SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 7
Download to read offline
A Comparison of the Crystal Structures of Eukaryotic and
Bacterial SSU Ribosomal RNAs Reveals Common
Structural Features in the Hypervariable Regions
Jung C. Lee*¤
, Robin R. Gutell*
Center for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, and Section of Integrative Biology, The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, Texas, United States of America
Abstract
While the majority of the ribosomal RNA structure is conserved in the three major domains of life – archaea, bacteria, and
eukaryotes, specific regions of the rRNA structure are unique to at least one of these three primary forms of life. In particular,
the comparative secondary structure for the eukaryotic SSU rRNA contains several regions that are different from the
analogous regions in the bacteria. Our detailed analysis of two recently determined eukaryotic 40S ribosomal crystal
structures, Tetrahymena thermophila and Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and the comparison of these results with the bacterial
Thermus thermophilus 30S ribosomal crystal structure: (1) revealed that the vast majority of the comparative structure model
for the eukaryotic SSU rRNA is substantiated, including the secondary structure that is similar to both bacteria and archaea
as well as specific for the eukaryotes, (2) resolved the secondary structure for regions of the eukaryotic SSU rRNA that were
not determined with comparative methods, (3) identified eukaryotic helices that are equivalent to the bacterial helices in
several of the hypervariable regions, (4) revealed that, while the coaxially stacked compound helix in the 540 region in the
central domain maintains the constant length of 10 base pairs, its two constituent helices contain 5+5 bp rather than the
6+4 bp predicted with comparative analysis of archaeal and eukaryotic SSU rRNAs.
Citation: Lee JC, Gutell RR (2012) A Comparison of the Crystal Structures of Eukaryotic and Bacterial SSU Ribosomal RNAs Reveals Common Structural Features in
the Hypervariable Regions. PLoS ONE 7(5): e38203. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038203
Editor: Ramy K. Aziz, Cairo University, Egypt
Received January 3, 2012; Accepted May 4, 2012; Published May 31, 2012
Copyright: ß 2012 Lee, Gutell. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: This work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (R01GM067317) and the Welch Foundation (F-1427). The funders had no role
in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
* E-mail: lee@msoe.edu (JCL); robin.gutell@mail.utexas.edu (RRG)
¤ Current address: BioMolecular Engineering, Department of Physics and Chemistry, Milwaukee School of Engineering, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States of
America
Introduction
While the ribosome is the site for protein synthesis, a function
that is essential for all organisms spanning the entire tree of life, it
is the ribosomal RNA (rRNA) that is directly associated with
peptidyl transferase and decoding [1,2,3]. A comparison of the
SSU rRNA sequences and their comparative structures reveals
that a significant portion of their structure is conserved in all
known organisms. Other regions are conserved within each of the
three primary phylogenetic domains –archaea, bacteria, and
eukaryotes, but differ between them [4,5]. In comparision with the
archaea and bacteria, several of the nine major variable regions
(V1–V9) in the SSU rRNA [6] have large insertions in organisms
within the eukaryotic phylogenetic domain [7]. While it is properly
assumed that the SSU rRNA secondary structure that is conserved
in eukaryotes, archaea, and bacteria will form the same three-
dimensional structure, a more challenging question is if any
structural elements in the eukaryotic variable regions with no
obvious similarility in secondary structure in the bacteria can form
a similar three-dimensional structure.
Comparative analysis has been used to accurately predict the
secondary structure and a few tertiary structure interactions in
numerous RNAs [8], including the bacterial Thermus thermophiles
SSU rRNA [9]and an archaeal Haloarcula marismortui LSU rRNA
[10]. To assess the accuracy of our comparative structure models
for the eukaryotic SSU rRNAs [7], two recent near-atomic-
resolution crystal structures of the eukaryotic ribosomal subunits,
Tetrahymena thermophila 40S [11] and Saccharomyces cerevisiae 80S [12],
were analyzed to determine not only their rRNA secondary and
tertiary structure interactions, but also the ribosomal protein
binding sites onto the rRNA. The results from this analysis were
the foundation for the detailed comparison between the two
eukaryotic 40S structures and the bacterial 30S structure from
Thermus thermophilus [9].
Results
Accuracy of the eukaryotic Tetrahymena thermophila and
Saccharomyces cerevisiase SSU rRNA comparative
structures and a general comparison between the
eukaryotic and bacterial SSU rRNA crystal structures
Our analysis revealed that the SSU rRNA structure in the 40S
ribosomal subunit from Tetrahymena thermophila [11] is nearly
identical to that in the 40S ribosomal subunit from Saccharomyces
cerevisiae [12]. Analogous to the previous comparison between the
comparative and crystal structures for the Thermus thermophilus SSU
rRNA and the Haloarcula marismortui LSU rRNA [8], nearly all of
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 1 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
the base pairs in both T. thermophila and S. cerevisiae comparative
secondary structure models are present in their respective crystal
structures as summarized in Figure 1 for the T. thermophila SSU
rRNA structure. This includes the part of the SSU rRNA structure
that is conserved in the archaea, bacteria, and eukaryotes, and the
proposed base pairs in the T. thermophila that are unique to the
eukaryotes. The major structural elements generally characteristic
of the eukaryotes are highlighted in red and green in Figure 1.
These are (numbering refers to E. coli SSU rRNA):
1. Many non-canonical base pairs in the 39–46/395–403 helix.
2. An insertion of at least a few nucleotides at position 143.
3. The replacement of a single helix between positions 179 and
198 with two helices. This V2 region and its interaction with
the V4 region is discussed below.
4. An insertion of 2–5 nucleotides between positions 249 and 252.
5. The V3 region, between positions 404–499 has two helices.
While both are different from the analogous helices in bacteria
and archaea, the second helix, closer to the 500–545
compound helix, is very irregular with several non-canonical
base pairs and bulge nucleotides.
6. The V4 region is between positions 588 and 652. This V4
region is discussed below.
7. An insertion of four nucleotides between positions 876 and 877.
8. The V6 region is between positions 991 and 1046. Three
helices occur in the bacteria while two are present in the
archaea and the eukaryotes. This V6 region is discussed below.
All of the tertiary structure interactions in both eukaryotic SSU
rRNA crystal structures that are not associated with eukaryotic
specific structural elements are also present in the bacterial SSU
rRNA crystal structure (see Figure S1). However, not all of the
tertiary structure interactions were discerned in the two eukaryotic
SSU rRNA crystal structures. As discussed below, a few of the
tertiary structure interactions with the eukaryotic specific regions
of the SSU rRNA were part of the rationale for our determination
that specific structural elements in the two eukaryotic SSU rRNA
structures were equivalent to helices in the bacterial SSU rRNA
(see next section).
Determination of the secondary structure in the V4
region that was unstructured in the comparative model
and the identification of the eukaryotic equivalent
structural elements for the bacterial helices in V2, V4, and
V6
The V2 region (between nucleotide positions 179 and 197,
Escherichia coli numbering) forms one helix in both bacteria and
archaea. The length of this helix usually correlates with the
presence or absence of an extra nucleotide at position 130 [13]. A
single bulge nucleotide at position 130 is associated with a three
base pair version of this helix while two bulge nucleotides at this
position is associated with a 10 base pair helix. A tertiary base-base
interaction was identified between the first nucleotide in the two
nucleotide bulge loop and the first nucleotide of the CUUG
tetraloop capping the 10 base pair helix in the bacterial T.
thermophilus crystal structure [9].
The majority of the eukaryotes in the crown region of the
phylogenetic tree including Saccharomyces and Tetrahymena contain
approximately 90 nucleotides that form two compound helices in
the V2 region in the comparative structure models [7]. These
helices are present in the two eukaryotic crystal structures as noted
previously [11]. The segments of the second compound helix
(colored red in Figures 1 and 2) are equivalent to the bacterial
and archaeal helix, based on: (1) the analogous tertiary structure
interaction described earlier between position 130 and the hairpin
loop and (2) the lonepair helical tip of the equivalent eukarytotic
structure in V2 interacts with S11e as its bacterial counterpart
interacts with S17 (Figure 1). The hairpin loop is formed from a
lone base pair on the 39 side of the internal loop of this compound
helix.
The V4 region (nucleotide positions 588–652, Escherichia coli
numbering) that forms a single compound helix in the bacterial
and archaeal SSU rRNA with approximately 55 nucleotides is
replaced in many of the eukaryotes in the crown region of the
phylogenetic tree, with approximately 220 nucleotides. The first
100 or so nucleotides form two compound helices while
approximately 120 consecutive nucleotides are unpaired in the
Gutell lab’s Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Tetrahymena thermophila
comparative SSU rRNA secondary structure models [7]. Second-
ary structure models for this region of eukaryotic SSU rRNAs have
been proposed by several groups [14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]. De
Wachter’s pseudoknot structure [6] has been accepted by many as
the correct secondary structure. No helical structure in these
secondary structure models are identical to the compound helix in
the 588–652 region of the bacterial and archael SSU rRNA. The
18S crystal structure of the T. thermophila 40S ribosomal subunit
recently indicated the formation of four helical elements in this
region [11].
The first two helices in the comparative structure model in the
V4 region are present in the 40S ribosomal subunits for the two
eukaryotic crystal structures. The last helix in the eukaryotic V4
region was not proposed in the Gutell lab’s comparative structure
but was proposed in some of the comparative structure models
from other labs [14,16,17,18,19,20,21,23]. The 59 segment of the
unstructured nucleotides in the Gutell lab’s eukaryotic SSU rRNA
comparative structure model contains numerous non-canonical
base pairs to form several irregular helices in the eukaryotic crystal
structure (Figures 1 and 2). That segment (colored red in
Figures 1 and 2) are equivalent to the bacterial and archaeal
compound helix between positions 588–652. This association is
based on: (1) two analogous tertiary structure interactions, the first
between the internal loop and base pairs 291:309 and 292:308 and
the second between the hairpin loop closed by a single non-
canonical base pair and the base pairs 41:401 and 42:400
(Figure 1), and (2) the interactions between the hairpin loop
closed by a single non-canonical base pair and the stem of the
equivalent eukaryotic helix with S9e and S22e, respectively, as
their bacterial counterparts interact with S4 and S8, respectively
(Figure 1).
A eukaryotic-specific long-range pseudoknot helix was proposed
between the V2 and V4 hypervariable regions of eukaryotic SSU
rRNA [24], based on the S. cerevisiae 80S cryo-EM structure and
comparative analysis of the eukaryotic SSU rRNA sequences [25].
Subsequent experimental analysis supports this prediction [26].
This long-range pseudoknot helix connecting the V2 and V4
regions is at the lower back of both eukaryotic ribosomal small
subunit crystal structures.
The V6 region is between positions 991 and 1046 in the SSU
rRNA. As noted earlier, three helices are in bacteria, and two in
the archaea and eukaryotes (Figure 2). The two helices in the
Tetrahymena and Saccharomyces SSU rRNA comparative structure
models were observed in the two eukcaryotic T. thermophila and S.
cerevisiae ribosomal crystal structures. While the first helix 996–
1003/1037–1045, is analogous in the three phylogenetic domains,
the bacterial 1006–1012/1017–1023 helix is equivalent to the
second helix in the eukaryotes (colored in Figures 1 and 2). This
Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 2 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
Figure 1. Comparison of the eukaryotic and bacterial SSU rRNA secondary structures. The base pairings, helices other RNA structural elements,
and relevant ribosomal proteins in the T. thermophila 40S crystal structure are mapped onto the T. thermophila SSU rRNA comparative secondary structure
