Gene expression must be stringently regulated to ensure efficient control of cellular processes. A key mechanism of gene expression regulation is the control of mRNA degradation (Chen and Shyu, 2017; Corbett, 2018), mediated by the removal of protective structures from mRNA, which suppresses translation or leads to mRNA degradation. In most eukaryotic cells, mRNA is stabilized through the addition during post-transcriptional modification of an N⁷-methyl guanosine (m⁷G) cap at the 5′ end and a polyA tail at the 3′ end (Furuichi et al., 1977; Garneau et al., 2007). General mRNA decay is typically initiated by deadenylation, which is mediated by the coordinated activity of the CCR4/NOT and PAN2/3 complexes (Chen and Shyu, 2011; Decker and Parker, 1993). Shortening of the polyA tail typically initiates mRNA decay, resulting in exonucleolytic degradation in the 5'–3' or 3'–5' direction, respectively, facilitated by the exonuclease XRN1 or the exosome complex (Chang et al., 2019; Garneau et al., 2007; Lim et al., 2016; Subtelny et al., 2014; Webster et al., 2018; Yi et al., 2018). While the cytoplasmic RNA exosome degrades mRNA in the 3'–5' direction, the primary effect of deadenylation is ‘mRNA decapping’, the removal of the m⁷G cap structure at the 5'-end of the mRNA that otherwise prevents mRNA degradation (Stevens, 1988). This connection between deadenylation and decapping is facilitated by Pat1, which, together with the Lsm1-7 complex, recruits the decapping complex through a combination of disordered and structured domains, promoting distinct steps of mRNA decay (Charenton et al., 2017; Charenton and Graille, 2018; Fourati et al., 2014; Lobel and Gross, 2020; Lobel et al., 2019; Sharif and Conti, 2013; Wu et al., 2014).

The mRNA decapping process is crucial for gene regulation because it leads to the irreversible removal of the mRNA cap structure, inhibiting translation initiation and inducing the XRN1-mediated degradation of mRNA through the 5′–3′ mRNA decay pathway (Hsu and Stevens, 1993; Topisirovic et al., 2011). Decapping does not only lead to the degradation of bulk mRNA molecules; it is also involved in specific mRNA decay pathways, such as AU-rich element-mediated decay, nonsense-mediated decay (NMD), and miRNA-triggered mRNA turnover (Arribas-Layton et al., 2013; Chen and Shyu, 2003; Fenger-Grøn et al., 2005; Jonas and Izaurralde, 2015; Loh et al., 2013). Because of its crucial role in gene regulation, decapping is tightly regulated by the activity of both general and pathway-specific factors through various mechanisms. In the context of NMD for instance, target transcripts can be degraded through endonucleolytic cleavage by SMG6 (Eberle et al., 2009; Huntzinger et al., 2008), or be facilitated by SMG5 in conjunction with the NMD effector SMG7 or the decapping factor PNRC2, leading to enhanced deadenylation and decapping (Cho et al., 2009; Fukuhara et al., 2005; Loh et al., 2013). Understanding the determinants of the preferential associations between certain degradation mechanisms and particular transcripts requires further study (Metze et al., 2013). Overall, the pivotal role of decapping in the intricate network of mRNA decay justifies ongoing research in this field.

In eukaryotes, the removal of the mRNA 5′-m⁷GDP cap structure is catalyzed by the decapping enzyme DCP2, a pyrophosphatase belonging to the Nudix family of proteins. This process results in the generation of 5′ monophosphorylated mRNA, which is subsequently targeted for degradation (Arribas-Layton et al., 2013; Lykke-Andersen, 2002; Steiger et al., 2003; van Dijk et al., 2002; Wang et al., 2002). The central component of the complex, DCP2, has two major domains: the N-terminal regulatory domain (NRD) and the catalytic Nudix domain (She et al., 2006; She et al., 2008). The positively charged patch of the Nudix domain plays a crucial role in RNA binding (Deshmukh et al., 2008; Piccirillo et al., 2003). Meanwhile, the NRD enhances decapping activity by specifically recognizing the m⁷G nucleotide of the mRNA cap structure and interacts with the N-terminal EVH1 domain of the major activator DCP1, further accelerating the decapping process (Chang et al., 2014; Charenton et al., 2016; Dunckley and Parker, 1999; Floor et al., 2010; Mugridge et al., 2016; She et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2002; Wurm et al., 2017). Yeast Dcp2 has an additional unstructured C-terminal extension that contains short helical leucine-rich motifs (HLMs) responsible for protein–protein interactions and elements that inhibit Dcp2 catalytic activity (Charenton et al., 2017; He and Jacobson, 2015). Interestingly, in contrast to yeast, metazoans have the HLM in DCP1, implying a conserved biological function with evolving regulation of mRNA decapping (Fromm et al., 2012).

The interactions between DCP1 and DCP2 proteins and their functions across various species have garnered extensive attention in the study of mRNA degradation mechanisms. While DCP2 is capable of demonstrating catalytic activity on its own (Lykke-Andersen, 2002; van Dijk et al., 2002; Wang et al., 2002), it is important to note that additional cofactors are involved in stimulating DCP2 for complete activation. In yeast, the primary activator of DCP2 is Dcp1, which is essential for decapping activity in vivo (Beelman et al., 1996) and considerably enhances the catalytic activity of Dcp2 in vitro (Deshmukh et al., 2008; Floor et al., 2010; She et al., 2006). Moreover, DCP1 has been shown to interact with other decapping proteins, such as DCP2, to form functional decapping complexes critical for mRNA degradation. Localization and functional analysis of decapping proteins across various species indicate that Dcp1-dependent decapping mechanisms have been conserved throughout evolution and play a significant role in the mRNA decapping machinery (Lall et al., 2005; Sakuno et al., 2004). Furthermore, the importance of DCP1 in plant species underscores the necessity of the decapping complex for proper plant development and highlights its potential homology with yeast and human DCP1 (Xu et al., 2006). These findings suggest that the interaction between DCP1 and DCP2 and their role in mRNA degradation is a conserved key biological process across species.

