Difference between revisions of "Part:BBa K5237009"

Line 42: Line 42:
 
   <!-- Part summary -->
 
   <!-- Part summary -->
 
   <section id="0">
 
   <section id="0">
     <h1>Mini staple:</h1>
+
     <h1>Mini staple: bGCN4</h1>
 
     <p>
 
     <p>
       The Mini staple is a fusion of GCN4 and rGCN4, engineered to bind two DNA strands simultaneously and induce
+
       The bGCN4 Mini Staple is a fusion of the basic leucine zipper GCN4 and rGCN4, offering a smaller, compact protein
       proximity.
+
       staple. With its well-characterized subunits and strong in silico and experimental validation, this Mini Staple
      With the Mini staples, we aimed to engineer a smaller alternative to the simple staples.
+
      serves as a versatile foundation for expanding to similar staples.
 
     </p>
 
     </p>
 
     <p> </p>
 
     <p> </p>
Line 83: Line 83:
 
           <li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-4.3"><a href="#4.3"><span class="tocnumber">4.3</span> <span
 
           <li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-4.3"><a href="#4.3"><span class="tocnumber">4.3</span> <span
 
                 class="toctext">In Silico Characterization using DaVinci</span></a>
 
                 class="toctext">In Silico Characterization using DaVinci</span></a>
 +
          </li>
 
         </ul>
 
         </ul>
 
       </li>
 
       </li>
Line 104: Line 105:
 
     <p>
 
     <p>
 
       <br />
 
       <br />
       Next to the well-studied linear DNA sequence, the 3D spatial organization of DNA plays a crucial role in gene
+
       Next to the well-studied linear DNA sequence, the <b>3D spatial organization</b> of DNA plays a crucial role in
       regulation,
+
       gene regulation,
       cell fate, disease development and more. However, the tools to precisely manipulate this genomic architecture
+
       cell fate, disease development and more. However, the tools to precisely manipulate this genomic
       remain limited, rendering it challenging to explore the full potential of the
+
       architecture remain limited, rendering it challenging to explore the full potential of the
       3D genome in synthetic biology. We - iGEM Team Heidelberg 2024 - have developed PICasSO, a powerful molecular
+
       3D genome in synthetic biology. We - iGEM Team Heidelberg 2024 - have developed PICasSO, a <b>powerful
      toolbox based on various DNA-binding proteins to address this issue.
+
        molecular toolbox</b> based on various DNA-binding proteins to address this issue.
 
     </p>
 
     </p>
 
     <p>
 
     <p>
 
       The <b>PICasSO</b> part collection offers a comprehensive, modular platform for precise manipulation and
 
       The <b>PICasSO</b> part collection offers a comprehensive, modular platform for precise manipulation and
       re-programming
+
       <b>re-programming
      of DNA-DNA interactions using protein staples in living cells, enabling researchers to recreate natural 3D genomic
+
        of DNA-DNA interactions</b> using protein staples in living cells, enabling researchers to recreate natural 3D
 +
      genomic
 
       interactions, such as enhancer hijacking, or to design entirely new spatial architectures for gene regulation.
 
       interactions, such as enhancer hijacking, or to design entirely new spatial architectures for gene regulation.
       Beyond its versatility, PICasSO includes robust assay systems to support the engineering, optimization, and
+
       Specifically, the fusion of two DNA binding proteins enables to artifically bring distant genomic loci into
 +
      proximty.
 +
      To unlock the system's full potential, we introduce versatile <b>chimeric CRISPR/Cas complexes</b>, connected
 +
      either on
 +
      the protein or the guide RNA level. These1 complexes are reffered to as protein- or Cas staples. Beyond its
 +
      versatility, PICasSO includes <b>robust assay</b> systems to support the engineering, optimization, and
 
       testing of new staples, ensuring functionality <i>in vitro</i> and <i>in vivo</i>. We took special care to include
 
       testing of new staples, ensuring functionality <i>in vitro</i> and <i>in vivo</i>. We took special care to include
       parts crucial for testing every step of the cycle (design, build, test, learn) when engineering new parts.
+
       parts crucial for testing every step of the cycle (design, build, test, learn) when <b>engineering new parts</b>.
 
