Difference between revisions of "Part:BBa K4165003"

 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 17: Line 17:
  
  
===Dry Lab Characterization===
+
===Functional parameters===
  
 +
<html>
 +
<style>
 +
table, th, td {
 +
  border:1px solid black; margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;
 +
}
 +
</style>
 +
<body>
 +
<table style="width:65%">
 +
<table>
 +
  <tr>
 +
    <th>Isoelectric point (PI)</th>
 +
    <th>Charge at pH 7</th>
 +
    <th>Molecular Weight (Protein)</th>
 +
  </tr>
 +
  <tr>
 +
    <td>4.103</td>
 +
    <td>-7.149</td>
 +
    <td>14.741 kDa</td>
 +
  </tr>
 +
</table>
 +
</body>
 +
</html>
  
 +
===Dry Lab Characterization===
 +
 +
<html>
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Optimization </p>
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Optimization </p>
  
Line 27: Line 52:
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Modeling </p>
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Modeling </p>
  
Coh2 was modeled tagged once with GST and once with His, to purify it and compare its stability and expression yield with the two tags, the models were done using (Alphafold - Modeller - trRosetta - Rosettafold) and the top models were obtained from Alphafold and trRosetta ranking 5 out of 6 according to our QA code.
+
Coh2 was modeled tagged once with GST and once with His tags to purify it and compare its stability and expression yield with the two tags, the models were done using (Alphafold - Modeller - trRosetta - Rosettafold), and the top models were obtained from Alphafold and trRosetta ranking 5 out of 6 according to our QA code (please refer to our <a href="https://2022.igem.wiki/cu-egypt/ProteinModelling.html">Modeling page)</a>.</p>.
  
  
Line 51: Line 76:
  
  
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Functional parameters </p>
+
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> 1.2. Docking </p>
 +
<html>
 +
The docking results showed that the fusion of GST to Coh2 increased its binding affinity score to Docs more than without the GST. Illustrating that GST increases the contact between both proteins. In addition, Galaxy and ClusPro docking results showed that the affinity when GST is fused to DocS is better than when fused to Coh2, this may be due to decreasing the overall non-interacting surface of the protein and consequently increasing the affinity. So, we ordered the four parts (His-DocS, GST-DocS, His-Coh2, GST-DocS) to prove our theory experimentally.
  
PI:         4.103
+
All of the docking results were ranked using our code for calculating the binding affinity based on PRODIGY (please refer to our <a href="https://2022.igem.wiki/cu-egypt/ProgrammingClub.html">Programming club page a code under the name of son</a>.</p>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> GST-Docs VS His-Coh by Cluspro </p>
 +
 
 +
<htchrome-extension://cbnaodkpfinfiipjblikofhlhlcickei/assets/images/logo/256.pngml>
 +
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/gst-docs-his-coh-cluspro.png" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 +
</html>
 +
 
 +
                Figure 3.: Docked structure of GST-Docs VS His-Coh2 designed by Cluspro displayed by Pymol.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> GST-Docs VS His-Coh2 by Galaxy </p>
 +
<html>
 +
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/switches/gst-docs-galaxy.png" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 +
</html>
 +
 
 +
                Figure 4.: Docked structure of GST-Docs VS His-Coh2 designed by Galaxy visualized by Pymol.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Binding energies of Docs VS Coh2 </p>
 +
 
 +
<html>
 +
<style>
 +
table, th, td {
 +
  border:1px solid black; margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;
 +
}
 +
</style>
 +
<body>
 +
<table style="width:40%">
 +
<table>
 +
  <tr>
 +
    <th>Binnding affinities of DocS Vs Coh2 docking (kcal/mol)</th>
 +
  </tr>
 +
  <tr>
 +
    <th>Model</th>
 +
    <th>Galaxy</th>
 +
    <th>Cluspro</th>
 +
  </tr>
 +
  <tr>
 +
    <th>GST_Coh2 vs His_DocS</th>
 +
    <td>-13.153</td>
 +
    <td>-11.635</td>
 +
  </tr>
 +
  <tr>
 +
    <th>GST_DocS vs His_Coh2</th>
 +
    <td>-13.488</td>
 +
    <td>-14.026</td>
 +
  </tr>
 +
</table>
 +
</body>
 +
</html>
  
Charge at (pH 7):         -7.149
+
              Table 2.: Binding energies of Docs VS Coh2 tagged with GST and His docked using Galaxy and ClusPro.
  
