Ribosome mediated mRNA translation is central to life. The cycle of translation, however, has been characterized mostly using reconstituted systems, with only few techniques applicable for studies in the living cell. Here we describe a live-cell ribosome-labeling method, which allows us to characterize the whole processes of finding and translating an mRNA, using single-molecule tracking techniques. We find that more than 90% of both bacterial ribosomal subunits are engaged in translation at any particular time, and that the 30S and 50S ribosomal subunits spend the same average time bound to an mRNA, revealing that 30S re-initiation on poly-cistronic mRNAs is not prevalent in E. coli. Instead, our results are best explained by substantial 70S re-initiation of translation of poly-cistronic mRNAs, which is further corroborated by experiments with translation initiation inhibitors. Finally, we find that a variety of previously described orthogonal ribosomes, with altered anti-Shine-Dalgarno sequences, show significant binding to endogenous mRNAs.

The ordered structure of UV chromophores in DNA resembles photosynthetic light-harvesting complexes in which quantum coherence effects play a major role in highly efficient directional energy transfer. The possible role of coherent excitons in energy transport in DNA remains debated. Meanwhile, energy transport properties are greatly important for understanding the mechanisms of photochemical reactions in cellular DNA and for DNA-based artificial nanostructures. Here, we studied energy transfer in DNA complexes formed with silver nanoclusters and with intercalating dye (acridine orange). Steady-state fluorescence measurements with two DNA templates (15-mer DNA duplex and calf thymus DNA) showed that excitation energy can be transferred to the clusters from 21 and 28 nucleobases, respectively. This differed from the DNA–acridine orange complex for which energy transfer took place from four neighboring bases only. Fluorescence up-conversion measurements showed that the energy transfer took place within 100 fs. The efficient energy transport in the Ag–DNA complexes suggests an excitonic mechanism for the transfer, such that the excitation is delocalized over at least four and seven stacked bases, respectively, in one strand of the duplexes stabilizing the clusters. This result demonstrates that the exciton delocalization length in some DNA structures may not be limited to just two bases.

The spread of antibiotic resistance is turning many of the currently used antibiotics less effective against common infections. To address this public health challenge, it is critical to enhance our understanding of the mechanisms of action of these compounds. Aminoglycoside drugs bind the bacterial ribosome, and decades of results from in vitro biochemical and structural approaches suggest that these drugs disrupt protein synthesis by inhibiting the ribosome’s translocation on the messenger RNA, as well as by inducing miscoding errors. So far, however, we have sparse information about the dynamic effects of these compounds on protein synthesis inside the cell. In the present study, we measured the effect of the aminoglycosides apramycin, gentamicin, and paromomycin on ongoing protein synthesis directly in live Escherichia coli cells by tracking the binding of dye-labeled transfer RNAs to ribosomes. Our results suggest that the drugs slow down translation elongation two- to fourfold in general, and the number of elongation cycles per initiation event seems to decrease to the same extent. Hence, our results imply that none of the drugs used in this study cause severe inhibition of translocation. Significance To address the public health challenges caused by the spread of antibiotic resistance, it is critical to enhance our understanding of the mechanisms of action of these compounds. In the present study, we use superresolved single-molecule tracking techniques, to investigate the effect of three aminoglycoside drugs on protein synthesis kinetics directly inside live bacterial cells. Our results imply that these drugs do not completely inhibit bacterial protein synthesis, but only make it slower. Hence, the bactericidal effect of these drugs is likely due to a disturbed, rather than inhibited, protein synthesis process.