     </p>
 
     </p>
 
     <p>At its heart, the PICasSO part collection consists of three categories. <br /><b>(i)</b> Our <b>DNA-binding
 
     <p>At its heart, the PICasSO part collection consists of three categories. <br /><b>(i)</b> Our <b>DNA-binding
Line 332: Line 339:
 
   <h1>2. Usage and Biology</h1>
 
   <h1>2. Usage and Biology</h1>
 
   <p>Small basic-region leucine zipper (bZip) proteins are characterized by their DNA-binding. The bZip motif
 
   <p>Small basic-region leucine zipper (bZip) proteins are characterized by their DNA-binding. The bZip motif
     consists of a coiled-coil leucine zipper dimerization domain, and a highly charged basic region that directly
+
     consists of a coiled-coil leucine zipper dimerization domain, and a highly charged basic region that binds to DNA
    contacts and binds to DNA (Hollenbeck &amp; Oakley, 2000). One well characterized example is the General Control
+
    (Hollenbeck &amp; Oakley, 2000). One well characterized example is the General Control
     Protein
+
     Protein 4 (GCN4), a well-characterized transcriptional activator from yeast (Arndt &amp; Fink, 1986).<br>
    4 (GCN4), a well-characterized transcriptional activator from yeast (Arndt &amp; Fink, 1986). At its N-terminus,
+
    At its N-terminus, GCN4 contains basic residues, the so-called bZip domain, through which it binds specifically to
    GCN4
+
    the CRE (cyclic AMP
    contains basic residues, the so-called bZip domain, through which it binds specifically to the CRE (cyclic AMP
+
 
     response element) DNA sequence (5' ATGACGTCAT 3') (Hollenbeck <i>et al.</i>, 2002). A variant of GCN4 with the DNA
 
     response element) DNA sequence (5' ATGACGTCAT 3') (Hollenbeck <i>et al.</i>, 2002). A variant of GCN4 with the DNA
     binding bZip-domain
+
     binding bZip-domain at the C-terminus (rGCN4) has been engineered to bind to the inverted CRE sequence, INV2 (5'
    at the C-terminus (rGCN4) has been engineered to bind to the inverted CRE sequence, INV2 (5' GTCAtaTGAC 3', upper
+
    GTCAtaTGAC 3', upper
 
     case letters indicate direct interaction between protein and DNA) with similar affinity
 
     case letters indicate direct interaction between protein and DNA) with similar affinity
     (Hollenbeck <i>et al.</i>, 2001). By genetically fusing GCN4 to rGCN4, we created a small bivalent DNA binding
+
     (Hollenbeck <i>et al.</i>, 2001). By genetically fusing GCN4 to rGCN4, we created a small, bivalent DNA binding
     staple with less than 150 amino acids, which was for its DNA binding and stapling capabilities.</p>
+
     staple with less than 150 amino acids.</p>
 
</section>
 
</section>
 
<section id="3">
 
<section id="3">
 
   <h1>3. Assembly and part evolution</h1>
 
   <h1>3. Assembly and part evolution</h1>
 
   <p>
 
   <p>
     The amino acid sequence for GCN4 and rGCN4 was obtained from literature (Hollenbeck et al. 2001), and
+
     The amino acid sequences for GCN4 and rGCN4 were obtained from literature (Hollenbeck et al. 2001), and
 
     codon-optimized for <i>Escherichia coli</i>.
 
     codon-optimized for <i>Escherichia coli</i>.
 
     The two leucine zipper were combined with a GSG linker harbouring a BamHI site to adapt the construct with different
 
     The two leucine zipper were combined with a GSG linker harbouring a BamHI site to adapt the construct with different
     linker designs.
+
     linker designs, based on our dry lab <a href="https://2024.igem.wiki/heidelberg/model" target="_blank">DaVinci</a>
 +
    model.
 
     A FLAG-tag (DYKDDDDK) was added to the N-terminus for protein purification. The FLAG-tag can be cleaved off using an
 
     A FLAG-tag (DYKDDDDK) was added to the N-terminus for protein purification. The FLAG-tag can be cleaved off using an
 
     Enterokinase, if necessary.
 
     Enterokinase, if necessary.
     The FLAG-GCN4 sequence was cloned into a T7 expression vector and expressed using <i>E. coli</i> BL21 (DE3) cells.
+
     Expression of FLAG-GCN4 was done under an IPTG inducible T7 promoter in <i>E. coli</i> BL21 (DE3) cells.
 
