Current Microbiology

, Volume 57, Issue 1, pp 18–22 | Cite as

Integrative Analyses of Posttranscriptional Regulation in the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae Using Transcriptomic and Proteomic Data

  • Gang Wu
  • Lei Nie
  • Weiwen Zhang


Correlation between mRNA and protein expression is typically modest due to substantial posttranscriptional regulation. Using large-scale transcriptomic and proteomic data of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, we quantitatively examined the effects of several posttranscriptional biological properties on the correlation between mRNA and protein expression levels (mRNA–protein correlation) on a genomewide scale. The two classes of properties investigated are (1) stability of mRNA and protein molecules and (2) biological properties related to translational process, such as codon usage and amino acid usage, and experimental data of ribosome density and occupancy. The multiple regression analysis showed that while mRNA half-life and translation initiation efficiency (estimated as mRNA secondary structure in the 5′-UTR) do not appear to have remarkable contributions to the variations in the mRNA–protein correlation, protein half-life descriptor (PHD) is identified as the most important property affecting mRNA–protein correlation (contributing to 16.87% of the total variation in mRNA–protein correlation), suggesting protein degradation significantly affects mRNA–protein correlation. Codon usage and amino acid composition contribute to 8.89% and 7.60% of the total variation, respectively, which is consistent with several previous studies in bacteria (such as Escherichia coli, Haemophilus influenzae, and Desulfovibrio vulgaris), suggesting that mRNA–protein correlation is affected the most by elongation during protein translation. Taken together, all posttranscriptional biological properties contributed to 33.15% of the total variation of mRNA–protein correlation.


Correlation mRNA Protein Genomewide Multiple regression 


  1. 1.
    Akashi H (2003) Translational selection and yeast proteome evolution. Genetics 164:1291–1303PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Belle A, Tanay A, Bitincka L, Shamir R, O’Shea EK (2006) Quantification of protein half-lives in the budding yeast proteome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:13,004–13,009Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beyer A, Hollunder J, Nasheuer HP, Wilhelm T (2004) Post-transcriptional expression regulation in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae on a genomic scale. Mol Cell Proteomics 3:1083–1092PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brockmann R, Beyer A, Heinisch JJ, Wilhelm T (2007) Posttranscriptional expression regulation: what determines translation rates? PLoS Comput Biol 3:e57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chhabra SR, He Q, Huang KH et al (2006) Global analysis of heat shock response in Desulfovibrio vulgaris Hildenborough. J Bacteriol 188:1817–1828PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Futcher B, Latter GI, Monardo P, McLaughlin CS, Garrels JI (1999) A sampling of the yeast proteome. Mol Cell Biol 19:7357–7368PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ghaemmaghami S, Huh WK, Bower K et al (2003) Global analysis of protein expression in yeast. Nature 425:737–741PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Greenbaum D, Colangelo C, Williams K, Gerstein M (2003) Comparing protein abundance and mRNA expression levels on a genomic scale. Genome Biol 4:117.1–117.8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gygi SP, Rochon Y, Franza BR, Aebersold R (1999) Correlation between protein and mRNA abundance in yeast. Mol Cell Biol 19:1720–1730PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ideker T, Thorsson V, Ranish JA et al (2001) Integrated genomic and proteomic analyses of a systematically perturbed metabolic network. Science 292:929–934PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lange R, Hengge-Aronis R (1994) The cellular concentration of the S subunit of RNA polymerase in Escherichia coli is controlled at the levels of transcription, translation, and protein stability. Genes Dev 8:1600–1612PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lithwick G, Margalit H (2003) Hierarchy of sequence-dependent features associated with prokaryotic translation. Genome Res 13:2665–2673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    MacKay VL, Li X, Flory MR et al (2004) Gene expression in yeast responding to mating pheromone: analysis by high-resolution translation state analysis and quantitative proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics 3:478–489PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nie L, Wu G, Zhang W (2006) Correlation between mRNA and protein abundance in Desulfovibrio vulgaris: a multiple regression to identify sources of variations. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 339:603–610PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nie L, Wu G, Zhang W (2006) Correlation of mRNA expression and protein abundance affected by multiple sequence features related to translational efficiency in Desulfovibrio vulgaris: a quantitative analysis. Genetics 174:2229–2243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ott RY, Longnecker M (2001) An introduction to statistical methods and data analysis. Duxbury Thompson Learning, Pacific Grove, CA, pp 646–650Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Preiss T, Baron-Benhamou J, Ansorge W, Hentze MW (2003) Homodirectional changes in transcriptome composition and mRNA translation induced by rapamycin and heat shock. Nat Struct Biol 10:1039–1047PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ringner M, Krogh M (2005) Folding free energies of 5′-UTRs impact post-transcriptional regulation on a genomic scale in yeast. PLoS Comput Biol 1:e72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sharp PM, Li WH (1987) The codon adaptation index: a measure of directional synonymous codon usage bias, and its potential applications. Nucleic Acids Res 15:1281–1295PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang Y, Liu CL, Storey JD, Tibshirani RJ, Herschlag D, Brown PO (2002) Precision and functional specificity in mRNA decay. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:5860–5865PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Washburn MP, Koller A, Oshiro G et al (2003) Protein pathway and complex clustering of correlated mRNA and protein expression analyses in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:3107–3112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wu G, Nie L, Freeland SJ (2007) The effects of differential gene expression on coding sequence features: analysis by one-way ANOVA. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 358:1108–1113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Molecular Micriobiology and ImmunologyJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biostatistics, Bioinformatics, and BiomathematicsGeorgetown UniversityWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Center for Ecogenomics, Biodesign InstituteArizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Personalised recommendations