diagram [7]. The nucleotides in the eukaryotic-specific structural elements are colored green, while the nucleotides colored red are structural elements in
the variable regions that are analogous to helices in the bacterial structure. The V2, V4, and V6 variable regions are colored red while the bacterial-specific
helix in V6 is shown in blue on the bacterial Thermus thermophilus SSU rRNA (inset). The long-range tertiary contacts maintained in both the eukaryotic and
the bacterial SSU rRNA are shown with red lines, while those specific for the eukaryotic 18S rRNA in green lines; the tertiary contacts specifically associated
with V2, V4, and V6 are shown with thicker lines. The ribosomal proteins common between eukaryotes and bacteria are shown in red, with their bacterial
equivalents in parentheses, while those present only in eukaryotes in green and those present in archaea and eukaryotes in purple. The sequence
insertions in the eukaryotic SSU rRNAs are highlighted in green with green arrows and numbers indicating the number of inserted nucleotides.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038203.g001
Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 3 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
association is based on: (1) one analogous set of tertiary structure
interactions between the hairpin loop of the 1006–1012/1017–
1023 like helix and the base pairs 986:1219 and 987:1218
(Figure 1) and (2) the interactions between this helix and the
eukaryotic ribosomal protein S15e, which is equivalent to the
bacterial protein S19 (Figure 1).
Role of eukaryotic-specific ribosomal proteins in
eukaryotic SSU rRNA
Comparative analysis of the ribosomal proteins identified four
ribosomal proteins that are only present in all eukaryotic
organisms - S7e, S10e, S12e, and S21e [27]. S7e interacts with
a part of V4, S10e and S12e interact with a U-turn in V6, and
S21e interacts with V5 (Figure 1). Of particular interest is S12e
which is located at the same spatial position occupied by the
bacterial-specific helix in the V6 region, suggesting that this
segment of RNA is replaced by a protein during the evolution of
the ribosome structure.
Maintenance of helix length in the coaxially stacked
helices in the 540 region
Based on the comparative analysis of the two helices in the 540
region of the SSU rRNA – 500–504/541–545 and 511–515/536–
540, it was proposed that these two helices will coaxially stack onto
one another. The bacteria have two 5 base pair helices flanking the
bulge loop while the eukaryotes and archaea have 6 base pairs in
the lower helix and 4 base pairs in the helix above the bulge loop
[28] to maintain a total length of 10 base pairs. The intervening
bulge loop between its two constituent helices forms a short
pseudoknot helix with the terminal hairpin loop (Figure 3).
However, the crystal structures for the T. thermophila and S. cerevisiae
revealed that these two eukaryotes (and probably all eukaryotes)
have 5 base pairs in the lower and upper helices. The sixth
‘putative’ base pair (G:C) in the lower helix did not have any
covariation in the eukaryotes and the archaea. Interestingly, the
upper helix contains two single nucleotide bulges in the T.
thermophila SSU and one single nucleotide bulge in the S. cerevisiae
SSU rRNA (Figure 3). It is also interesting to note that the
pseudoknot helix between positions 505–507/524–526 in the
eukaryotic SSU rRNAs contain only two base pairs, not the three
base pairs observed in the bacterial SSU rRNA. Nonetheless, the
overall 3D folding pattern of the 540 region in the eukaryotic
crystal structures are very similar to that in the bacterial crystal
structure (data not shown).
Discussion
From the analysis of the eukaryotic ribosomal crystal structures
for T. thermophila and S.cerevisiae, and the subsequent comparison
with the bacterial high-resolution ribosomal crystal structures, we
determined that: (1) nearly all of the base pairs in the eukaryotic
Figure 2. Gallery for the three hypervariable regions V2, V4, and V6 from the eukaryotic T. thermophila 18S, bacterial T. thermophilus
16S, and archaeal Haloarcula marismortui 16S rRNAs. The coloring scheme is the same as in Fig. 1. The helices shared by the bacterial 16S and
eukaryotic 18S rRNAs are shown in red, while the eukaryotic-specific and bacterial-specific helices are shown in green and in blue, respectively.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038203.g002
Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 4 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
SSU rRNA comparative structure model are substantiated. This
includes, those base pairs that are in the structure conserved in the
three primary phylogenetic domains, those structural elements
unique to the eukaryotes, and the non-canonical base pairs that
occur in several of the irregular helices (e.g. 39–46/395–403 and
the second helix in V3). (2) resolved the secondary structure in the
part of the V4 region that had been unstructured in the Gutell
lab’s eukaryotic comparative structure models. This includes both
regular and irregular helices containing an abundance of non-
canonical base pairs. (3) Identified tertiary structure interactions in
the eukaryotic crystal structures that were not predicted with
comparative analysis and determined the binding sites for a few of
the eukaryotic ribosomal proteins that interact with regions of the
SSU rRNA that are unique to the eukaryotes. Nearly all of the
tertiary structure interactions are also present in the bacterial
crystal structure. The few exceptions are for those interactions that
are interacting between two eukaryotic specific regions. (4)
Identified three structural elements, one in V2, one in V4, and
the third in V6, that are analogous to bacterial helices. The first
two of these helices do not have any obvious simarility between the
eukaryotic and bacterial versions. All three were determined to be
analogous based on similar tertiary structure interactions and
ribosomal protein binding sites. (5) Determined that the four
eukaryotic specific ribosomal proteins bind to regions of the SSU
rRNA that are unique to the eukaryotes. (6) Determined that the
two helices in the 540 region of the SSU rRNA - 500–504/541–
545 and 511–515/536–540 each have five base pairs in the
eukaryotes, in contrast with the comparative structure models that
had six base pairs in the first helix and four base pair in the second.
While the bacteria has three base pairs in the 505–507/524–526
pseudoknot helix, the two eukaryotic crystal structures contain
only two base pairs.
Materials and Methods
The RasMol program [29,30] was used for a detailed visual
mapping of the base pairs,long-range tertiary contacts, and RNA-
protein interactions in the two eukaryotic (PDB IDs 2XZM and
3U5B/3U5C) and one bacterial (PDB ID 1FJG) SSU rRNA
crystal structures [9,12]. All the figures and supplementary
information in the text are also available at http://www.rna.
ccbb.utexas.edu/SIM/4A/Hypervariable_SSU_rRNA/ at the
CRW Site.
Supporting Information
Figure S1 Long-range RNA tertiary contacts in the
bacterial Thermus thermophilus SSU rRNA. This figure,
with the long-range tertiary interactions in Figure 1 shown in
thick lines, was generated with RNA2DMap (http://www.rna.
icmb.utexas.edu/SAE/2A/RNA2DMap/index.php), a visualiza-
tion tool based on the RNA secondary structure diagram for
displaying both RNA crystal structure information and compar-
ative data.
(EPS)
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: JCL RRG. Analyzed the data:
JCL RRG. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: JCL RRG.
Wrote the paper: JCL RRG.
References
1. Noller HF, Chaires JB (1972) Functional modification of 16S ribosomal RNA by
kethoxal. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 69: 3115–3118.
2. Hansen JL, Schmeing TM, Moore PB, Steitz TA (2002) Structural insights into
peptide bond formation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 11670–11675.
Figure 3. Comparison of the 540 regions in the eukaryotic and bacterial rRNAs. Maintenance of helix length of 10 bp in the coaxially
stacked compound helices and length difference of the pseudoknot helices in the 540 regions in eukaryotic 18S and bacterial 16S rRNAs.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038203.g003
Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 5 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
3. Wimberly BT, Guymon R, McCutcheon JP, White SW, Ramakrishnan V
(1999) A detailed view of a ribosomal active site: the structure of the L11-RNA
complex. Cell 97: 491–502.
4. Gutell RR, Weiser B, Woese CR, Noller HF (1985) Comparative anatomy of
16-S-like ribosomal RNA. Prog Nucleic Acid Res Mol Biol 32: 155–216.
5. Winker S, Woese CR (1991) A definition of the domains Archaea, Bacteria and
Eucarya in terms of small subunit ribosomal RNA characteristics. Syst Appl
Microbiol 14: 305–310.
6. Neefs JM, De Wachter R (1990) A proposal for the secondary structure of a
variable area of eukaryotic small ribosomal subunit RNA involving the existence
of a pseudoknot. Nucleic Acids Res 18: 5695–5704.
7. Cannone JJ, Subramanian S, Schnare MN, Collett JR, D’Souza LM, et al.
(2002) The comparative RNA web (CRW) site: an online database of
comparative sequence and structure information for ribosomal, intron, and
other RNAs. BMC Bioinformatics 3: 2.
8. Gutell RR, Lee JC, Cannone JJ (2002) The accuracy of ribosomal RNA
comparative structure models. Curr Opin Struct Biol 12: 301–310.
9. Wimberly BT, Brodersen DE, Clemons WM, Jr., Morgan-Warren RJ,
Carter AP, et al. (2000) Structure of the 30S ribosomal subunit. Nature 407:
327–339.
10. Ban N, Nissen P, Hansen J, Moore PB, Steitz TA (2000) The complete atomic
structure of the large ribosomal subunit at 2.4 A resolution. Science 289:
905–920.
11. Rabl J, Leibundgut M, Ataide SF, Haag A, Ban N (2011) Crystal structure of the
eukaryotic 40S ribosomal subunit in complex with initiation factor 1. Science
331: 730–736.
12. Ben-Shem A, Garreau de Loubresse N, Melnikov S, Jenner L, Yusupova G, et
al. (2011) The structure of the eukaryotic ribosome at 3.0 A resolution. Science
334: 1524–1529.
13. Woese CR, Gutell RR (1989) Evidence for several higher order structural
elements in ribosomal RNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 86: 3119–3122.
14. Zwieb C, Glotz C, Brimacombe R (1981) Secondary structure comparisons
between small subunit ribosomal RNA molecules from six different species.
Nucleic Acids Res 9: 3621–3640.
15. Nelles L, Van Broeckhoven C, De Wachter R, Vandenberghe A (1984) Location
of the hidden break in large subunit ribosomal RNA of Artemia salina.
Naturwissenschaften 71: 634–635.
16. Herzog M, Maroteaux L (1986) Dinoflagellate 17S rRNA sequence inferred
from the gene sequence: Evolutionary implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 83:
8644–8648.
17. Gonzalez IL, Schmickel RD (1986) The human 18S ribosomal RNA gene:
evolution and stability. Am J Hum Genet 38: 419–427.
18. Ellis RE, Sulston JE, Coulson AR (1986) The rDNA of C. elegans: sequence and
structure. Nucleic Acids Res 14: 2345–2364.
19. Rairkar A, Rubino HM, Lockard RE (1988) Chemical probing of adenine
residues within the secondary structure of rabbit 18S ribosomal RNA. Biochem
27: 582–592.
20. Hendriks L, De Baere R, Van Broeckhoven C, De Wachter R (1988) Primary
and secondary structure of the 18 S ribosomal RNA of the insect species
Tenebrio molitor. FEBS Lett 232: 115–120.
21. Johansen T, Johansen S, Haugli FB (1988) Nucleotide sequence of the Physarum
polycephalum small subunit ribosomal RNA as inferred from the gene sequence:
secondary structure and evolutionary implications. Curr Genet 14: 265–273.
22. Nickrent DL, Sargent ML (1991) An overview of the secondary structure of the
V4 region of eukaryotic small-subunit ribosomal RNA. Nucleic Acids Res 19:
227–235.
23. Nelles L, Fang BL, Volckaert G, Vandenberghe A, De Wachter R (1984)
Nucleotide sequence of a crustacean 18S ribosomal RNA gene and secondary
structure of eukaryotic small subunit ribosomal RNAs. Nucleic Acids Res 12:
8749–8768.
24. Alkemar G, Nygard O (2003) A possible tertiary rRNA interaction between
expansion segments ES3 and ES6 in eukaryotic 40S ribosomal subunits. RNA 9:
20–24.
25. Spahn CM, Beckmann R, Eswar N, Penczek PA, Sali A, et al. (2001) Structure
of the 80S ribosome from Saccharomyces cerevisiae–tRNA-ribosome and subunit-
subunit interactions. Cell 107: 373–386.
26. Alkemar G, Nygard O (2004) Secondary structure of two regions in expansion
segments ES3 and ES6 with the potential of forming a tertiary interaction in
eukaryotic 40S ribosomal subunits. RNA 10: 403–411.
27. Lecompte O, Ripp R, Thierry JC, Moras D, Poch O (2002) Comparative
analysis of ribosomal proteins in complete genomes: an example of reductive
evolution at the domain scale. Nucleic Acids Res 30: 5382–5390.
28. Gutell RR, Larsen N, Woese CR (1994) Lessons from an evolving rRNA: 16S
and 23S rRNA structures from a comparative perspective. Microbiol Rev 58:
10–26.
29. Sayle RA, Milner-White EJ (1995) RASMOL: biomolecular graphics for all.
Trends Biochem Sci 20: 374.
30. Bernstein HJ (2000) Recent changes to RasMol, recombining the variants.
Trends Biochem Sci 25: 453–455.
Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 6 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
Gutell 118.plos_one_2012.7_e38203.supplementalfig

