Polysomal profiling is a powerful technique that allows for the quantification of the state of translation of specific transcripts under different treatment conditions. It is a very simple technique in principle yet it requires several steps of execution, some of which are critical for producing good polysome profiles. These key steps are: 1) using RNase-free chemicals and plasticware, 2) preparing good sucrose gradients (in our experience a 10-50% sucrose gradients work best for efficiently resolving 40/60S subunits and mRNAs with bound ribosomes), and 3) using cells that are exponentially growing and no more than 80% confluent in order to capture the highest rates of translation. This latter step should be taken into consideration when doing long cell treatments, such as gene knockdown or overexpression, so that the amount of cells to plate will be a function of how much the cells will be confluent at endpoint.
In the results presented here, polysome profile analysis was an important tool for assessing PDCD4 role in the translation regulation of the IRES-harboring mRNAs XIAP and Bcl-xL12. The fact that we did not observe any change in the general polysome profiles upon PDCD4 knock-down (Figure 1B) allowed us to conclude that PDCD4 did not impair global cellular translation under the conditions of the experiment. We next used RT-qPCR analysis to determine the distribution of the XIAP and Bcl-xL mRNAs in cells treated with PDCD4 or control siRNAs. qPCR is a method of choice for analyzing polysome profiles, as opposed to standard RT-PCR or Northern blotting, because it allows for a quantitative rather than semi-quantitative analysis of mRNA distribution and for the detection of subtle shifts in translational efficiency between treatments. Using this technique, we were able to show that the distribution of the XIAP and Bcl-xL mRNAs (expressed as a percent of total target mRNA across the gradient) was significantly shifted into heavy polyribosomes (mRNAs with a large number of ribosomes associated with them) after PDCD4 knock-down (Figure 1D, E), thus indicating an increase in translation of these mRNAs. This was further confirmed by an increase in XIAP and Bcl-xL protein levels but not in their steady-state RNA levels (Figure 1F, G). Importantly, the polysome distribution of the non-IRES variant of XIAP was unchanged between treated and untreated cells (Figure 1C). Alternatively, translational efficiency could be presented as a ratio of mRNA content in polysomes (usually fractions 5 to 10) versus monosomes (usually fractions 2 to 4)14.
The use of controls throughout the protocol is important in validating any polysome profiling result, as peaks observed from absorbance readings at 254 nm cannot on their own be attributed to ribosomal RNA (detergents, such as Triton X-100 strongly absorb in this region of the spectrum and may obscure 40/60S peaks at the top of the gradient). Blank gradients without lysate and/or with lysate buffer need to be run to determine the relative contribution of the buffers to the absorbance at 254 nm. Artefactual higher order structures can also lead to erroneous interpretations of polysomes where there are in fact none (e.g. “pseudo-polysomes”20). Sequestering magnesium (used throughout the procedure to stabilize 80S ribosomes) with the divalent cation chelator EDTA added to lysates and to the gradient buffer (20 mM for 15 min) will cause separation of the ribosome into its component small (40S) and large (60S) subunits. Thus, if absorbance peaks recorded at 260 nm are indeed polysomes, EDTA treatment will collapse the profile such that a single maximum will be observed near the top of gradient that corresponds to free mRNA and ribosomal units (data not shown). Coincident with EDTA-induced collapse of the profile, all of the specific targets analyzed by qPCR should now be found at the top of the gradient.
The number of ribosomes associated with a mRNA is not always an indicator of how efficiently that particular mRNA is being translated. Indeed, there are specific contexts in which active translation on polysomes becomes stalled 21,22 which the reader should be aware of. Determining whether or not transcripts are actively engaged with the translation machinery can be done by a) treating the sample with puromycin, which unlike EDTA, causes 'run-off' of ribosomes that are actively translocating across a mRNA, or b) treating the sample with homoharringtonine which inhibits translocation of only the first ribosome at the start codon, again causing 'run-off' of any downstream translocating ribosomes.
