Placement: Promote to Homepage

Now, Weissman, who is also a professor of biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an HHMI Investigator, and postdoc in his lab Jingchuan Luo have expanded our knowledge of localized translation at mitochondria, structures that generate energy for the cell. In a paper published in Cell on August 27, they share a new tool, LOCL-TL, for studying localized translation in close detail, and describe the discoveries it enabled about two classes of proteins that are locally translated at mitochondria.

The importance of localized translation at mitochondria relates to their unusual origin. Mitochondria were once bacteria that lived within our ancestors’ cells. Over time the bacteria lost their autonomy and became part of the larger cells, which included migrating most of their genes into the larger cell’s genome in the nucleus. Cells evolved processes to ensure that proteins needed by mitochondria that are encoded in genes in the larger cell’s genome get transported to the mitochondria. Mitochondria retain a few genes in their own genome, so production of proteins from the mitochondrial genome and that of the larger cell’s genome must be coordinated to avoid mismatched production of mitochondrial parts. Localized translation may help cells to manage the interplay between mitochondrial and nuclear protein production—among other purposes.

How to detect local protein production

For a protein to be made, genetic code stored in DNA is read into RNA, and then the RNA is read or translated by a ribosome, a cellular machine that builds a protein according to the RNA code. Weissman’s lab previously developed a method to study localized translation by tagging ribosomes near a structure of interest, and then capturing the tagged ribosomes in action and observing the proteins they are making. This approach, called proximity-specific ribosome profiling, allows researchers to see what proteins are being made where in the cell. The challenge that Luo faced was how to tweak this method to capture only ribosomes at work near mitochondria.

Ribosomes work quickly, so a ribosome that gets tagged while making a protein at the mitochondria can move on to making other proteins elsewhere in the cell in a matter of minutes. The only way researchers can guarantee that the ribosomes they capture are still working on proteins made near the mitochondria is if the experiment happens very quickly.

Weissman and colleagues had previously solved this time sensitivity problem in yeast cells with a ribosome-tagging tool called BirA that is activated by the presence of the molecule biotin. BirA is fused to the cellular structure of interest, and tags ribosomes it can touch—but only once activated. Researchers keep the cell depleted of biotin until they are ready to capture the ribosomes, to limit the time when tagging occurs. However, this approach does not work with mitochondria in mammalian cells because they need biotin to function normally, so it cannot be depleted.

Luo and Weissman adapted the existing tool to respond to blue light instead of biotin. The new tool, LOV-BirA, is fused to the mitochondria’s outer membrane. Cells are kept in the dark until the researchers are ready. Then they expose the cells to blue light, activating LOV-BirA to tag ribosomes. They give it a few minutes and then quickly extract the ribosomes. This approach proved very accurate at capturing only ribosomes working at mitochondria.

The researchers then used a method originally developed by the Weissman lab to extract the sections of RNA inside of the ribosomes. This allows them to see exactly how far along in the process of making a protein the ribosome is when captured, which can reveal whether the entire protein is made at the mitochondria, or whether it is partly produced elsewhere and only gets completed at the mitochondria.

“One advantage of our tool is the granularity it provides,” Luo says. “Being able to see what section of the protein is locally translated helps us understand more about how localized translation is regulated, which can then allow us to understand its dysregulation in disease and to control localized translation in future studies.”

Two protein groups are made at mitochondria

Using these approaches, the researchers found that about twenty percent of the genes needed in mitochondria that are located in the main cellular genome are locally translated at mitochondria. These proteins can be divided into two distinct groups with different evolutionary histories and mechanisms for localized translation.

One group consists of relatively long proteins, each containing more than 400 amino acids or protein building blocks. These proteins tend to be of bacterial origin—present in the ancestor of mitochondria—and they are locally translated in both mammalian and yeast cells, suggesting that their localized translation has been maintained through a long evolutionary history.

Like many mitochondrial proteins encoded in the nucleus, these proteins contain a mitochondrial targeting sequence (MTS), a zip code that tells the cell where to bring them. The researchers discovered that most proteins containing an MTS also contain a nearby inhibitory sequence that prevents transportation until they are done being made. This group of locally translated proteins lacks the inhibitory sequence, so they are brought to the mitochondria during their production.