In addition to Dcp1, proteins such as Edc1-3, Pby1, Lsm1-7, Pat1, and Dhh1 (PNRC1, PNRC2, EDC3, EDC4, Lsm1-7, Lsm14, PatL1, and DDX6 in metazoans) promote decapping by directly or indirectly interacting with Dcp2 (Charenton et al., 2020; Charenton et al., 2017; Charenton and Graille, 2018; Charenton et al., 2016; Cho et al., 2009; Gaviraghi et al., 2018; He and Jacobson, 2023; He et al., 2022; Jonas and Izaurralde, 2013; Ling et al., 2011; Lobel et al., 2019; Mugridge et al., 2018b). These proteins facilitate decapping through the assembly of messenger ribonucleoprotein (RNP) units or the structural rearrangement of DCP2. High levels of these proteins have been detected in large RNP granules, processing bodies (P-bodies), which likely serve as sites for the storage of translationally repressed RNAs and the process of mRNA decay (Eulalio et al., 2007; Jonas and Izaurralde, 2013; Luo et al., 2018).

The interactions between the subunits of the decapping complex are crucial for enhancing its activity and for the targeting of specific mRNAs. Although Dcp1 and Dcp2 have been shown to interact strongly in yeast, direct DCP1-DCP2 interactions are weak in metazoans. Instead, the metazoan-specific protein EDC4, which has binding sites for both DCP1 and DCP2, likely functions as a scaffold that brings these proteins together despite their weak interaction propensity (Chang et al., 2014; Fenger-Grøn et al., 2005). In addition to EDC4, DCP1 acts as a binding platform for other coactivator proteins, such as yeast Edc1 and Edc2 and the human PNRC paralogs, PNRC1 and PNRC2 (Gaviraghi et al., 2018; Jonas and Izaurralde, 2013; Mugridge et al., 2016). In metazoans, the HLM domain of DCP1 interacts with the Lsm domains of proteins such as EDC3 and Lsm14 in a mutually exclusive manner. Moreover, in multicellular eukaryotes, DCP1 features a C-terminal extension that induces DCP1 trimerization, referred to as the trimerization domain (TD). Trimerization is a prerequisite for the incorporation of DCP1 into active decapping complexes and for promoting efficient mRNA decapping in vivo (Fromm et al., 2012; Jonas and Izaurralde, 2013; Tritschler et al., 2007). This competition results in the formation of structurally and functionally distinct assemblies, contributing to target specificity (Vidya and Duchaine, 2022).

Recent structural analyses of the Kluyveromyces lactis Dcp1-Dcp2-Edc3 complex indicate that the Lsm domain of Edc3 binds to an extended helix at the C-terminus of the Dcp2 Nudix domain (Charenton et al., 2016). Furthermore, the activation peptide of Edc1 bridges Dcp1 and Dcp2, as observed in the Edc1-Dcp1-Dcp2 complex in Saccharomyces pombe and Kluyveromyces lactis (Mugridge et al., 2018b; Wurm et al., 2017). These structural insights suggest that Edc1 and Edc3 collaborate through distinct mechanisms, aiding the decapping process (Charenton and Graille, 2018; Charenton et al., 2016; Mugridge et al., 2018a; Mugridge et al., 2018b; Tibble et al., 2021). Specifically, Edc1 stabilizes Dcp2’s catalytically active conformation, while Edc3 extends the RNA binding surface of the Dcp2 Nudix domain (Charenton et al., 2016; Mugridge et al., 2018b). This extended RNA interaction potentially accounts for the transcript-specific nature of Edc3-mediated decapping activation, hinting at distinct coactivators' roles in gene-specific regulation.

While structural studies suggest that interactions with Dcp1 are central to the activation of Dcp2 (Charenton and Graille, 2018; Deshmukh et al., 2008; Mugridge et al., 2018a; Mugridge et al., 2016; She et al., 2008; Valkov et al., 2016), the lack of structural information on the human decapping complex hinders our understanding of the specific role of human DCP1 in decapping. It remains unclear how DCP1 contributes to the conformational changes in the DCP2 catalytic cycle or to mRNA and cap structure recognition. A further complication is the existence of two paralogs of human DCP1, DCP1a, and DCP1b, which have 31% sequence identity over their entire length (Lykke-Andersen, 2002; van Dijk et al., 2002). The functional differences of these paralogs have yet to be determined. Studies of their potentially distinct roles in the decapping complex may provide new insight into the molecular mechanisms of mRNA decapping. The fact that decapping dysfunctions can have detrimental effects on cell growth and have been linked to severe neurological disorders in humans (Ahmed et al., 2015; Ng et al., 2015) highlights the importance of understanding the mechanisms of mRNA decapping regulation and the potential therapeutic implications.

In this study, we investigated the roles of human DCP1 in mRNA decapping by generating HEK-293T cell lines lacking DCP1a, DCP1b, or both. Our findings indicate that human DCP1 promotes decapping in vivo and that DCP1a and DCP1b play redundant roles in the general 5′–3′ mRNA decay pathway. We found that EVH1 domain may be crucial for enhancing DCP2’s recruitment to target mRNA in cells. Multiomics analyses revealed distinct expressional and metabolomic profiles for the knockout cell lines. These results indicate that the DCP1 paralogs have distinct roles in the regulation of various biological processes. Overall, our findings offer valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying human DCP1-mediated mRNA decapping and the specific mRNA targets and biological processes regulated by DCP1a and DCP1b in humans.

DCP1 is a key component in the mRNA decay pathway, crucial for the regulation of gene expression. Research across various species, from yeast to humans, has provided insights into the conservation and evolution of mRNA decapping mechanisms. Notably, DCP1 interacts with other decapping proteins such as DCP2, forming a decapping complex for mRNA degradation. Additionally, the localization and functional analysis of DCP1 in different model organisms, as well as its importance in plant species, highlight its role in post-transcriptional gene expression regulation across species (Lall et al., 2005; Sakuno et al., 2004; Xu et al., 2006). However, in human cells, the specific biological functions of DCP1, especially the distinctions between its two paralogs, DCP1a and DCP1b, have not been fully elucidated. In this study, we found that DCP1 plays a key role in promoting mRNA decapping in human cells. By generating cell lines deficient in DCP1a, DCP1b, or both, our research emphasizes the importance of human DCP1 in the decapping process. We also verified that DCP1 is not only a key platform for assembling various mRNA decapping cofactors, but also established that the EVH1 domain of DCP1 is critical for the mRNA decapping process. Through RNA immunoprecipitation assays, we discovered that the interactions between DCP2 and mRNA heavily rely on the presence of DCP1’s EVH1 domain. These findings imply that DCP1 facilitates the binding of DCP2 to target mRNAs through multiple mechanisms, thereby enhancing the efficiency of mRNA decapping. Finally, our integrated transcriptome and metabolome analyses comparing the specific functions of DCP1a and DCP1b in human cells revealed that they can regulate distinct endogenous mRNA targets and biological processes.

