ERK and p38 MAP kinases, acting through the downstream mitogen- and stress-activated kinase 1/2 (MSK1/2), elicit histone H3 phosphorylation on a subfraction of nucleosomes – including those at Fos and Jun – concomitant with gene induction. S10 and S28 on the H3 tail have both been shown to be phospho-acceptors in vivo. Both phospho-epitopes appear with similar time-courses and both occur on H3 tails that are highly sensitive to TSA-induced hyperacetylation, similarities which might suggest that MSK1/2 phosphorylates both sites on the same H3 tails. Indeed, on recombinant histone octamers in vitro , MSK1 efficiently phosphorylates both sites on the same H3 tail. However, sequential immunoprecipitation studies show that antibodies against phosphorylated S10-H3 recover virtually all this epitope without depletion of phosphorylated S28-H3, and vice versa, indicating that the two phospho-epitopes are not located on the same H3 tail in vivo. Confocal immunocytochemistry confirms the clear physical separation of the two phospho-epitopes in the intact mouse nucleus. Finally, we used transfection-based experiments to test models that might explain such differential targeting. Overexpression and delocalisation of MSK1 does not result in the breakdown of targeting in vivo despite the fact that the ectopic kinase is fully activated by external stimuli. These studies reveal a remarkable level of targeting of S10 and S28 phosphorylation to distinct H3 tails within chromatin in the interphase mouse nucleus. Possible models for such exquisite targeting are discussed.

Although it is frequently assumed that translation does not occur in eukaryotic nuclei, recent evidence suggests that some translation can take place and that it is closely coupled to transcription. The first evidence concerns the destruction of nuclear mRNAs containing premature termination codons by nonsense-mediated decay (NMD). Only ribosomes can detect termination codons, and as some NMD occurs within the nuclear fraction, active nuclear ribosomes could perform the required detection. The second evidence is the demonstration that tagged amino acids are incorporated into nascent polypeptides in a nuclear process coupled to transcription. The third evidence is that components involved in translation, NMD and transcription colocalize, coimmunoprecipitate and co-purify. All these results are simply explained if nuclear ribosomes scan nascent transcripts for premature termination codons at the site of transcription. Alternatively, the scanning needed for NMD might take place at the nuclear membrane, and contaminating cytoplasmic ribosomes might give the appearance of some nuclear translation. We argue, however, that the balance of evidence favours bona fide nuclear translation.

It is widely believed that translation occurs only in the cytoplasm of eukaryotes, but recent results suggest some takes place in nuclei, coupled to transcription. Support for this heterodoxy comes from studies of the nonsense-mediated decay (NMD) pathway; this pathway probably uses ribosomes to proofread messenger RNAs. We find components of the machineries involved in transcription, translation and NMD colocalise, interact and copurify, and that interactions between them are probably mediated by the C-terminal domain of the catalytic subunit of RNA polymerase II. These results are simply explained if the NMD machinery uses nuclear ribosomes to translate – and so proofread – newly made transcripts; then, faulty transcripts and any truncated peptides produced by nuclear translation would be degraded.