# Pervasive translation of Xrn1-sensitive unstable long non-coding RNAs in yeast

Sara Andjus, Ugo Szachnowski, Nicolas Vogt, Stamatia Gioftsidi, Isabelle Hatin, David Cornu, Chris Papadopoulos, Anne Lopes, Olivier Namy, Maxime Wery, et al.

► To cite this version:

Sara Andjus, Ugo Szachnowski, Nicolas Vogt, Stamatia Gioftsidi, Isabelle Hatin, et al. Pervasive translation of Xrn1-sensitive unstable long non-coding RNAs in yeast. RNA, 2024, 30, pp.662-679. 10.1261/rna.079903.123. hal-04765900

HAL Id: hal-04765900

https://hal.science/hal-04765900v1

Submitted on 4 Nov 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Pervasive translation of Xrn1-sensitive unstable long
noncoding RNAs in yeast

SARA ANDJUS,<sup>1,4</sup> UGO SZACHNOWSKI,<sup>2,4</sup> NICOLAS VOGT,<sup>2</sup> STAMATIA GIOFTSIDI,<sup>2</sup> ISABELLE HATIN,<sup>3</sup> DAVID CORNU,<sup>3</sup> CHRIS PAPADOPOULOS,<sup>3</sup> ANNE LOPES,<sup>3</sup> OLIVIER NAMY,<sup>3</sup> MAXIME WERY,<sup>2,5</sup> and ANTONIN MORILLON<sup>2,5</sup>

ABSTRACT

Despite being predicted to lack coding potential, cytoplasmic long noncoding (Inc)RNAs can associate with ribosomes. However, the landscape and biological relevance of IncRNA translation remain poorly studied. In yeast, cytoplasmic Xrn1-sensitive unstable transcripts (XUTs) are targeted by nonsense-mediated mRNA decay (NMD), suggesting a translation-dependent degradation process. Here, we report that XUTs are pervasively translated, which impacts their decay. We show that XUTs globally accumulate upon translation elongation inhibition, but not when initial ribosome loading is impaired. Ribo-seq confirmed ribosomes binding to XUTs and identified ribosome-associated 5'-proximal small ORFs. Mechanistically, the NMD-sensitivity of XUTs mainly depends on the 3'-untranslated region length. Finally, we show that the peptide resulting from the translation of an NMD-sensitive XUT reporter exists in NMD-competent cells. Our work highlights the role of translation in the posttranscriptional metabolism of XUTs. We propose that XUT-derived peptides could be exposed to natural selection, while NMD restricts XUT levels.

Keywords: IncRNA; Xrn1; NMD; translation

INTRODUCTION

Long noncoding (Inc)RNAs arise from the pervasive transcrip-
tion of eukaryotic genomes (Jarroux et al. 2017). Although the
debate on their functional significance is still ongoing
(Ponting and Haerty 2022), some of them are now recognized
as important RNA regulators involved in multiple cellular func-
tions (Wery et al. 2011; Kopp and Mendell 2018; Yao et al.
2019; Statello et al. 2021). Consistent with their functional im-
portance, their expression appears to be precisely controlled
(Djebali et al. 2012; Lorenzi et al. 2021). Furthermore, the ab-
normal expression of IncRNAs is associated with human dis-
eases, including cancers (Schmitt and Chang 2016;
Renganathan and Felley-Bosco 2017; Saha et al. 2017).
However, a full mechanistic description is still required to un-
derstand the raison d'être of IncRNAs in cells, as well as the
molecular mechanisms regulating their expression.

By definition, IncRNAs are predicted to lack coding po-
tential. However, this assumption has been challenged by
several independent observations, showing that cytoplas-
mic IncRNAs can associate with ribosomes (Ingolia et al.
2011, 2014; Smith et al. 2014; van Heesch et al. 2014;
Carlevaro-Fita et al. 2016). In fact, ribosome profiling
(Ribo-seq) analyses identified small open reading frames
(smORFs) on subsets of IncRNAs (Aspden et al. 2014;
Ingolia et al. 2014; Smith et al. 2014; Chen et al. 2020;
Chothani et al. 2022), resulting in some cases in the produc-
tion of functional peptides (Slavoff et al. 2013; Zanet et al.
2015; D'Lima et al. 2017; Matsumoto et al. 2017; van
Heesch et al. 2019).

Apart from such examples of functional IncRNA-derived
peptides, which are scarce to date, the extent and biological
relevance of IncRNA translation remain unclear. An emerg-
ing view in the field proposes that IncRNAs could constitute
a reservoir of rapidly evolving smORFs which the cell could
exploit as a source of potential genetic novelty by producing
novel peptides (Ruiz-Orera et al. 2014). If beneficial, IncRNA-

<footnote n="1">¹ncRNA, Epigenetic and Genome Fluidity, Institut Curie, PSL University, Sorbonne Université, CNRS UMR3244, F-75248 Paris Cedex 05, France</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²ncRNA, Epigenetic and Genome Fluidity, Institut Curie, Sorbonne Université, CNRS UMR3244, F-75248 Paris Cedex 05, France</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, CNRS, Institute for Integrative Biology of the Cell (I2BC), 91198 Gif-sur-Yvette, France</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴Co-first authors.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵Co-last authors.</footnote>

<footnote>Corresponding authors: maxime.wery@curie.fr,
antonin.morillon@curie.fr</footnote>

<footnote>Handling editor: Ling-Ling Chen</footnote>

<footnote>Article is online at http://www.rmajournal.org/cgi/doi/10.1261/rna
.079903.123. Freely available online through the RNA Open Access
option.</footnote>

<footnote>© 2024 Andjus et al. This article, published in RNA, is available
under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0
International), as described at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by-nc/4.0/.</footnote>
derived peptides could be selected, thereby contributing to
the emergence of novel protein-coding genes through the
evolutionary process known as de novo gene birth
(Carvunis et al. 2012; Zhao et al. 2014; McLysaght and
Hurst 2016; Schmitz et al. 2018; Van Oss and Carvunis
2019; Blevins et al. 2021; Papadopoulos et al. 2021).

In the budding yeast *Saccharomyces cerevisiae*, the idea
that cytoplasmic IncRNAs can be translated has been sug-
gested by the observation that they are degraded through
nonsense-mediated mRNA decay (NMD). NMD is a con-
served translation-dependent RNA decay pathway known
to target mRNAs bearing premature termination codons
(PTCs) in the ORF as well as "normal" mRNAs with a long
3' untranslated region (UTR) (Muhlrad and Parker 1999;
Amrani et al. 2004; Kebaara and Atkin 2009; Celik et al.
2017). Nevertheless, such "aberrant" transcripts represent
only one type of NMD substrate (Smith and Baker 2015;
Andjus et al. 2021). In fact, 70% of yeast cytoplasmic
IncRNAs, known as Xrn1-sensitive unstable transcripts
(XUTs) due to their extensive degradation by the cytoplas-
mic 5'-exonuclease Xrn1 (Van Dijk et al. 2011), were shown
to be NMD substrates (Malabat et al. 2015; Wery et al.
2016). However, direct experimental evidence that XUTs
are globally translated is still missing. Whether NMD-insen-
sitive IncRNAs (30% of XUTs) are also translated, and if so,
what are the molecular features allowing them to escape
NMD, remain open questions. The molecular consequenc-
es of translation on the posttranscriptional regulation of
XUT expression are also far from being understood.
Finally, the output and biological relevance of such nonca-
nonical translation events are still largely unknown.

Here, we show that XUTs are pervasively translated. We
found that not only NMD-sensitive but also NMD-insensi-
tive XUTs accumulate in wild-type (WT) yeast cells treated
with translation elongation inhibitors. In contrast, XUT lev-
els remain unchanged in stress conditions associated with
global inhibition of translation initiation. Analysis of
5' phosphorylated RNA decay intermediates indicates
that stalled elongating ribosomes lead to impaired cotrans-
lational degradation of XUTs by blocking Xrn1 in cells treat-
ed with translation elongation inhibitors. Ribo-seq
experiments confirmed that both NMD-sensitive and
-resistant XUTs are bound by ribosomes and identified
ribosome-associated smORFs in their 5'-proximal portion.
Mechanistic analyses on a candidate XUT demonstrated
that its NMD-sensitivity depends on the length of the 3'
UTR downstream from the translated smORF. Finally, we
show that the peptide resulting from an NMD-sensitive
IncRNA reporter exists in WT cells, suggesting that despite
the "cryptic" nature of the transcript, its translation results
in a detectable product.

Altogether, our data support a model where translation
occupies a central role in the metabolism of cytoplasmic
IncRNAs, a rapid binding by ribosomes probably being
the default route as they reach the cytoplasm.

RESULTS

Cytoplasmic IncRNAs accumulate upon translation elongation inhibition

The NMD-sensitivity of XUTs suggests that translation de-
termines their decay. We anticipated that inhibiting transla-
tion would result in the accumulation of NMD-sensitive
XUTs. To explore this idea, we treated exponentially grow-
ing WT cells with cycloheximide (CHX), a translation
elongation inhibitor which prevents tRNA release and ribo-
some translocation (Garreau de Loubresse et al. 2014).
Samples were collected at different time points after the
addition of the drug, then total RNA was extracted and an-
alyzed by northern blot. We observed that the NMD-sensi-
tive XUT1678 and XUT0741 accumulate as soon as 5-10
min after CHX addition (Fig. 1A). This effect is reversible,
as XUT1678 and XUT0741 levels decreased after washing
the CHX-treated cells and returning them to growth in fresh
medium without CHX (Supplemental Fig. S1A). In contrast,
the 5' ITS1 fragment, a well-known physiological target of
Xrn1 (Stevens et al. 1991), did not accumulate in CHX-treat-
ed WT cells (Fig. 1A), indicating that CHX does not block
the activity of Xrn1. Moreover, treating WT cells with aniso-
mycin (ANS), which also inhibits translation elongation but
at a different stage than CHX, led to a similar accumulation
of XUT1678 and XUT0741 (Supplemental Fig. S1B), rein-
forcing our hypothesis of a general translation-dependent
IncRNA decay process.

These results were extended at the genome-wide level
using RNA-seq, showing that 1144 (94%) and 1012 (83%)
NMD-sensitive XUTs significantly accumulate (FC > 2,
P-value < 0.05) in WT cells treated with CHX (mean FC
7.4) or ANS (mean FC 8.5), respectively (Fig. 1B,C; see
also Supplemental Fig. S1C,D; Supplemental Table S1).
By comparison, CHX and ANS had a lower effect on cryptic
unstable transcripts (mean FC 4.4 and 3.9, respectively;
Supplemental Fig. S1E), which are primarily degraded in
the nucleus by the exosome (Wyers et al. 2005; Neil et al.
2009; Xu et al. 2009), although some of them can escape
nuclear decay and be exported to the cytoplasm
(Thompson and Parker 2007).