In a prior investigation, we made an intriguing discovery. In human cells, substituting the conserved NR-loop with a flexible GSSG loop in the EVH1 domain of DCP1 had no adverse effect on the interaction between DCP1 and DCP2, nor did it impede their integration into decapping factors. However, this seemingly subtle alteration had a significant consequence – it disrupted the activation of DCP2 (Chang et al., 2014). This points to the pivotal role played by the EVH1 domain of DCP1 in the activation of DCP2, which, in turn, is a critical step in the mRNA decapping process. These findings, combined with our findings in the present study, provide compelling evidence that the DCP1 EVH1 domain is not just a passive component but a crucial player in coordinating interactions and facilitating conformational changes necessary for efficient mRNA decapping. A comprehensive functional characterization of these mechanisms is imperative to fully elucidate the mechanisms underlying DCP1-mediated activation of decapping.

While the protein components of the mRNA decapping machinery have been identified, our current understanding of the distinct roles played by individual decapping factors throughout the process remains limited. Notably, whether the different decapping factors confer target specificity has yet to be clarified. Although previous studies have suggested that DCP1a and DCP1b, the two paralogs of DCP1, play redundant roles in general mRNA decay, this notion is mainly based on reporter assays and single-gene approaches. The specific regulation of endogenous mRNA targets and biological processes by DCP1a and DCP1b is yet to be elucidated.

In this study, we investigated potential functional differences between DCP1a and DCP1b through a combined transcriptome and metabolome analysis. While DCP1a and DCP1b have both been implicated in cancer, our observation of significant alterations in multiple cancer-related pathways in DCP1a-knockout cells suggests that DCP1a might be more prominently associated with cancer development. Furthermore, the downregulation of DCP1a in multiple cancer types further supports the concept that DCP1a is a cancer-associated gene and suggests that its dysregulation may play a contributory role in the onset and progression of diverse cancers. (Ibayashi et al., 2021; Wu et al., 2018; Wu et al., 2021b). Survival analysis has indicated that elevated DCP1a expression in uterine carcinosarcoma carcinoma correlates with improved PFI. Conversely, higher levels of DCP1b expression are associated with both favorable and unfavorable PFIs. Together with the observation of dysregulation of DCP1b in numerous cancers, we speculate that DCP1b is also implicated in cancer pathogenesis, and further studies are required to fully understand the roles of DCP1a and DCP1b in cancer pathogenesis.

With the transcriptome profiles of DCP1a and DCP1b knockout cells, we anticipate significant upregulation among potential targets. However, to discern direct targets from genes upregulated due to indirect effects, it is imperative to delve deeper into mRNA decay rates. Various tools and methods, such as time-series RNA-seq (Viegas et al., 2023) or specialized sequencing techniques like Precision Run-On sequencing (PRO-seq) (Blumberg et al., 2021) or RNA Approach to Equilibrium Sequencing (RATE-Seq) (Abdul-Rahman and Gresham, 2018), have been proposed to estimate mRNA decay rates. Luo et al. utilized TimeLapse-seq to identify potential targets for DCP2 (Luo et al., 2021; Schofield et al., 2018). Incorporating these approaches could provide a more comprehensive understanding in this context.

Notably, our candidate target genes exhibited minimal overlap with the 91 targets of DCP2 (Luo et al., 2021); only EPPK1 overlapped among potential targets of DCP1b_KO, while TES, PAX6, and C18orf21 were the only overlapping genes in the DCP1a/b double knockout.

Our scrutiny of the transcript profiles and metabolite levels within DCP1a- and DCP1b-knockout cells has unveiled their unique contributions to cellular processes. While DCP1a and DCP1b might exhibit certain common gene targets, the distinct transcriptome profiles suggest their functions are not entirely interchangeable. Pathway analysis indicated that DCP1a and DCP1b may have partially complementary roles in regulating cellular pathways. Additionally, several metabolites showed notable alterations in knockout cells, potentially opening a new avenue for investigating the metabolic consequences of DCP1 knockout. Our findings yield valuable understanding of the distinct functions of DCP1a and DCP1b in human cells and the complex regulatory mechanisms underlying cellular metabolism. The potential targets we identified could be investigated further by quantifying specific transcripts and metabolites, and a larger sample size would facilitate the identification of correlations between differentially expressed genes and differentially abundant metabolites.

Overall, our study provides valuable insights into the molecular mechanisms governing DCP1-mediated decapping in human cells and the coordinated regulation of DCP1a and DCP1b, which has important implications for gene expression and cellular function. Future biochemical characterization of the specific mRNA targets and biological pathways regulated by DCP1a and DCP1b is necessary to fully elucidate their roles. This information may help uncover the precise mechanisms underlying mRNA decapping and gene regulation. Furthermore, studying the dysregulation of DCP1 paralogs, especially in cancer, may reveal potential therapeutic targets and improve treatment strategies.

Sequencing data have been deposited in GEO under accession codes GSE230847.

1. 1. Chen TW
   2. Chang CT

   (2023) NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus

   ID GSE230847. Uncovering human DCP1 is essential for mRNA decapping process and paralog-specific functions in gene regulation.

