AbstractBackgroundPentatricopeptide repeat (PPR) proteins are required for numerous RNA processing events in plant organelles including C-to-U editing, splicing, stabilization, and cleavage. Fifteen PPR proteins are known to be required for RNA editing at 21 sites in Arabidopsis chloroplasts, and belong to the PLS class of PPR proteins. In this study, we investigate the co-evolution of four PPR genes (CRR4, CRR21, CLB19, and OTP82) and their six editing targets in Brassicaceae species. PPR genes are composed of approximately 10 to 20 tandem repeats and each repeat has two α-helical regions, helix A and helix B, that are separated by short coil regions. Each repeat and structural feature was examined to determine the selective pressures on these regions.ResultsAll of the PPR genes examined are under strong negative selection. Multiple independent losses of editing site targets are observed for both CRR21 and OTP82. In several species lacking the known editing target for CRR21, PPR genes are truncated near the 17th PPR repeat. The coding sequences of the truncated CRR21 genes are maintained under strong negative selection; however, the 3’ UTR sequences beyond the truncation site have substantially diverged. Phylogenetic analyses of four PPR genes show that sequences corresponding to helix A are high compared to helix B sequences. Differential evolutionary selection of helix A versus helix B is observed in both plant and mammalian PPR genes.ConclusionPPR genes and their cognate editing sites are mutually constrained in evolution. Editing sites are frequently lost by replacement of an edited C with a genomic T. After the loss of an editing site, the PPR genes are observed with three outcomes: first, few changes are detected in some cases; second, the PPR gene is present as a pseudogene; and third, the PPR gene is present but truncated in the C-terminal region. The retention of truncated forms of CRR21 that are maintained under strong negative selection even in the absence of an editing site target suggests that unrecognized function(s) might exist for this PPR protein. PPR gene sequences that encode helix A are under strong selection, and could be involved in RNA substrate recognition.

Many transcripts expressed from plant organelle genomes are modified by C-to-U RNA editing. Nuclear encoded pentatricopeptide repeat (PPR) proteins are required as RNA binding specificity determinants in the RNA editing mechanism. Bioinformatic analysis has shown that most of the Arabidopsis PPR proteins necessary for RNA editing events include a C-terminal portion that shares structural characteristics with a superfamily of deaminases. The DYW deaminase domain includes a highly conserved zinc binding motif that shares characteristics with cytidine deaminases. The Arabidopsis PPR genes, ELI1 and DOT4, both have DYW deaminase domains and are required for single RNA editing events in chloroplasts. The ELI1 DYW deaminase domain was expressed as a recombinant protein in Escherichia coli and was shown to bind two zinc atoms per polypeptide. Thus, the DYW deaminase domain binds a zinc metal ion, as expected for a cytidine deaminase, and is potentially the catalytic component of an editing complex. Genetic complementation experiments demonstrate that large portions of the DYW deaminase domain of ELI1 may be eliminated, but the truncated genes retain the ability to restore editing site conversion in a mutant plant. These results suggest that the catalytic activity can be supplied in trans by uncharacterized protein(s) of the editosome.

Many transcripts expressed from plant organelle genomes are modified by C-to-U RNA editing. Nuclear encoded pentatricopeptide repeat (PPR) proteins include an RNA binding domain that provides site specificity. In addition, many PPR proteins include a C-terminal DYW deaminase domain with characteristic zinc binding motifs (CXXC, HXE) and has recently been shown to bind zinc ions. The glutamate residue of the HXE motif is catalytically required in the reaction catalyzed by cytidine deaminase. In this work, we examine the activity of the DYW deaminase domain through truncation or mutagenesis of the HXE motif. OTP84 is required for editing three chloroplast sites, and transgenes expressing OTP84 with C-terminal truncations were capable of editing only one of the three cognate sites at high efficiency. These results suggest that the deaminase domain of OTP84 is required for editing two of the sites, but another deaminase is able to supply the deamination activity for the third site. OTP84 and CREF7 transgenes were mutagenized to replace the glutamate residue of the HXE motif, and transgenic plants expressing OTP84-E824A and CREF7-E554A were unable to efficiently edit the cognate editing sites for these genes. In addition, plants expressing CREF7-E554A exhibited substantially reduced capacity to edit a non-cognate site, rpoA C200. These results indicate that the DYW deaminase domains of PPR proteins are involved in editing their cognate editing sites, and in some cases may participate in editing additional sites in the chloroplast.