Notably, 333 (75%) and 254 (57%) NMD-insensitive XUTs
also accumulate in CHX- or ANS-treated WT cells, respec-
tively (mean FC 5.0 and 6.2; Fig. 1C,D; see also Supplemental
Fig. S1F; Supplemental Table S1), indicating that translation
elongation inhibition affects XUTs independently of NMD.
To further explore this idea, we performed RNA-seq in
CHX-treated *upf1Δ* cells. This revealed that NMD inactivation
and CHX have a synergistic effect on NMD-sensitive XUTs
(Fig. 1D), their global levels being significantly higher in
CHX-treated *upf1Δ* cells compared to untreated *upf1Δ* (*P* <
2 × 10<sup>-26</sup>, Wilcoxon rank-sum test) or CHX-treated WT cells
(*P* < 2 × 10<sup>-26</sup>, Wilcoxon rank-sum test). Similar observations
were made with ANS (Supplemental Fig. S1F). Importantly,
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

**FIGURE 1.** XUTs accumulate upon translation elongation inhibition, independently of NMD. (A) WT (YAM1) cells were grown to mid-log phase in rich (yeast extract-peptone-dextrose, YPD) medium at 30°C. CHX was then added at a final concentration of 100 µg/mL, and samples were collected at different time points. Untreated *xrn1Δ* (YAM6) and *upf1Δ* (YAM202) cells, grown under the same conditions, were used as controls. Total RNA was extracted and analyzed by northern blot. *XUT1678*, *XUT0741*, the 5' ITS1 fragment (as well as the 20S pre-rRNA it derives from), and *scR1* (loading control) were detected using ³²P-labeled AMO1595, AMO1762, AMO496, and AMO1482 oligonucleotides, respectively. Note that probe AMO1595 also detects *SUT768*, an overlapping shorter stable isoform of *XUT1678*, which can be detected in WT cells (Wery et al. 2016). (B) Total RNA-seq was performed using total RNA extracted from exponentially growing WT (YAM1) cells (grown as above) treated for 15 min with CHX (100 µg/mL, final concentration) or with an equal volume of DMSO (control). The scatter plot shows the RNA-seq signals (tag densities, log₂ scale) for the NMD-sensitive XUTs, mRNAs (light gray dots), and snoRNAs (black dots) in CHX-treated and control WT cells. Up-regulated (CHX/control fold change [FC] >2, *P*-value < 0.05) and unaffected NMD-sensitive XUTs are represented as red and dark gray dots, respectively (see also *Supplemental Table S1*). (C) Total RNA-seq was performed in WT (YAM1) and *upf1Δ* (YAM202) cells, including or not a treatment with CHX (15 min, 100 µg/mL final concentration) or ANS (30 min, 100 µg/mL final concentration). Densities were computed for NMD-sensitive and NMD-insensitive XUTs, using our previously published annotation (Wery et al. 2016). The sensitivity to NMD and/or CHX/ANS of each transcript is shown as a heatmap of the FC (log₂ scale) relative to the corresponding control WT cells (treated for the same time with an equal volume of DMSO). Note in the first column that some XUTs (97) previously annotated as NMD-sensitive here show a fold enrichment <2 in the *upf1Δ* mutant (see *Supplemental Table S1*), probably reflecting some variability between independent experiments. (D) Same as above. The data are presented as densities (tag/nt, log₂ scale) for NMD-sensitive and NMD-insensitive XUTs in control (DMSO) or CHX-treated WT (YAM1) and *upf1Δ* (YAM202) cells. (***) *P*-value < 0.001; (ns) not significant upon two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test (adjusted for multiple testing with the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure).

this synergy between NMD inactivation and CHX- or ANS-induced translation elongation inhibition was only observed for the NMD-sensitive XUTs, but not for the NMD-insensitive ones (Fig. 1D; *Supplemental Fig. S1F*).

Together, these results show that XUTs globally accumulate in cells treated with translation elongation inhibitors, in a mechanism which is independent of NMD.

## LncRNA levels remain globally unchanged upon stress-induced inhibition of translation initiation

At the molecular level, CHX or ANS act by arresting elongating ribosomes on their RNA substrates, a property which is widely exploited in Ribo-seq analyses (Lareau et al. 2014; Wu et al. 2019).
Interestingly, mRNA degradation is known to occur cotranslationally (Hu et al. 2009), and several reports have shown that the physical presence of ribosomes on the mRNA can interfere with its cotranslational degradation by Xrn1 (Pelechano et al. 2015; Serdar et al. 2016). This prompted us to investigate whether the accumulation of XUTs observed upon CHX or ANS treatment reflects a protective effect of the stalled ribosomes, sterically blocking Xrn1 (Fig. 2A). According to this model, XUTs should not

accumulate when ribosomes are not loaded on the tran-
scripts, i.e., in conditions where translation initiation is in-
hibited (Fig. 2A).

Glucose is the preferred source of carbon of yeast. Previ-
ous works have shown that glucose depletion results in a
global inhibition of translation at the initiation level, with
a rapid loss of polysomes (Ashe et al. 2000; Coller and Par-
ker 2005; Castelli et al. 2011). More recently, the Tollervey
lab showed that the stress response induced upon glucose

starvation or heat-shock is associated
with a displacement of translation initi-
ation factors from mRNAs (Bresson
et al. 2020).

To study the impact of translation initiation inhibition on XUTs, we performed RNA-seq using WT cells grown in a glucose-containing medium and then shifted for 16 min into a medium containing glycerol and ethanol (Supplemental Fig. S2A–C). Strikingly, XUT levels remain globally unchanged upon glucose depletion (mean FC 1.0), which is in sharp contrast with the effect of translation elongation inhibition (CHX, mean FC 5.3) observed in glucose-containing medium (Fig. 2B; see also Supplemental Table S1). Similarly, a reanalysis of RNA-seq data obtained in heat-shock conditions (Bresson et al. 2020) showed that this stress does not lead to a global accumulation of XUTs either (mean FC 0.9; see Supplemental Fig. S2D; Supplemental Table S1).

Importantly, we observed that the sensitivity of XUTs to CHX and to NMD significantly decreases upon glucose depletion (Fig. 2C), confirming that translation is inhibited in this condition. In contrast, the sensitivity of XUTs to Xrn1 was unchanged (Fig. 2C), indicating that Xrn1-dependent degradation of XUTs remains fully functional upon glucose depletion.

Altogether, these data show that XUTs do not accumulate in conditions where initial ribosome loading is impaired. This contrasts with the effect of the inhibitors of translation elongation, thereby suggesting that the stabilization of XUTs observed in these conditions is mediated by the stalled elongating ribosomes, sterically protecting them from degradation.

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

**FIGURE 2.** XUT levels remain unaffected upon translation initiation inhibition. (A) Working model showing the presumed effect of CHX-mediated inhibition of translation elongation (**left**) and of stress-induced inhibition of translation initiation (glucose starvation, **right**) on Xrn1-dependent degradation of XUTs (**red**). The red arrow on the XUT represents a smORF. (B) Total RNA-seq was performed in WT (YAM1), *xrn1Δ* (YAM6), and *upf1Δ* (YAM202) grown in complete synthetic medium (CSM). WT cells grown in the same conditions and then submitted to a CHX treatment or glucose starvation (–Glu) were also included. Densities (**tag/nt**) were computed for the 1470 XUTs significantly up-regulated in the *xrn1* mutant grown in CSM (see Supplemental Fig. S3A), which were then separated according to their sensitivity to NMD (see Supplemental Fig. S3B). The sensitivity of each of these XUTs to CHX and glucose starvation is presented as a heatmap of the FC (log₂ scale). As an indication, the sensitivity of these XUTs to Xrn1 (*xrn1Δ*/WT) and NMD (*upf1Δ*/WT) is also presented. (C) Box-plot showing the RNA-seq signals (densities, **tag/nt**, log₂ scale) for the same set of XUTs as in *B*, in WT (YAM1), *upf1Δ* (YAM202), and *xrn1Δ* (YAM6) cells grown in CSM with glucose (control; black) or undergoing glucose starvation for 16 min (–Glucose; gray). An aliquot of WT cells was then treated with CHX for 15 min. (***) *P*-value < 0.001; (ns) not significant upon two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test (adjusted for multiple testing with the Benjamini–Hochberg procedure).
Translational landscape of yeast IncRNAs

A previous Ribo-seq analysis in *upf1Δ* yeast cells revealed 47 smORFs on 43 IncRNAs, providing a first proof-of-principle that IncRNAs are bound by ribosomes in *S. cerevisiae* (Smith et al. 2014). To define a more comprehensive translational landscape of yeast IncRNAs, we performed a new Ribo-seq experiment in WT and *upf1Δ* cells, producing two data sets for each genetic background: one in native conditions (untreated cells), and a second using CHX-treated cells (Fig. 3A).

As a first approach, we pooled our Ribo-seq data and searched for smORFs (≥5 codons, starting with an AUG codon) using Ribotricer (Choudhary et al. 2020), which directly assesses the 3-nt periodicity of Ribo-seq data to

identify translated ORFs (see Materials and Methods). This led to the identification of 1560 translated smORFs on 748 XUTs (Fig. 3A; list 1 in *Supplemental Table S2*). We then repeated the same procedure, separating the conditions, which produced a refined list of 1270 smORFs from 633 XUTs, translated in at least one condition (Fig. 3A,B; list 2 in *Supplemental Table S2*). Applying an additional coverage threshold (≥10 reads/smORF in at least one condition) restricted the list to 825 smORFs for 475 XUTs (Fig. 3A; list 3 in *Supplemental Table S2*), which corresponds to the most robust candidates within the set of translated smORFs/XUTs, showing the highest levels of translation and being translated in at least one condition. Bearing in mind that IncRNA translation could be transient and occur at low levels, we decided to use the second list of 633 translated

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

**FIGURE 3.** Translational landscape of XUTs. (A) Experimental scheme. Ribo-seq libraries were prepared from biological duplicates of WT and *upf1Δ* cells grown in native conditions (no CHX) or treated for 15 min with CHX (100 µg/mL final concentration). SmORFs (≥5 codons, starting with an AUG) were detected using the Ribotricer software (Choudhary et al. 2020), pooling all conditions together (list 1) or analyzing them separately (list 2). A third list was produced from list 2 upon application of a signal threshold (≥10 reads/smORF). See lists in *Supplemental Table S2*. (B) Venn diagram showing the number of XUTs detected as translated by Ribotricer (list 2) in each of the indicated conditions. See also *Supplemental Table S2*. (C) Metagene of Ribo-seq signals along the 633 translated XUTs (list 2). For each condition, the densities (tag/nt, log₂) along the XUTs ± 200 nt were piled up, then the average signal was plotted. The shading surrounding each line denotes the 95% confidence interval. (D) Heatmap view of the Ribo-seq signals (densities, tag/nt) from positions -50 to +150 relative to the AUG codon of the smORF showing the highest signal for the 510 NMD-sensitive and 123 NMD-insensitive XUTs detected as translated. A separate heatmap is shown for each condition.
XUTs as a compromise for the descriptive analysis below. Figure 3C shows a metagene of the Ribo-seq signals for these XUTs. A similar metagene analysis for the other XUTs (not detected as translated) revealed that the signals are globally lower, suggesting that our analysis captured the XUTs displaying the highest levels of translation (Supplemental Fig. S3A).

Of these 633 XUTs, 510 are NMD-sensitive and 123 are NMD-insensitive (Fig. 3D; see also Supplemental Table S2). Interestingly, 297 of them are detected as translated in the absence of CHX treatment, essentially in the *upf1Δ* mutant (Fig. 3B). As one would expect, combining NMD inactivation and CHX treatment strongly improves the detection of XUT translation (Fig. 3B). Cumulatively, 411 XUTs were detected as translated in at least two data sets (Fig. 3B).

We note that for half of the XUTs (311/633), Ribotricer detected more than one smORF (Supplemental Fig. S3B). This could reflect the potential of several smORFs on the same XUT to attract the translation machinery and/or the existence of distinct isoforms for the same XUT, possibly encompassing different smORFs. Interestingly, for 75% of the translated XUTs, the smORF showing the highest Ribo-seq signal corresponds to one of the first three smORFs predicted in the XUT sequence (Supplemental Fig. S3C). This is consistent with the observation that ribosomes preferentially bind the 5'-proximal region of the translated XUTs (Fig. 3C). This profile is unlikely to be an artifact due to the CHX treatment, as it is also observed in the absence of the drug (Fig. 3C).