   </p>
 
   </p>
 
</section>
 
</section>
Line 365: Line 372:
 
     linker types to
 
     linker types to
 
     create a functioning staple. Through dry lab modelling, various linker designs have already been simulated to
 
     create a functioning staple. Through dry lab modelling, various linker designs have already been simulated to
     predict
+
     predict improved dimerization and DNA binding.
    improved dimerization and DNA binding.
+
 
   </p>
 
   </p>
 
   <section id="4.1">
 
   <section id="4.1">
 
     <h2>4.1 Protein Expression and Purification</h2>
 
     <h2>4.1 Protein Expression and Purification</h2>
 
     <p>
 
     <p>
       The bZip proteins GCN4, rGCN4 and their fusion bGCN4 were fused N-terminally to a FLAG-tag (DYKDDDDK). All
+
       The bZip proteins GCN4, rGCN4 and the fusion thereof, bGCN4, were fused N-terminally to a FLAG-tag (DYKDDDDK).
       proteins could be readily
+
       All proteins could be readily
 
       expressed under the T7 promoter in <i class="”italic”">E. coli</i> BL21 DE3 and purified with Anti-FLAG affinity
 
       expressed under the T7 promoter in <i class="”italic”">E. coli</i> BL21 DE3 and purified with Anti-FLAG affinity
 
       columns. The purity of the proteins was confirmed by SDS-PAGE (Figure 2).
 
       columns. The purity of the proteins was confirmed by SDS-PAGE (Figure 2).
Line 401: Line 407:
 
       </div>
 
       </div>
 
     </div>
 
     </div>
     <p align="justify"></p>
+
     <p align="justify">
 
     The Electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) is a widely adopted method used to study DNA-protein
 
     The Electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) is a widely adopted method used to study DNA-protein
     interactions. EMSA functions on the basis that nucleic acids bound to proteins have reduced electrophoretic
+
     interactions. EMSA functions on the basis that nucleic acids, bound to proteins, have reduced electrophoretic
 
     mobility, compared to their counterpart. (Hellman &amp; Fried, 2007). Mobility-shift
 
     mobility, compared to their counterpart. (Hellman &amp; Fried, 2007). Mobility-shift
 
     assays can both be used to qualitatively assess DNA binding capabilities or quantitatively to determine binding
 
     assays can both be used to qualitatively assess DNA binding capabilities or quantitatively to determine binding
 
     stoichiometry and kinetics such as the apparent dissociation constant (K<sub>d</sub>) (Fried, 1989).
 
     stoichiometry and kinetics such as the apparent dissociation constant (K<sub>d</sub>) (Fried, 1989).
 
     </p>
 
     </p>
     <section style="clear:both;" id="4.2.1">
+
 
 +
     <section id="4.2.1" style="clear:both;">
 
       <h2>4.2.1 Qualitative DNA binding analysis</h2>
 
       <h2>4.2.1 Qualitative DNA binding analysis</h2>
 
       <p>
 
       <p>
Line 416: Line 423:
 
         (Figure 4).
 
         (Figure 4).
 
       </p>
 
       </p>
 +
 +
      <p>
 +
        The Electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) is a widely adopted method used to study DNA-protein
 +
        interactions. EMSA functions on the basis that nucleic acids, bound to proteins, have reduced electrophoretic
 +
        mobility, compared to their counterpart. (Hellman &amp; Fried, 2007). Mobility-shift
 +
        assays can be used both to qualitatively assess DNA binding capabilities or quantitatively to determine binding
 +
        stoichiometry and kinetics such as the apparent dissociation constant (K<sub>d</sub>) (Fried, 1989).<br><br>
 +
 +
        To analyze the binding DNA affinity an EMSA was performed, in which
 +
        bGCN4 was incubated in binding buffer with a 20 bp DNA probe containing the either the <i>CRE</i> (GCN4 binding)
 +
        sequence (5' ATGACGTCAT 3') or the <i>INVii</i> (rGCN4 binding) sequence (5' GTCAtaTGAC 3') until equilibration.
 +
        Subsequently the formed protein-DNA complexes were loaded on a native PAGE. Afterwards the DNA bands were
 +
        stained with SYBR-safe. <br>
 +
        The bGCN4 fusion protein did not show any DNA binding for both target sites.
 +
      </p>
 +
 
