Take the 2-minute tour ×
Biology Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for biology researchers, academics, and students. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The field seems extremely divided on the debate. On one hand, artificial experiments have suggested that synonymous mutations don't correlate with gene expression but rather, the mRNA 5' structure is the most important 1. On the other hand, genome wide analysis suggests that tRNA biases are better associated with high expression 2. What other works balance out this discussion?

  1. Coding-sequence determinants of gene expression in Escherichia coli
  2. Translation efficiency is determined by both codon bias and folding energy
  3. An evolutionarily conserved mechanism for controlling the efficiency of protein translation
share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers 2

up vote 10 down vote accepted

This is an excellent question! To my knowledge, there hasn't been a definite answer yet. Recently, I did tons of research on which factors influence protein expression and you should definitely check out the following questions which I asked:

  1. What is the criticality of the ribosome binding site relative to the start codon in prokaryotic translation?

  2. What determines a successful protein expression in E. coli?

I answered my second question by posting a concise version of a paper from DNA2.0 (a gene synthesis company) that discusses the protein expression. It summarizes all the important factors (RBS site, codon frequency match, 5' mRNA secondary structure), but it doesn't discuss the extend to which they influence expression.

There is a nature paper from Voigt lab about RBS calculator, which takes into account only the 5' mRNA secondary structure and it doesn't discuss at all the codon-optimization. The calculator was good, but far away from perfect: there is a 50% chance of predicting an expression level within a 2-fold range of the target one.

On the other hand, an older paper from DNA2.0 argues that the mRNA is covered with ribosomes practically all the time, so the secondary structure of the mRNA should have little effect. Besides, an actively translating ribosome can break up stem-loop structures.

In my opinion, we are still far off from predicting RNA secondary structure formation, although it might be highly implicated in protein expression. From what I read, I think that it is equally crucial that there is no strong secondary structure at the 5' end of the mRNA, the RBS sequence is close to the consensus one and it it appropriately spaced upstream of the start codon, and the first 60-100 codon frequencies match the frequency of your heterologous host.

share|improve this answer
1  
nice answer Gergana! –  shigeta Mar 14 '12 at 17:09
    
I spent quite some time trying to answer the same question, so I couldn't help but share my knowledge! –  Gergana Vandova Mar 14 '12 at 17:50
add comment

Consider mRNA primary structure in terms of uORFs, upstream open reading frames. These can cause ribosome pausing or slowing and even disassociation from the mRNA.

I agree that a definite answer is not known (+1). For different mRNAs, under different cellular conditions (eg, low levels of a given charged tRNA), the balance or interplay between structure- and codon usage-based control of translation could be different.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.