432-1437. 711 Chu J, Cencic R, Wang W, Porco JA, Pelletier J. 2015. Translation Inhibition by 712 Rocaglates is Independent of eIF4E Phosphorylation Status. Mol Cancer Ther. 713 Colina R, Costa-Mattioli M, Dowling RJ, Jaramillo M, Tai LH, Breitbach CJ, Martineau 714 Y, Larsson O, Rong L, Svitkin YV et al. 2008. Translational control of the 715 innate immune response through IRF-7. Nature 452(7185): 323-328. 716 Consortium F the RP Clst Forrest AR Kawaji H Rehli M Baillie JK de Hoon MJ Haberle 717 V Lassmann T et al. 2014. A promoter-level mammalian expression atlas. 718 Nature 507(7493): 462-470. 719 Damgaard CK, Lykke-Andersen J. 2011. Translational coregulation of 5'TOP mRNAs 720 by TIA-1 and TIAR. Genes Dev 25(19): 2057-2068. 721 de Sousa Abreu R, Penalva LO, Marcotte EM, Vogel C. 2009. Global signatures of 722 protein and mRNA expression levels. Mol Biosyst 5(12): 1512-1526. 723 Elfakess R, Sinvani H, Haimov O, Svitkin Y, Sonenberg N, Dikstein R. 2011. Unique 724 translation initiation of mRNAs-containing TISU element. Nucleic Acids Res 725 39(17): 7598-7609. 726 Elmore SP, Qian T, Grissom SF, Lemasters JJ. 2001. The mitochondrial permeability 727 transition initiates autophagy in rat hepatocytes. FASEB journal : official 728 publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology 729 15(12): 2286-2287. 730 Feoktistova K, Tuvshintogs E, Do A, Fraser CS. 2013. Human eIF4E promotes mRNA 731 restructuring by stimulating eIF4A helicase activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 732 110(33): 13339-13344. 733 Fonseca BD, Zakaria C, Jia JJ, Graber TE, Svitkin Y, Tahmasebi S, Healy D, Hoang HD, 734 Jensen JM, Diao IT et al. 2015. La-related Protein 1 (LARP1) Represses 735 Terminal Oligopyrimidine (TOP) mRNA Translation Downstream of mTOR 736 Complex 1 (mTORC1). J Biol Chem 290(26): 15996-16020. 737 Galicia-Vazquez G, Cencic R, Robert F, Agenor AQ, Pelletier J. 2012. A cellular 738 response linking eIF4AI activity to eIF4AII transcription. RNA 18(7): 1373- 739 1384.

