5' tRNA halves are highly expressed in the primate hippocampus and might sequence-specifically regulate gene expression.

Fragments of mature tRNAs have long been considered as mere degradation products without physiological function. However, recent reports show that tRNA-derived small RNAs (tsRNAs) play prominent roles in diverse cellular processes across a wide spectrum of species. Contrasting the situation in other small RNA pathways the mechanisms behind these effects appear more diverse, more complex, and are generally less well understood. In addition, surprisingly little is known about the expression profiles of tsRNAs across different tissues and species. Here, we provide an initial overview of tsRNA expression in different species and tissues, revealing very high levels of 5' tRNA halves (5' tRHs) particularly in the primate hippocampus. We further modulated the regulation capacity of selected 5' tRHs in human cells by transfecting synthetic tsRNA mimics ("overexpression") or antisense-RNAs ("inhibition") and identified differentially expressed transcripts based on RNA-seq. We then used a novel k-mer mapping approach to dissect the underlying targeting rules, suggesting that 5' tRHs silence genes in a sequence-specific manner, while the most efficient target sites align to the mid-region of the 5' tRH and are located within the CDS or 3' UTR of the target. This amends previous observations that tsRNAs guide Argonaute proteins to silence their targets via a miRNA-like 5' seed match and suggests a yet unknown mechanism of regulation. Finally, our data suggest that some 5' tRHs that are also able to sequence-specifically stabilize mRNAs as up-regulated mRNAs are also significantly enriched for 5' tRH target sites.

Comparison of Two Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE) Methods for the Identification and Quantification of Porcine Retinal Protein Markers by LC-MS/MS.

Proper sample preparation protocols represent a critical step for liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS)-based proteomic study designs and influence the speed, performance and automation of high-throughput data acquisition. The main objective of this study was to compare two commercial solid-phase extraction (SPE)-based sample preparation protocols (comprising SOLAµTM HRP SPE spin plates from Thermo Fisher Scientific and ZIPTIP® C18 pipette tips from Merck Millipore) for analytical performance, reproducibility, and analysis speed. The house swine represents a promising animal model for studying human eye diseases including glaucoma and provides excellent requirements for the qualitative and quantitative MS-based comparison in terms of ocular proteomics. In total six technical replicates of two protein fractions [extracted with 0.1% dodecyl-ß-maltoside (DDM) or 1% trifluoroacetic acid (TFA)] of porcine retinal tissues were subjected to in-gel trypsin digestion and purified with both SPE-based workflows (N = 3) prior to LC-MS analysis. On average, 550 ± 70 proteins (1512 ± 199 peptides) and 305 ± 48 proteins (806 ± 144 peptides) were identified from DDM and TFA protein fractions, respectively, after ZIPTIP® C18 purification, and SOLAµTM workflow resulted in the detection of 513 ± 55 proteins (1347 ± 180 peptides) and 300 ± 33 proteins (722 ± 87 peptides), respectively (FDR < 1%). Venn diagram analysis revealed an average overlap of 65 ± 2% (DDM fraction) and 69 ± 4% (TFA fraction) in protein identifications between both SPE-based methods. Quantitative analysis of 25 glaucoma-related protein markers also showed no significant differences (P > 0.05) regarding protein recovery between both SPE methods. However, only glaucoma-associated marker MECP2 showed a significant (P = 0.02) higher abundance in ZIPTIP®-purified replicates in comparison to SOLAµTM-treated study samples. Nevertheless, this result was not confirmed in the verification experiment using in-gel trypsin digestion of recombinant MECP2 (P = 0.24). In conclusion, both SPE-based purification methods worked equally well in terms of analytical performance and reproducibility, whereas the analysis speed and the semi-automation of the SOLAµTM spin plates workflow is much more convenient in comparison to the ZIPTIP® C18 method.