       <div class="thumb">
 
       <div class="thumb">
 
         <div class="thumbinner" style="width:550px"><img alt="" class="thumbimage"
 
         <div class="thumbinner" style="width:550px"><img alt="" class="thumbimage"
Line 437: Line 460:
 
       <h2>4.2.2 Quantitative DNA binding analysis</h2>
 
       <h2>4.2.2 Quantitative DNA binding analysis</h2>
 
       <p>
 
       <p>
         To further analyze DNA binding, quantitative shift assays were performed for GCN4 and rGCN4. Here
+
         To further analyze DNA binding of the staple subunits, quantitative shift assays were performed for GCN4 and rGCN4. Here
 
         0.5 µM DNA were incubated with varying concentrations of protein until equilibration. After
 
         0.5 µM DNA were incubated with varying concentrations of protein until equilibration. After
 
         electrophoresis, bands were stained with SYBR-Safe and quantified based on pixel intensity. The
 
         electrophoresis, bands were stained with SYBR-Safe and quantified based on pixel intensity. The
Line 452: Line 475:
 
         experimentally
 
         experimentally
 
         determined site saturation values (For this experiment 0 and 1 were chosen for min and max
 
         determined site saturation values (For this experiment 0 and 1 were chosen for min and max
         respectively). GCN4 binds to its optimal DNA binding motif with an apparent dissociation
+
         respectively).  
        constant K<sub>k</sub> of (0.2930.033)×10<sup>-6</sup> M, which is almost identical to the
+
        rGCN4 binding
+
        affinity to INVii a <sub>d</sub> of (0.2980.030)×10<sup>-6</sup> M.
+
 
       </p>
 
       </p>
 
       <div class="thumb">
 
       <div class="thumb">
Line 474: Line 494:
 
         </div>
 
         </div>
 
       </div>
 
       </div>
      <p>
+
    <p>
        To better understand the proteins, quantitative analysis was done to determine the apparent dissociation
+
      GCN4 binds to its optimal DNA binding motif with an apparent dissociation
        constant
+
      constant K<sub>D</sub> of (0.293 &#177; 0.033) × 10<sup>-6</sup> M, which is almost identical to the
        for GCN4 and rGCN4. <br />
+
      rGCN4 dissociation constant
        For the purified proteins GCN4, rGCN4 and the fusion bGCN4 a qualitative gel was run with high protein
+
      to INVii a K<sub>D</sub> of (0.298 &#177; 0.030) × 10<sup>-6</sup> M.
        concentration (Figure 3).
+
      Comparing them to literature values, our dissociation constants are approximately a factor 10 higher then those
        Bands for GCN4 and rGCN4 were visible but no band for bGCN4 could be detected, indicating a
+
      described in literature ((96) × 10<sup>-8</sup> M for
        lack of DNA binding. This suggests that the dimerization, necessary for DNA binding, is disrupted by the
+
      GCN4 and (2.90.8) × 10<sup>-8</sup> M for rGCN4) (Hollenbeck <i class="italic">et al.</i>, 2001). The
        GSG-linker (Ellenberger <i class="italic">et al.</i>, 1992; Liu <i class="italic">et al.</i>, 2006; Lupas
+
      differences could be due to the lower sensitivity of SYBR-Safe staining compared to radio-labeled oligos.
        <i class="italic">et al.</i>, 2017; Woolfson, 2023). To better understand possible problems in dimerization
+
      Most likely, the protein concentration was miscalculated due to the presence of additional (lower intensity)
        circular dichroism can be used to analyze secondary structure
+
      bands in
        and proper coiled coil formation (Greenfield, 2006). Further engineering can be done by testing out
+
      the SDS-PAGE analysis, indicating co-purification of small amounts of unspecific proteins.
        various linkers with specific properties to ensure correct folding and dimerization (Chen <i class="italic">et
+
      <br /><br />
          al.</i>, 2013). The apparent binding kinetics calculated for GCN4 ((0.2930.033) × 10<sup>-6</sup> M) and
+
      The FLAG-tag fusion to the N-terminus of proteins could potentially decrease binding affinity, likely due
        rGCN4
+
      to steric hindrance affecting the interaction with DNA. Interestingly, the differences in binding affinity
        ((0.2980.030) × 10<sup>-6</sup> M) are
+
      between GCN4 and rGCN4 appear negligible. Since GCN4 binds to DNA via its N-terminus and rGCN4 binds
        approximately a factor 10 higher then those described in literature ((96) × 10<sup>-8</sup> M for
+
      C-terminally, the FLAG-tag likely does not directly influence DNA binding. However, it may influence the
        GCN4 and (2.90.8) × 10<sup>-8</sup> M for rGCN4) (Hollenbeck <i class="italic">et al.</i>, 2001). The
+
      dimerization of the proteins, which is necessary for DNA binding. To further investigate this, the
        differences could be due to the lower sensitivity of SYBR-Safe
+
      FLAG-tag can be cleaved using an enterokinase and potential changes in binding affinity analyzed.
        staining compared to radio-labeled oligos.
+
       Furthermore, coiled coil formation, and the amount of dimeric and monomeric proteins could be further analyzed
        <br /><br />
+
      with circular dichroism spectroscopy (Greenfield, 2006).
        The FLAG-tag fusion to the N-terminus of proteins could potentially decrease binding affinity, likely due
+
    </p>
        to steric hindrance affecting the interaction with DNA. Interestingly, the differences in binding affinity
+
        between GCN4 and rGCN4 appear negligible. Since GCN4 binds to DNA via its N-terminus and rGCN4 binds
+
        C-terminally, the FLAG-tag likely does not directly influence DNA binding. However, it may influence the
+
        dimerization of the proteins, which is necessary for DNA binding. To further investigate this, the
+
        FLAG-tag can be cleaved using an enterokinase and potential changes in binding affinity analyzed
+
       </p>
+
 