Molecular weight:        14.741 kDa
 
  
 
===WetLab Results===
 
===WetLab Results===
In the wet lab, we started with cloning in the pJET vector followed by the expression in the pGS-21a, then we performed two different kinds of lysis to extract the protein to find which lysis buffer will give a better yield, and quantified the protein expression before and after induction using BCA assay, in the end, we tested the His Coh affinity by the pulldown assay against the GST Doc and His Doc against GST Coh.
+
In the wet lab, we started with cloning in the pJET vector followed by the expression in the pGS-21a, then we performed two different kinds of lysis to extract the protein to find which lysis buffer would give a better yield and quantified the protein expression before and after induction using BCA assay, in the end, we tested the His Coh affinity by the pulldown assay against the GST Doc and His Doc against GST Coh.
 +
<html>
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Transformation of His Coh in DH-5 alpha using pJET cloning vector </p>
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Transformation of His Coh in DH-5 alpha using pJET cloning vector </p>
The transformation was done using the TSS buffer protocol, after trying three buffers which are Calcium chloride, Magnesium chloride, and a combination between Calcium chloride and Magnesium chloride, we optimized our protocol to use the TSS buffer protocol as it showed the best results with a transformation efficiency of His Coh in DH-5 alpha using pJET vector is 172000 No. of transformants/μg.
+
The transformation was done using the TSS buffer protocol, after trying three buffers which are Calcium chloride, Magnesium chloride, and a combination between Calcium chloride and Magnesium chloride, we optimized our protocol to use the TSS buffer protocol as it showed the best results with a transformation efficiency of His Coh in DH-5 alpha using pJET vector is 172000 No. of transformants/μg, you can find the complete protocol optimization in our <a href="https://2022.igem.wiki/cu-egypt/ProtocolOptimization.html wiki page">Optimziation page.</a>.</p>
 
<html>
 
<html>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/his-coh-pjet.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/his-coh-pjet.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
</html>
 
</html>
                                       Figure 3. Transformed plate of His Coh + pJET  
+
                                       Figure 3. The transformed plate of His Coh + pJET  
  
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Transformation of His Coh in BL-21 using pGS-21a expression vector </p>
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Transformation of His Coh in BL-21 using pGS-21a expression vector </p>
Line 74: Line 155:
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/his-coh-pgs.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/his-coh-pgs.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
</html>
 
</html>
                                     Figure 4. Transformed plate of His Coh + pGS-21a
+
                                     Figure 4. The transformed plate of His Coh + pGS-21a
  
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Comparison between chemical lysis and sonication for His COH </p>
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Comparison between chemical lysis and sonication for His COH </p>
Chemical lysis and physical lysis using sonication were done to check which of them gives better results in protein extraction. After comparing the results we optimized our protocol to use sonication for His Coh extraction.
+
Chemical lysis and physical lysis using sonication were done to check which gives better protein extraction results. After comparing the results, we optimized our protocol to use sonication for His Coh extraction.
 
<html>
 
<html>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/data-analysis/sonication-or-chemical/sonication-or-chemical/his-coh.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/data-analysis/sonication-or-chemical/sonication-or-chemical/his-coh.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
Line 83: Line 164:
 
                 Figure 5. This graph shows the difference between chemical lysis and sonication for His COH.
 
                 Figure 5. This graph shows the difference between chemical lysis and sonication for His COH.
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Pull-down assay of His Coh against GST Doc and GST Coh against His Doc.</p>
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> Pull-down assay of His Coh against GST Doc and GST Coh against His Doc.</p>
Pull-down assay is a one-step technique performed to check the protein-protein interaction and to check if they bind properly. We performed a pull-down assay to check the binding affinity between His Coh against GST Doc, and between His doc and GST Coh (Illustrated in figure 6). We illustrate that the binding between His Doc with GST Coh is more stable than that His Coh with GST Doc.  
+
Pull-down assay is a one-step technique performed to check the protein-protein interaction and to check if they bind properly. We performed a pull-down assay to check the binding affinity between His Coh against GST Doc and between His doc and GST Coh (Illustrated in figure 6). We illustrate that the binding between His Doc with GST Coh is more stable than that of His Coh with GST Doc.  
 
<html>
 
<html>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/coh-vs-doc.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/coh-vs-doc.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
Line 89: Line 170:
 
                 Figure 6. This graph shows the pull-down assay of His Coh against GST Doc and His Doc against GST Coh.  
 
                 Figure 6. This graph shows the pull-down assay of His Coh against GST Doc and His Doc against GST Coh.  
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> BCA assay results for His COH and GST COH </p>
 
<p style=" font-weight: bold; font-size:14px;"> BCA assay results for His COH and GST COH </p>
BCA assay is a technique that is performed to quantify the protein concentration, and it depends on the color of the BCA working reagent which is directly proportional to the quantity of the protein. We performed BCA for His Coh to know its concentration and it is found to be 0.286725851.
+
BCA assay is a technique that is performed to quantify the protein concentration. It depends on the color of the BCA working reagent, which is directly proportional to the quantity of the protein. We performed BCA for His Coh to know its concentration, which was found to be 0.286725851 mg/ml.
 