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE230847

1. 1. Abdul-Rahman F
   2. Gresham D

   (2018) Determining mrna decay rates using rna approach to equilibrium sequencing (RATE-Seq)

   Methods in Molecular Biology 1720:15–24.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-7540-2_2

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Ahmed I
   2. Buchert R
   3. Zhou M
   4. Jiao X
   5. Mittal K
   6. Sheikh TI
   7. Scheller U
   8. Vasli N
   9. Rafiq MA
   10. Brohi MQ
   11. Mikhailov A
   12. Ayaz M
   13. Bhatti A
   14. Sticht H
   15. Nasr T
   16. Carter MT
   17. Uebe S
   18. Reis A
   19. Ayub M
   20. John P
   21. Kiledjian M
   22. Vincent JB
   23. Jamra RA

   (2015) Mutations in DCPS and EDC3 in autosomal recessive intellectual disability indicate a crucial role for mRNA decapping in neurodevelopment

   Human Molecular Genetics 24:3172–3180.

   https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddv069

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Arribas-Layton M
   2. Wu D
   3. Lykke-Andersen J
   4. Song H

   (2013) Structural and functional control of the eukaryotic mRNA decapping machinery

   Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1829:580–589.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbagrm.2012.12.006

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Beelman CA
   2. Stevens A
   3. Caponigro G
   4. LaGrandeur TE
   5. Hatfield L
   6. Fortner DM
   7. Parker R

   (1996) An essential component of the decapping enzyme required for normal rates of mRNA turnover

   Nature 382:642–646.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/382642a0

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Blumberg A
   2. Zhao Y
   3. Huang YF
   4. Dukler N
   5. Rice EJ
   6. Chivu AG
   7. Krumholz K
   8. Danko CG
   9. Siepel A

   (2021) Characterizing RNA stability genome-wide through combined analysis of PRO-seq and RNA-seq data

   BMC Biology 19:30.

   https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-021-00949-x

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Bolger AM
   2. Lohse M
   3. Usadel B

   (2014) Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data

   Bioinformatics 30:2114–2120.

   https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Braun JE
   2. Truffault V
   3. Boland A
   4. Huntzinger E
   5. Chang CT
   6. Haas G
   7. Weichenrieder O
   8. Coles M
   9. Izaurralde E

   (2012) A direct interaction between DCP1 and XRN1 couples mRNA decapping to 5’ exonucleolytic degradation

   Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 19:1324–1331.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.2413

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Calviello L
   2. Mukherjee N
   3. Wyler E
   4. Zauber H
   5. Hirsekorn A
   6. Selbach M
   7. Landthaler M
   8. Obermayer B
   9. Ohler U

   (2016) Detecting actively translated open reading frames in ribosome profiling data

   Nature Methods 13:165–170.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3688

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Chang CT
   2. Bercovich N
   3. Loh B
   4. Jonas S
   5. Izaurralde E

   (2014) The activation of the decapping enzyme DCP2 by DCP1 occurs on the EDC4 scaffold and involves a conserved loop in DCP1

   Nucleic Acids Research 42:5217–5233.

   https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku129

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Chang CT
    2. Muthukumar S
    3. Weber R
    4. Levdansky Y
    5. Chen Y
    6. Bhandari D
    7. Igreja C
    8. Wohlbold L
    9. Valkov E
    10. Izaurralde E

    (2019) A low-complexity region in human XRN1 directly recruits deadenylation and decapping factors in 5’-3’ messenger RNA decay

    Nucleic Acids Research 47:9282–9295.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkz633

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Charenton C
    2. Taverniti V
    3. Gaudon-Plesse C
    4. Back R
    5. Séraphin B
    6. Graille M

    (2016) Structure of the active form of Dcp1-Dcp2 decapping enzyme bound to m⁷GDP and its Edc3 activator

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 23:982–986.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.3300

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Charenton C
    2. Gaudon-Plesse C
    3. Fourati Z
    4. Taverniti V
    5. Back R
    6. Kolesnikova O
    7. Séraphin B
    8. Graille M

    (2017) A unique surface on Pat1 C-terminal domain directly interacts with Dcp2 decapping enzyme and Xrn1 5’-3’ mRNA exonuclease in yeast

    PNAS 114:E9493–E9501.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1711680114

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Charenton C
    2. Graille M

    (2018) mRNA decapping: finding the right structures

    Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 373:20180164.

    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2018.0164

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Charenton C
    2. Gaudon-Plesse C
    3. Back R
    4. Ulryck N
    5. Cosson L
    6. Séraphin B
    7. Graille M

    (2020) Pby1 is a direct partner of the Dcp2 decapping enzyme

    Nucleic Acids Research 48:6353–6366.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkaa337

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Chen C-YA
    2. Shyu A-B

    (2003) Rapid deadenylation triggered by a nonsense codon precedes decay of the RNA body in a mammalian cytoplasmic nonsense-mediated decay pathway

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 23:4805–4813.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.23.14.4805-4813.2003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Chen C-YA
    2. Shyu A-B

    (2011) Mechanisms of deadenylation-dependent decay

    Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. RNA 2:167–183.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/wrna.40

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Chen C-YA
    2. Shyu A-B

    (2017) Emerging Themes in Regulation of Global mRNA Turnover in cis

    Trends in Biochemical Sciences 42:16–27.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2016.08.014

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Cho H
    2. Kim KM
    3. Kim YK

    (2009) Human proline-rich nuclear receptor coregulatory protein 2 mediates an interaction between mRNA surveillance machinery and decapping complex

    Molecular Cell 33:75–86.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2008.11.022

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Cho H
    2. Han S
    3. Choe J
    4. Park SG
    5. Choi SS
    6. Kim YK

    (2013) SMG5-PNRC2 is functionally dominant compared with SMG5-SMG7 in mammalian nonsense-mediated mRNA decay

    Nucleic Acids Research 41:1319–1328.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks1222

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Corbett AH

    (2018) Post-transcriptional regulation of gene expression and human disease

    Current Opinion in Cell Biology 52:96–104.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceb.2018.02.011

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Croft D
    2. O’Kelly G
    3. Wu G
    4. Haw R
    5. Gillespie M
    6. Matthews L
    7. Caudy M
    8. Garapati P
    9. Gopinath G
    10. Jassal B
    11. Jupe S
    12. Kalatskaya I
    13. Mahajan S
    14. May B
    15. Ndegwa N
    16. Schmidt E
    17. Shamovsky V
    18. Yung C
    19. Birney E
    20. Hermjakob H
    21. D’Eustachio P
    22. Stein L