The smORFs detected on XUTs display a median size of 87 nt (Supplemental Fig. S3D), which is in line with the size of noncanonical (n)ORFs recently identified in yeast and the fact that these nORFs are globally shorter than canonical ORFs (Wacholder et al. 2023). On the other hand, these translated smORFs are globally longer than the other ORFs found in XUT sequences, but which are not translated (Supplemental Fig. S3D, *P* = 5.2 × 10⁻¹⁶², Wilcoxon rank-sum test). They are also longer than the three first ORFs found by chance when randomly shuffling the sequence of XUTs (Supplemental Fig. S3D, *P* = 6.2 × 10⁻¹⁷⁸, Wilcoxon rank-sum test).

Together, these data show that a substantial fraction of XUTs carry smORFs that are experimentally detected as translated.

## Features of translated lncRNAs

The annotation of translated smORFs paved the way for a deeper characterization of the translated XUTs. First, we wanted to strengthen our hypothesis that the stalled elongating ribosomes lead to impaired cotranslational degradation of XUTs by blocking Xrn1 in cells treated with translation elongation inhibitors. To that purpose, we analyzed published 5' phosphorylated RNA-sequencing

(5PSeq) data obtained in CHX-treated WT cells (Zhang and Pelechano 2021). This technique allows to follow cotranslational degradation by sequencing 5' phosphorylated RNA fragments produced as Xrn1 is blocked by the last translating ribosomes (Zhang and Pelechano 2021). As shown in Figure 4A, the translated XUTs display the typical profile of cotranslational degradation, with a peak localized 14 nt upstream of the AUG codon (defined by Ribo-seq), followed by a signal showing a 3-nt periodicity (Pelechano et al. 2015; Zhang and Pelechano 2021).

In terms of cellular levels, we found that the translated XUTs are globally more abundant than the other XUTs, not only in CHX-WT cells but also in untreated WT cells (Supplemental Fig. S4A,B), and we observed a positive correlation between ribosome occupancy and XUT abundance (Fig. 4B). This suggests that Ribo-seq might be more prone to capture the translation of the most abundant XUTs.

Then, we analyzed the codon optimality within the translated smORFs of XUTs. Codon optimality affects translation elongation and has been associated with mRNA stability (Presnyak et al. 2015; Hanson and Coller 2018). In fact, unstable mRNAs are enriched in nonoptimal codons, which are supposed to be decoded less efficiently (Presnyak et al. 2015). In addition, "normal" mRNAs (i.e., devoid of PTC) yet targeted by NMD are also enriched in nonoptimal codons (Celik et al. 2017). This prompted us to determine the codon optimality score of the translated XUTs. Globally, we observed that it is significantly lower than for mRNAs (Fig. 4C; *P* < 2 × 10⁻¹⁶, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test). However, while NMD-sensitivity correlates with a lower codon optimality in the case of mRNAs (Supplemental Fig. S4C; *P* = 1.1 × 10⁻¹⁶, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test), XUTs display an opposite pattern, the average codon optimality score being significantly higher for the NMD-sensitive XUTs (Fig. 4D; *P* = 4.9 × 10⁻⁴, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test).

Finally, we computed the size of the 3' UTR of the translated XUTs and observed that it is significantly longer for the NMD-sensitive XUTs than for the NMD-insensitive XUTs (Fig. 4E; median = 733 vs. 236 nt; *P* = 1.63 × 10⁻²⁶, Wilcoxon rank-sum test), strongly indicating that the length of the 3' UTR is a key determinant for XUT degradation by NMD, as for mRNAs. This is also consistent with previous observations supporting the role of the 3'-UTR length in dictating the sensitivity of yeast lncRNAs to NMD (Smith et al. 2014).

In summary, our results are consistent with a model where the accumulation of XUTs in CHX-treated cells is due to the stalled elongating ribosomes, impairing Xrn1-dependent cotranslational RNA degradation. They also reveal that the NMD-sensitive XUT displays a higher codon optimality score and a longer 3' UTR in comparison to the NMD-insensitive ones.
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

**FIGURE 4.** Features of translated XUTs. (A) Metagene of 5PSeq signals along positions -50 to +50 relative to the AUG codon of the smORF showing the highest signal for the translated XUTs. The peak at position -14 corresponds to the 5' extremity of the footprint of the first ribosome, stalled at the level of the AUG codon. The shading surrounding the main line denotes the 95% confidence interval. Original data were obtained in CHX-treated WT cells by Pelechano's lab (Zhang and Pelechano 2021) and were retrieved from the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession number: GSE152375). (B) Scatter plot showing the Ribo-seq (TSS to TSS + 50) and RNA-seq signals (tag/nt, log₂ scale) for the translated XUTs. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) is indicated. (C) Average codon optimality score for the 633 translated XUTs (red) versus mRNAs (black), shown as a cumulative frequency plot. For XUTs with several annotated smORFs, we considered the smORF displaying the highest Ribo-seq signal. The indicated P-value was obtained upon the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. (D) Same as above for the 510 NMD-sensitive (red) and 123 NMD-insensitive (gray) translated XUTs. (E) Box-plot showing the size of the 3' UTR for the NMD-sensitive and NMD-insensitive translated XUTs. When several translated smORFs have been annotated for the same XUT, we considered the one with the highest Ribo-seq signal. The P-value was obtained upon a two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

## The long 3' UTR of XUT0741 is a major determinant of its NMD-sensitivity

In yeast, the length of the 3' UTR is known to be critical for NMD activation (Muhlrad and Parker 1999; Amrani et al. 2004; Kebaara and Atkin 2009; Smith et al. 2014; Celik et al. 2017). The observation that the 3' UTR is significantly longer for the NMD-sensitive XUTs compared to NMD-insensitive XUTs suggests that it might also constitute a key determinant of the NMD-sensitivity for XUTs (Fig. 4E). We

therefore investigated this hypothesis, using the NMD-sensitive XUT0741 as a model candidate.

XUT0741 belongs to the top list of translated XUTs, with a single 5'-proximal smORF (15 codons), detected by each of our analyses (Supplemental Fig. S5A; Supplemental Table S2). This smORF is followed by a 1.3 kb long 3' UTR containing multiple stop codons in the same frame (Fig. 5A). To explore the role of the 3' UTR as a cis element determining its NMD-sensitivity, we designed six mutants of XUT0741 by mutating several of these in-frame stop codons, thereby
<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

<table><thead><tr><th>ORF (nt)</th><th>3' UTR (nt)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>45</td><td>1345</td></tr><tr><td>363</td><td>1027</td></tr><tr><td>732</td><td>658</td></tr><tr><td>843</td><td>547</td></tr><tr><td>1092</td><td>298</td></tr><tr><td>1176</td><td>214</td></tr><tr><td>1299</td><td>91</td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>

**FIGURE 5.** The NMD-sensitivity of XUT0741 depends on its long 3' UTR. (A) Schematic representation of the native and mutant alleles of XUT0741. The transcript and the coding region are represented as a red line and a blue arrow, respectively. The sequence of the smORF in the native XUT0741 is indicated. The length of the coding region and of the 3' UTR is shown beside each allele. The chimera construct was obtained by combining the 5' UTR and coding region of the *xut0741-d* allele to the long 3' UTR of the native XUT0741. (B) WT and *upf1Δ* cells expressing the different alleles of XUT0741 were grown to mid-log phase, at 30°C, in YPD medium. After total RNA extraction, the levels of each transcript were assessed by strand-specific RT-qPCR, and then normalized on *scR1*. The gray bars correspond to the levels of the different alleles of XUT0741 in WT cells (native XUT set to 1, indicated by the dashed line). (C) NMD-sensitivity of each allele of XUT0741, given by the ratio between the mean levels of each transcript in the *upf1* mutant and the WT strain (see Supplemental Fig. S5B). Mean and SD values were calculated from three independent biological replicates. (**) *P* < 0.01; (***) *P* < 0.001; (ns) not significant upon t-test. The dashed line indicates a *upf1Δ*/WT ratio* = 1 (i.e., no NMD-sensitivity). (D) WT and *upf1Δ* cells expressing the native XUT0741, the *xut0741-d* allele, and the chimera were grown as described above. Total RNA was extracted and analyzed by northern blot. The different alleles of XUT0741 and *scR1* (loading control) were detected using ³²P-labeled AMO3581 and AMO1482 oligonucleotides, respectively. (E) NMD-sensitivity of each allele, calculated from northern blot signals in WT and *upf1Δ* cells (see Supplemental Fig. S5D). Mean and SD values were calculated from three independent biological replicates. (***) *P* < 0.001; (ns) not significant upon t-test. Dashed line: *upf1Δ*/WT ratio* = 1.

progressively lengthening the smORF and shortening the 3' UTR (Fig. 5A; see sequences in Supplemental File S1). These mutant alleles were integrated at the genomic locus in WT and *upf1Δ* strains. Their expression was then assessed by strand-specific RT-qPCR.

Our data show that the abundance of the XUT in WT cells and its NMD-sensitivity remain unchanged in the three first mutants (Fig. 5B,C; Supplemental Fig. S5B,C). However, when the 3' UTR is shortened to 298 nt in the *xut0741-d* mutant (which is in the range of 3'-UTR size for NMD-insensitive XUTs; see Fig. 4E), we observed a significant accumulation of the mutated transcript, correlating with a significant decrease of its sensitivity to NMD (Fig. 5B,C; Supplemental Fig. S5B,C). Further shortening the 3' UTR in mutants -e and -f did not aggravate these effects (Fig. 5B,C). Interestingly, these data are consistent with previous observations indicating that a 3' UTR longer than 300 nt is critical to determine the sensitivity to NMD of mRNAs (Kebaara and Atkin 2009). Note that the mutations introduced in XUT0741 do not affect the NMD-sensitivity of another XUT (Supplemental Fig. S5C).

Thus, changing the length of the coding region relative to the 3' UTR not only modifies the abundance of XUT0741 in WT cells, but also its NMD-sensitivity. To discriminate whether the latter depends on the length of the ORF or 3' UTR, we constructed a chimera combining the extended ORF of the "NMD-resistant" *xut0741-d* mutant with the long 3' UTR of the native XUT0741 (Fig. 5A). The fate of this chimera was then analyzed by northern blot. As expected, the corresponding RNA was longer than the native XUT (Fig. 5D). Importantly, the levels of the chimera in WT cells were undistinguishable from the levels of the native XUT0741 (Fig. 5D; Supplemental Fig. S5D), and in contrast to the *xut0741-d* mutant, the chimera and the native XUT display the same NMD-sensitivity (Fig. 5E). We therefore conclude that the NMD-
sensitivity of *XUT0741* is determined by its long 3' UTR, which is consistent with the observation that the 3' UTR for the translated NMD-sensitive XUTs is significantly longer (Fig. 4E).

**The peptide resulting from an NMD-sensitive IncRNA reporter exists in NMD-competent WT cells**

All the data described above indicate that translation occupies an important place in the metabolism of cytoplasmic IncRNAs. We asked whether peptides could be produced as these IncRNAs are targeted to NMD (for simplicity, we will systematically use the term "peptide" to refer to the product of the translation of a IncRNA, regardless of its size).

The fact that NMD is triggered as translation terminates makes it possible for the resulting translation product to be released, as previously observed for several PTC-containing mRNA reporters (Maderazo et al. 2000; Kuroha et al. 2009, 2013; Serdar et al. 2020; Chu et al. 2021). We explored whether this could occur with XUTs using the *xut0741-b* mutant (Fig. 5A), because this mutant displays the same NMD-sensitivity as the native XUT (Fig. 5C) but encodes a larger peptide, easier to detect by western blot. We decided to use this mutant as an artificial NMD-sensitive IncRNA reporter, following the insertion of a C-terminal 3FLAG tag (Fig. 6A; see the sequence in Supplemental File S1). We controlled that the insertion of the 3FLAG tag does not affect the NMD-sensitivity of the transcript (Fig. 6B; Supplemental Fig. S6A). Importantly, despite the very low abundance of the transcript in WT cells, at the protein level we observed a clear band at the expected size by western blotting, demonstrating that the encoded peptide is produced (Fig. 6C, lane 3), its level increasing in the *upf1Δ* context (Fig. 6C, lane 4).