     </section>
 
     </section>
 
     <section id="4.3">
 
     <section id="4.3">
Line 512: Line 526:
 
         refine experimental parameters, and find optimal connections between protein staples and target DNA.
 
         refine experimental parameters, and find optimal connections between protein staples and target DNA.
 
         We calibrated DaVinci with literature and our own experimental affinity data obtained via EMSA assays and
 
         We calibrated DaVinci with literature and our own experimental affinity data obtained via EMSA assays and
         purified
+
         purified proteins.<br>
        proteins. This enabled us to simulate enhancer hijacking in silico, providing valuable input for the design of
+
        further
+
        experiments. Additionally, we apply the same approach to our part collection.
+
 
         DaVinci is divided into three phases: static structure prediction, all-atom dynamics simulation, and long-ranged
 
         DaVinci is divided into three phases: static structure prediction, all-atom dynamics simulation, and long-ranged
         dna
+
         dna dynamics simulation. We applied the first two to our parts, characterizing structure and dynamics of the
        dynamics simulation. We applied the first two to our parts, characterizing structure and dynamics of the
+
 
         dna-binding
 
         dna-binding
 
         interaction.
 
         interaction.
 
       </p>
 
       </p>
 
       <p>
 
       <p>
         When selecting a peptide linker, both length and rigidity are important considerations. These linkers can
+
         In our efforts to create a bivalent DNA binding protein with minimal size, we created a Mini staple (<a
         determine
+
          href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K5237009" target="_blank">BBa_K5237009</a>)
         function and dynamics of the whole construct. We selected seven peptide linkers from the literature to cover a
+
        consisting of
         broad
+
        GCN4 fused with an GSG-linker to rGCN4 (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K5237008"
         range of physical properties (Chen et al., 2013). We tested these linkers first on our mini staples, which
+
          target="_blank">BBa_K5237008</a>). The structure and binding affinity of GCN4 were predicted and calculated.
         allowed for
+
         Furthermore different possible linkers were tested.<br>
         quicker and easier implementation before moving to the more complex Cas staples.
+
         We assessed the flexibility and rigidity of our constructs through the pLDDT values assigned
 +
        during the predictions. Figure 2 illustrates the variation in linkers using the ('GGGGS')<sub>n</sub>
 +
         sequence for flexible linkers and the ('EAAAK')<sub>n</sub> sequence for rigid linkers (Arai <i>et al.</i>, 2001).
 +
         The predictions are colored by their pLDDT scores, which act as a surrogate measure of
 +
        chain rigidity (Akdel <i>et al.</i>, 2022; Guo <i>et al.</i>, 2022). The construct C (Fig. 5) was tested as part
 +
         BBa_K5237009 in the Wetlab - it did not bind DNA on any side as the structure is to rigid
 +
         which hinders dimerisation of the two subunits
 +
 
