mRNP granule proteins Fmrp and Dcp1a differentially regulate mRNP complexes to contribute to control of muscle stem cell quiescence and activation

Nainita Roy, Swetha Sundar, Malini Pillai, Farah Patell-Socha, Sravya Ganesh, Ajoy Aloysius, Mohammed Rumman, Hardik Gala, Simon M Hughes, Peter S Zammit, Jyotsna Dhawan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During skeletal muscle regeneration, satellite stem cells use distinct pathways to repair damaged myofibers or to self-renew by returning to quiescence. Cellular/mitotic quiescence employs mechanisms that promote a poised or primed state, including altered RNA turnover and translational repression. Here, we investigate the role of mRNP granule proteins Fragile X Mental Retardation Protein (Fmrp) and Decapping protein 1a (Dcp1a) in muscle stem cell quiescence and differentiation.

METHODS: Using isolated single muscle fibers from adult mice, we established differential enrichment of mRNP granule proteins including Fmrp and Dcp1a in muscle stem cells vs. myofibers. We investigated muscle tissue homeostasis in adult Fmr1-/- mice, analyzing myofiber cross-sectional area in vivo and satellite cell proliferation ex vivo. We explored the molecular mechanisms of Dcp1a and Fmrp function in quiescence, proliferation and differentiation in a C2C12 culture model. Here, we used polysome profiling, imaging and RNA/protein expression analysis to establish the abundance and assembly status of mRNP granule proteins in different cellular states, and the phenotype of knockdown cells.

RESULTS: Quiescent muscle satellite cells are enriched for puncta containing the translational repressor Fmrp, but not the mRNA decay factor Dcp1a. MuSC isolated from Fmr1-/- mice exhibit defective proliferation, and mature myofibers show reduced cross-sectional area, suggesting a role for Fmrp in muscle homeostasis. Expression and organization of Fmrp and Dcp1a varies during primary MuSC activation on myofibers, with Fmrp puncta prominent in quiescence, but Dcp1a puncta appearing during activation/proliferation. This reciprocal expression of Fmrp and Dcp1a puncta is recapitulated in a C2C12 culture model of quiescence and activation: consistent with its role as a translational repressor, Fmrp is enriched in non-translating mRNP complexes abundant in quiescent myoblasts; Dcp1a puncta are lost in quiescence, suggesting stabilized and repressed transcripts. The function of each protein differs during proliferation; whereas Fmrp knockdown led to decreased proliferation and lower cyclin expression, Dcp1a knockdown led to increased cell proliferation and higher cyclin expression. However, knockdown of either Fmrp or Dcp1a led to compromised differentiation. We also observed cross-regulation of decay versus storage mRNP granules; knockdown of Fmrp enhances accumulation of Dcp1a puncta, whereas knockdown of Dcp1a leads to increased Fmrp in puncta.

CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, our results provide evidence that the balance of mRNA turnover versus utilization is specific for distinct cellular states.

Original languageEnglish
Article number18
Pages (from-to)18
JournalSkeletal Muscle
Volume11
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 8 Jul 2021

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'mRNP granule proteins Fmrp and Dcp1a differentially regulate mRNP complexes to contribute to control of muscle stem cell quiescence and activation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this