The use of control transcripts for qPCR analysis is also critical. The selection of transcripts that are not affected by different treatment conditions such as some housekeeping genes (GAPDH, Actin, Tubulin, Nucleolin), ribosomal mRNAs (18S, RPL13A) or in this case the non-IRES variant of the XIAP IRES, is important in verifying if the treatment’s effect on translation is specific or generalized. These control transcripts can be used to normalize the distribution of the analyzed mRNAs as was done here (XIAP and Bcl-xL mRNAs were normalized to GAPDH mRNA and expressed as a percentage of the total mRNA content represented by the sum of mRNA content in every fraction) or alternatively, target and control mRNAs can be expressed as absolute values and shown separately. qPCR analysis of the input lysates (usually 10% of total volume) is another step that will control for the distribution of specific mRNAs. Ideally, the mRNA content of a specific transcript in the input lysate should be comparable to the sum of mRNA content in all 10 fractions analyzed. Finally, an optional step to control for the phenol:chloroform extraction step is to spike each polysome fraction with an in vitro transcribed reporter mRNA (such as CAT, chloramphenicol acetyl transferase) that will be subsequently quantified by qPCR and can even be used to normalize the data 14.
As with any technique, the polysome profiling presents some limitations. The fact that usually a minimum of 10 fractions (more subtle shifts in translation efficiency may require 20 or more) need to be collected in order to have nice polysome distributions makes this step limiting, in the sense that only a maximum of 4 samples can be analyzed at a time to be able to comfortably handle RNA extraction and qPCR analysis of 40 samples and 4 input controls at once. The sample size can easily add up with how many transcripts are to be analyzed and how many qPCR replicates to do, and this can be costly. Another limitation of a qPCR-based polysomal profiling analysis is that it can only be done on a candidate-based approach (where the transcripts to be analyzed are known beforehand) and cannot be applied for genome-wide analysis of translation. However, at the beginning of the 21st century, investigators started to interrogate their polysomal RNA at a genomic level using DNA microarrays 15 and more recently with next-generation sequencing 16,17. In this powerful approach, polysomal profiling is performed as described in this protocol except that rather than performing qPCR analysis of individual fractions, monosomes fractions (usually fraction 2-4) and polysomes fractions (usually fractions) are pooled together and variations in global translation analyzed by DNA microarray or whole-genome RNA sequencing. Hence with this approach, it is possible to assess all the mRNAs whose distribution shifts from polysomes to monosomes (decrease in translation) or vice-versa (increase in translation) upon a specific treatment. Validation and quantification of specific mRNA polysomes distribution can then be done by qPCR. An even more powerful use of the polysomal profiling principle is ribosome profiling. Further high throughput extension of this technique was reported recently that allows for simultaneous monitoring of hundreds of polysome fractions 23. This provides a clear advantage when probing translational efficiencies of mutant collections or in a large-scale RNAi screens. Ribosome profiling is a technique that takes advantage of next generation sequencing to map RNA fragments protected by ribosomes (ribosome footprints) engaged in protein synthesis24,25. In this technique, ribosome translocation can be inhibited with cycloheximide (reversible) or emetine (irreversible) followed by cell lysis and RNase digestion to yield a population of ribosome footprints. Ribosomes are enriched, total RNA is isolated, and contaminating ribosomal and mitochondrial ribosomal RNA is removed. RNA footprints of approximately 26-28 nucleotides are isolated, reverse transcribed, converted into a cDNA library and sequenced26. Unlike standard polysome profiling, this approach not only identifies specific mRNAs that are translationally regulated but also yields mRNA-specific information at codon resolution such as the exact occupation and density of ribosomes along a specific transcript. This is particularly of interest for mRNAs with specific modes of translation such as IRES-harboring mRNAs, as it could give more information on where on the transcript ribosome-recruitment is occurring.