More Related Content

Similar to Gutell 118.plos_one_2012.7_e38203.supplementalfig

Gutell 119.plos_one_2017_7_e39383
Gutell 119.plos_one_2017_7_e39383Gutell 119.plos_one_2017_7_e39383
Gutell 119.plos_one_2017_7_e39383Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 100.imb.2006.15.533
Gutell 100.imb.2006.15.533Gutell 100.imb.2006.15.533
Gutell 100.imb.2006.15.533Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 101.physica.a.2007.386.0564.good
Gutell 101.physica.a.2007.386.0564.goodGutell 101.physica.a.2007.386.0564.good
Gutell 101.physica.a.2007.386.0564.goodRobin Gutell
 
Gutell 080.bmc.bioinformatics.2002.3.2
Gutell 080.bmc.bioinformatics.2002.3.2Gutell 080.bmc.bioinformatics.2002.3.2
Gutell 080.bmc.bioinformatics.2002.3.2Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 034.mr.1994.58.0010
Gutell 034.mr.1994.58.0010Gutell 034.mr.1994.58.0010
Gutell 034.mr.1994.58.0010Robin Gutell
 
Ptacin_et_al-2013-Cellular_Microbiology (review)
Ptacin_et_al-2013-Cellular_Microbiology (review)Ptacin_et_al-2013-Cellular_Microbiology (review)
Ptacin_et_al-2013-Cellular_Microbiology (review)Jerod Ptacin
 
Gutell 002.nar.1981.09.06167
Gutell 002.nar.1981.09.06167Gutell 002.nar.1981.09.06167
Gutell 002.nar.1981.09.06167Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 006.tibs.1983.08.0359
Gutell 006.tibs.1983.08.0359Gutell 006.tibs.1983.08.0359
Gutell 006.tibs.1983.08.0359Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 087.mpe.2003.29.0216
Gutell 087.mpe.2003.29.0216Gutell 087.mpe.2003.29.0216
Gutell 087.mpe.2003.29.0216Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 103.structure.2008.16.0535
Gutell 103.structure.2008.16.0535Gutell 103.structure.2008.16.0535
Gutell 103.structure.2008.16.0535Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 015.nar.1988.16.r175
Gutell 015.nar.1988.16.r175Gutell 015.nar.1988.16.r175
Gutell 015.nar.1988.16.r175Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 023.nar.1992.20.sup.2095
Gutell 023.nar.1992.20.sup.2095Gutell 023.nar.1992.20.sup.2095
Gutell 023.nar.1992.20.sup.2095Robin Gutell
 