Production of these longer proteins begins anywhere in the cell, and then after approximately the first 250 amino acids are made, they get transported to the mitochondria. While the rest of the protein gets made, it is simultaneously fed into a channel that brings it inside the mitochondria. This ties up the channel for a long time, limiting import of other proteins, so cells can only afford to do this simultaneous production and import for select proteins. The researchers hypothesize that these bacterial-origin proteins are given priority as an ancient mechanism to ensure that they are accurately produced and placed within mitochondria.

The second locally translated group consists of short proteins, each less than 200 amino acids long. These proteins are more recently evolved, and correspondingly, the researchers found that the mechanism for their localized translation is not shared by yeast. Their mitochondrial recruitment happens at the RNA level. Two sequences within regulatory sections of each RNA molecule that do not encode the final protein instead code for the cell’s machinery to recruit the RNAs to the mitochondria.

The researchers searched for molecules that might be involved in this recruitment, and identified the RNA binding protein AKAP1, which exists at mitochondria. When they eliminated AKAP1, the short proteins were translated indiscriminately around the cell. This provided an opportunity to learn more about the effects of localized translation, by seeing what happens in its absence. When the short proteins were not locally translated, this led to the loss of various mitochondrial proteins, including those involved in oxidative phosphorylation, our cells’ main energy generation pathway.

In future research, Weissman and Luo will delve deeper into how localized translation affects mitochondrial function and dysfunction in disease. The researchers also intend to use LOCL-TL to study localized translation in other cellular processes, including in relation to embryonic development, neural plasticity, and disease.

“This approach should be broadly applicable to different cellular structures and cell types, providing many opportunities to understand how localized translation contributes to biological processes,” Weissman says. “We’re particularly interested in what we can learn about the roles it may play in diseases including neurodegeneration, cardiovascular diseases, and cancers.”

Luo et al. “Proximity-specific ribosome profiling reveals the logic of localized mitochondrial translation.” Cell, August 27, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2025.08.002

All life is connected in a vast family tree. Every organism exists in relationship to its ancestors, descendants, and cousins, and the path between any two individuals can be traced. The same is true of cells within organisms—each of the trillions of cells in the human body is produced through successive divisions from a fertilized egg, and can all be related to one another through a cellular family tree. In simpler organisms such as the worm C. elegans, this cellular family tree has been fully mapped, but the cellular family tree of a human is many times larger and more complex.

In the past, Whitehead Institute Member Jonathan Weissman and other researchers have developed lineage tracing methods to track and reconstruct the family trees of cell divisions in model organisms in order to understand more about the relationships between cells and how they assemble into tissues, organs, and—in some cases—tumors. These methods could help to answer many questions about how organisms develop and diseases like cancer are initiated and progress.

Now, Weissman and colleagues have developed an advanced lineage tracing tool that not only captures an accurate family tree of cell divisions, but also combines that with spatial information: identifying where each cell ends up within a tissue. The researchers used their tool, PEtracer, to observe the growth of metastatic tumors in mice. Combining lineage tracing and spatial data provided the researchers with a detailed view of how elements intrinsic to the cancer cells and from their environments influenced tumor growth, as Weissman and postdocs in his lab Luke Koblan, Kathryn Yost, and Pu Zheng, and graduate student William Colgan share in a paper published in the journal Science on July 24.

“Developing this tool required combining diverse skillsets through the sort of ambitious interdisciplinary collaboration that’s only possible at a place like Whitehead Institute,” says Weissman, who is also a professor of biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an HHMI Investigator. “Luke came in with an expertise in genetic engineering, Pu in imaging, Katie in cancer biology, and William in computation but the real key to their success was their ability to work together to build PEtracer.”

“Understanding how cells move in time and space is an important way to look at biology, and here we were able to see both of those things in high resolution. The idea is that by understanding both a cell’s past and where it ends up, you can see how different factors throughout its life influenced its behaviors. In this study we use these approaches to look at tumor growth, though in principle we can now begin to apply these tools to study other biology of interest like embryonic development,” Koblan says.