<html>
 
<html>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/standard-curve.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/standard-curve.jpg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
Line 96: Line 177:
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/bca-his-coh.png" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/bca-his-coh.png" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
</html>
 
</html>
                 Figure 7. This graph illustrates the results of BCA assay for His Coh showing that our protein  
+
                 Figure 7. This graph illustrates the results of the BCA assay for His Coh, showing that our protein  
                                         concentration is expected to be 0.286725851.
+
                                         concentration is expected to be 0.286725851 mg/ml.
 
<html>
 
<html>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/bca-gst-coh.png" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/bca-gst-coh.png" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
 
</html>
 
</html>
                 Figure 8. This graph illustrates the results of BCA assay for GST Coh showing that our protein  
+
                 Figure 8. This graph illustrates the results of the BCA assay for GST Coh, showing that our protein  
                                         concentration is expected to be 0.1158.
+
                                         concentration is expected to be 0.1158 mg/ml.
 
+
===pull down assay gel result ====
+
We run the elusion from the pull-down interaction to check if the His Coh interacts well with GST Doc. If the binding between His Coh and GST Doc happened the gel of SDS-PAGE will contain 2 bands. 
+
<html>
+
<p><img src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4165/wiki/parts-registry/wetlab-results/his-coh-gst-doc-and-coh-www-tld.jpeg" style="margin-left:200px;" alt="" width="500" /></p>
+
</html>
+
      Figure 9. This figure shows the binding between His Coh and Gst Doc happened as there are two bands in the gel.
+
   
+
 
+
 
+
  
 
===References===
 
===References===

Latest revision as of 03:06, 14 October 2022


CoH2 (Cohesin)

Cohesin type 2 is an enzyme that binds to its counterpart DocS (BBa_K3396000) to form a protein pair used for the assembly of our PROTAC system.


Usage and Biology

The Cohesin 2 module comes from the C. thermocellum scaffoldin and it could recognize and bind tightly to its complementary counterpart Dockerin S. The Coh2–DocS pair represents the interaction between two complementary families of protein modules that exhibit divergent specificities and affinities, ranging from one of the highest known affinity constants between two proteins to relatively low-affinity interactions. This serves an essential role in the assembly of cellulosomal enzymes into the multienzyme cellulolytic complex (cellulosome), this interaction happens in two different forms, called the dual binding mode, in a calcium-dependent manner due to the presence of a calcium-binding site in the dockerin protein.

We used the DocS-Coh2 binding in our Snitch system to form the PROTAC pair that will conjugate E3 ligase trim 21 (BBa_K4165001) with the binding peptide for our targeted protein tau.

Sequence and Features


Assembly Compatibility:
  • 10
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[10]
  • 12
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[12]
  • 21
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[21]
  • 23
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[23]
  • 25
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[25]
  • 1000
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[1000]


Functional parameters

Isoelectric point (PI) Charge at pH 7 Molecular Weight (Protein)
4.103 -7.149 14.741 kDa

Dry Lab Characterization

Optimization

This part is considered as an improved version of the NUDT 2020 team part (BBa_K3396001), it is optimized to be suitable for expression in E. coli.

Modeling

Coh2 was modeled tagged once with GST and once with His tags to purify it and compare its stability and expression yield with the two tags, the models were done using (Alphafold - Modeller - trRosetta - Rosettafold), and the top models were obtained from Alphafold and trRosetta ranking 5 out of 6 according to our QA code (please refer to our Modeling page).

.

GST-Coh2

          Figure 1.: Predicted 3D structure of Coh2 protein tagged by GST designed by AlphaFold tool visualized on pymol.


His-Coh2


            Figure 2.: Predicted 3D structure of Coh2 protein tagged by His designed by TRrosetta visualized by pymol.


1.2. Docking

The docking results showed that the fusion of GST to Coh2 increased its binding affinity score to Docs more than without the GST. Illustrating that GST increases the contact between both proteins. In addition, Galaxy and ClusPro docking results showed that the affinity when GST is fused to DocS is better than when fused to Coh2, this may be due to decreasing the overall non-interacting surface of the protein and consequently increasing the affinity. So, we ordered the four parts (His-DocS, GST-DocS, His-Coh2, GST-DocS) to prove our theory experimentally. All of the docking results were ranked using our code for calculating the binding affinity based on PRODIGY (please refer to our Programming club page a code under the name of son.

GST-Docs VS His-Coh by Cluspro

               Figure 3.: Docked structure of GST-Docs VS His-Coh2 designed by Cluspro displayed by Pymol.


GST-Docs VS His-Coh2 by Galaxy

                Figure 4.: Docked structure of GST-Docs VS His-Coh2 designed by Galaxy visualized by Pymol.


