Transfer RNA in Decoding and the Wobble Hypothesis

Mick F Tuite, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK
Tobias von der Haar, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK

Published online: November 2016

DOI: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0001497.pub2

Abstract

Translation of the genetic code stored in messenger ribonucleic acid (RNA) requires significantly fewer transfer RNAs (35–45) than there are codons (61, amino acid specifying). This is achieved through an increased flexibility in the allowable base‐pair interactions between the messenger RNA and the transfer RNA involving the third position of the codon and the first position of the corresponding anticodon. The rules governing this RNA:RNA interaction were originally summarised in Crick's ‘wobble hypothesis’. Covalent modification of the first base of an anticodon of a transfer RNA can profoundly affect the degree of flexibility in its base‐pairing potential by either extending or restricting such interactions. Recent studies suggest that the rate at which a codon is processed by the ribosome is influenced by whether or not decoding of that codon is via wobble base interactions. Yet, in spite of this flexibility and different rates of processing, decoding by transfer RNAs is achieved with considerable accuracy.

Key Concepts

  • The genetic code is decoded via transient interactions between messenger RNA (mRNA) and a series of ‘adaptor’ RNA molecules called transfer RNAs (tRNAs).
  • The mRNA–tRNA interaction occurs on the ribosome via the complementary base pairing between the three‐base anticodon of the tRNA and the three‐base codon in the mRNA.
  • A greater degree of flexibility of allowable base‐pair interactions between mRNA and tRNA allows most organisms to have far fewer tRNA species than there are codons.
  • Specific non‐Watson–Crick base‐pair interactions occur between the third base of a codon and the first base of the anticodon of a tRNA during decoding, the so‐called wobble.
  • Wobble base pairing enables the decoding of two or more codons by the same tRNA.
  • Certain modified bases, for example inosine (I) can extend or restrict the degree of flexibility in the range of mRNA:tRNA interactions.
  • Codons that are decoded by wobble base interactions are processed at a slower rate in the ribosome.
  • Certain antibiotics, for example streptomycin can promote misreading at the wobble third position of a codon.
  • The genetic code assignments are not universally conserved particularly in organellar genes, for example mitochondrial genes.

Keywords: wobble hypothesis; tRNA; anticodon; codon; mRNA decoding; codon recognition; base modification

Figure 1. mRNA–tRNA interactions involve base pairing between the anticodon of the transfer RNA (tRNA) and the messenger RNA (mRNA) codon. (a) Standard depiction of the two‐dimensional ‘clover‐leaf’ structure of a tRNA molecule. (b) An Arg‐inserting tRNA with a UCU anticodon can translate both the AGA codon by standard base‐pair interactions at all three positions and the AGG codon by a non‐Watson and Crick pairing in the third ‘wobble’ position of the codon.
Figure 2. The three‐dimensional structure of a transfer RNA (tRNA) molecule. tRNA molecules take up an L‐shaped structure because of a variety of intramolecular base interactions. The anticodon is present in a large unpaired region of the molecule with the three bases of the anticodon all pointing approximately in the same direction. The ‘U turn’ base (U33) immediately adjacent to the anticodon is indicated.
Figure 3. Wobble base‐pair interactions that occur between the first base of the anticodon (left) and the third base of the codon (right).
Figure 4. Translation of the UGA codon in Escherichia coli by a Trp‐inserting tRNA. The relative, approximate efficiencies of UGG/UGA decoding by (a) the wild‐type transfer RNA (tRNA), (b) a nonsense suppressor mutant of the tRNA in which C34 has been replaced by U34, and (c) a novel suppressor variant of the tRNA with G24 replaced by A24.
close

References

Andachi Y, Yamao F, Muto A and Osawa S (1989) Codon recognition patterns as deduced from sequences of the complete set of transfer RNA species in Mycoplasma capricolum: resemblance to mitochondria. Journal of Molecular Biology 209: 37–54.

Chan CT, Pang YL, Deng W, et al. (2012) Reprogramming of tRNA modifications controls the oxidative stress response by codon‐biased translation of proteins. Nature Communications 3: 937–944.

Crick FHC (1966) Codon–anticodon pairing: the wobble hypothesis. Journal of Molecular Biology 19: 548–555.

Curran JF (1995) Decoding with A:I wobble pair is inefficient. Nucleic Acids Research 23: 683–688.

Hirsh D and Gold L (1971) Translation of the UGA triplet in vitro by tryptophan transfer RNA. Journal of Molecular Biology 58: 459–468.

Jühling F, Mörl M, Hartmann RK, et al. (2009) tRNAdb 2009: compilation of tRNA sequences and tRNA genes. Nucleic Acids Research 37: D159–D162.

Kothe U and Rodnina MV (2007) Codon reading by tRNAAla with modified uridine in the wobble position. Molecular Cell 25: 167–174.

Lagerkvist U (1978) ‘Two out of three’: an alternative method for codon reading. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United states of America 75: 1759–1762.

Muramatsu T, Nishikawa K, Nemoto F, et al. (1988) Codon and amino‐acid specificities of a transfer RNA are both converted by a single post‐transcriptional modification. Nature 336: 179–181.

Nedialkova DD and Leidel SA (2015) Optimization of codon translation rates via tRNA modifications maintains proteome integrity. Cell 161: 1606–1618.

Nirenberg M (2004) Deciphering the genetic code – a personal account. Trends in Biochemical Sciences 29: 46–54.

Osawa S, Jukes TH, Watanabe K and Muto A (1992) Recent evidence for evolution of the genetic code. Microbiological Reviews 56: 229–264.

Parker J (1992) Variations in reading the genetic code. In: Hatfield DL, Lee BJ and Pirtle RM (eds) Transfer RNA in Protein Synthesis, pp. 191–267. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Sibler AP, Dirheimer G and Martin RP (1986) Codon reading patterns in Saccharomyces cerevisiae mitochondria based on sequences of mitochondrial tRNAs. FEBS Letters 194: 131–138.

Thompson RC, Dix DB, Gerson RB and Karim AM (1981) A GTPase reaction accompanying the rejection of Leu‐tRNA2 by UUU‐programmed ribosomes. Journal of Biological Chemistry 256: 81–89.

Voorhees RM and Ramakrishnan V (2013) Structural basis of the translational elongation cycle. Annual Reviews of Biochemistry 82: 203–236.

Further Reading

Eggertsson G and Soll D (1988) Transfer ribonucleic acid‐mediated suppression of termination codons in Escherichia coli. Microbiological Reviews 52: 354–374.

Osawa S (1995) Evolution of the Genetic Code. Oxford: Oxford Science Publications.

Soll D and RajBhandary UL (1995) tRNA Structure, Biosynthesis and Function. Washington, DC: ASM Press.

Related Sub-Topics:

Noncoding RNA | Translation of RNA | RNA Structure and Function
Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

Article Title: Transfer RNA in Decoding and the Wobble Hypothesis
 
How to Cite close
Tuite, Mick F, and von der Haar, Tobias(Nov 2016) Transfer RNA in Decoding and the Wobble Hypothesis. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0001497.pub2]