    (2011) Reactome: a database of reactions, pathways and biological processes

    Nucleic Acids Research 39:D691–D697.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkq1018

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Decker CJ
    2. Parker R

    (1993) A turnover pathway for both stable and unstable mRNAs in yeast: evidence for A requirement for deadenylation

    Genes & Development 7:1632–1643.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.7.8.1632

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Deshmukh MV
    2. Jones BN
    3. Quang-Dang DU
    4. Flinders J
    5. Floor SN
    6. Kim C
    7. Jemielity J
    8. Kalek M
    9. Darzynkiewicz E
    10. Gross JD

    (2008) mRNA decapping is promoted by an RNA-binding channel in Dcp2

    Molecular Cell 29:324–336.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2007.11.027

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Dunckley T
    2. Parker R

    (1999) The DCP2 protein is required for mRNA decapping in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and contains a functional MutT motif

    The EMBO Journal 18:5411–5422.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/18.19.5411

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Eberle AB
    2. Lykke-Andersen S
    3. Mühlemann O
    4. Jensen TH

    (2009) SMG6 promotes endonucleolytic cleavage of nonsense mRNA in human cells

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 16:49–55.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.1530

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Eulalio A
    2. Behm-Ansmant I
    3. Izaurralde E

    (2007) P bodies: at the crossroads of post-transcriptional pathways

    Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology 8:9–22.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2080

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Fenger-Grøn M
    2. Fillman C
    3. Norrild B
    4. Lykke-Andersen J

    (2005) Multiple processing body factors and the ARE binding protein TTP activate mRNA decapping

    Molecular Cell 20:905–915.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2005.10.031

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Floor SN
    2. Jones BN
    3. Hernandez GA
    4. Gross JD

    (2010) A split active site couples cap recognition by Dcp2 to activation

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 17:1096–1101.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.1879

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Fourati Z
    2. Kolesnikova O
    3. Back R
    4. Keller J
    5. Charenton C
    6. Taverniti V
    7. Plesse CG
    8. Lazar N
    9. Durand D
    10. van Tilbeurgh H
    11. Séraphin B
    12. Graille M

    (2014) The C-terminal domain from S. cerevisiae Pat1 displays two conserved regions involved in decapping factor recruitment

    PLOS ONE 9:e96828.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0096828

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Frankish A
    2. Diekhans M
    3. Ferreira A-M
    4. Johnson R
    5. Jungreis I
    6. Loveland J
    7. Mudge JM
    8. Sisu C
    9. Wright J
    10. Armstrong J
    11. Barnes I
    12. Berry A
    13. Bignell A
    14. Carbonell Sala S
    15. Chrast J
    16. Cunningham F
    17. Di Domenico T
    18. Donaldson S
    19. Fiddes IT
    20. García Girón C
    21. Gonzalez JM
    22. Grego T
    23. Hardy M
    24. Hourlier T
    25. Hunt T
    26. Izuogu OG
    27. Lagarde J
    28. Martin FJ
    29. Martínez L
    30. Mohanan S
    31. Muir P
    32. Navarro FCP
    33. Parker A
    34. Pei B
    35. Pozo F
    36. Ruffier M
    37. Schmitt BM
    38. Stapleton E
    39. Suner M-M
    40. Sycheva I
    41. Uszczynska-Ratajczak B
    42. Xu J
    43. Yates A
    44. Zerbino D
    45. Zhang Y
    46. Aken B
    47. Choudhary JS
    48. Gerstein M
    49. Guigó R
    50. Hubbard TJP
    51. Kellis M
    52. Paten B
    53. Reymond A
    54. Tress ML
    55. Flicek P

    (2019) GENCODE reference annotation for the human and mouse genomes

    Nucleic Acids Research 47:D766–D773.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky955

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Fromm SA
    2. Truffault V
    3. Kamenz J
    4. Braun JE
    5. Hoffmann NA
    6. Izaurralde E
    7. Sprangers R

    (2012) The structural basis of Edc3- and Scd6-mediated activation of the Dcp1:Dcp2 mRNA decapping complex

    The EMBO Journal 31:279–290.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2011.408

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Fukuhara N
    2. Ebert J
    3. Unterholzner L
    4. Lindner D
    5. Izaurralde E
    6. Conti E

    (2005) SMG7 is a 14-3-3-like adaptor in the nonsense-mediated mRNA decay pathway

    Molecular Cell 17:537–547.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2005.01.010

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Furuichi Y
    2. LaFiandra A
    3. Shatkin AJ

    (1977) 5’-Terminal structure and mRNA stability

    Nature 266:235–239.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/266235a0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Garneau NL
    2. Wilusz J
    3. Wilusz CJ

    (2007) The highways and byways of mRNA decay

    Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology 8:113–126.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2104

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Gaviraghi M
    2. Vivori C
    3. Pareja Sanchez Y
    4. Invernizzi F
    5. Cattaneo A
    6. Santoliquido BM
    7. Frenquelli M
    8. Segalla S
    9. Bachi A
    10. Doglioni C
    11. Pelechano V
    12. Cittaro D
    13. Tonon G

    (2018) Tumor suppressor PNRC1 blocks rRNA maturation by recruiting the decapping complex to the nucleolus

    The EMBO Journal 37:e99179.

    https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201899179

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Gu Z
    2. Eils R
    3. Schlesner M

    (2016) Complex heatmaps reveal patterns and correlations in multidimensional genomic data

    Bioinformatics 32:2847–2849.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btw313

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Guijas C
    2. Montenegro-Burke JR
    3. Domingo-Almenara X
    4. Palermo A
    5. Warth B
    6. Hermann G
    7. Koellensperger G
    8. Huan T
    9. Uritboonthai W
    10. Aisporna AE
    11. Wolan DW
    12. Spilker ME
    13. Benton HP
    14. Siuzdak G

    (2018) METLIN: A technology platform for identifying knowns and unknowns

    Analytical Chemistry 90:3156–3164.

    https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.7b04424

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. He F
    2. Jacobson A

    (2015) Control of mRNA decapping by positive and negative regulatory elements in the Dcp2 C-terminal domain