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 7: rRNA PCR and Major Groups
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 7: rRNA PCR and Major Groups Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 7: rRNA PCR and Major Groups
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 7: rRNA PCR and Major Groups Jonathan Eisen
 
Gutell 083.jmb.2002.321.0215
Gutell 083.jmb.2002.321.0215Gutell 083.jmb.2002.321.0215
Gutell 083.jmb.2002.321.0215Robin Gutell
 
Canonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulins
Canonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulinsCanonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulins
Canonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulinsNational Institute of Biologics
 
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 3: Woese and the Tree of Life
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 3: Woese and the Tree of LifeMicrobial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 3: Woese and the Tree of Life
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 3: Woese and the Tree of LifeJonathan Eisen
 
Gutell 092.jmb.2004.344.1225
Gutell 092.jmb.2004.344.1225Gutell 092.jmb.2004.344.1225
Gutell 092.jmb.2004.344.1225Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 114.jmb.2011.413.0473
Gutell 114.jmb.2011.413.0473Gutell 114.jmb.2011.413.0473
Gutell 114.jmb.2011.413.0473Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 014.emboj.1986.05.1111
Gutell 014.emboj.1986.05.1111Gutell 014.emboj.1986.05.1111
Gutell 014.emboj.1986.05.1111Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 081.cosb.2002.12.0301
Gutell 081.cosb.2002.12.0301Gutell 081.cosb.2002.12.0301
Gutell 081.cosb.2002.12.0301Robin Gutell
 

Similar to Gutell 118.plos_one_2012.7_e38203.supplementalfig (20)

Gutell 119.plos_one_2017_7_e39383
Gutell 119.plos_one_2017_7_e39383Gutell 119.plos_one_2017_7_e39383
Gutell 119.plos_one_2017_7_e39383
 
Gutell 100.imb.2006.15.533
Gutell 100.imb.2006.15.533Gutell 100.imb.2006.15.533
Gutell 100.imb.2006.15.533
 
Gutell 101.physica.a.2007.386.0564.good
Gutell 101.physica.a.2007.386.0564.goodGutell 101.physica.a.2007.386.0564.good
Gutell 101.physica.a.2007.386.0564.good
 
Gutell 080.bmc.bioinformatics.2002.3.2
Gutell 080.bmc.bioinformatics.2002.3.2Gutell 080.bmc.bioinformatics.2002.3.2
Gutell 080.bmc.bioinformatics.2002.3.2
 
Gutell 034.mr.1994.58.0010
Gutell 034.mr.1994.58.0010Gutell 034.mr.1994.58.0010
Gutell 034.mr.1994.58.0010
 
Ptacin_et_al-2013-Cellular_Microbiology (review)
Ptacin_et_al-2013-Cellular_Microbiology (review)Ptacin_et_al-2013-Cellular_Microbiology (review)
Ptacin_et_al-2013-Cellular_Microbiology (review)
 
Gutell 002.nar.1981.09.06167
Gutell 002.nar.1981.09.06167Gutell 002.nar.1981.09.06167
Gutell 002.nar.1981.09.06167
 
Gutell 006.tibs.1983.08.0359
Gutell 006.tibs.1983.08.0359Gutell 006.tibs.1983.08.0359
Gutell 006.tibs.1983.08.0359
 
Gutell 087.mpe.2003.29.0216
Gutell 087.mpe.2003.29.0216Gutell 087.mpe.2003.29.0216
Gutell 087.mpe.2003.29.0216
 
Gutell 103.structure.2008.16.0535
Gutell 103.structure.2008.16.0535Gutell 103.structure.2008.16.0535
Gutell 103.structure.2008.16.0535
 
Gutell 015.nar.1988.16.r175
Gutell 015.nar.1988.16.r175Gutell 015.nar.1988.16.r175
Gutell 015.nar.1988.16.r175
 
Gutell 023.nar.1992.20.sup.2095
Gutell 023.nar.1992.20.sup.2095Gutell 023.nar.1992.20.sup.2095
Gutell 023.nar.1992.20.sup.2095
 
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 7: rRNA PCR and Major Groups
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 7: rRNA PCR and Major Groups Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 7: rRNA PCR and Major Groups
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 7: rRNA PCR and Major Groups
 
Gutell 083.jmb.2002.321.0215
Gutell 083.jmb.2002.321.0215Gutell 083.jmb.2002.321.0215
Gutell 083.jmb.2002.321.0215
 
Canonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulins
Canonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulinsCanonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulins
Canonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulins
 
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 3: Woese and the Tree of Life
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 3: Woese and the Tree of LifeMicrobial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 3: Woese and the Tree of Life
Microbial Phylogenomics (EVE161) Class 3: Woese and the Tree of Life
 
Gutell 092.jmb.2004.344.1225
Gutell 092.jmb.2004.344.1225Gutell 092.jmb.2004.344.1225
Gutell 092.jmb.2004.344.1225
 
Gutell 114.jmb.2011.413.0473
Gutell 114.jmb.2011.413.0473Gutell 114.jmb.2011.413.0473
Gutell 114.jmb.2011.413.0473
 
Gutell 014.emboj.1986.05.1111
Gutell 014.emboj.1986.05.1111Gutell 014.emboj.1986.05.1111
Gutell 014.emboj.1986.05.1111
 
Gutell 081.cosb.2002.12.0301
Gutell 081.cosb.2002.12.0301Gutell 081.cosb.2002.12.0301
Gutell 081.cosb.2002.12.0301
 

More from Robin Gutell

Gutell 124.rna 2013-woese-19-vii-xi
Gutell 124.rna 2013-woese-19-vii-xiGutell 124.rna 2013-woese-19-vii-xi
Gutell 124.rna 2013-woese-19-vii-xiRobin Gutell
 
Gutell 123.app environ micro_2013_79_1803
Gutell 123.app environ micro_2013_79_1803Gutell 123.app environ micro_2013_79_1803
Gutell 123.app environ micro_2013_79_1803Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 122.chapter comparative analy_russell_2013
Gutell 122.chapter comparative analy_russell_2013Gutell 122.chapter comparative analy_russell_2013
Gutell 122.chapter comparative analy_russell_2013Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 121.bibm12 alignment 06392676
Gutell 121.bibm12 alignment 06392676Gutell 121.bibm12 alignment 06392676
Gutell 121.bibm12 alignment 06392676Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 120.plos_one_2012_7_e38320_supplemental_data
Gutell 120.plos_one_2012_7_e38320_supplemental_dataGutell 120.plos_one_2012_7_e38320_supplemental_data
Gutell 120.plos_one_2012_7_e38320_supplemental_dataRobin Gutell
 
Gutell 117.rcad_e_science_stockholm_pp15-22
Gutell 117.rcad_e_science_stockholm_pp15-22Gutell 117.rcad_e_science_stockholm_pp15-22
Gutell 117.rcad_e_science_stockholm_pp15-22Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 116.rpass.bibm11.pp618-622.2011
Gutell 116.rpass.bibm11.pp618-622.2011Gutell 116.rpass.bibm11.pp618-622.2011
Gutell 116.rpass.bibm11.pp618-622.2011Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 115.rna2dmap.bibm11.pp613-617.2011
Gutell 115.rna2dmap.bibm11.pp613-617.2011Gutell 115.rna2dmap.bibm11.pp613-617.2011
Gutell 115.rna2dmap.bibm11.pp613-617.2011Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 113.ploso.2011.06.e18768
Gutell 113.ploso.2011.06.e18768Gutell 113.ploso.2011.06.e18768
Gutell 113.ploso.2011.06.e18768Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 112.j.phys.chem.b.2010.114.13497
Gutell 112.j.phys.chem.b.2010.114.13497Gutell 112.j.phys.chem.b.2010.114.13497
Gutell 112.j.phys.chem.b.2010.114.13497Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 111.bmc.genomics.2010.11.485
Gutell 111.bmc.genomics.2010.11.485Gutell 111.bmc.genomics.2010.11.485
Gutell 111.bmc.genomics.2010.11.485Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 110.ant.v.leeuwenhoek.2010.98.195
Gutell 110.ant.v.leeuwenhoek.2010.98.195Gutell 110.ant.v.leeuwenhoek.2010.98.195
Gutell 110.ant.v.leeuwenhoek.2010.98.195Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 109.ejp.2009.44.277
Gutell 109.ejp.2009.44.277Gutell 109.ejp.2009.44.277
Gutell 109.ejp.2009.44.277Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 108.jmb.2009.391.769
Gutell 108.jmb.2009.391.769Gutell 108.jmb.2009.391.769
Gutell 108.jmb.2009.391.769Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 107.ssdbm.2009.200
Gutell 107.ssdbm.2009.200Gutell 107.ssdbm.2009.200
Gutell 107.ssdbm.2009.200Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 106.j.euk.microbio.2009.56.0142.2
Gutell 106.j.euk.microbio.2009.56.0142.2Gutell 106.j.euk.microbio.2009.56.0142.2
Gutell 106.j.euk.microbio.2009.56.0142.2Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 105.zoologica.scripta.2009.38.0043
Gutell 105.zoologica.scripta.2009.38.0043Gutell 105.zoologica.scripta.2009.38.0043
Gutell 105.zoologica.scripta.2009.38.0043Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 104.biology.direct.2008.03.016
Gutell 104.biology.direct.2008.03.016Gutell 104.biology.direct.2008.03.016
Gutell 104.biology.direct.2008.03.016Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 102.bioinformatics.2007.23.3289
Gutell 102.bioinformatics.2007.23.3289Gutell 102.bioinformatics.2007.23.3289
Gutell 102.bioinformatics.2007.23.3289Robin Gutell
 