31 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

740 Gandin V, Sikstrom K, Alain T, Morita M, McLaughlan S, Larsson O, Topisirovic I. 741 2014. Polysome fractionation and analysis of mammalian translatomes on a 742 genome-wide scale. Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE(87). 743 Garcia-Garcia C, Frieda KL, Feoktistova K, Fraser CS, Block SM. 2015. RNA 744 BIOCHEMISTRY. Factor-dependent processivity in human eIF4A DEAD-box 745 helicase. Science 348(6242): 1486-1488. 746 Gerashchenko MV, Gladyshev VN. 2014. Translation inhibitors cause abnormalities 747 in ribosome profiling experiments. Nucleic Acids Res 42(17): e134. 748 Gingras AC, Gygi SP, Raught B, Polakiewicz RD, Abraham RT, Hoekstra MF, 749 Aebersold R, Sonenberg N. 1999. Regulation of 4E-BP1 phosphorylation: a 750 novel two-step mechanism. Genes Dev 13(11): 1422-1437. 751 Gingras AC, Raught B, Gygi SP, Niedzwiecka A, Miron M, Burley SK, Polakiewicz RD, 752 Wyslouch-Cieszynska A, Aebersold R, Sonenberg N. 2001. Hierarchical 753 phosphorylation of the translation inhibitor 4E-BP1. Genes Dev 15(21): 2852- 754 2864. 755 Graff JR, Konicek BW, Carter JH, Marcusson EG. 2008. Targeting the eukaryotic 756 translation initiation factor 4E for cancer therapy. Cancer Res 68(3): 631- 757 634. 758 Guttman M, Russell P, Ingolia NT, Weissman JS, Lander ES. 2013. Ribosome profiling 759 provides evidence that large noncoding do not encode proteins. Cell 760 154(1): 240-251. 761 Gygi SP, Rochon Y, Franza BR, Aebersold R. 1999. Correlation between protein and 762 mRNA abundance in yeast. Mol Cell Biol 19(3): 1720-1730. 763 Hara K, Yonezawa K, Kozlowski MT, Sugimoto T, Andrabi K, Weng QP, Kasuga M, 764 Nishimoto I, Avruch J. 1997. Regulation of eIF-4E BP1 phosphorylation by 765 mTOR. J Biol Chem 272(42): 26457-26463. 766 Hinnebusch AG. 2014. The scanning mechanism of eukaryotic translation initiation. 767 Annu Rev Biochem 83: 779-812. 768 Hsieh AC, Liu Y, Edlind MP, Ingolia NT, Janes MR, Sher A, Shi EY, Stumpf CR, 769 Christensen C, Bonham MJ et al. 2012. The translational landscape of mTOR 770 signalling steers cancer initiation and metastasis. Nature 485 (7396): 55-61. 771 Ingolia NT. 2014. Ribosome profiling: new views of translation, from single codons 772 to genome scale. Nat Rev Genet 15(3): 205-213. 773 Ingolia NT, Ghaemmaghami S, Newman JR, Weissman JS. 2009. Genome-wide 774 analysis in vivo of translation with nucleotide resolution using ribosome 775 profiling. Science 324(5924): 218-223. 776 Jovanovic M, Rooney MS, Mertins P, Przybylski D, Chevrier N, Satija R, Rodriguez EH, 777 Fields AP, Schwartz S, Raychowdhury R et al. 2015. Immunogenetics. 778 Dynamic profiling of the protein life cycle in response to pathogens. Science 779 347(6226): 1259038. 780 Kim YC, Guan KL. 2015. mTOR: a pharmacologic target for autophagy regulation. J 781 Clin Invest 125(1): 25-32. 782 King HA, Gerber AP. 2014. Translatome profiling: methods for genome-scale 783 analysis of mRNA translation. Briefings in functional genomics. 784 Klionsky DJ Abdalla FC Abeliovich H Abraham RT Acevedo-Arozena A Adeli K 785 Agholme L Agnello M Agostinis P Aguirre-Ghiso JA et al. 2012. Guidelines for