    RNA 21:1633–1647.

    https://doi.org/10.1261/rna.052449.115

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. He F
    2. Wu C
    3. Jacobson A

    (2022) Dcp2 C-terminal cis-binding elements control selective targeting of the decapping enzyme by forming distinct decapping complexes

    eLife 11:e74410.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.74410

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. He F
    2. Jacobson A

    (2023) Eukaryotic mRNA decapping factors: molecular mechanisms and activity

    The FEBS Journal 290:5057–5085.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.16626

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Hsu CL
    2. Stevens A

    (1993) Yeast cells lacking 5’-->3’ exoribonuclease 1 contain mRNA species that are poly(A) deficient and partially lack the 5’ cap structure

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 13:4826–4835.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.13.8.4826-4835.1993

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Huntzinger E
    2. Kashima I
    3. Fauser M
    4. Saulière J
    5. Izaurralde E

    (2008) SMG6 is the catalytic endonuclease that cleaves mRNAs containing nonsense codons in metazoan

    RNA 14:2609–2617.

    https://doi.org/10.1261/rna.1386208

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Ibayashi M
    2. Aizawa R
    3. Tsukamoto S

    (2021) mRNA decapping factor Dcp1a is essential for embryonic growth in mice

    Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 555:128–133.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2021.03.117

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Jakymiw A
    2. Lian S
    3. Eystathioy T
    4. Li S
    5. Satoh M
    6. Hamel JC
    7. Fritzler MJ
    8. Chan EKL

    (2005) Disruption of GW bodies impairs mammalian RNA interference

    Nature Cell Biology 7:1267–1274.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb1334

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Jonas S
    2. Izaurralde E

    (2013) The role of disordered protein regions in the assembly of decapping complexes and RNP granules

    Genes & Development 27:2628–2641.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.227843.113

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Jonas S
    2. Izaurralde E

    (2015) Towards a molecular understanding of microRNA-mediated gene silencing

    Nature Reviews. Genetics 16:421–433.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3965

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Kanehisa M
    2. Goto S

    (2000) KEGG: Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes

    Nucleic Acids Research 28:27–30.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/28.1.27

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Lai T
    2. Cho H
    3. Liu Z
    4. Bowler MW
    5. Piao S
    6. Parker R
    7. Kim YK
    8. Song H

    (2012) Structural basis of the pnrc2-mediated link between mrna surveillance and decapping

    Structure 20:2025–2037.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2012.09.009

    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Lall S
    2. Piano F
    3. Davis RE

    (2005) Caenorhabditis elegans decapping proteins: localization and functional analysis of Dcp1, Dcp2, and DcpS during embryogenesis

    Molecular Biology of the Cell 16:5880–5890.

    https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.e05-07-0622

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Li B
    2. Dewey CN

    (2011) RSEM: accurate transcript quantification from RNA-Seq data with or without a reference genome

    BMC Bioinformatics 12:323.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-323

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Lim J
    2. Lee M
    3. Son A
    4. Chang H
    5. Kim VN

    (2016) mTAIL-seq reveals dynamic poly(A) tail regulation in oocyte-to-embryo development

    Genes & Development 30:1671–1682.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.284802.116

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Ling SHM
    2. Qamra R
    3. Song H

    (2011) Structural and functional insights into eukaryotic mRNA decapping

    Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. RNA 2:193–208.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/wrna.44

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Lobel JH
    2. Tibble RW
    3. Gross JD

    (2019) Pat1 activates late steps in mRNA decay by multiple mechanisms

    PNAS 116:23512–23517.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1905455116

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Lobel JH
    2. Gross JD

    (2020) Pdc2/Pat1 increases the range of decay factors and RNA bound by the Lsm1-7 complex

    RNA 26:1380–1388.

    https://doi.org/10.1261/rna.075812.120

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Loh B
    2. Jonas S
    3. Izaurralde E

    (2013) The SMG5-SMG7 heterodimer directly recruits the CCR4-NOT deadenylase complex to mRNAs containing nonsense codons via interaction with POP2

    Genes & Development 27:2125–2138.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.226951.113

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Love MI
    2. Huber W
    3. Anders S

    (2014) Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2

    Genome Biology 15:550.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-014-0550-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Luo Y
    2. Na Z
    3. Slavoff SA

    (2018) P-bodies: composition, properties, and functions

    Biochemistry 57:2424–2431.

    https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.7b01162

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Luo Y
    2. Schofield JA
    3. Na Z
    4. Hann T
    5. Simon MD
    6. Slavoff SA

    (2021) Discovery of cellular substrates of human RNA-decapping enzyme DCP2 using a stapled bicyclic peptide inhibitor

    Cell Chemical Biology 28:463–474.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chembiol.2020.12.003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Lykke-Andersen J
    2. Shu MD
    3. Steitz JA

    (2000) Human Upf proteins target an mRNA for nonsense-mediated decay when bound downstream of a termination codon

    Cell 103:1121–1131.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(00)00214-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Lykke-Andersen J

    (2002) Identification of a human decapping complex associated with hUpf proteins in nonsense-mediated decay

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 22:8114–8121.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.22.23.8114-8121.2002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Metze S
    2. Herzog VA
    3. Ruepp M-D
    4. Mühlemann O

    (2013) Comparison of EJC-enhanced and EJC-independent NMD in human cells reveals two partially redundant degradation pathways

    RNA 19:1432–1448.

    https://doi.org/10.1261/rna.038893.113

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Mugridge JS
    2. Ziemniak M
    3. Jemielity J
    4. Gross JD

    (2016) Structural basis of mRNA-cap recognition by Dcp1-Dcp2

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 23:987–994.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.3301

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Mugridge JS
    2. Coller J
    3. Gross JD

    (2018a) Structural and molecular mechanisms for the control of eukaryotic 5’-3’ mRNA decay

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 25:1077–1085.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-018-0164-z

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Mugridge JS
    2. Tibble RW
    3. Ziemniak M
    4. Jemielity J
    5. Gross JD

    (2018b) Structure of the activated Edc1-Dcp1-Dcp2-Edc3 mRNA decapping complex with substrate analog poised for catalysis