Gutell 099.nature.2006.443.0931
Gutell 099.nature.2006.443.0931Gutell 099.nature.2006.443.0931
Gutell 099.nature.2006.443.0931Robin Gutell
 

More from Robin Gutell (20)

Gutell 124.rna 2013-woese-19-vii-xi
Gutell 124.rna 2013-woese-19-vii-xiGutell 124.rna 2013-woese-19-vii-xi
Gutell 124.rna 2013-woese-19-vii-xi
 
Gutell 123.app environ micro_2013_79_1803
Gutell 123.app environ micro_2013_79_1803Gutell 123.app environ micro_2013_79_1803
Gutell 123.app environ micro_2013_79_1803
 
Gutell 122.chapter comparative analy_russell_2013
Gutell 122.chapter comparative analy_russell_2013Gutell 122.chapter comparative analy_russell_2013
Gutell 122.chapter comparative analy_russell_2013
 
Gutell 121.bibm12 alignment 06392676
Gutell 121.bibm12 alignment 06392676Gutell 121.bibm12 alignment 06392676
Gutell 121.bibm12 alignment 06392676
 
Gutell 120.plos_one_2012_7_e38320_supplemental_data
Gutell 120.plos_one_2012_7_e38320_supplemental_dataGutell 120.plos_one_2012_7_e38320_supplemental_data
Gutell 120.plos_one_2012_7_e38320_supplemental_data
 
Gutell 117.rcad_e_science_stockholm_pp15-22
Gutell 117.rcad_e_science_stockholm_pp15-22Gutell 117.rcad_e_science_stockholm_pp15-22
Gutell 117.rcad_e_science_stockholm_pp15-22
 
Gutell 116.rpass.bibm11.pp618-622.2011
Gutell 116.rpass.bibm11.pp618-622.2011Gutell 116.rpass.bibm11.pp618-622.2011
Gutell 116.rpass.bibm11.pp618-622.2011
 
Gutell 115.rna2dmap.bibm11.pp613-617.2011
Gutell 115.rna2dmap.bibm11.pp613-617.2011Gutell 115.rna2dmap.bibm11.pp613-617.2011
Gutell 115.rna2dmap.bibm11.pp613-617.2011
 
Gutell 113.ploso.2011.06.e18768
Gutell 113.ploso.2011.06.e18768Gutell 113.ploso.2011.06.e18768
Gutell 113.ploso.2011.06.e18768
 
Gutell 112.j.phys.chem.b.2010.114.13497
Gutell 112.j.phys.chem.b.2010.114.13497Gutell 112.j.phys.chem.b.2010.114.13497
Gutell 112.j.phys.chem.b.2010.114.13497
 
Gutell 111.bmc.genomics.2010.11.485
Gutell 111.bmc.genomics.2010.11.485Gutell 111.bmc.genomics.2010.11.485
Gutell 111.bmc.genomics.2010.11.485
 
Gutell 110.ant.v.leeuwenhoek.2010.98.195
Gutell 110.ant.v.leeuwenhoek.2010.98.195Gutell 110.ant.v.leeuwenhoek.2010.98.195
Gutell 110.ant.v.leeuwenhoek.2010.98.195
 
Gutell 109.ejp.2009.44.277
Gutell 109.ejp.2009.44.277Gutell 109.ejp.2009.44.277
Gutell 109.ejp.2009.44.277
 
Gutell 108.jmb.2009.391.769
Gutell 108.jmb.2009.391.769Gutell 108.jmb.2009.391.769
Gutell 108.jmb.2009.391.769
 
Gutell 107.ssdbm.2009.200
Gutell 107.ssdbm.2009.200Gutell 107.ssdbm.2009.200
Gutell 107.ssdbm.2009.200
 
Gutell 106.j.euk.microbio.2009.56.0142.2
Gutell 106.j.euk.microbio.2009.56.0142.2Gutell 106.j.euk.microbio.2009.56.0142.2
Gutell 106.j.euk.microbio.2009.56.0142.2
 
Gutell 105.zoologica.scripta.2009.38.0043
Gutell 105.zoologica.scripta.2009.38.0043Gutell 105.zoologica.scripta.2009.38.0043
Gutell 105.zoologica.scripta.2009.38.0043
 
Gutell 104.biology.direct.2008.03.016
Gutell 104.biology.direct.2008.03.016Gutell 104.biology.direct.2008.03.016
Gutell 104.biology.direct.2008.03.016
 
Gutell 102.bioinformatics.2007.23.3289
Gutell 102.bioinformatics.2007.23.3289Gutell 102.bioinformatics.2007.23.3289
Gutell 102.bioinformatics.2007.23.3289
 
Gutell 099.nature.2006.443.0931
Gutell 099.nature.2006.443.0931Gutell 099.nature.2006.443.0931
Gutell 099.nature.2006.443.0931
 

Recently uploaded

AI as an Interface for Commercial Buildings
AI as an Interface for Commercial BuildingsAI as an Interface for Commercial Buildings
AI as an Interface for Commercial BuildingsMemoori
 
Understanding the Laravel MVC Architecture
Understanding the Laravel MVC ArchitectureUnderstanding the Laravel MVC Architecture
Understanding the Laravel MVC ArchitecturePixlogix Infotech
 
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdfUnraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdfAlex Barbosa Coqueiro
 
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):comworks
 
Artificial intelligence in the post-deep learning era
Artificial intelligence in the post-deep learning eraArtificial intelligence in the post-deep learning era
Artificial intelligence in the post-deep learning eraDeakin University
 
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks..."LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...Fwdays
 
Pigging Solutions Piggable Sweeping Elbows
Pigging Solutions Piggable Sweeping ElbowsPigging Solutions Piggable Sweeping Elbows
Pigging Solutions Piggable Sweeping ElbowsPigging Solutions
 
"Debugging python applications inside k8s environment", Andrii Soldatenko
"Debugging python applications inside k8s environment", Andrii Soldatenko"Debugging python applications inside k8s environment", Andrii Soldatenko
"Debugging python applications inside k8s environment", Andrii SoldatenkoFwdays
 
Unblocking The Main Thread Solving ANRs and Frozen Frames
Unblocking The Main Thread Solving ANRs and Frozen FramesUnblocking The Main Thread Solving ANRs and Frozen Frames
Unblocking The Main Thread Solving ANRs and Frozen FramesSinan KOZAK
 
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024The Digital Insurer
 
Transcript: New from BookNet Canada for 2024: BNC BiblioShare - Tech Forum 2024
Transcript: New from BookNet Canada for 2024: BNC BiblioShare - Tech Forum 2024Transcript: New from BookNet Canada for 2024: BNC BiblioShare - Tech Forum 2024
Transcript: New from BookNet Canada for 2024: BNC BiblioShare - Tech Forum 2024BookNet Canada
 
Designing IA for AI - Information Architecture Conference 2024
Designing IA for AI - Information Architecture Conference 2024Designing IA for AI - Information Architecture Conference 2024
Designing IA for AI - Information Architecture Conference 2024Enterprise Knowledge
 
WordPress Websites for Engineers: Elevate Your Brand
WordPress Websites for Engineers: Elevate Your BrandWordPress Websites for Engineers: Elevate Your Brand
WordPress Websites for Engineers: Elevate Your Brandgvaughan
 
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr LapshynFwdays
 
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR SystemsHuman Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR SystemsMark Billinghurst
 
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024Lorenzo Miniero
 
My Hashitalk Indonesia April 2024 Presentation
My Hashitalk Indonesia April 2024 PresentationMy Hashitalk Indonesia April 2024 Presentation
My Hashitalk Indonesia April 2024 PresentationRidwan Fadjar
 
APIForce Zurich 5 April Automation LPDG
APIForce Zurich 5 April  Automation LPDGAPIForce Zurich 5 April  Automation LPDG
APIForce Zurich 5 April Automation LPDGMarianaLemus7
 

Recently uploaded (20)

AI as an Interface for Commercial Buildings
AI as an Interface for Commercial BuildingsAI as an Interface for Commercial Buildings
AI as an Interface for Commercial Buildings
 
Understanding the Laravel MVC Architecture
Understanding the Laravel MVC ArchitectureUnderstanding the Laravel MVC Architecture
Understanding the Laravel MVC Architecture
 
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdfUnraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
Unraveling Multimodality with Large Language Models.pdf
 
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
CloudStudio User manual (basic edition):
 
Artificial intelligence in the post-deep learning era
Artificial intelligence in the post-deep learning eraArtificial intelligence in the post-deep learning era
Artificial intelligence in the post-deep learning era
 
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks..."LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
"LLMs for Python Engineers: Advanced Data Analysis and Semantic Kernel",Oleks...
 