32 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

786 the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy. Autophagy 787 8(4): 445-544. 788 Koromilas AE, Lazaris-Karatzas A, Sonenberg N. 1992. mRNAs containing extensive 789 secondary structure in their 5' non-coding region translate efficiently in cells 790 overexpressing initiation factor eIF-4E. Embo J 11(11): 4153-4158. 791 Kristensen AR, Gsponer J, Foster LJ. 2013. Protein synthesis rate is the predominant 792 regulator of protein expression during differentiation. Molecular systems 793 biology 9: 689. 794 Lareau LF, Hite DH, Hogan GJ, Brown PO. 2014. Distinct stages of the translation 795 elongation cycle revealed by sequencing ribosome-protected mRNA 796 fragments. Elife 3: e01257. 797 Larsson O, Morita M, Topisirovic I, Alain T, Blouin MJ, Pollak M, Sonenberg N. 2012. 798 Distinct perturbation of the translatome by the antidiabetic drug metformin. 799 Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109(23): 8977-8982. 800 Larsson O, Nadon R. 2013. Re-analysis of genome wide data on mammalian 801 microRNA-mediated suppression of gene expression. Translation 1(1): 802 e24557. 803 Lazaris-Karatzas A, Montine KS, Sonenberg N. 1990. Malignant transformation by a 804 eukaryotic initiation factor subunit that binds to mRNA 5' cap. Nature 805 345(6275): 544-547. 806 Levy S, Avni D, Hariharan N, Perry RP, Meyuhas O. 1991. Oligopyrimidine tract at the 807 5' end of mammalian mRNAs is required for their 808 translational control. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 88(8): 3319-3323. 809 Li JJ, Bickel PJ, Biggin MD. 2014. System wide analyses have underestimated protein 810 abundances and the importance of transcription in mammals. PeerJ 2: e270. 811 Li JJ, Biggin MD. 2015. Gene expression. Statistics requantitates the central dogma. 812 Science 347(6226): 1066-1067. 813 Lodish HF. 1974. Model for the regulation of mRNA translation applied to 814 haemoglobin synthesis. Nature 251(5474): 385-388. 815 Ly T, Ahmad Y, Shlien A, Soroka D, Mills A, Emanuele MJ, Stratton MR, Lamond AI. 816 2014. A proteomic chronology of gene expression through the cell cycle in 817 human myeloid leukemia cells. Elife 3: e01630. 818 Merrick WC. 2015. eIF4F: A Retrospective. J Biol Chem 290(40): 24091-24099. 819 Meyuhas O, Kahan T. 2014. The race to decipher the top secrets of TOP mRNAs. 820 Biochimica et biophysica acta. 821 Miloslavski R, Cohen E, Avraham A, Iluz Y, Hayouka Z, Kasir J, Mudhasani R, Jones 822 SN, Cybulski N, Ruegg MA et al. 2014. Oxygen sufficiency controls TOP mRNA 823 translation via the TSC-Rheb-mTOR pathway in a 4E-BP-independent 824 manner. Journal of molecular cell biology 6(3): 255-266. 825 Modelska A, Turro E, Russell R, Beaton J, Sbarrato T, Spriggs K, Miller J, Gräf S, 826 Provenzano E, Blows F et al. 2015. The malignant phenotype in breast cancer 827 is driven by eIF4A1-mediated changes in the translational landscape. Cell 828 Death Dis 6: e1603. 829 Morita M, Gravel SP, Chenard V, Sikstrom K, Zheng L, Alain T, Gandin V, Avizonis D, 830 Arguello M, Zakaria C et al. 2013. mTORC1 Controls Mitochondrial Activity