Binding energies of Docs VS Coh2

Binnding affinities of DocS Vs Coh2 docking (kcal/mol)
Model Galaxy Cluspro
GST_Coh2 vs His_DocS -13.153 -11.635
GST_DocS vs His_Coh2 -13.488 -14.026

             Table 2.: Binding energies of Docs VS Coh2 tagged with GST and His docked using Galaxy and ClusPro.


WetLab Results

In the wet lab, we started with cloning in the pJET vector followed by the expression in the pGS-21a, then we performed two different kinds of lysis to extract the protein to find which lysis buffer would give a better yield and quantified the protein expression before and after induction using BCA assay, in the end, we tested the His Coh affinity by the pulldown assay against the GST Doc and His Doc against GST Coh.

Transformation of His Coh in DH-5 alpha using pJET cloning vector

The transformation was done using the TSS buffer protocol, after trying three buffers which are Calcium chloride, Magnesium chloride, and a combination between Calcium chloride and Magnesium chloride, we optimized our protocol to use the TSS buffer protocol as it showed the best results with a transformation efficiency of His Coh in DH-5 alpha using pJET vector is 172000 No. of transformants/μg, you can find the complete protocol optimization in our Optimziation page..

                                      Figure 3. The transformed plate of His Coh + pJET 

Transformation of His Coh in BL-21 using pGS-21a expression vector

After cloning the Coh protein in DH5 alpha we extract the plasmid using manual miniprep, as it extracts more yield. To initiate protein expression, we transform Coh protein in BL-21 using the pGS-21a vector. The transformation efficiency is 180000 No. of transformants/μg.

                                   Figure 4. The transformed plate of His Coh + pGS-21a

Comparison between chemical lysis and sonication for His COH

Chemical lysis and physical lysis using sonication were done to check which gives better protein extraction results. After comparing the results, we optimized our protocol to use sonication for His Coh extraction.

                Figure 5. This graph shows the difference between chemical lysis and sonication for His COH.

Pull-down assay of His Coh against GST Doc and GST Coh against His Doc.

Pull-down assay is a one-step technique performed to check the protein-protein interaction and to check if they bind properly. We performed a pull-down assay to check the binding affinity between His Coh against GST Doc and between His doc and GST Coh (Illustrated in figure 6). We illustrate that the binding between His Doc with GST Coh is more stable than that of His Coh with GST Doc.

                Figure 6. This graph shows the pull-down assay of His Coh against GST Doc and His Doc against GST Coh. 

BCA assay results for His COH and GST COH

BCA assay is a technique that is performed to quantify the protein concentration. It depends on the color of the BCA working reagent, which is directly proportional to the quantity of the protein. We performed BCA for His Coh to know its concentration, which was found to be 0.286725851 mg/ml.

               Figure 7. This graph illustrates the results of the BCA assay for His Coh, showing that our protein 
                                       concentration is expected to be 0.286725851 mg/ml.

                Figure 8. This graph illustrates the results of the BCA assay for GST Coh, showing that our protein 
                                       concentration is expected to be 0.1158 mg/ml.

References

1. Brás, J. L., Carvalho, A. L., Viegas, A., Najmudin, S., Alves, V. D., Prates, J. A., Ferreira, L. M., Romão, M. J., Gilbert, H. J., & Fontes, C. M. (2012). Escherichia coli Expression, Purification, Crystallization, and Structure Determination of Bacterial Cohesin–Dockerin Complexes. Methods in Enzymology, 510, 395-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-415931-0.00021-5

2. Slutzki, M., Ruimy, V., Morag, E., Barak, Y., Haimovitz, R., Lamed, R., & Bayer, E. A. (2012). High-Throughput Screening of Cohesin Mutant Libraries on Cellulose Microarrays. Methods in Enzymology, 510, 453-463. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-415931-0.00024-0

3. Stahl, S. W., Nash, M. A., Fried, D. B., Slutzki, M., Barak, Y., Bayer, E. A., & Gaub, H. E. (2012). Single-molecule dissection of the high-affinity cohesin–dockerin complex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(50), 20431-20436.

4. Karpol A, Kantorovich L, Demishtein A, Barak Y, Morag E, Lamed R, Bayer EA. Engineering a reversible, high-affinity system for efficient protein purification based on the cohesin-dockerin interaction. J Mol Recognit. 2009 Mar-Apr;22(2):91-8. doi: 10.1002/jmr.926. PMID: 18979459.

5. Wojciechowski, M., Różycki, B., Huy, P.D.Q. et al. Dual binding in cohesin-dockerin complexes: the energy landscape and the role of short, terminal segments of the dockerin module. Sci Rep 8, 5051 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23380-9