To gain further insight into the relationship between translation and NMD-sensitivity of XUTs, we designed a construct where the translation of our NMD-sensitive IncRNA reporter is blocked in *cis* by a short stem-loop (SL) element, known to inhibit translation initiation with a minimal effect on RNA decay (Beelman and Parker

1994; Muhlrad et al. 1995). This SL was inserted into our reporter, upstream of the translation start site (Fig. 6A; see sequence in Supplemental File S1). A western blot showed that the production of the peptide is completely lost upon SL insertion, indicating that the transcript is no longer translated in this context (Fig. 6C, lanes 5,6). At the RNA level, this loss of translation correlates with a loss of the sensitivity to CHX and to NMD (Fig. 6D). In contrast, the transcript remained sensitive to *Xrn1* (Fig. 6D; Supplemental Fig. S6B).

The experimental detection of the translation product derived from our reporter upon epitope-tagging paves the way toward the characterization of the yeast peptidome using mass spectrometry (MS), bearing in mind that this has

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /></figure>

**FIGURE 6.** Detection of the peptide derived from an NMD-sensitive XUT reporter. (A) Schematic representation of the tagged *xut0741-b* alleles, using the same color code as in Figure 5A. (B) WT and *upf1Δ* cells expressing the native *XUT0741* or the *xut0741-b* allele fused to a C-terminal 3FLAG tag (*xut0741-b-FLAG*) were grown to mid-log phase, at 30°C, in YPD medium. Total RNA was extracted and analyzed by northern blot. *XUT0741* and *scR1* were detected as described in Figure 1A. (C) WT and *upf1Δ* cells expressing the native *XUT0741*, the *xut0741-b-FLAG* or the *SL-xut0741-b-FLAG* alleles were grown as above. Protein extracts (40 µg) were separated by poly-acrylamide gel electrophoresis and then transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane. The size of the protein ladder bands is indicated on the left of the panel. *Pgk1* was used as a loading control. (D) WT, *upf1Δ* and *xrn1Δ* cells expressing the *SL-xut0741-b-FLAG* allele were grown as above. For the WT strain, a sample of cells was also treated for 15 min with CHX (100 µg/mL, final concentration). After total RNA extraction, the levels of the *SL-xut0741-b-FLAG* transcript were assessed by strand-specific RT-qPCR, normalized on *scR1* and set as 1 for the untreated WT condition (indicated by the dashed line). Mean and SD values were calculated from three independent biological replicates. (**) *P* < 0.01; (*) *P* < 0.05; (ns) not significant upon t-test.
been reported to be technically challenging due to the cur-
rent limitations of peptidomics, especially for lowly ex-
pressed microproteins (Wacholder and Carvunis 2023).
We failed to detect the peptide derived from the native
XUT0741, although we were able to unambiguously detect
a synthetic, labeled version of it (Supplemental Fig. S6C).
We postulate that the abundance of the native peptide
within the total extract is not sufficient enough to be detect-
ed by MS.

Besides their low abundance, the amino acid composi-
tion of XUT-derived peptides might also impede their
detection by MS. In fact, the composition of XUT-encoded
peptides differs from the proteins encoded by mRNAs,
with an overrepresentation of hydrophobic residues (such
as phenylalanine, isoleucine, and leucine), and an under-
representation of lysine (Supplemental Fig. S6D). We also
observed a spectacular depletion of the negatively
charged residues (aspartate and glutamate) in the peptides
encoded by XUTs (Supplemental Fig. S6D).

Notwithstanding the current lack of robust MS data, our
results show that translation of an NMD-sensitive IncRNA
reporter gives rise to a peptide in WT cells, while the tran-
script is being efficiently targeted to NMD. Furthermore,
our mechanistic analysis confirms that the CHX- and
NMD-sensitivity of XUTs is indicative of an active transla-
tion process.

DISCUSSION

Since their discovery, IncRNAs have been considered as
transcripts devoid of coding potential, thereby escaping
translation. However, accumulating experimental evidence
leads us to reevaluate this assumption. In fact, IncRNAs
copurify with polysomes in different models, including
yeast (Smith et al. 2014) and human cells (van Heesch
et al. 2014; Carlevaro-Fita et al. 2016; Douka et al. 2021).
In addition, high-throughput sequencing of ribosome-
bound fragments using Ribo-seq or related approaches
has uncovered smORFs within IncRNAs (Ingolia et al.
2011; Aspden et al. 2014; Ingolia et al. 2014; Smith et al.
2014; Chen et al. 2020; Douka et al. 2021). Finally, several
studies reported the identification of peptides resulting
from the translation of smORFs carried on lncRNAs (Slavoff
et al. 2013; Smith et al. 2014; Zanet et al. 2015; D'Lima et al.
2017; Matsumoto et al. 2017; Chen et al. 2020; Douka et al.
2021).

LncRNA expression in budding and fission yeasts is re-
stricted by the extensive action of nuclear and cytoplasmic
RNA decay machineries (Atkinson et al. 2018; Watts et al.
2018; Wery et al. 2018b; Szachnowski et al. 2019), includ-
ing the 5'-exoribonuclease Xrn1, which degrades a con-
served family of cytoplasmic IncRNAs referred to as XUTs
(Van Dijk et al. 2011). Strikingly, previous works in S. cerevi-
siae revealed that most of them are targeted by the transla-
tion-dependent NMD pathway, suggesting that XUTs are

translated and that translation controls their degradation
(Malabat et al. 2015; Wery et al. 2016; de Andres-Pablo
et al. 2017).

Here we report several observations supporting this hy-
pothesis. We showed that the majority of XUTs accumulate
in WT cells treated with CHX or ANS (Fig. 1), two drugs
known to inhibit translation elongation but via different
mechanisms (Garreau de Loubresse et al. 2014). Using
Ribo-seq, we showed that a substantial fraction of XUTs
are actually bound by ribosomes, and we identified ribo-
some-associated smORFs, which are mainly found in the
5'-proximal region of XUTs (Fig. 3). Mechanistic analyses
at the level of a candidate XUT showed that its sensitivity
to NMD is determined by the length of the 3' UTR down-
stream from the translated smORF (Fig. 5). Finally, we
showed that translation of an NMD-sensitive IncRNA re-
porter results in a peptide which is detected in WT cells,
while the transcript is degraded through NMD (Fig. 6).

The fact that NMD-sensitive XUTs accumulate in the presence of translation elongation inhibitors reinforces our model of a translation-dependent decay process. However, the underlying molecular mechanism appears to be more complex than anticipated, as the accumulation of XUTs observed upon CHX/ANS treatment cannot be solely explained by the inability of the cell to trigger NMD when translation is inhibited. First, NMD-insensitive XUTs (which account for 30% of XUTs) also accumulate in the presence of CHX or ANS (Fig. 1C,D; Supplemental Fig. S1F). Second, stress conditions associated with global translation initiation inhibition do not recapitulate the stabilization effect of the translation elongation inhibitors (Fig. 2B,C; Supplemental Fig. S2D). Third, 5PSeq data obtained in CHX-treated cells show that the translated XUTs display the typical profile of cotranslational degradation (Fig. 4A). Together, these observations suggest that the global accumulation of XUTs induced by translation elongation inhibitors is mediated by the elongating ribosomes, stalled on their RNA template and sterically blocking Xrn1 independently of NMD.

Our Ribo-seq analysis allowed us to identify ribosome-
associated smORFs for 510 NMD-sensitive XUTs and 123
NMD-insensitive XUTs (Fig. 3D), considerably extending
the repertoire of translated IncRNAs in yeast (Smith et al.
2014; Wery et al. 2016). Importantly, our data also indicate
that NMD insensitivity does not imply a lack of translation,
and that the translational landscape of yeast IncRNAs ex-
tends beyond the scope of NMD. This is consistent
with the observation that translation elongation inhibition
impacts the decay of most NMD-insensitive XUTs (Fig.
1C,D; Supplemental Fig. S1F).

The number of smORFs/XUTs detected as translated de-
pends on the stringency of the approach used to analyze
the Ribo-seq signals (Fig. 3A), which is in line with the
idea that IncRNA translation is transient and therefore
more difficult to detect in comparison to canonical mRNA
translation (Wacholder et al. 2023). Besides the low
abundance of XUTs even in conditions where they are sta-
bilized (NMD inactivation, CHX treatment), we imagine that
the translation of many of their smORFs remains labile,
probably reflecting the fact that they are rapidly and contin-
uously evolving. This idea is supported by the idea that the
vast majority of nORFs identified in yeast show no conser-
vation (Wacholder et al. 2023). Furthermore, perhaps
some constraints associated with canonical mRNA transla-
tion could be relaxed in the context of lncRNA translation as
a strategy to maximize the potential for genetic novelty,
which would be interesting from an evolutionary point of
view. But the corollary is therefore the difficulty for us to
detect such noncanonical translation events using pipe-
lines that use the marks of canonical translation (e.g., use
of an AUG initiator codon, predominance of one phase
vs. the two others). The field is therefore in need of dedicat-
ed approaches and computational tools to reveal the ex-
haustive landscape of lncRNA translation.

Together with the observation that the NMD-sensitive XUTs display a longer 3' UTR compared to the NMD-insensitive ones (Fig. 4E), the mechanistic analysis on the *XUT0741* candidate highlights the critical role of the 3' UTR in determining the NMD-sensitivity of XUTs, as it is also the case for mRNAs (Muhlrad and Parker 1999; Kebaara and Atkin 2009; Celik et al. 2017). However, even in the mutant with the shortest 3' UTR, the NMD-sensitivity is not fully abolished (Supplemental Fig. S5B). One possible explanation is the existence of an alternative smORF, unaffected in our mutants. Supporting this hypothesis, we observed low Ribo-seq signals upstream of the detected smORF, overlapping the annotated TSS of *XUT0741* (Supplemental Fig. S5A). Interestingly, *XUT0741* TSS corresponds to the "G" of an "ATG" triplet, followed by 14 codons before the first in-frame stop codon (see sequences in Supplemental File S1). The production of multiple RNA isoforms from the same transcription unit is common in yeast (Pelechano et al. 2013), and we can imagine that any 5'-extended isoforms of *XUT0741* would encompass this ATG and therefore carry this alternative smORF. Additional mechanistic analyses combined with RNA isoform profiling would be required to confirm this hypothesis. Nonetheless, the complexity of the yeast transcriptome, with the existence of multiple RNA isoforms displaying different boundaries, might possibly explain the detection of several smORFs per XUT and should be kept in mind when investigating how the position of smORFs relative to its annotated extremities could impact the fate of a XUT.

Independently of the presence of a PTC and of the
length of the 3' UTR, NMD-sensitive yeast mRNAs have
been shown to be enriched in nonoptimal codons (Celik
et al. 2017). Our data reveal that XUTs display an opposite
pattern, the codon optimality score of the NMD-sensitive
XUTs being significantly higher in comparison to the
NMD-insensitive XUTs (Fig. 4D). More globally, the codon
optimality score of XUTs is significantly lower compared to

mRNAs (Fig. 4C), which would be consistent with their high
instability (Presnyak et al. 2015). Together with the different
composition in amino acids of XUT-derived peptides in
comparison to proteins (Supplemental Fig. S6D), this also
indicates that the primary properties of the smORFs of
XUTs are distinct from the canonical ORFs of yeast, possibly
reflecting that they are in a very early stage of selection, if
only engaged in this process.