Pigging Solutions Piggable Sweeping Elbows
Pigging Solutions Piggable Sweeping ElbowsPigging Solutions Piggable Sweeping Elbows
Pigging Solutions Piggable Sweeping Elbows
 
Vulnerability_Management_GRC_by Sohang Sengupta.pptx
Vulnerability_Management_GRC_by Sohang Sengupta.pptxVulnerability_Management_GRC_by Sohang Sengupta.pptx
Vulnerability_Management_GRC_by Sohang Sengupta.pptx
 
DMCC Future of Trade Web3 - Special Edition
DMCC Future of Trade Web3 - Special EditionDMCC Future of Trade Web3 - Special Edition
DMCC Future of Trade Web3 - Special Edition
 
"Debugging python applications inside k8s environment", Andrii Soldatenko
"Debugging python applications inside k8s environment", Andrii Soldatenko"Debugging python applications inside k8s environment", Andrii Soldatenko
"Debugging python applications inside k8s environment", Andrii Soldatenko
 
Unblocking The Main Thread Solving ANRs and Frozen Frames
Unblocking The Main Thread Solving ANRs and Frozen FramesUnblocking The Main Thread Solving ANRs and Frozen Frames
Unblocking The Main Thread Solving ANRs and Frozen Frames
 
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
My INSURER PTE LTD - Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
 
Transcript: New from BookNet Canada for 2024: BNC BiblioShare - Tech Forum 2024
Transcript: New from BookNet Canada for 2024: BNC BiblioShare - Tech Forum 2024Transcript: New from BookNet Canada for 2024: BNC BiblioShare - Tech Forum 2024
Transcript: New from BookNet Canada for 2024: BNC BiblioShare - Tech Forum 2024
 
Designing IA for AI - Information Architecture Conference 2024
Designing IA for AI - Information Architecture Conference 2024Designing IA for AI - Information Architecture Conference 2024
Designing IA for AI - Information Architecture Conference 2024
 
WordPress Websites for Engineers: Elevate Your Brand
WordPress Websites for Engineers: Elevate Your BrandWordPress Websites for Engineers: Elevate Your Brand
WordPress Websites for Engineers: Elevate Your Brand
 
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
"Federated learning: out of reach no matter how close",Oleksandr Lapshyn
 
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR SystemsHuman Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
Human Factors of XR: Using Human Factors to Design XR Systems
 
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
SIP trunking in Janus @ Kamailio World 2024
 
My Hashitalk Indonesia April 2024 Presentation
My Hashitalk Indonesia April 2024 PresentationMy Hashitalk Indonesia April 2024 Presentation
My Hashitalk Indonesia April 2024 Presentation
 
APIForce Zurich 5 April Automation LPDG
APIForce Zurich 5 April  Automation LPDGAPIForce Zurich 5 April  Automation LPDG
APIForce Zurich 5 April Automation LPDG
 