    Nature Communications 9:1152.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03536-x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Ng CKL
    2. Shboul M
    3. Taverniti V
    4. Bonnard C
    5. Lee H
    6. Eskin A
    7. Nelson SF
    8. Al-Raqad M
    9. Altawalbeh S
    10. Séraphin B
    11. Reversade B

    (2015) Loss of the scavenger mRNA decapping enzyme DCPS causes syndromic intellectual disability with neuromuscular defects

    Human Molecular Genetics 24:3163–3171.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddv067

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Piccirillo C
    2. Khanna R
    3. Kiledjian M

    (2003) Functional characterization of the mammalian mRNA decapping enzyme hDcp2

    RNA 9:1138–1147.

    https://doi.org/10.1261/rna.5690503

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Rohart F
    2. Gautier B
    3. Singh A
    4. Lê Cao K-A

    (2017) mixOmics: An R package for ’omics feature selection and multiple data integration

    PLOS Computational Biology 13:e1005752.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005752

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Sakuno T
    2. Araki Y
    3. Ohya Y
    4. Kofuji S
    5. Takahashi S
    6. Hoshino S
    7. Katada T

    (2004) Decapping reaction of mRNA requires Dcp1 in fission yeast: its characterization in different species from yeast to human

    Journal of Biochemistry 136:805–812.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/jb/mvh190

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Schofield JA
    2. Duffy EE
    3. Kiefer L
    4. Sullivan MC
    5. Simon MD

    (2018) TimeLapse-seq: adding a temporal dimension to RNA sequencing through nucleoside recoding

    Nature Methods 15:221–225.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4582

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Sgromo A
    2. Raisch T
    3. Backhaus C
    4. Keskeny C
    5. Alva V
    6. Weichenrieder O
    7. Izaurralde E

    (2018) Drosophila Bag-of-marbles directly interacts with the CAF40 subunit of the CCR4-NOT complex to elicit repression of mRNA targets

    RNA 24:381–395.

    https://doi.org/10.1261/rna.064584.117

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Sharif H
    2. Conti E

    (2013) Architecture of the Lsm1-7-Pat1 complex: a conserved assembly in eukaryotic mRNA turnover

    Cell Reports 5:283–291.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2013.10.004

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
72. 1. She M
    2. Decker CJ
    3. Chen N
    4. Tumati S
    5. Parker R
    6. Song H

    (2006) Crystal structure and functional analysis of Dcp2p from Schizosaccharomyces pombe

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 13:63–70.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb1033

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
73. 1. She M
    2. Decker CJ
    3. Svergun DI
    4. Round A
    5. Chen N
    6. Muhlrad D
    7. Parker R
    8. Song H

    (2008) Structural basis of dcp2 recognition and activation by dcp1

    Molecular Cell 29:337–349.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2008.01.002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Steiger M
    2. Carr-Schmid A
    3. Schwartz DC
    4. Kiledjian M
    5. Parker R

    (2003) Analysis of recombinant yeast decapping enzyme

    RNA 9:231–238.

    https://doi.org/10.1261/rna.2151403

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Stevens A

    (1988) mRNA-decapping enzyme from Saccharomyces cerevisiae: purification and unique specificity for long RNA chains

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 8:2005–2010.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.8.5.2005-2010.1988

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Subramanian A
    2. Tamayo P
    3. Mootha VK
    4. Mukherjee S
    5. Ebert BL
    6. Gillette MA
    7. Paulovich A
    8. Pomeroy SL
    9. Golub TR
    10. Lander ES
    11. Mesirov JP

    (2005) Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles

    PNAS 102:15545–15550.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0506580102

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Subtelny AO
    2. Eichhorn SW
    3. Chen GR
    4. Sive H
    5. Bartel DP

    (2014) Poly(A)-tail profiling reveals an embryonic switch in translational control

    Nature 508:66–71.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13007

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. The Gene Ontology C

    (2019) The gene ontology resource: 20 years and still going strong

    Nucleic Acids Research 47:D330–D338.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky1055

    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Tibble RW
    2. Depaix A
    3. Kowalska J
    4. Jemielity J
    5. Gross JD

    (2021) Biomolecular condensates amplify mRNA decapping by biasing enzyme conformation

    Nature Chemical Biology 17:615–623.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41589-021-00774-x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Topisirovic I
    2. Svitkin YV
    3. Sonenberg N
    4. Shatkin AJ

    (2011) Cap and cap-binding proteins in the control of gene expression

    Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. RNA 2:277–298.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/wrna.52

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Tritschler F
    2. Eulalio A
    3. Truffault V
    4. Hartmann MD
    5. Helms S
    6. Schmidt S
    7. Coles M
    8. Izaurralde E
    9. Weichenrieder O

    (2007) A divergent Sm fold in EDC3 proteins mediates DCP1 binding and P-body targeting

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 27:8600–8611.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.01506-07

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. 1. Valkov E
    2. Muthukumar S
    3. Chang CT
    4. Jonas S
    5. Weichenrieder O
    6. Izaurralde E

    (2016) Structure of the Dcp2-Dcp1 mRNA-decapping complex in the activated conformation

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 23:574–579.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.3232

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
83. 1. van Dijk E
    2. Cougot N
    3. Meyer S
    4. Babajko S
    5. Wahle E
    6. Séraphin B

    (2002) Human Dcp2: a catalytically active mRNA decapping enzyme located in specific cytoplasmic structures

    The EMBO Journal 21:6915–6924.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/cdf678

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
84. 1. Vidya E
    2. Duchaine TF

    (2022) Eukaryotic mRNA Decapping Activation

    Frontiers in Genetics 13:832547.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.832547

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
85. 1. Viegas JO
    2. Fishman L
    3. Meshorer E
    4. Rabani M

    (2023) Calculating RNA degradation rates using large-scale normalization in mouse embryonic stem cells

    STAR Protocols 4:102534.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xpro.2023.102534

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
86. 1. Wang Z
    2. Jiao X
    3. Carr-Schmid A
    4. Kiledjian M

    (2002) The hDcp2 protein is a mammalian mRNA decapping enzyme

    PNAS 99:12663–12668.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.192445599