One interesting observation made in the context of this
work is that the translation product resulting from an
NMD-sensitive IncRNA reporter can be detected in a WT
context, where NMD is functional. Whether this reporter
can still be considered as a lncRNA or whether it becomes
an mRNA since its ORF now extends over the arbitrary
threshold of 300 nt reflects the debate on the fuzzy boundary
between translated lncRNAs and mRNAs. In fact, if the dis-
tinction between the two classes was only a matter of ORF
size, the MFA1 and MFA2 mRNAs (which encode the mating
pheromone a-factor in S. cerevisiae) could be redefined as
lncRNAs, since their ORF is 111 nt long (Michaelis and Her-
skowitz 1988). Besides the semantics, the idea that a peptide
resulting from an NMD substrate could exist in the cell is
plausible, since NMD is activated as translation terminates
at the level of a "normal" stop codon (this is the position
of this codon within the transcript which is sensed as "abnor-
mal"). Previous studies using PTC-containing mRNA report-
ers have shown that the resulting peptides could be
detected in yeast and human cells (Maderazo et al. 2000;
Kuroha et al. 2009, 2013; Serdar et al. 2020; Chu et al.
2021). However, this has not been explored so far for cryptic
IncRNAs. In this context, the observation we made here
opens exciting perspectives regarding the possibility that
IncRNA translation gives rise to peptides which can exist in
the cell, despite the transcripts they originate from are de-
graded through NMD. Our data pave the way toward the fu-
ture characterization of the yeast peptidome using MS,
searching for native XUT-derived peptides, bearing in
mind the actual technical limitations of this approach for
the identification of short and lowly expressed peptides
(Chothani et al. 2022; Wacholder and Carvunis 2023).

Overall, our data indicate that cytoplasmic lncRNAs are
pervasively translated and globally behave like PTC-con-
taining mRNAs, most of them being targeted by NMD.
We propose that the resulting peptides could be used as
raw material for natural selection.

De novo gene birth has been associated with adaptation
to environmental stress (Arendsee et al. 2014). In addition,
NMD is known to be repressed under a variety of stress con-
ditions (Mendell et al. 2004; Gardner 2008). It is, therefore,
tempting to speculate that despite the fact that the cell has
evolved efficient pathways to degrade lncRNAs and control
their expression (Smith and Baker 2015), these pathways
can be down-regulated under certain conditions (e.g.,
stress) in order to sample the peptide potential hosted in
these lncRNAs.
In conclusion, our work is coherent with the idea that translation plays a major role in the posttranscriptional metabolism of cytoplasmic lncRNAs, and that their definition as "noncoding" is probably not appropriate anymore to describe their actual status. Rather, they might be viewed as noncanonical translated (nct)RNAs oscillating between the "coding" and "noncoding" worlds.

# MATERIALS AND METHODS

## Yeast strains and media

The strains used in this study are listed in Supplemental Table S3. Mutants were constructed by transformation and were all verified by PCR on genomic DNA (see below).

Yeast cells were grown to mid-log phase (OD~600~ 0.5) at 30°C in YPD medium or CSM, with 2% glucose. In the glucose starvation experiments, glucose was replaced by glycerol and ethanol.

5-Fluoroorotic acid (5-FOA) was used at a final concentration of 1 g/L on solid CSM plates. G418 (Geneticin; Gibco) was used at a final concentration of 100 µg/mL on solid YPD plates. CHX (Sigma) and ANS (Sigma) were used at a final concentration of 100 µg/mL.

## Construction of *xut0741* mutants

The *xut0741-a*, *-b*, *-d* and *-f* alleles, flanked by Nael sites, were produced as synthetic gBlocks DNA fragments (IDT—Integrated DNA Technologies), and then cloned between the KpnI and XbaI sites of the pAM376 backbone vector (Szachnowski et al. 2019), giving the pAM594, pAM596, pAM598, and pAM600 vectors, respectively. The *xut0741-c* and *xut0741-e* mutants were constructed by site-directed mutagenesis from *xut0741-d* and then cloned into the same backbone vector, giving the pAM724 and pAM723 vectors, respectively. The sequence of each allele was verified by Sanger sequencing and is available in Supplemental File S1. The mutant alleles were excised from the pCRII vector using Nael digestion and transformed into the YAM2831 strain (where the *XUT0741/ADH2* locus has been deleted by *URA3*). After 1 d of growth on a nonselective medium, transformants were replicated on CSM + 5-FOA plates and incubated at 30°C for 4–5 d. The proper integration of the mutant alleles was confirmed by PCR on genomic DNA using oligonucleotides AMO3350-3351. *UPF1* was deleted subsequently by transformation with the product of a PCR on YAM202 (*upf1Δ::kanMX4*) genomic DNA with oligonucleotides AMO2710-2711. The transformants were selected on YPD + G418 plates, and *UPF1* deletion was verified by PCR on genomic DNA using oligonucleotides AMO190-2712.

The chimera-encoding plasmid (pAM726) was produced in two steps. First, the 3' UTR of the native *XUT0741* was amplified by PCR on YAM1 genomic DNA using oligonucleotides AMO3471-3382, and then cloned between the KpnI and XbaI sites of a pCRII-TOPO backbone, giving the pAM725 vector. Second, the sequence corresponding to the 5' UTR and ORF of the *xut0741-d* mutant was amplified by PCR on YAM2854 genomic DNA using oligonucleotides AMO3379-3497, and then cloned between the KpnI and EcoRI sites of pAM725, giving the pAM726 vector. The sequence of the chimera allele was verified by Sanger sequencing (see Supplemental File S1).

Carboxy-terminal 3FLAG tagging of *xut0741-b* was performed using an "overlap extension PCR" strategy. A first amplicon was produced by PCR on YAM2853 genomic DNA using oligonucleotides AMO3379-3530. A second amplicon was produced by PCR on the same DNA using oligonucleotides AMO3382-3531. After purification on agarose gel, the two amplicons (displaying a 28-bp overlap) were mixed and used as DNA templates for PCR using oligonucleotides AMO3379-3382. The final full PCR product was then digested by KpnI and XbaI and cloned in the same backbone vector as the other *xut0741* mutants, giving the pAM728 plasmid (see Supplemental File S1 for insert sequence). All subsequent steps were as above.

The SL (GATCCCGCGGTTCGCCGCGG), previously shown to inhibit mRNA translation (Beelman and Parker 1994), was inserted into the 3FLAG-tagged *xut0741-b* allele using a similar "overlap extension PCR" strategy, involving the overlapping oligonucleotides AMO3550 (for the 5' amplicon) and AMO3549 (for the 3' amplicon), ultimately giving the pAM741 plasmid (insert sequence available in Supplemental File S1). All subsequent steps were as above.

*XRN1* was deleted in strains YAM2908 (*xut0741-b-3FLAG*) and YAM2934 (*SL-xut0741-b-3FLAG*) by transformation with the product of a PCR on YAM6 (*xrn1Δ::kanMX4*) genomic DNA with oligonucleotides AMO34-35. The transformants were selected on YPD + G418 plates and screened by PCR on genomic DNA using oligonucleotides AMO3247-1669.

## Total RNA extraction

Total RNA was extracted from exponentially growing cells (OD~600~ 0.5) using a standard hot phenol procedure. Extracted RNA was ethanol-precipitated, resuspended in nuclease-free H~2~O (Ambion), and quantified using a NanoDrop 2000c spectrophotometer and/or a Qubit fluorometer with the Qubit RNA HS Assay kit (Life Technologies).

## Northern blot

Ten micrograms of total RNA was separated on denaturing 1.2% agarose gel and then transferred to Hybond-XL nylon membrane (GE Healthcare). ³²P-labeled oligonucleotides (listed in Supplemental Table S4) were hybridized overnight at 42°C in ULTRAhyb-Oligo hybridization buffer (Ambion). After hybridization, membranes were washed twice in 2x SSC/0.1% SDS for 15 min at 25°C, and once in 0.1x SSC/0.1% SDS for 15 min at 25°C. Membranes were exposed to Storage Phosphor screens. The signal was detected using a Typhoon Trio PhosphorImager and analyzed with version 10.1 of the ImageQuant TL software (Cytiva).

## Strand-specific RT-qPCR

Strand-specific RT-qPCR experiments were performed from three biological replicates, as previously described (Wery et al. 2018a). The oligonucleotides used are listed in Supplemental Table S4.
## Total RNA-seq

For each strain/condition, total RNA-seq was performed from two biological replicates. For each sample, 1 µg of total RNA was mixed with 2 µL of diluted ERCC RNA spike-in mix (1:100 dilution in nuclease-free H₂O; Invitrogen). Ribosomal (r)RNAs were depleted using the RiboMinus Eukaryote v2 kit (Ambion). Libraries were prepared from the rRNA-depleted RNA using the TruSeq Stranded mRNA Sample Preparation Kit (Illumina) and the IDT for Illumina—TruSeq RNA UD indexes (Illumina). Paired-end sequencing (2 × 50 nt) was performed on a NovaSeq 6000 system (Illumina).

## Total-seq data processing and analysis

Reads were trimmed and mapped on the S288C reference genome as previously described (Wery et al. 2023), with the addition of either ERCC RNA spike-in sequences or the *Schizosaccharomyces pombe* genome (ASM294v2, for the heat-shock data set). All subsequent analyses used uniquely mapped reads. Mapping statistics are presented in Supplemental Table S5.

Gene counts and tag densities were computed as previously described (Wery et al. 2023). The RNA-seq data obtained in the YPD medium (Fig. 1; Supplemental Fig. S1) were first normalized on the ERCC RNA spike-in signal; since snoRNA expression was not affected in the different mutants/conditions analyzed, snoRNA counts were then used for normalization as previously described (Wery et al. 2016, 2018b). The data obtained in CSM ± glucose (Fig. 2; Supplemental Fig. S2) were normalized on the ERCC RNA spike-in signal. For the heat-shock data set (retrieved from the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus using accession number GSE148166), gene counts were normalized on the S. pombe spike-in RNA (Bresson et al. 2020).

XUTs were defined as up-regulated in a given condition when showing a greater than twofold enrichment in this condition versus the control, with a P-value < 0.05 (adjusted for multiple testing with the Benjamini–Hochberg procedure) upon differential expression analyses using DESeq2 (Love et al. 2014).

## Ribo-seq library preparation

Ribo-seq analysis was performed from two biological replicates of YAM1 (WT) and YAM202 (*upf1Δ*) cells, grown to mid-log phase (OD~600~ 0.5) at 30°C in YPD, then treated or not for 15 min with CHX (100 µg/mL, final concentration). For each sample, 250 mL of cells were harvested by centrifugation at room temperature and directly frozen in liquid nitrogen after supernatant removal.

Cells were lysed in 1× lysis buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl pH 7.4, 100 mM NaCl, 30 mM MgCl₂) supplemented by 2× cOMPlete Protease Inhibitor Cocktail (Roche), and ribosome-protected fragments (RPFs) were prepared as previously described (Baudin-Baillieu et al. 2016), except that the purification on sucrose cushion was performed before the digestion with RNase I (Ambion, 5 units/UA~260~). Biotinylated oligonucleotides (IDT—Integrated DNA Technologies) used for ribo-depletion are listed in Supplemental Table S4.