33 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

831 and Biogenesis through 4E-BP-Dependent Translational Regulation. Cell 832 Metab 18(5): 698-711. 833 Morita M, Gravel SP, Hulea L, Larsson O, Pollak M, St-Pierre J, Topisirovic I. 2015. 834 mTOR coordinates protein synthesis, mitochondrial activity and 835 proliferation. Cell Cycle 14(4): 473-480. 836 Narendra D, Tanaka A, Suen DF, Youle RJ. 2008. Parkin is recruited selectively to 837 impaired mitochondria and promotes their autophagy. J Cell Biol 183(5): 838 795-803. 839 Pause A, Belsham GJ, Gingras AC, Donze O, Lin TA, Lawrence JC, Jr., Sonenberg N. 840 1994a. Insulin-dependent stimulation of protein synthesis by 841 phosphorylation of a regulator of 5'-cap function. Nature 371(6500): 762- 842 767. 843 Pause A, Methot N, Svitkin Y, Merrick WC, Sonenberg N. 1994b. Dominant negative 844 mutants of mammalian translation initiation factor eIF-4A define a critical 845 role for eIF-4F in cap-dependent and cap-independent initiation of 846 translation. EMBO J 13(5): 1205-1215. 847 Pelechano V, Wei W, Steinmetz LM. 2015. Widespread Co-translational RNA Decay 848 Reveals Ribosome Dynamics. Cell 161(6): 1400-1412. 849 Pelletier J, Graff J, Ruggero D, Sonenberg N. 2015. Targeting the eIF4F Translation 850 Initiation Complex: A Critical Nexus for Cancer Development. Cancer Res 851 75(2): 250-263. 852 Pelletier J, Sonenberg N. 1985. Insertion mutagenesis to increase secondary 853 structure within the 5' noncoding region of a eukaryotic mRNA reduces 854 translational efficiency. Cell 40(3): 515-526. 855 Piccirillo CA, Bjur E, Topisirovic I, Sonenberg N, Larsson O. 2014. Translational 856 control of immune responses: from transcripts to translatomes. Nat Immunol 857 15(6): 503-511. 858 R Core Team. 2014. R: A Language and Envoronment for Statistical Computing. 859 Raught B, Peiretti F, Gingras AC, Livingstone M, Shahbazian D, Mayeur GL, 860 Polakiewicz RD, Sonenberg N, Hershey JW. 2004. Phosphorylation of 861 eucaryotic translation initiation factor 4B Ser422 is modulated by S6 kinases. 862 EMBO J 23(8): 1761-1769. 863 Roux PP, Topisirovic I. 2012. Regulation of mRNA translation by signaling pathways. 864 Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 4(11). 865 Rubio CA, Weisburd B, Holderfield M, Arias C, Fang E, DeRisi JL, Fanidi A. 2014. 866 Transcriptome-wide characterization of the eIF4A signature highlights 867 plasticity in translation regulation. Genome biology 15(10): 476. 868 Salimullah M, Sakai M, Plessy C, Carninci P. 2011. NanoCAGE: a high-resolution 869 technique to discover and interrogate cell transcriptomes. Cold Spring Harb 870 Protoc 2011(1): pdb prot5559. 871 Scaduto RC, Jr., Grotyohann LW. 1999. Measurement of mitochondrial membrane 872 potential using fluorescent rhodamine derivatives. Biophysical journal 76(1 873 Pt 1): 469-477. 874 Schwanhausser B, Busse D, Li N, Dittmar G, Schuchhardt J, Wolf J, Chen W, Selbach 875 M. 2011. Global quantification of mammalian gene expression control. Nature 876 473(7347): 337-342.

34 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

877 Sen ND, Zhou F, Ingolia NT, Hinnebusch AG. 2015. Genome-wide analysis of 878 translational efficiency reveals distinct but overlapping functions of yeast 879 DEAD-box RNA helicases Ded1 and eIF4A. Genome research 25(8): 1196- 880 1205. 881 Settembre C, Zoncu R, Medina DL, Vetrini F, Erdin S, Erdin S, Huynh T, Ferron M, 882 Karsenty G, Vellard MC et al. 2012. A lysosome-to-nucleus signalling 883 mechanism senses and regulates the lysosome via mTOR and TFEB. EMBO J 884 31(5): 1095-1108. 885 Shama S, Avni D, Frederickson RM, Sonenberg N, Meyuhas O. 1995. Overexpression 886 of initiation factor eIF-4E does not relieve the translational repression of 887 ribosomal protein mRNAs in quiescent cells. Gene expression 4(4-5): 241- 888 252. 889 Shimobayashi M, Hall MN. 2014. Making new contacts: the mTOR network in 890 metabolism and signalling crosstalk. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 15(3): 155-162. 891 Sinvani H, Haimov O, Svitkin Y, Sonenberg N, Tamarkin-Ben-Harush A, Viollet B, 892 Dikstein R. 2015. Translational Tolerance of Mitochondrial Genes to 893 Metabolic Energy Stress Involves TISU and eIF1-eIF4GI Cooperation in Start 894 Codon Selection. Cell Metab 21(3): 479-492. 895 Sonenberg N, Hinnebusch AG. 2009. Regulation of translation initiation in 896 : mechanisms and biological targets. Cell 136(4): 731-745. 897 Suzuki A, Wakaguri H, Yamashita R, Kawano S, Tsuchihara K, Sugano S, Suzuki Y, 898 Nakai K. 2015. DBTSS as an integrative platform for transcriptome, 899 epigenome and genome sequence variation data. Nucleic Acids Res 900 43(Database issue): D87-91. 901 Suzuki Y, Sugano S. 2003. Construction of a full-length enriched and a 5'-end 902 enriched cDNA library using the oligo-capping method. Methods in molecular 903 biology 221: 73-91. 904 Svitkin YV, Pause A, Haghighat A, Pyronnet S, Witherell G, Belsham GJ, Sonenberg N. 905 2001. The requirement for eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (elF4A) in 906 translation is in direct proportion to the degree of mRNA 5' secondary 907 structure. Rna 7(3): 382-394. 908 Tcherkezian J, Cargnello M, Romeo Y, Huttlin EL, Lavoie G, Gygi SP, Roux PP. 2014. 909 Proteomic analysis of cap-dependent translation identifies LARP1 as a key 910 regulator of 5'TOP mRNA translation. Genes Dev 28(4): 357-371. 911 Thoreen CC, Chantranupong L, Keys HR, Wang T, Gray NS, Sabatini DM. 2012. A 912 unifying model for mTORC1-mediated regulation of mRNA translation. 913 Nature 485(7396): 109-113. 914 Thoreen CC, Kang SA, Chang JW, Liu Q, Zhang J, Gao Y, Reichling LJ, Sim T, Sabatini 915 DM, Gray NS. 2009. An ATP-competitive mammalian target of rapamycin 916 inhibitor reveals rapamycin-resistant functions of mTORC1. J Biol Chem 917 284(12): 8023-8032. 918 Truitt ML, Conn CS, Shi Z, Pang X, Tokuyasu T, Coady AM, Seo Y, Barna M, Ruggero D. 919 2015. Differential Requirements for eIF4E Dose in Normal Development and 920 Cancer. Cell 162(1): 59-71.