Gutell 118.plos_one_2012.7_e38203.supplementalfig

  • 1. A Comparison of the Crystal Structures of Eukaryotic and Bacterial SSU Ribosomal RNAs Reveals Common Structural Features in the Hypervariable Regions Jung C. Lee*¤ , Robin R. Gutell* Center for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, and Section of Integrative Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America Abstract While the majority of the ribosomal RNA structure is conserved in the three major domains of life – archaea, bacteria, and eukaryotes, specific regions of the rRNA structure are unique to at least one of these three primary forms of life. In particular, the comparative secondary structure for the eukaryotic SSU rRNA contains several regions that are different from the analogous regions in the bacteria. Our detailed analysis of two recently determined eukaryotic 40S ribosomal crystal structures, Tetrahymena thermophila and Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and the comparison of these results with the bacterial Thermus thermophilus 30S ribosomal crystal structure: (1) revealed that the vast majority of the comparative structure model for the eukaryotic SSU rRNA is substantiated, including the secondary structure that is similar to both bacteria and archaea as well as specific for the eukaryotes, (2) resolved the secondary structure for regions of the eukaryotic SSU rRNA that were not determined with comparative methods, (3) identified eukaryotic helices that are equivalent to the bacterial helices in several of the hypervariable regions, (4) revealed that, while the coaxially stacked compound helix in the 540 region in the central domain maintains the constant length of 10 base pairs, its two constituent helices contain 5+5 bp rather than the 6+4 bp predicted with comparative analysis of archaeal and eukaryotic SSU rRNAs. Citation: Lee JC, Gutell RR (2012) A Comparison of the Crystal Structures of Eukaryotic and Bacterial SSU Ribosomal RNAs Reveals Common Structural Features in the Hypervariable Regions. PLoS ONE 7(5): e38203. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038203 Editor: Ramy K. Aziz, Cairo University, Egypt Received January 3, 2012; Accepted May 4, 2012; Published May 31, 2012 Copyright: ß 2012 Lee, Gutell. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Funding: This work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (R01GM067317) and the Welch Foundation (F-1427). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. * E-mail: lee@msoe.edu (JCL); robin.gutell@mail.utexas.edu (RRG) ¤ Current address: BioMolecular Engineering, Department of Physics and Chemistry, Milwaukee School of Engineering, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States of America Introduction While the ribosome is the site for protein synthesis, a function that is essential for all organisms spanning the entire tree of life, it is the ribosomal RNA (rRNA) that is directly associated with peptidyl transferase and decoding [1,2,3]. A comparison of the SSU rRNA sequences and their comparative structures reveals that a significant portion of their structure is conserved in all known organisms. Other regions are conserved within each of the three primary phylogenetic domains –archaea, bacteria, and eukaryotes, but differ between them [4,5]. In comparision with the archaea and bacteria, several of the nine major variable regions (V1–V9) in the SSU rRNA [6] have large insertions in organisms within the eukaryotic phylogenetic domain [7]. While it is properly assumed that the SSU rRNA secondary structure that is conserved in eukaryotes, archaea, and bacteria will form the same three- dimensional structure, a more challenging question is if any structural elements in the eukaryotic variable regions with no obvious similarility in secondary structure in the bacteria can form a similar three-dimensional structure. Comparative analysis has been used to accurately predict the secondary structure and a few tertiary structure interactions in numerous RNAs [8], including the bacterial Thermus thermophiles SSU rRNA [9]and an archaeal Haloarcula marismortui LSU rRNA [10]. To assess the accuracy of our comparative structure models for the eukaryotic SSU rRNAs [7], two recent near-atomic- resolution crystal structures of the eukaryotic ribosomal subunits, Tetrahymena thermophila 40S [11] and Saccharomyces cerevisiae 80S [12], were analyzed to determine not only their rRNA secondary and tertiary structure interactions, but also the ribosomal protein binding sites onto the rRNA. The results from this analysis were the foundation for the detailed comparison between the two eukaryotic 40S structures and the bacterial 30S structure from Thermus thermophilus [9]. Results Accuracy of the eukaryotic Tetrahymena thermophila and Saccharomyces cerevisiase SSU rRNA comparative structures and a general comparison between the eukaryotic and bacterial SSU rRNA crystal structures Our analysis revealed that the SSU rRNA structure in the 40S ribosomal subunit from Tetrahymena thermophila [11] is nearly identical to that in the 40S ribosomal subunit from Saccharomyces cerevisiae [12]. Analogous to the previous comparison between the comparative and crystal structures for the Thermus thermophilus SSU rRNA and the Haloarcula marismortui LSU rRNA [8], nearly all of PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 1 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
  • 2. the base pairs in both T. thermophila and S. cerevisiae comparative secondary structure models are present in their respective crystal structures as summarized in Figure 1 for the T. thermophila SSU rRNA structure. This includes the part of the SSU rRNA structure that is conserved in the archaea, bacteria, and eukaryotes, and the proposed base pairs in the T. thermophila that are unique to the eukaryotes. The major structural elements generally characteristic of the eukaryotes are highlighted in red and green in Figure 1. These are (numbering refers to E. coli SSU rRNA): 1. Many non-canonical base pairs in the 39–46/395–403 helix. 2. An insertion of at least a few nucleotides at position 143. 3. The replacement of a single helix between positions 179 and 198 with two helices. This V2 region and its interaction with the V4 region is discussed below. 4. An insertion of 2–5 nucleotides between positions 249 and 252. 5. The V3 region, between positions 404–499 has two helices. While both are different from the analogous helices in bacteria and archaea, the second helix, closer to the 500–545 compound helix, is very irregular with several non-canonical base pairs and bulge nucleotides. 6. The V4 region is between positions 588 and 652. This V4 region is discussed below. 7. An insertion of four nucleotides between positions 876 and 877. 8. The V6 region is between positions 991 and 1046. Three helices occur in the bacteria while two are present in the archaea and the eukaryotes. This V6 region is discussed below. All of the tertiary structure interactions in both eukaryotic SSU rRNA crystal structures that are not associated with eukaryotic specific structural elements are also present in the bacterial SSU rRNA crystal structure (see Figure S1). However, not all of the tertiary structure interactions were discerned in the two eukaryotic SSU rRNA crystal structures. As discussed below, a few of the tertiary structure interactions with the eukaryotic specific regions of the SSU rRNA were part of the rationale for our determination that specific structural elements in the two eukaryotic SSU rRNA structures were equivalent to helices in the bacterial SSU rRNA (see next section). Determination of the secondary structure in the V4 region that was unstructured in the comparative model and the identification of the eukaryotic equivalent structural elements for the bacterial helices in V2, V4, and V6 The V2 region (between nucleotide positions 179 and 197, Escherichia coli numbering) forms one helix in both bacteria and archaea. The length of this helix usually correlates with the presence or absence of an extra nucleotide at position 130 [13]. A single bulge nucleotide at position 130 is associated with a three base pair version of this helix while two bulge nucleotides at this position is associated with a 10 base pair helix. A tertiary base-base interaction was identified between the first nucleotide in the two nucleotide bulge loop and the first nucleotide of the CUUG tetraloop capping the 10 base pair helix in the bacterial T. thermophilus crystal structure [9]. The majority of the eukaryotes in the crown region of the phylogenetic tree including Saccharomyces and Tetrahymena contain approximately 90 nucleotides that form two compound helices in the V2 region in the comparative structure models [7]. These helices are present in the two eukaryotic crystal structures as noted previously [11]. The segments of the second compound helix (colored red in Figures 1 and 2) are equivalent to the bacterial and archaeal helix, based on: (1) the analogous tertiary structure interaction described earlier between position 130 and the hairpin loop and (2) the lonepair helical tip of the equivalent eukarytotic structure in V2 interacts with S11e as its bacterial counterpart interacts with S17 (Figure 1). The hairpin loop is formed from a lone base pair on the 39 side of the internal loop of this compound helix. The V4 region (nucleotide positions 588–652, Escherichia coli numbering) that forms a single compound helix in the bacterial and archaeal SSU rRNA with approximately 55 nucleotides is replaced in many of the eukaryotes in the crown region of the phylogenetic tree, with approximately 220 nucleotides. The first 100 or so nucleotides form two compound helices while approximately 120 consecutive nucleotides are unpaired in the Gutell lab’s Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Tetrahymena thermophila comparative SSU rRNA secondary structure models [7]. Second- ary structure models for this region of eukaryotic SSU rRNAs have been proposed by several groups [14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]. De Wachter’s pseudoknot structure [6] has been accepted by many as the correct secondary structure. No helical structure in these secondary structure models are identical to the compound helix in the 588–652 region of the bacterial and archael SSU rRNA. The 18S crystal structure of the T. thermophila 40S ribosomal subunit recently indicated the formation of four helical elements in this region [11]. The first two helices in the comparative structure model in the V4 region are present in the 40S ribosomal subunits for the two eukaryotic crystal structures. The last helix in the eukaryotic V4 region was not proposed in the Gutell lab’s comparative structure but was proposed in some of the comparative structure models from other labs [14,16,17,18,19,20,21,23]. The 59 segment of the unstructured nucleotides in the Gutell lab’s eukaryotic SSU rRNA comparative structure model contains numerous non-canonical base pairs to form several irregular helices in the eukaryotic crystal structure (Figures 1 and 2). That segment (colored red in Figures 1 and 2) are equivalent to the bacterial and archaeal compound helix between positions 588–652. This association is based on: (1) two analogous tertiary structure interactions, the first between the internal loop and base pairs 291:309 and 292:308 and the second between the hairpin loop closed by a single non- canonical base pair and the base pairs 41:401 and 42:400 (Figure 1), and (2) the interactions between the hairpin loop closed by a single non-canonical base pair and the stem of the equivalent eukaryotic helix with S9e and S22e, respectively, as their bacterial counterparts interact with S4 and S8, respectively (Figure 1). A eukaryotic-specific long-range pseudoknot helix was proposed between the V2 and V4 hypervariable regions of eukaryotic SSU rRNA [24], based on the S. cerevisiae 80S cryo-EM structure and comparative analysis of the eukaryotic SSU rRNA sequences [25]. Subsequent experimental analysis supports this prediction [26]. This long-range pseudoknot helix connecting the V2 and V4 regions is at the lower back of both eukaryotic ribosomal small subunit crystal structures. The V6 region is between positions 991 and 1046 in the SSU rRNA. As noted earlier, three helices are in bacteria, and two in the archaea and eukaryotes (Figure 2). The two helices in the Tetrahymena and Saccharomyces SSU rRNA comparative structure models were observed in the two eukcaryotic T. thermophila and S. cerevisiae ribosomal crystal structures. While the first helix 996– 1003/1037–1045, is analogous in the three phylogenetic domains, the bacterial 1006–1012/1017–1023 helix is equivalent to the second helix in the eukaryotes (colored in Figures 1 and 2). This Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 2 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