Libraries were then prepared from 10 ng of RPFs using the D-Plex Small RNA-seq kit for Illumina (Diagenode) and the D-Plex Unique Dual Indexes for Illumina—set A (Diagenode). The RPFs were diluted in a final volume of 8 µL before the addition of 2 µL

of Dephosphorylation Buffer, 5 µL of Crowding Buffer, and 0.5 µL of Dephosphorylation Reagent. The samples were incubated for 15 min at 37°C. RNA tailing was performed by adding 1.5 µL of Small Tailing Master Mix (1 µL of Small Tailing Buffer + 0.5 µL of Small Tailing Reagent) to the dephosphorylated RNAs, and incubating the samples for 40 min at 37°C. The samples were transferred on ice for 2 min before the addition of 1 µL of the Reverse Transcription Primer (RT-PCR). The samples were denatured for 10 min at 70°C and then cooled down to 25°C at a 0.5°C/sec rate. A Reverse Transcription Master Mix (RTMM) was prepared by mixing 5 µL of Reverse Transcription Buffer and 1 µL of Reverse Transcription Reagent; 6 µL of this mix was added to the samples, which were then incubated for 15 min at 25°C. After adding 2 µL of Small Template Switch Oligo, the samples were incubated for 120 min at 42°C, then heated for 10 min at 70°C and finally kept at 4°C. For the PCR amplification, 20 µL of D-Plex Primer UDI and 50 µL of PCR Master Mix were added, then the following program was run: initial denaturation at 98°C for 30 sec; 10 cycles including 15 sec at 98°C followed by 1 min at 72°C; final incubation of 10 min at 72°C; hold at 4°C. The libraries were then purified using the Monarch PCR & DNA Cleanup Kit (NEB), using a 5:1 ratio of Binding Buffer:Sample. Purified DNA was eluted in 50 µL of nuclease-free H₂O (Ambion). A second cleanup of the libraries was performed using 1 volume of AMPure XP beads (Beckman). Libraries were eluted in 20 µL of nuclease-free H₂O (Ambion), and then quantified using the Qubit dsDNA HS assay (Invitrogen). Finally, the size and the molarity of each library were determined using a High Sensitivity D1000 ScreenTape in a 4200 TapeStation (Agilent Technologies).

Single-end sequencing (50 nt) of the libraries was performed on a NovaSeq 6000 system (Illumina).

## Detection of translated XUTs/smORFs using Ribotricer

Unique molecular identifiers (UMIs) were extracted using umi-tools (Smith et al. 2017), and then used to discard PCR duplicates. Reads were trimmed using cutadapt v2.10 (Martin 2011), and then mapped using HISAT v2.0.0 (Kim et al. 2019), as above. Reads mapping on rRNA were discarded. Subsequent analyses only used uniquely mapped reads with a size comprised between 25 and 35 nt. Mapping statistics are presented in Supplemental Table S5.

Ribotricer 1.3.1 was used to extract translated ORFs (minimum length of 15 nt) based on S. cerevisiae genome annotation (including XUTs), using ATG as the start codon and a phase-score cutoff of 0.318, as recommended by the authors (Choudhary et al. 2020). The phasing of Ribo-seq data was also analyzed independently (Supplemental Fig. S7), upon prediction of the P-site for different k-mers (25-mers to 35-mers) using RiboWaltz (Lauria et al. 2018). List 1 of translated XUTs was obtained after pooling the bam files from all conditions. List 2 was obtained by analyzing each condition separately, pooling the bam files from the two biological replicates. List 3 was obtained from list 2, upon application of a coverage filter (at least 10 reads per translated smORF).

## Protein extraction and western blot

Protein extracts were prepared from exponentially growing cells, using a standard method based on cell lysis with glass beads in
"IP" buffer (20 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 100 mM NaCl, 0.5 mM EDTA, 1 mM DTT, 20% glycerol), supplemented with 0.05% NP40, 0.5X cOmplete Protease Inhibitor Cocktail (Roche) and 1 mM AEBSF.

Forty micrograms of total extracts were separated on NuPAGE 4%-12% Bis-Tris gel (Invitrogen) in 1× NuPAGE MOPS SDS running buffer (Invitrogen), and then transferred on a nitrocellulose membrane using iBlot 2 Transfer Stack system (Invitrogen), with program "0."

The FLAG-tagged peptide and Pgk1 were detected using the anti-FLAG M2 (Sigma F1365; 1:1000 dilution) and anti-Pgk1 22C5D8 (Abcam ab113687; 1:10,000 dilution) monoclonal primary antibodies, revealed using the SuperSignal West Femto Maximum Sensitivity Substrate (Thermo Scientific) and the SuperSignal West Pico Chemiluminescent Substrate (Thermo Scientific), respectively, with a ChemiDoc Imaging System (BioRad). The secondary antibody was the antimouse IgG (whole molecule)-peroxidase antibody produced in rabbit (Sigma A9044; 1:10,000 dilution).

## Mass spectrometry

MS was performed starting from crude extracts of *upf1Δ* (YAM202) cells grown to mid-log phase at 30°C in CSM medium with 0.1% proline as nitrogen source and containing 0.003% SDS, and then treated for 3 h with 50 µM MG-132 proteasome inhibitor (Sigma M7449).

The crude extracts were separated on 4%-12% bis-tris gels (Invitrogen NP0326BOX) in MES buffer (Invitrogen NP0002), then the region of the gel encompassing the small peptides fraction (1–10 kDa) was cut in bands of ~2 mm and subjected to in-gel trypsin digestion, as previously described (Szabó et al. 2018), before submission to MS analysis. Trypsin-generated peptides were analyzed by nanoLC-MS/MS using a nanoElute liquid chromatography system (Bruker) coupled to a timsTOF Pro Mass spectrometer (Bruker). Peptides were loaded on an Aurora analytical column (ION OPTIK, 25 cm × 75 m, C18, 1.6 m) and separated with a gradient of 0%-35% of solvent B for 100 min. Solvent A was 0.1% formic acid and 2% acetonitrile in water, and solvent B was acetonitrile with 0.1% formic acid. MS and MS/MS spectra were recorded from m/z 100 to 1700 with a mobility scan range from 0.6 to 1.4 V s/cm². MS/MS spectra were acquired with the PASEF (parallel accumulation serial fragmentation) ion mobility-based acquisition mode using a number of PASEF MS/MS scans set as 10. MS and MS/MS raw data were processed and converted into mgf files with DataAnalysis software (Bruker). Protein identifications were performed using the Mascot search engine (Matrix Science) against SwissProt and a noncanonical proteins homemade database. Database searches were performed using trypsin cleavage specificity with two possible missed cleavages. Carbamidomethylation of cysteines was set as fixed modification and oxidation of methionines as variable modification. Peptide and fragment tolerances were set at 10 ppm and 0.05 Da, respectively. Only ions with a score higher than the identity threshold and a false-positive discovery rate of <1% (Mascot decoy option) were considered.

As a control, we included a synthetic, labeled AQUA version of the peptide derived from XUT0741 (AQUA Basic Heavy grade, Thermo Scientific). The sequence of the synthetic peptide was MPY(I)TNTAEATMSTV, where (I) corresponds to a stable isotope isoleucine (+7 Da).

## DATA DEPOSITION

Raw sequences generated in this work have been deposited to the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus and can be accessed using accession number GSE203283. Genome browsers for the visualization of processed data are publicly accessible at http://vm-gb.curie.fr/mw4.

## SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

Supplemental material is available for this article.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Aaron Wacholder and Anne-Ruxandra Carvunis for sharing unpublished results and fruitful discussions. We are also grateful to all members of our laboratories for discussions and to our colleague Michael Schertzer for his careful reading of this manuscript and English revisions. High-throughput sequencing was performed by the ICGex NGS platform of the Institut Curie. Data management, quality control, and primary analysis were performed by the Bioinformatics platform of the Institut Curie. This work has benefited from the ANR "DNA-life" (ANR-15-CE12-0007) grant and the European Research Council "DARK-616180-ERC-2014" consolidator grant allocated to A.M., and from the ANR "Actimeth" (19-CE12-0004-02) grant allocated to O.N. The ICGex NGS platform of the Institut Curie is supported by grants ANR-10-EQPX-03 (Equipex) and ANR-10-INBS-09-08 (France Génomique Consortium) from the Agence Nationale de la Recherche ("Investissements d'Avenir" program), by the ITMO-Cancer Aviesan (Plan Cancer III) and by the SiRIC-Curie program (SiRIC Grant INCa-DGOS-465 and INCa-DGOSInserm_12554). S.A. has been supported by a PhD fellowship from PSL University and by the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale (FRM).

Author contributions: M.W., I.H., O.N., and A.M. designed experiments. S.A., N.V., S.G., I.H., D.C., and M.W. performed experiments. U.S., C.P., and A.L. performed bioinformatics analyses. S.A., U.S., I.H., D.C., C.P., A.L., and M.W. analyzed the data. M.W. and A.M. designed the project. M.W. and A.M. supervised the project. A.M. and O.N. acquired funding. M.W. wrote the manuscript, with input from all authors.

*Received November 29, 2023; accepted February 15, 2024.*

## REFERENCES

Amrani N, Ganesan R, Kervestin S, Mangus DA, Ghosh S, Jacobson A. 2004. A faux 3'-UTR promotes aberrant termination and triggers nonsense-mediated mRNA decay. *Nature* **432**: 112–118. doi:10.1038/nature03060

Andjus S, Morillon A, Wery M. 2021. From yeast to mammals, the nonsense-mediated mRNA decay as a master regulator of long non-coding RNAs functional trajectory. *Noncoding RNA* **7**: 44. doi:10.3390/ncrna7030044

Arendsee ZW, Li L, Wurtele ES. 2014. Coming of age: orphan genes in plants. *Trends Plant Sci* **19**: 698–708. doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2014.07.003

Ashe MP, De Long SK, Sachs AB. 2000. Glucose depletion rapidly inhibits translation initiation in yeast. *Mol Biol Cell* **11**: 833–848. doi:10.1091/mbc.11.3.833
Aspden JL, Eyre-Walker YC, Phillips RJ, Amin U, Mumtaz MA, Brocard M, Couso JP. 2014. Extensive translation of small Open Reading Frames revealed by Poly-Ribo-Seq. *Elife* **3**: e03528. doi:10.7554/eLife.03528

Atkinson SR, Marguerat S, Bitton DA, Rodríguez-López M, Rallis C, Lemay JF, Cotobal C, Malecki M, Smialowski P, Mata J, et al. 2018. Long noncoding RNA repertoire and targeting by nuclear exosome, cytoplasmic exonuclease, and RNAi in fission yeast. *RNA* **24**: 1195–1213. doi:10.1261/rna.065524.118

Baudin-Baillieu A, Hatin I, Legendre R, Namy O. 2016. Translation analysis at the genome scale by ribosome profiling. *Methods Mol Biol* **1361**: 105–124. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-3079-1_7

Beelman CA, Parker R. 1994. Differential effects of translational inhibition in cis and in trans on the decay of the unstable yeast MFA2 mRNA. *J Biol Chem* **269**: 9687–9692. doi:10.1016/S0021-9258 (17)36937-5

Blevins WR, Ruiz-Orera J, Meseguer X, Blasco-Moreno B, Villanueva-Cañas JL, Espinar L, Díez J, Carey LB, Albà MM. 2021. Uncovering de novo gene birth in yeast using deep transcriptomics. *Nat Commun* **12**: 604. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-20911-3

Bresson S, Shchepachev V, Spanos C, Turowski TW, Rappsilber J, Tollervey D. 2020. Stress-induced translation inhibition through rapid displacement of scanning initiation factors. *Mol Cell* **80**: 470–484.e8. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2020.09.021

Carlevaro-Fita J, Rahim A, Guigó R, Vardy LA, Johnson R. 2016. Cytoplasmic long noncoding RNAs are frequently bound to and degraded at ribosomes in human cells. *RNA* **22**: 867–882. doi:10.1261/ma.053561.115

