Back

Kinetic logic of uridylation-mediated RNA decay

Sgromo, A.; Jordan, B. M.; Aerestad, A.; Moersdorf, D.; Boneberg, F.; Jinek, M.; Burkard, T. R.; Popitsch, N.; Ameres, S. L.

2026-03-27 biochemistry
10.64898/2026.03.27.714668 bioRxiv
Show abstract

3'-terminal uridylation marks structured non-coding RNAs for cytoplasmic decay, yet how uridylation is quantitatively coupled to exonucleolytic degradation remains unclear. Here, we dissect the kinetic logic of uridylation-mediated RNA surveillance in Drosophila melanogaster. Using biochemical reconstitution together with high-throughput enzymology and quantitative modeling, we show that the terminal uridylyl transferase Tailor generates discrete oligo(U) intermediates through product-dependent kinetic tuning, while co-substrate promiscuity suppresses sustained processivity under physiological nucleotide conditions. Massively parallel binding and decay assays further reveal how the 3'-to-5' exoribonuclease Dis3l2 selectively degrades Tailor-primed RNAs by integrating 3'-proximal uridine content and defined 3'-end accessibility--features encoded by short, kinetically tuned oligo(U) intermediates centered on four nucleotides--to enable productive threading of RNA substrates along an extended RNA-binding path to the catalytic site. Together, our findings establish a quantitative framework in which uridylation encodes decay competence through transient RNA 3'-end states that are matched to the mechanistic requirements for decay. HighlightsO_LIThe TUTase Tailor kinetically tunes uridylation to generate short, discrete oligo(U) intermediates C_LIO_LIMixed nucleotide availability suppresses sustained processive uridylation C_LIO_LIDis3l2 decodes 3'-proximal uridine content and end accessibility to commit RNAs to decay C_LIO_LIShort oligo(U) tails encode RNA decay competence through transient RNA 3'-end states C_LI

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.