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Weber R
    2. Chang C-T

    (2024) Human DDX6 regulates translation and decay of inefficiently translated mRNAs

    eLife 13:RP92426.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.92426

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
88. 1. Webster MW
    2. Chen YH
    3. Stowell JAW
    4. Alhusaini N
    5. Sweet T
    6. Graveley BR
    7. Coller J
    8. Passmore LA

    (2018) mRNA deadenylation is coupled to translation rates by the differential activities of ccr4-not nucleases

    Molecular Cell 70:1089–1100.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.033

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
89. 1. Weinstein JN
    2. Collisson EA
    3. Mills GB
    4. Shaw KRM
    5. Ozenberger BA
    6. Ellrott K
    7. Shmulevich I
    8. Sander C
    9. Stuart JM
    10. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network

    (2013) The cancer genome atlas pan-cancer analysis project

    Nature Genetics 45:1113–1120.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2764

    • Google Scholar
90. Book

    1. Wickham H

    (2016) Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis

    Springer-Verlag.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4

    • Google Scholar
91. 1. Wishart DS
    2. Feunang YD
    3. Marcu A
    4. Guo AC
    5. Liang K
    6. Vázquez-Fresno R
    7. Sajed T
    8. Johnson D
    9. Li C
    10. Karu N
    11. Sayeeda Z
    12. Lo E
    13. Assempour N
    14. Berjanskii M
    15. Singhal S
    16. Arndt D
    17. Liang Y
    18. Badran H
    19. Grant J
    20. Serra-Cayuela A
    21. Liu Y
    22. Mandal R
    23. Neveu V
    24. Pon A
    25. Knox C
    26. Wilson M
    27. Manach C
    28. Scalbert A

    (2018) HMDB 4.0: the human metabolome database for 2018

    Nucleic Acids Research 46:D608–D617.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkx1089

    • Google Scholar
92. 1. Wu D
    2. Muhlrad D
    3. Bowler MW
    4. Jiang S
    5. Liu Z
    6. Parker R
    7. Song H

    (2014) Lsm2 and Lsm3 bridge the interaction of the Lsm1-7 complex with Pat1 for decapping activation

    Cell Research 24:233–246.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/cr.2013.152

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
93. 1. Wu C
    2. Zhu X
    3. Tao K
    4. Liu W
    5. Ruan T
    6. Wan W
    7. Zhang C
    8. Zhang W

    (2018) MALAT1 promotes the colorectal cancer malignancy by increasing DCP1A expression and miR203 downregulation

    Molecular Carcinogenesis 57:1421–1431.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/mc.22868

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
94. 1. Wu T
    2. Hu E
    3. Xu S
    4. Chen M
    5. Guo P
    6. Dai Z
    7. Feng T
    8. Zhou L
    9. Tang W
    10. Zhan L
    11. Fu X
    12. Liu S
    13. Bo X
    14. Yu G

    (2021a) clusterProfiler 4.0: A universal enrichment tool for interpreting omics data

    Innovation 2:100141.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xinn.2021.100141

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
95. 1. Wu H
    2. Zhang J
    3. Bai Y
    4. Zhang S
    5. Zhang Z
    6. Tong W
    7. Han P
    8. Fu B
    9. Zhang Y
    10. Shen Z

    (2021b) DCP1A is an unfavorable prognostic-related enhancer RNA in hepatocellular carcinoma

    Aging 13:23020–23035.

    https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.203593

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
96. 1. Wu HW
    2. Wu JD
    3. Yeh YP
    4. Wu TH
    5. Chao CH
    6. Wang W
    7. Chen TW

    (2023) DoSurvive: A webtool for investigating the prognostic power of A single or combined cancer biomarker

    iScience 26:107269.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.107269

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
97. 1. Wurm JP
    2. Holdermann I
    3. Overbeck JH
    4. Mayer PHO
    5. Sprangers R

    (2017) Changes in conformational equilibria regulate the activity of the Dcp2 decapping enzyme

    PNAS 114:6034–6039.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704496114

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
98. 1. Xu J
    2. Yang JY
    3. Niu QW
    4. Chua NH

    (2006) Arabidopsis DCP2, DCP1, and VARICOSE form a decapping complex required for postembryonic development

    The Plant Cell 18:3386–3398.

    https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.106.047605

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
99. 1. Yi H
    2. Park J
    3. Ha M
    4. Lim J
    5. Chang H
    6. Kim VN

    (2018) PABP cooperates with the ccr4-not complex to promote mrna deadenylation and block precocious decay

    Molecular Cell 70:1081–1088.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.009

    • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Ting-Wen Chen

   1. Institute of Bioinformatics and Systems Biology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan
   2. Department of Biological Science and Technology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan
   3. Center for Intelligent Drug Systems and Smart Bio-devices (IDS2 B), National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan

   Contribution

   Data curation, Software, Formal analysis, Visualization, Methodology, Writing - original draft, Writing - review and editing

   Contributed equally with

   Hsiao-Wei Liao

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

2. Hsiao-Wei Liao

   Department of Pharmacy, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei City, Taiwan

   Contribution

   Resources, Data curation, Software, Formal analysis, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing - original draft, Writing - review and editing

   Contributed equally with

   Ting-Wen Chen

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

3. Michelle Noble

   Department of Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology, Tübingen, Germany

   Contribution

   Resources, Data curation, Formal analysis, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Writing - review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

4. Jing-Yi Siao

   Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan

   Contribution

   Data curation, Formal analysis, Validation, Visualization, Writing - original draft

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

5. Yu-Hsuan Cheng

   Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan

   Contribution

   Formal analysis, Validation, Visualization, Writing - review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

6. Wei-Chung Chiang

   Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan

   Contribution

   Resources, Data curation, Software, Methodology

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

7. Yi-Tzu Lo

   Institute of Bioinformatics and Systems Biology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan

   Contribution

   Formal analysis, Visualization

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

8. Chung-Te Chang

   1. Department of Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology, Tübingen, Germany
   2. Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Resources, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Writing - original draft, Project administration, Writing - review and editing

   For correspondence

   chungte.chang@gmail.com

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4792-1646

• 806

  views

• 64

  downloads

• 0

  citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.