Carvunis AR, Rolland T, Wapinski I, Calderwood MA, Yildirim MA, Simonis N, Charloteaux B, Hidalgo CA, Barbette J, Santhanam B, et al. 2012. Proto-genes and de novo gene birth. *Nature* **487**: 370–374. doi:10.1038/nature11184

Castelli LM, Lui J, Campbell SG, Rowe W, Zeef LA, Holmes LE, Hoyle NP, Bone J, Selley JN, Sims PF, et al. 2011. Glucose depletion inhibits translation initiation via eIF4A loss and subsequent 48S preinitiation complex accumulation, while the pentose phosphate pathway is coordinately up-regulated. *Mol Biol Cell* **22**: 3379–3393. doi:10.1091/mbc.e11-02-0153

Celik A, Baker R, He F, Jacobson A. 2017. High-resolution profiling of NMD targets in yeast reveals translational fidelity as a basis for substrate selection. *RNA* **23**: 735–748. doi:10.1261/ma.060541.116

Chen J, Brunner AD, Cogan JZ, Nuñez JK, Fields AP, Adamson B, Itzhak DN, Li JY, Mann M, Leonetti MD, et al. 2020. Pervasive functional translation of noncanonical human open reading frames. *Science* **367**: 1140–1146. doi:10.1126/science.aay0262

Chothani SP, Adami E, Widjaja AA, Langley SR, Viswanathan S, Pua CJ, Zhihao NT, Harmston N, D'Agostino G, Whiffin N, et al. 2022. A high-resolution map of human RNA translation. *Mol Cell* **82**: 2885–2899.e8. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2022.06.023

Choudhary S, Li W, Smith AD. 2020. Accurate detection of short and long active ORFs using Ribo-seq data. *Bioinformatics* **36**: 2053–2059. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz878

Chu V, Feng Q, Lim Y, Shao S. 2021. Selective destabilization of poly-peptides synthesized from NMD-targeted transcripts. *Mol Biol Cell* **32**: ar38. doi:10.1091/mbc.E21-08-0382

Coller J, Parker R. 2005. General translational repression by activators of mRNA decapping. *Cell* **122**: 875–886. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2005.07.012

de Andres-Pablo A, Morillon A, Wery M. 2017. LncRNAs, lost in translation or licence to regulate? *Curr Genet* **63**: 29–33. doi:10.1007/s00294-016-0615-1

Djebali S, Davis CA, Merkel A, Dobin A, Lassmann T, Mortazavi A, Tanzer A, Lagarde J, Lin W, Schlesinger F, et al. 2012. Landscape of transcription in human cells. *Nature* **489**: 101–108. doi:10.1038/nature11233

D'Lima NG, Ma J, Winkler L, Chu Q, Loh KH, Corpuz EO, Budnik BA, Lykke-Andersen J, Saghatelian A, Slavoff SA. 2017. A human microprotein that interacts with the mRNA decapping complex. *Nat Chem Biol* **13**: 174–180. doi:10.1038/nchembio.2249

Douka K, Birds I, Wang D, Kosteletos A, Clayton S, Byford A, Vasconcelos EJR, O'Connell MJ, Deuchars J, Whitehouse A, et al. 2021. Cytoplasmic long noncoding RNAs are differentially regulated and translated during human neuronal differentiation. *RNA* **27**: 1082–1101. doi:10.1261/rna.078782.121

Gardner LB. 2008. Hypoxic inhibition of nonsense-mediated RNA decay regulates gene expression and the integrated stress response. *Mol Cell Biol* **28**: 3729–3741. doi:10.1128/MCB.02284-07

Garreau de Loubresse N, Prokhorova I, Holtkamp W, Rodnina MV, Yusupova G, Yusupov M. 2014. Structural basis for the inhibition of the eukaryotic ribosome. *Nature* **513**: 517–522. doi:10.1038/nature13737

Hanson G, Coller J. 2018. Codon optimality, bias and usage in translation and mRNA decay. *Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol* **19**: 20–30. doi:10.1038/nrm.2017.91

Hu W, Sweet TJ, Chamnongpol S, Baker KE, Coller J. 2009. Co-translational mRNA decay in *Saccharomyces cerevisiae*. *Nature* **461**: 225–229. doi:10.1038/nature08265

Ingolia NT, Lareau LF, Weissman JS. 2011. Ribosome profiling of mouse embryonic stem cells reveals the complexity and dynamics of mammalian proteomes. *Cell* **147**: 789–802. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2011.10.002

Ingolia NT, Brar GA, Stern-Ginossar N, Harris MS, Talhouarne GJ, Jackson SE, Wills MR, Weissman JS. 2014. Ribosome profiling reveals pervasive translation outside of annotated protein-coding genes. *Cell Rep* **8**: 1365–1379. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2014.07.045

Jarroux J, Morillon A, Pinskaya M. 2017. History, discovery, and classification of lncRNAs. *Adv Exp Med Biol* **1008**: 1–46. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5203-3_1

Kebaara BW, Atkin AL. 2009. Long 3'-UTRs target wild-type mRNAs for nonsense-mediated mRNA decay in *Saccharomyces cerevisiae*. *Nucleic Acids Res* **37**: 2771–2778. doi:10.1093/nar/gkp146

Kim D, Paggi JM, Park C, Bennett C, Salzberg SL. 2019. Graph-based genome alignment and genotyping with HISAT2 and HISAT-genotype. *Nat Biotechnol* **37**: 907–915. doi:10.1038/s41587-019-0201-4

Kopp F, Mendell JT. 2018. Functional classification and experimental dissection of long noncoding RNAs. *Cell* **172**: 393–407. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.01.011

Kuroha K, Tatematsu T, Inada T. 2009. Upf1 stimulates degradation of the product derived from aberrant messenger RNA containing a specific nonsense mutation by the proteasome. *EMBO Rep* **10**: 1265–1271. doi:10.1038/embor.2009.200

Kuroha K, Ando K, Nakagawa R, Inada T. 2013. The Upf factor complex interacts with aberrant products derived from mRNAs containing a premature termination codon and facilitates their proteasomal degradation. *J Biol Chem* **288**: 28630–28640. doi:10.1074/jbc.M113.460691

Lareau LF, Hite DH, Hogan GJ, Brown PO. 2014. Distinct stages of the translation elongation cycle revealed by sequencing ribosome-protected mRNA fragments. *Elife* **3**: e01257. doi:10.7554/eLife.01257

Lauria F, Tebaldi T, Bernabò P, Groen EJN, Gillingwater TH, Viero G. 2018. riboWaltz: optimization of ribosome P-site positioning in ribosome profiling data. *PLoS Comput Biol* **14**: e1006169. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006169

Lorenzi L, Chiu HS, Avila Cobos F, Gross S, Volders PJ, Cannoodt R, Nuytens J, Vanderheyden K, Anckaert J, Lefever S, et al. 2021. The RNA Atlas expands the catalog of human non-coding RNAs. *Nat Biotechnol* **39**: 1453–1465. doi:10.1038/s41587-021-00936-1
Love MI, Huber W, Anders S. 2014. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. *Genome Biol* **15**: 550. doi:10.1186/s13059-014-0550-8

Maderazo AB, He F, Mangus DA, Jacobson A. 2000. Upf1p control of nonsense mRNA translation is regulated by Nmd2p and Upf3p. *Mol Cell Biol* **20**: 4591-4603. doi:10.1128/MCB.20.13.4591-4603.2000

Malabat C, Feuerbach F, Ma L, Saveanu C, Jacquier A. 2015. Quality control of transcription start site selection by nonsense-mediated-mRNA decay. *Elife* **4**: e06722. doi:10.7554/eLife.06722

Martin M. 2011. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. *EMBnet.journal* **17**: 10–12. doi:10.14806/ej.17.1.200

Matsumoto A, Pasut A, Matsumoto M, Yamashita R, Fung J, Monteleone E, Saghatelian A, Nakayama KI, Clohessy JG, Pandolfi PP. 2017. mTORC1 and muscle regeneration are regulated by the LINCO0961-encoded SPAR polypeptide. *Nature* **541**: 228–232. doi:10.1038/nature21034

McLysaght A, Hurst LD. 2016. Open questions in the study of de novo genes: what, how and why. *Nat Rev Genet* **17**: 567–578. doi:10.1038/nrg.2016.78

Mendell JT, Sharifi NA, Meyers JL, Martinez-Murillo F, Dietz HC. 2004. Nonsense surveillance regulates expression of diverse classes of mammalian transcripts and mutes genomic noise. *Nat Genet* **36**: 1073–1078. doi:10.1038/ng1429

Michaelis S, Herskowitz I. 1988. The a-factor pheromone of *Saccharomyces cerevisiae* is essential for mating. *Mol Cell Biol* **8**: 1309–1318. doi:10.1128/mcb.8.3.1309-1318.1988

Muhlrad D, Parker R. 1999. Aberrant mRNAs with extended 3' UTRs are substrates for rapid degradation by mRNA surveillance. *RNA* **5**: 1299–1307. doi:10.1017/S1355838299990829

Muhlrad D, Decker CJ, Parker R. 1995. Turnover mechanisms of the stable yeast PGK1 mRNA. *Mol Cell Biol* **15**: 2145–2156. doi:10.1128/MCB.15.4.2145

Neil H, Malabat C, d'Aubenton-Carafa Y, Xu Z, Steinmetz LM, Jacquier A. 2009. Widespread bidirectional promoters are the major source of cryptic transcripts in yeast. *Nature* **457**: 1038–1042. doi:10.1038/nature07747

Papadopoulos C, Callebaut I, Gelly JC, Hatin I, Namy O, Renard M, Lespinet O, Lopes A. 2021. Intergenic ORFs as elementary structural modules of de novo gene birth and protein evolution. *Genome Res* **31**: 2303–2315. doi:10.1101/gr.275638.121

Pelechano V, Wei W, Steinmetz LM. 2013. Extensive transcriptional heterogeneity revealed by isoform profiling. *Nature* **497**: 127–131. doi:10.1038/nature12121

Pelechano V, Wei W, Steinmetz LM. 2015. Widespread co-translational RNA decay reveals ribosome dynamics. *Cell* **161**: 1400–1412. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.008

Ponting CP, Haerty W. 2022. Genome-wide analysis of human long non-coding RNAs: a provocative review. *Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet* **23**: 153–172. doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-112921-123710

Presnyak V, Alhusaini N, Chen YH, Martin S, Morris N, Kline N, Olson S, Weinberg D, Baker KE, Graveley BR, et al. 2015. Codon optimality is a major determinant of mRNA stability. *Cell* **160**: 1111–1124. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.02.029

Renganathan A, Felley-Bosco E. 2017. Long noncoding RNAs in cancer and therapeutic potential. *Adv Exp Med Biol* **1008**: 199–222. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5203-3_7

Ruiz-Orera J, Messeguer X, Subirana JA, Alba MM. 2014. Long non-coding RNAs as a source of new peptides. *Elife* **3**: e03523. doi:10.7554/eLife.03523

Saha P, Verma S, Pathak RU, Mishra RK. 2017. Long noncoding RNAs in mammalian development and diseases. *Adv Exp Med Biol* **1008**: 155–198. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5203-3_6

Schmitt AM, Chang HY. 2016. Long noncoding RNAs in cancer pathways. *Cancer Cell* **29**: 452–463. doi:10.1016/j.ccell.2016.03.010

Schmitz JF, Ullrich KK, Bomberg-Bauer E. 2018. Incipient de novo genes can evolve from frozen accidents that escaped rapid transcript turnover. *Nat Ecol Evol* **2**: 1626–1632. doi:10.1038/s41559-018-0639-7

