In eukaryotic cells, efficient translation of most cellular mRNAs requires the synergistic interplay between the m7GpppN cap structure and the poly(A) tail during initiation. We have developed and characterized a cell-free system from human HeLa cells that recapitulates this important feature, displaying more than one order of magnitude of translational synergism between the cap structure and the poly(A) tail. The stimulation of cap-dependent translation by the poly(A) tail is length-dependent, but not mediated by changes in mRNA stability. Using this system, we investigated the effect of the poly(A) tail on the translation of picornaviral RNAs, which are naturally polyadenylated but initiate translation via internal ribosome entry sites (IRESs). We show that translation driven by the IRESs of poliovirus (PV), encephalomyocarditis virus (EMCV), and hepatitis A virus is also significantly augmented by a poly(A) tail, ranging from an approximately 3-fold stimulation for the EMCV-IRES to a more than 10-fold effect for the PV IRES. These results raise interesting questions concerning the underlying molecular mechanism(s). The cell-free system described here should prove useful in studying these questions as well as providing a general biochemical tool to examine the translation initiation pathway in a more physiological setting.

The strategies developed by internal ribosome entry site (IRES) elements to recruit the translational machinery are poorly understood. In this study we show that protein–RNA interaction of the eIF4G translation initiation factor with sequences of the foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) IRES is a key determinant of internal translation initiation in living cells. Moreover, we have identified the nucleotides required for eIF4G-RNA functional interaction, using native proteins from FMDV-susceptible cell extracts. Substitutions in the conserved internal AA loop of the base of domain 4 led to strong impairment of both eIF4G-RNA interaction in vitro and IRES-dependent translation initiation in vivo. Conversely, substitutions in the vicinity of the internal AA loop that did not impair IRES activity retained their ability to interact with eIF4G. Direct UV-crosslinking as well as competition assays indicated that domains 1–2, 3, and 5 of the IRES did not contribute to this interaction. In agreement with this, binding to domain 4 alone was as efficient as to the full-length IRES. The C-terminal fragment of eIF4G, proteolytically processed by the FMDV Lb protease, was sufficient to interact with the IRES or to its domain 4 alone. Additionally, we show here that binding of the eIF4B initiation factor to the IRES required domain 5 sequences. Moreover, eIF4G-IRES interaction was detected in the absence of eIF4B-IRES binding, suggesting that both initiation factors interact with the 3′ region of the IRES but use different residues. The strong correlation found between eIF4G-RNA interaction and IRES activity in transfected cells suggests that eIF4G acts as a linker to recruit the translational machinery in IRES-dependent initiation.