35 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

921 Twig G, Elorza A, Molina AJ, Mohamed H, Wikstrom JD, Walzer G, Stiles L, Haigh SE, 922 Katz S, Las G et al. 2008. Fission and selective fusion govern mitochondrial 923 segregation and elimination by autophagy. EMBO J 27(2): 433-446. 924 Vogel C, Marcotte EM. 2012. Insights into the regulation of protein abundance from 925 proteomic and transcriptomic analyses. Nat Rev Genet 13(4): 227-232. 926 von Manteuffel SR, Gingras AC, Ming XF, Sonenberg N, Thomas G. 1996. 4E-BP1 927 phosphorylation is mediated by the FRAP-p70s6k pathway and is 928 independent of mitogen-activated protein kinase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 929 93(9): 4076-4080. 930 Wolfe AL, Singh K, Zhong Y, Drewe P, Rajasekhar VK, Sanghvi VR, Mavrakis KJ, Jiang 931 M, Roderick JE, Van der Meulen J et al. 2014. RNA G-quadruplexes cause 932 eIF4A-dependent oncogene translation in cancer. Nature Jul 27: doi: 933 10.1038/nature13485. 934

36 Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

nanoCAGE reveals 5' UTR features that define specific modes of translation of functionally related MTOR-sensitive mRNAs

Valentina Gandin, Laia Masvidal, Laura Hulea, et al.

Genome Res. published online March 16, 2016 Access the most recent version at doi:10.1101/gr.197566.115

Supplemental http://genome.cshlp.org/content/suppl/2016/04/08/gr.197566.115.DC1 Material

P

Accepted Peer-reviewed and accepted for publication but not copyedited or typeset; accepted Manuscript manuscript is likely to differ from the final, published version.

Open Access Freely available online through the Genome Research Open Access option.

Creative This manuscript is Open Access.This article, published in Genome Research, is Commons available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International license), License as described at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Email Alerting Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article - sign up in the box at the Service top right corner of the article or click here.

Advance online articles have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet appeared in the paper journal (edited, typeset versions may be posted when available prior to final publication). Advance online articles are citable and establish publication priority; they are indexed by PubMed from initial publication. Citations to Advance online articles must include the digital object identifier (DOIs) and date of initial publication.

To subscribe to Genome Research go to: https://genome.cshlp.org/subscriptions

Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press