Serdar LD, Whiteside DL, Baker KE. 2016. ATP hydrolysis by UPF1 is required for efficient translation termination at premature stop codons. *Nat Commun* **7**: 14021. doi:10.1038/ncomms14021

Serdar LD, Whiteside DL, Nock SL, McGrath D, Baker KE. 2020. Inhibition of post-termination ribosome recycling at premature termination codons in UPF1 ATPase mutants. *Elife* **9**: e57834. doi:10.7554/eLife.57834

Slavoff SA, Mitchell AJ, Schwaid AG, Cabili MN, Ma J, Levin JZ, Karger AD, Budnik BA, Rinn JL, Saghatelian A. 2013. Peptidomic discovery of short open reading frame-encoded peptides in human cells. *Nat Chem Biol* **9**: 59–64. doi:10.1038/nchembio.1120

Smith JE, Baker KE. 2015. Nonsense-mediated RNA decay--a switch and dial for regulating gene expression. *Bioessays* **37**: 612–623. doi:10.1002/bies.201500007

Smith JE, Alvarez-Dominguez JR, Kline N, Huynh NJ, Geisler S, Hu W, Coller J, Baker KE. 2014. Translation of small open reading frames within unannotated RNA transcripts in *Saccharomyces cerevisiae*. *Cell Rep* **7**: 1858–1866. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2014.05.023

Smith T, Heger A, Sudbery I. 2017. UMI-tools: modeling sequencing errors in Unique Molecular Identifiers to improve quantification accuracy. *Genome Res* **27**: 491–499. doi:10.1101/gr.209601.116

Statello L, Guo CJ, Chen LL, Huarte M. 2021. Gene regulation by long non-coding RNAs and its biological functions. *Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol* **22**: 96–118. doi:10.1038/s41580-020-00315-9

Stevens A, Hsu CL, Isham KR, Larimer FW. 1991. Fragments of the internal transcribed spacer 1 of pre-rRNA accumulate in *Saccharomyces cerevisiae* lacking 5'–---3' exoribonuclease 1. *J Bacteriol* **173**: 7024–7028. doi:10.1128/jb.173.21.7024-7028.1991

Szabó A, Papin C, Cornu D, Chélot E, Lipinszki Z, Udvardy A, Redeker V, Mayor U, Rouyer F. 2018. Ubiquitylation dynamics of the clock cell proteome and TIMELESS during a circadian cycle. *Cell Rep* **23**: 2273–2282. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2018.04.064

Szachnowski U, Andjus S, Foretek D, Morillon A, Wery M. 2019. Endogenous RNAi pathway evolutionarily shapes the destiny of the antisense lncRNAs transcriptome. *Life Sci Alliance* **2**: e201900407. doi:10.26508/lsa.201900407

Thompson DM, Parker R. 2007. Cytoplasmic decay of intergenic transcripts in *Saccharomyces cerevisiae*. *Mol Cell Biol* **27**: 92–101. doi:10.1128/MCB.01023-06

Van Dijk EL, Chen CL, d'Aubenton-Carafa Y, Gourvennec S, Kwapisz M, Roche V, Bertrand C, Silvain M, Legoix-Né P, Loeillet S, et al. 2011. XUTs are a class of Xrn1-sensitive antisense regulatory non coding RNA in yeast. *Nature* **475**: 114–117. doi:10.1038/nature10118

van Heesch S, van Iterson M, Jacobi J, Boymans S, Essers PB, de Bruijn E, Hao W, Maclnnes AW, Cuppen E, Simonis M. 2014. Extensive localization of long noncoding RNAs to the cytosol and mono- and polyribosomal complexes. *Genome Biol* **15**: R6. doi:10.1186/gb-2014-15-1-r6

van Heesch S, Witte F, Schneider-Lunitz V, Schulz JF, Adami E, Faber AB, Kirchner M, Maatz H, Blachut S, Sandmann CL, et al. 2019. The translational landscape of the human heart. *Cell* **178**: 242–260. e29. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.05.010

Van Oss SB, Carvunis AR. 2019. De novo gene birth. *PLoS Genet* **15**: e1008160. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1008160
Wacholder A, Carvunis AR. 2023. Biological factors and statistical limitations prevent detection of most noncanonical proteins by mass spectrometry. *PLoS Biol* **21**: e3002409. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002409

Wacholder A, Parikh SB, Coelho NC, Acar O, Houghton C, Chou L, Carvunis AR. 2023. A vast evolutionarily transient translatome contributes to phenotype and fitness. *Cell Syst* **14**: 363–381.e8. doi:10.1016/j.cels.2023.04.002

Watts BR, Wittmann S, Wery M, Gautier C, Kus K, Birot A, Heo DH, Kilchert C, Morillon A, Vasiljeva L. 2018. Histone deacetylation promotes transcriptional silencing at facultative heterochromatin. *Nucleic Acids Res* **46**: 5426–5440. doi:10.1093/nar/gky232

Wery M, Kwapisz M, Morillon A. 2011. Noncoding RNAs in gene regulation. *Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med* **3**: 728–738. doi:10.1002/wsbm.148

Wery M, Descrimes M, Vogt N, Dallongeville AS, Gautherset D, Morillon A. 2016. Nonsense-mediated decay restricts lncRNA levels in yeast unless blocked by double-stranded RNA structure. *Mol Cell* **61**: 379–392. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2015.12.020

Wery M, Gautier C, Descrimes M, Yoda M, Migeot V, Hermand D, Morillon A. 2018a. Bases of antisense lncRNA-associated regulation of gene expression in fission yeast. *PLoS Genet* **14**: e1007465. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1007465

Wery M, Gautier C, Descrimes M, Yoda M, Vennin-Rendos H, Migeot V, Gautherset D, Hermand D, Morillon A. 2018b. Native elongating transcript sequencing reveals global anti-correlation between sense and antisense nascent transcription in fission yeast. *RNA* **24**: 196–208. doi:10.1261/rna.063446.117

Wery M, Szachnowski U, Andjus S, de Andres-Pablo A, Morillon A. 2023. The RNA helicases Dbp2 and Mtr4 regulate the expression of Xrn1-sensitive long non-coding RNAs in yeast. *Front. RNA Res* **1**: 1244554. doi:10.3389/fmar.2023.1244554

Wu CC, Zinshteyn B, Wehner KA, Green R. 2019. High-resolution ribosome profiling defines discrete ribosome elongation states and translational regulation during cellular stress. *Mol Cell* **73**: 959–970.e5. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2018.12.009

Wyers F, Rougemaille M, Badis G, Rousselle JC, Dufour ME, Boulay J, Régnault B, Devaux F, Namane A, Séraphin B, et al. 2005. Cryptic pol II transcripts are degraded by a nuclear quality control pathway involving a new poly(A) polymerase. *Cell* **121**: 725–737. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2005.04.030

Xu Z, Wei W, Gagneur J, Perocchi F, Clauder-Münster S, Camblong J, Guffanti E, Stutz F, Huber W, Steinmetz LM. 2009. Bidirectional promoters generate pervasive transcription in yeast. *Nature* **457**: 1033–1037. doi:10.1038/nature07728

Yao RW, Wang Y, Chen LL. 2019. Cellular functions of long noncoding RNAs. *Nat Cell Biol* **21**: 542–551. doi:10.1038/s41556-019-0311-8

Zanet J, Benrabah E, Li T, Pélissier-Monier A, Chanut-Delalande H, Ronsin B, Bellen HJ, Payre F, Plaza S. 2015. Pri sORF peptides induce selective proteasome-mediated protein processing. *Science* **349**: 1356–1358. doi:10.1126/science.aac5677

Zhang Y, Pelechano V. 2021. High-throughput 5'P sequencing enables the study of degradation-associated ribosome stalls. *Cell Rep Methods* **1**: 100001. doi:10.1016/j.crmeth.2021.100001

Zhao L, Saelao P, Jones CD, Begun DJ. 2014. Origin and spread of de novo genes in *Drosophila melanogaster* populations. *Science* **343**: 769–772. doi:10.1126/science.1248286

## MEET THE FIRST AUTHORS

<figure><img src="image_15.png" /><figcaption>Sara Andjus</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_16.png" /><figcaption>Ugo Szachnowski</figcaption></figure>

Meet the First Author(s) is an editorial feature within RNA, in which the first author(s) of research-based papers in each issue have the opportunity to introduce themselves and their work to readers of RNA and the RNA research community. Sara Andjus is the first author of this paper, "Pervasive translation of Xrn1-sensitive unstable long noncoding RNAs in yeast." Sara is currently working as an R&D researcher in a deep tech startup. She obtained her PhD in October 2022 in Antonin Morillon's lab at Institut Curie under PSL Research University (Paris), working on the biogenesis and decay of long noncoding RNAs in yeast. Ugo Szachnowski was a bioinformatics engineer in

Antonin Morillon's lab (Institut Curie) from 2018 to 2021, working on the role of lncRNA in yeast. He started a PhD in 2021 in the same team, working on the heterogeneity of lncRNA expression at the single-cell level in cancer.

**What are the major results described in your paper and how do they impact this branch of the field?**

Our paper brings to light the intriguing relationship between translation and the fate of unstable long noncoding (lnc)RNAs, challenging conventional notions. Using a simple eukaryotic organism, yeast, we show that RNAs, previously characterized as noncoding, can indeed interact with ribosomes and undergo active translation, consequently affecting how quickly they will be degraded. In fact, we demonstrate that while being bound by elongating ribosomes, lncRNAs are protected from the decay machinery. Using an lncRNA reporter, we show that despite decay machinery targeting the RNA to degradation, its translation product is released, exists in the cell and can be detected. Altogether, in this study, we comprehensively elucidate the functional implications for lncRNAs engaging with the translation machinery in a detailed, robust, and systematic manner. Our findings underscore the significance of translation in shaping the posttranscriptional metabolism of unstable lncRNAs, shedding light on previously unexplored aspects of RNA biology.

*Continued*
**What led you to study RNA or this aspect of RNA science?**

**SA:** Studying RNA and its various aspects, including its stability, diverse functions, and the enigmatic world of lncRNAs, despite being technically challenging, presented a captivating challenge and opportunity throughout my PhD journey. RNA molecules have multifaceted capabilities, and we still do not fully understand most of them!

**US:** Studying lncRNAs was like opening a door on a new world, as this field was not covered during my studies. So many are described and yet the function of most of them is unknown: It is an exciting and challenging field!

**If you were able to give one piece of advice to your younger self, what would that be?**

**SA:** It would be to believe more in myself. Also, a small tip—keep the “negative” results somewhere in the drawer—they might reveal to be more useful than you thought.

**US:** I would say more reading and more thinking. Often, I have been so eager to start running an analysis that I did not take enough time to think in detail of what I was doing, ending in doing it over—really frustrating.

**Are there specific individuals or groups who have influenced your philosophy or approach to science?**

**SA:** There are two quotes that followed me throughout my studies. The first one is a quote from Che Guevara: "Be realistic, demand the impossible." The second one is a citation of Marie Curie: "Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less."

**US:** I really enjoyed Stephen Jay Gould's *Punctuated Equilibrium*. Science never stops, and all ideas, even the most widely accepted, should be open to debate.

**How did you decide to work together as co-first authors?**

Having a team that combined expertise in both wet laboratory experimentation and bioinformatics was a must for this project. In fact, all the genome-wide data of this work could not speak by themselves without the bioinformatics analysis behind it. Our collaboration started with the first RNA-seq data set and since then was like a ping pong game. The complementary expertise of the two of us, but also of the other authors of this work, highlights the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in scientific research, ultimately driving the success of a project—which is also reinforced by chocolate sharing in the afternoons!