  • 3. Figure 1. Comparison of the eukaryotic and bacterial SSU rRNA secondary structures. The base pairings, helices other RNA structural elements, and relevant ribosomal proteins in the T. thermophila 40S crystal structure are mapped onto the T. thermophila SSU rRNA comparative secondary structure diagram [7]. The nucleotides in the eukaryotic-specific structural elements are colored green, while the nucleotides colored red are structural elements in the variable regions that are analogous to helices in the bacterial structure. The V2, V4, and V6 variable regions are colored red while the bacterial-specific helix in V6 is shown in blue on the bacterial Thermus thermophilus SSU rRNA (inset). The long-range tertiary contacts maintained in both the eukaryotic and the bacterial SSU rRNA are shown with red lines, while those specific for the eukaryotic 18S rRNA in green lines; the tertiary contacts specifically associated with V2, V4, and V6 are shown with thicker lines. The ribosomal proteins common between eukaryotes and bacteria are shown in red, with their bacterial equivalents in parentheses, while those present only in eukaryotes in green and those present in archaea and eukaryotes in purple. The sequence insertions in the eukaryotic SSU rRNAs are highlighted in green with green arrows and numbers indicating the number of inserted nucleotides. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038203.g001 Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 3 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
  • 4. association is based on: (1) one analogous set of tertiary structure interactions between the hairpin loop of the 1006–1012/1017– 1023 like helix and the base pairs 986:1219 and 987:1218 (Figure 1) and (2) the interactions between this helix and the eukaryotic ribosomal protein S15e, which is equivalent to the bacterial protein S19 (Figure 1). Role of eukaryotic-specific ribosomal proteins in eukaryotic SSU rRNA Comparative analysis of the ribosomal proteins identified four ribosomal proteins that are only present in all eukaryotic organisms - S7e, S10e, S12e, and S21e [27]. S7e interacts with a part of V4, S10e and S12e interact with a U-turn in V6, and S21e interacts with V5 (Figure 1). Of particular interest is S12e which is located at the same spatial position occupied by the bacterial-specific helix in the V6 region, suggesting that this segment of RNA is replaced by a protein during the evolution of the ribosome structure. Maintenance of helix length in the coaxially stacked helices in the 540 region Based on the comparative analysis of the two helices in the 540 region of the SSU rRNA – 500–504/541–545 and 511–515/536– 540, it was proposed that these two helices will coaxially stack onto one another. The bacteria have two 5 base pair helices flanking the bulge loop while the eukaryotes and archaea have 6 base pairs in the lower helix and 4 base pairs in the helix above the bulge loop [28] to maintain a total length of 10 base pairs. The intervening bulge loop between its two constituent helices forms a short pseudoknot helix with the terminal hairpin loop (Figure 3). However, the crystal structures for the T. thermophila and S. cerevisiae revealed that these two eukaryotes (and probably all eukaryotes) have 5 base pairs in the lower and upper helices. The sixth ‘putative’ base pair (G:C) in the lower helix did not have any covariation in the eukaryotes and the archaea. Interestingly, the upper helix contains two single nucleotide bulges in the T. thermophila SSU and one single nucleotide bulge in the S. cerevisiae SSU rRNA (Figure 3). It is also interesting to note that the pseudoknot helix between positions 505–507/524–526 in the eukaryotic SSU rRNAs contain only two base pairs, not the three base pairs observed in the bacterial SSU rRNA. Nonetheless, the overall 3D folding pattern of the 540 region in the eukaryotic crystal structures are very similar to that in the bacterial crystal structure (data not shown). Discussion From the analysis of the eukaryotic ribosomal crystal structures for T. thermophila and S.cerevisiae, and the subsequent comparison with the bacterial high-resolution ribosomal crystal structures, we determined that: (1) nearly all of the base pairs in the eukaryotic Figure 2. Gallery for the three hypervariable regions V2, V4, and V6 from the eukaryotic T. thermophila 18S, bacterial T. thermophilus 16S, and archaeal Haloarcula marismortui 16S rRNAs. The coloring scheme is the same as in Fig. 1. The helices shared by the bacterial 16S and eukaryotic 18S rRNAs are shown in red, while the eukaryotic-specific and bacterial-specific helices are shown in green and in blue, respectively. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038203.g002 Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 4 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
  • 5. SSU rRNA comparative structure model are substantiated. This includes, those base pairs that are in the structure conserved in the three primary phylogenetic domains, those structural elements unique to the eukaryotes, and the non-canonical base pairs that occur in several of the irregular helices (e.g. 39–46/395–403 and the second helix in V3). (2) resolved the secondary structure in the part of the V4 region that had been unstructured in the Gutell lab’s eukaryotic comparative structure models. This includes both regular and irregular helices containing an abundance of non- canonical base pairs. (3) Identified tertiary structure interactions in the eukaryotic crystal structures that were not predicted with comparative analysis and determined the binding sites for a few of the eukaryotic ribosomal proteins that interact with regions of the SSU rRNA that are unique to the eukaryotes. Nearly all of the tertiary structure interactions are also present in the bacterial crystal structure. The few exceptions are for those interactions that are interacting between two eukaryotic specific regions. (4) Identified three structural elements, one in V2, one in V4, and the third in V6, that are analogous to bacterial helices. The first two of these helices do not have any obvious simarility between the eukaryotic and bacterial versions. All three were determined to be analogous based on similar tertiary structure interactions and ribosomal protein binding sites. (5) Determined that the four eukaryotic specific ribosomal proteins bind to regions of the SSU rRNA that are unique to the eukaryotes. (6) Determined that the two helices in the 540 region of the SSU rRNA - 500–504/541– 545 and 511–515/536–540 each have five base pairs in the eukaryotes, in contrast with the comparative structure models that had six base pairs in the first helix and four base pair in the second. While the bacteria has three base pairs in the 505–507/524–526 pseudoknot helix, the two eukaryotic crystal structures contain only two base pairs. Materials and Methods The RasMol program [29,30] was used for a detailed visual mapping of the base pairs,long-range tertiary contacts, and RNA- protein interactions in the two eukaryotic (PDB IDs 2XZM and 3U5B/3U5C) and one bacterial (PDB ID 1FJG) SSU rRNA crystal structures [9,12]. All the figures and supplementary information in the text are also available at http://www.rna. ccbb.utexas.edu/SIM/4A/Hypervariable_SSU_rRNA/ at the CRW Site. Supporting Information Figure S1 Long-range RNA tertiary contacts in the bacterial Thermus thermophilus SSU rRNA. This figure, with the long-range tertiary interactions in Figure 1 shown in thick lines, was generated with RNA2DMap (http://www.rna. icmb.utexas.edu/SAE/2A/RNA2DMap/index.php), a visualiza- tion tool based on the RNA secondary structure diagram for displaying both RNA crystal structure information and compar- ative data. (EPS) Author Contributions Conceived and designed the experiments: JCL RRG. Analyzed the data: JCL RRG. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: JCL RRG. Wrote the paper: JCL RRG. References 1. Noller HF, Chaires JB (1972) Functional modification of 16S ribosomal RNA by kethoxal. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 69: 3115–3118. 2. Hansen JL, Schmeing TM, Moore PB, Steitz TA (2002) Structural insights into peptide bond formation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 11670–11675. Figure 3. Comparison of the 540 regions in the eukaryotic and bacterial rRNAs. Maintenance of helix length of 10 bp in the coaxially stacked compound helices and length difference of the pseudoknot helices in the 540 regions in eukaryotic 18S and bacterial 16S rRNAs. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038203.g003 Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 5 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203
  • 6. 3. Wimberly BT, Guymon R, McCutcheon JP, White SW, Ramakrishnan V (1999) A detailed view of a ribosomal active site: the structure of the L11-RNA complex. Cell 97: 491–502. 4. Gutell RR, Weiser B, Woese CR, Noller HF (1985) Comparative anatomy of 16-S-like ribosomal RNA. Prog Nucleic Acid Res Mol Biol 32: 155–216. 5. Winker S, Woese CR (1991) A definition of the domains Archaea, Bacteria and Eucarya in terms of small subunit ribosomal RNA characteristics. Syst Appl Microbiol 14: 305–310. 6. Neefs JM, De Wachter R (1990) A proposal for the secondary structure of a variable area of eukaryotic small ribosomal subunit RNA involving the existence of a pseudoknot. Nucleic Acids Res 18: 5695–5704. 7. Cannone JJ, Subramanian S, Schnare MN, Collett JR, D’Souza LM, et al. (2002) The comparative RNA web (CRW) site: an online database of comparative sequence and structure information for ribosomal, intron, and other RNAs. BMC Bioinformatics 3: 2. 8. Gutell RR, Lee JC, Cannone JJ (2002) The accuracy of ribosomal RNA comparative structure models. Curr Opin Struct Biol 12: 301–310. 9. Wimberly BT, Brodersen DE, Clemons WM, Jr., Morgan-Warren RJ, Carter AP, et al. (2000) Structure of the 30S ribosomal subunit. Nature 407: 327–339. 10. Ban N, Nissen P, Hansen J, Moore PB, Steitz TA (2000) The complete atomic structure of the large ribosomal subunit at 2.4 A resolution. Science 289: 905–920. 11. Rabl J, Leibundgut M, Ataide SF, Haag A, Ban N (2011) Crystal structure of the eukaryotic 40S ribosomal subunit in complex with initiation factor 1. Science 331: 730–736. 12. Ben-Shem A, Garreau de Loubresse N, Melnikov S, Jenner L, Yusupova G, et al. (2011) The structure of the eukaryotic ribosome at 3.0 A resolution. Science 334: 1524–1529. 13. Woese CR, Gutell RR (1989) Evidence for several higher order structural elements in ribosomal RNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 86: 3119–3122. 14. Zwieb C, Glotz C, Brimacombe R (1981) Secondary structure comparisons between small subunit ribosomal RNA molecules from six different species. Nucleic Acids Res 9: 3621–3640. 15. Nelles L, Van Broeckhoven C, De Wachter R, Vandenberghe A (1984) Location of the hidden break in large subunit ribosomal RNA of Artemia salina. Naturwissenschaften 71: 634–635. 16. Herzog M, Maroteaux L (1986) Dinoflagellate 17S rRNA sequence inferred from the gene sequence: Evolutionary implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 83: 8644–8648. 17. Gonzalez IL, Schmickel RD (1986) The human 18S ribosomal RNA gene: evolution and stability. Am J Hum Genet 38: 419–427. 18. Ellis RE, Sulston JE, Coulson AR (1986) The rDNA of C. elegans: sequence and structure. Nucleic Acids Res 14: 2345–2364. 19. Rairkar A, Rubino HM, Lockard RE (1988) Chemical probing of adenine residues within the secondary structure of rabbit 18S ribosomal RNA. Biochem 27: 582–592. 20. Hendriks L, De Baere R, Van Broeckhoven C, De Wachter R (1988) Primary and secondary structure of the 18 S ribosomal RNA of the insect species Tenebrio molitor. FEBS Lett 232: 115–120. 21. Johansen T, Johansen S, Haugli FB (1988) Nucleotide sequence of the Physarum polycephalum small subunit ribosomal RNA as inferred from the gene sequence: secondary structure and evolutionary implications. Curr Genet 14: 265–273. 22. Nickrent DL, Sargent ML (1991) An overview of the secondary structure of the V4 region of eukaryotic small-subunit ribosomal RNA. Nucleic Acids Res 19: 227–235. 23. Nelles L, Fang BL, Volckaert G, Vandenberghe A, De Wachter R (1984) Nucleotide sequence of a crustacean 18S ribosomal RNA gene and secondary structure of eukaryotic small subunit ribosomal RNAs. Nucleic Acids Res 12: 8749–8768. 24. Alkemar G, Nygard O (2003) A possible tertiary rRNA interaction between expansion segments ES3 and ES6 in eukaryotic 40S ribosomal subunits. RNA 9: 20–24. 25. Spahn CM, Beckmann R, Eswar N, Penczek PA, Sali A, et al. (2001) Structure of the 80S ribosome from Saccharomyces cerevisiae–tRNA-ribosome and subunit- subunit interactions. Cell 107: 373–386. 26. Alkemar G, Nygard O (2004) Secondary structure of two regions in expansion segments ES3 and ES6 with the potential of forming a tertiary interaction in eukaryotic 40S ribosomal subunits. RNA 10: 403–411. 27. Lecompte O, Ripp R, Thierry JC, Moras D, Poch O (2002) Comparative analysis of ribosomal proteins in complete genomes: an example of reductive evolution at the domain scale. Nucleic Acids Res 30: 5382–5390. 28. Gutell RR, Larsen N, Woese CR (1994) Lessons from an evolving rRNA: 16S and 23S rRNA structures from a comparative perspective. Microbiol Rev 58: 10–26. 29. Sayle RA, Milner-White EJ (1995) RASMOL: biomolecular graphics for all. Trends Biochem Sci 20: 374. 30. Bernstein HJ (2000) Recent changes to RasMol, recombining the variants. Trends Biochem Sci 25: 453–455. Evolution of Small Subunit Ribosomal RNA Structure PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 6 May 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 5 | e38203