CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 137RNA and protein synthesis mechanismsPI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling in cancerFungal and yeast genetics research

Intracellular translation initiation factor levels in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and their role in cap‐complex function

Open access
von der Haar, Tobias, McCarthy, John E. G.·2002·Molecular Microbiology
DOI 10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.03172.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Summary: Knowledge of the balance of activities of eukaryotic initiation factors (eIFs) is critical to our understanding of the mechanisms underlying translational control. We have therefore estimated the intracellular levels of 11 eIFs in logarithmically growing cells of Saccharomyces cerevisiae using polyclonal antibodies raised in rabbits against recombinant proteins. Those factors involved in 43S complex formation occur at levels comparable (i.e. within a 0.5‐ to 2.0‐fold range) to those published for ribosomes. In contrast, the subunits of the cap‐binding complex eIF4F showed considerable variation in their abundance. The helicase eIF4A was the most abundant eIF of the yeast cell, followed by eIF4E at multiple copies per ribosome, and eIF4B at approximately one copy per ribosome. The adaptor protein eIF4G was the least abundant of the eIF4 factors, with a copy number per cell that is substoichiometric to the ribosome and similar to the abundance of mRNA. The observed excess of eIF4E over its functional partner eIF4G is not strictly required during exponential growth: at eIF4E levels artificially reduced to 30% of those in wild‐type yeast, growth rates and the capacity for general protein synthesis are only minimally affected. This demonstrates that eIF4E does not exercise a higher level of rate control over translation than other eIFs. However, other features of the yeast life cycle, such as the control of cell size, are more sensitive to changes in eIF4E abundance. Overall, these data constitute an important basis for developing a quantitative model of the workings of the eukaryotic translation apparatus.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.03172.x

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • SCM protein levels sum to just over 35 million protein molecules per haploid cell, similar to the 50 million molecules per cell estimated previously within the variation in total protein extraction.

    “Scaled to 4μg of protein in 1.5×106 cells (2.7pg protein per yeast cell in cells roughly 30 μm 3 in size) [55], SCM protein levels sum to just over 35 million protein molecules per haploid cell, similar to the 50 million molecules per cell estimated previously [20] within the variation in total protein extraction from haploid yeast cells (cf. [56], which estimates 4.95pg per cell).”

    From Accounting for Experimental Noise Reveals That mRNA Levels, Amplified by Post-Transcriptional Processes, Largely Determine Steady-State Protein Levels in Yeast (2015) · cites this paper as [56]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
von der Haar, T., & McCarthy, J. E. G.
Affiliations
University of Manchester (GB)
ORCID
McCarthy, John E. G.
Venue
Molecular Microbiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-10
Volume
46
Issue
2
Pages
531-544
ISSN
  • 0950-382X (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2958
DOI
10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.03172.x
OpenAlex
W2132432514
Cited by
137
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 23 d)
Locations
  • Molecular Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling in cancer
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
Keywords
eukaryotic initiation factors, eIF4E, eIF4G, eIF4A, eIF4B, cap-binding complex, translation initiation, protein abundance, translational regulation, cell size control, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, protein synthesis
MeSH terms
Animals, Phosphoproteins, Rabbits, RNA Caps, RNA, Viral, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Protein Biosynthesis, Gene Expression Regulation, Fungal, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins, Nuclear Cap-Binding Protein Complex, Eukaryotic Initiation Factor-4E, Eukaryotic Initiation Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review