Ability of GFPSRE+ mRNA. To differentiate between these 
two possibilities we compared GFP-SRE+ mRNA in vts1D cells and eap1D vts1D double delete cells (Figure 1B) and found that this mRNA has the same stability under these different conditions. This suggests that Vts1p and Eap1p function together in the same pathway to degrade GFP-SRE+ mRNA. To further confirm the importance of Eap1p in the degradation of Vts1p target mRNAs we measured the stability of YIR016W mRNA in eap1D cells, having previously shown that Vts1p binds to this mRNA and regulates its stability through deadenylation, decapping and 59-to-39 exonucleolytic decay [12], [18]. To do this we used a reporter construct in which GFP is fused to the YIR016W ORF under the control of the GAL1 promoter (GFPYIR016W). This construct allows us to perform Hexaconazole biological activity transcriptionalpulse/chase Anlotinib biological activity experiments similar to those described for the GFPSRE+ reporter and the GFP tag allows us to specifically detect this transcript in cells that contain endogenous YIR016W mRNA. We induced GFP-YIR016W reporter transcription by adding galactose to eap1D cells and then shut off transcription with glucose. Similar to our findings using the GFP-SRE+ reporter, we found that the stability of GFP-YIR016W mRNA was increased in the eap1D strain as compared to wild-type (Figure 2). Taken together these data indicate that Eap1p is required for the rapid decay of Vts1p target mRNAs. The role of Eap1p in the degradation of Vts1p target mRNAs could indicate a general role in the degradation of mRNAs. Alternatively, its role could be more specific, perhaps reflecting a direct function in Vts1p-mediated decay. To explore these possibilities we assessed the stability of a GFP reporter mRNA (GFP-SRE-) which is identical to the GFP-SRE+ reporter with the exception that it carries SREs in which the loop sequences are mutated to block Vts1p binding [12] and as such this mRNA is not destabilzed by Vts1p (Figure 3). Transcriptional pulse-chase experiments demonstrated that GFP-SRE- mRNA was not stabilized in eap1D cells and, in fact, the earlier time points suggest a modest destabilization of the mRNA in these cells (Figure 3). Similar to Vts1p target mRNAs [18], the GFP-SRE- mRNA was destabilized through the major mRNA decay pathway as degradation required Ccr4p (the catalytic subunit of the Ccr4pPop2p-Not deadenylase) and the 59-to-39 exonuclease Xrn1p (Figure S1). Thus, the differential role of Eap1p in the stability of GFP-SRE+ and GFP-SRE- mRNAs is consistent with a direct role for Eap1p in the degradation of Vts1p target mRNAs as opposed to a general role in transcript degradation. Interestingly, these experiments demonstrated that GFP-SREmRNA was less stable in a vts1D strain compared to wild-type cells (Figure 3). We suggest that the physical interaction between Vts1p and the Ccr4p-Pop2p-Not deadenylase complex [18] in wild-type cells sequesters some fraction of the deadenylase into a pool that is unable 12926553 to act on mRNAs that are not targeted by Vts1p. In a vts1DFigure 1. Eap1p and Vts1p function in the same pathway to destabilize GFP-SRE+ mRNA. GFP-SRE+ mRNA expression was induced in the indicated strains and then shut-off with glucose and reporter mRNA levels were assayed at the times indicated after transcriptional shutoff by Northern blot. The results of at least three independent experiments were quantitated and normalized using the levels of SCR1 RNA and graphed with error bars representing standard deviation. *Note that.Ability of GFPSRE+ mRNA. To differentiate between these two possibilities we compared GFP-SRE+ mRNA in vts1D cells and eap1D vts1D double delete cells (Figure 1B) and found that this mRNA has the same stability under these different conditions. This suggests that Vts1p and Eap1p function together in the same pathway to degrade GFP-SRE+ mRNA. To further confirm the importance of Eap1p in the degradation of Vts1p target mRNAs we measured the stability of YIR016W mRNA in eap1D cells, having previously shown that Vts1p binds to this mRNA and regulates its stability through deadenylation, decapping and 59-to-39 exonucleolytic decay [12], [18]. To do this we used a reporter construct in which GFP is fused to the YIR016W ORF under the control of the GAL1 promoter (GFPYIR016W). This construct allows us to perform transcriptionalpulse/chase experiments similar to those described for the GFPSRE+ reporter and the GFP tag allows us to specifically detect this transcript in cells that contain endogenous YIR016W mRNA. We induced GFP-YIR016W reporter transcription by adding galactose to eap1D cells and then shut off transcription with glucose. Similar to our findings using the GFP-SRE+ reporter, we found that the stability of GFP-YIR016W mRNA was increased in the eap1D strain as compared to wild-type (Figure 2). Taken together these data indicate that Eap1p is required for the rapid decay of Vts1p target mRNAs. The role of Eap1p in the degradation of Vts1p target mRNAs could indicate a general role in the degradation of mRNAs. Alternatively, its role could be more specific, perhaps reflecting a direct function in Vts1p-mediated decay. To explore these possibilities we assessed the stability of a GFP reporter mRNA (GFP-SRE-) which is identical to the GFP-SRE+ reporter with the exception that it carries SREs in which the loop sequences are mutated to block Vts1p binding [12] and as such this mRNA is not destabilzed by Vts1p (Figure 3). Transcriptional pulse-chase experiments demonstrated that GFP-SRE- mRNA was not stabilized in eap1D cells and, in fact, the earlier time points suggest a modest destabilization of the mRNA in these cells (Figure 3). Similar to Vts1p target mRNAs [18], the GFP-SRE- mRNA was destabilized through the major mRNA decay pathway as degradation required Ccr4p (the 
catalytic subunit of the Ccr4pPop2p-Not deadenylase) and the 59-to-39 exonuclease Xrn1p (Figure S1). Thus, the differential role of Eap1p in the stability of GFP-SRE+ and GFP-SRE- mRNAs is consistent with a direct role for Eap1p in the degradation of Vts1p target mRNAs as opposed to a general role in transcript degradation. Interestingly, these experiments demonstrated that GFP-SREmRNA was less stable in a vts1D strain compared to wild-type cells (Figure 3). We suggest that the physical interaction between Vts1p and the Ccr4p-Pop2p-Not deadenylase complex [18] in wild-type cells sequesters some fraction of the deadenylase into a pool that is unable 12926553 to act on mRNAs that are not targeted by Vts1p. In a vts1DFigure 1. Eap1p and Vts1p function in the same pathway to destabilize GFP-SRE+ mRNA. GFP-SRE+ mRNA expression was induced in the indicated strains and then shut-off with glucose and reporter mRNA levels were assayed at the times indicated after transcriptional shutoff by Northern blot. The results of at least three independent experiments were quantitated and normalized using the levels of SCR1 RNA and graphed with error bars representing standard deviation. *Note that.