Designing a tool to track cells in space and time

PEtracer tracks cells’ lineages by repeatedly adding short, predetermined codes to the DNA of cells over time. Each piece of code, called a lineage tracing mark, is made up of 5 bases, the building blocks of DNA. These marks are inserted using a gene editing technology called prime editing, which directly rewrites stretches of DNA with minimal undesired byproducts. Over time, each cell acquires more lineage tracing marks, while also maintaining the marks of its ancestors. The researchers can then compare cells’ combinations of marks to figure out relationships and reconstruct the family tree.

“We used computational modeling to design the tool from first principles, to make sure that it was highly accurate, and compatible with imaging technology. We ran many simulations to land on the optimal parameters for a new lineage tracing tool, and then engineered our system to fit those parameters,” Colgan says.

When the tissue—in this case, a tumor growing in the lung of a mouse—had sufficiently grown, the researchers collected these tissues and used advanced imaging approaches to look at each cell’s lineage relationship to other cells via the lineage tracing marks, along with its spatial position within the imaged tissue and its identity (as determined by the levels of different RNAs expressed in each cell). PEtracer is compatible with both imaging approaches and sequencing methods that capture genetic information from single cells.

“Making it possible to collect and analyze all of this data from the imaging was a large challenge,” Zheng says. “What’s particularly exciting to me is not just that we were able to collect terabytes of data, but that we designed the project to collect data that we knew we could use to answer important questions and drive biological discovery.”

Reconstructing the history of a tumor

Combining the lineage tracing, gene expression, and spatial data let the researchers understand how the tumor grew. They could tell how closely related neighboring cells are and compare their traits. Using this approach, the researchers found that the tumors they were analyzing were made up of four distinct modules, or neighborhoods, of cells.

The tumor cells closest to the lung, the most nutrient-dense region, were the most fit, meaning their lineage history indicated the highest rate of cell division over time. Fitness in cancer cells tends to correlate to how aggressively tumors will grow.

The cells at the “leading edge” of the tumor, the far side from the lung, were more diverse and not as fit. Below the leading edge was a low-oxygen neighborhood of cells that might once have been leading edge cells, now trapped in a less desirable spot. Between these cells and the lung-adjacent cells was the tumor core, a region with both living and dead cells as well as cellular debris.

The researchers found that cancer cells across the family tree were equally likely to end up in most of the regions, with the exception of the lung adjacent region, where a few branches of the family tree dominated. This suggests that the cancer cells’ differing traits were heavily influenced by their environments, or the conditions in their local neighborhoods, rather than their family history. Further evidence of this point was that expression of certain fitness-related genes, such as Fgf1/Fgfbp1, correlated to a cell’s location rather than its ancestry. However, lung adjacent cells also had inherited traits that gave them an edge, including expression of the fitness-related gene Cldn4­—showing that family history influenced outcomes as well.

These findings demonstrate how cancer growth is influenced both by factors intrinsic to certain lineages of cancer cells and by environmental factors that shape the behavior of cancer cells exposed to them.

“By looking at so many dimensions of the tumor in concert, we could gain insights that would not have been possible with a more limited view,” Yost says. “Being able to characterize different populations of cells within a tumor will enable researchers to develop therapies that target the most aggressive populations more effectively.”

“Now that we’ve done the hard work of designing the tool, we’re excited to apply it to look at all sorts of questions in health and disease, in embryonic development, and across other model species, with an eye toward understanding important problems in human health,” Koblan says. “The data we collect will also be useful for training AI models of cellular behavior. We’re excited to share this technology with other researchers and see what we all can discover.”

Luke W. Koblan, Kathryn E. Yost, Pu Zheng, William N. Colgan, Matthew G. Jones, Dian Yang, Arhan Kumar, Jaspreet Sandhu, Alexandra Schnell, Dawei Sun, Can Ergen, Reuben A. Saunders, Xiaowei Zhuang, William E. Allen, Nir Yosef, Jonathan S. Weissman. “High-resolution spatial mapping of cell state and lineage dynamics in vivo with PEtracer.” Science, online July 24, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adx3800