 
       </p>
 
       </p>
 
       <div class="thumb">
 
       <div class="thumb">
         <div class="thumbinner" style="width:80%">
+
         <div class="thumbinner" style="width:80%;">
           <img alt="" src="" style="width:99%;" class="thumbimage" />
+
           <img alt="" class="thumbimage"
 +
            src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/5237/model/structure-figure-3.svg" style="width:99%;" />
 
           <div class="thumbcaption">
 
           <div class="thumbcaption">
             <i>
+
             <i><b>Figure 5: Variation of linkers connecting our mini staples.</b>
              <b>Figure 6: Variation of linkers connecting our mini staples.</b>
+
               Panels A (BBa_K5237007) and B (BBa_K5237008) show
               Panels <b>A</b> (<a href=https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K5237007>GCN4</a>) and
+
               orientations of the leucine zipper, each bound to DNA. Panels C to I display linker variations colored by their pLDDT
              <b>B</b> (<a href=https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K5237008>rGCN4</a>) show orientations of the leucine
+
              confidence score, which serves as a surrogate for chain flexibility (Akdel et al., 2022). Note that panels H and I are
               zipper, each bound to DNA.
+
              not bound to the second DNA strand. All structures were predicted using the AlphaFold server (Google DeepMind,
              Panels <b>C</b> to <b>I</b> show orientations of the leucine zipper, each bound to DNA.
+
              2024).
              Panels <b>C</b> to <b>I</b> display linker variations colored by their pLDDT confidence score,
+
              which serves as a surrogate for chain flexibility (Akdel <i>et al.</i>, 2022).
+
              Note that panels <b>H</b> and <b>I</b> are not bound to the second DNA strand.
+
              All structures were predicted using the AlphaFold server (Google DeepMind, 2024)
+
 
             </i>
 
             </i>
 
           </div>
 
           </div>
 
         </div>
 
         </div>
 
       </div>
 
       </div>
      <p>
+
 
        We assessed the flexibility and rigidity of our constructs through the pLDDT values assigned
+
        during the predictions. Figure 6 illustrates the variation in linkers using the ('GGGGS')<sub>n</sub>
+
        sequence for flexible linkers and the ('EAAAK')<sub>n</sub> sequence for rigid linkers (Arai <i>et al.</i>,
+
        2001).
+
        The predictions are colored by their pLDDT scores, which act as a surrogate measure of
+
        chain rigidity (Akdel <i>et al.</i>, 2022; Guo et al., 2022). The construct <b>C</b> was tested as part
+
        BBa_K5237009 in the Wetlab - it did not bind DNA on any side as the structure is to rigid
+
        which hinders dimerisation of the two subunits.
+
      </p>
+
 
     </section>
 
     </section>
 
   </section>
 
   </section>
Line 569: Line 574:
 
         href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-022-00849-w" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-022-00849-w</a>
 
         href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-022-00849-w" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-022-00849-w</a>
 
     </p>
 
     </p>
     <p>Arai, R., Ueda, H., Kitayama, A., Kamiya, N., & Nagamune, T. (2001). Design of the linkers which effectively
+
     <p>Arai, R., Ueda, H., Kitayama, A., Kamiya, N., &amp; Nagamune, T. (2001). Design of the linkers which effectively
 
       separate domains of a bifunctional fusion protein. <i>Protein Engineering, Design and Selection</i>, 14(8),
 
       separate domains of a bifunctional fusion protein. <i>Protein Engineering, Design and Selection</i>, 14(8),
 
       529–532. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/protein/14.8.529"
 
       529–532. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/protein/14.8.529"
Line 578: Line 583:
 
       8516–8520. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.83.22.8516"
 
       8516–8520. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.83.22.8516"
 
         target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.83.22.8516</a></p>
 
         target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.83.22.8516</a></p>
     <p>Chen, X., Zaro, J. L., & Shen, W.-C. (2013). Fusion protein linkers: Property, design and functionality.
+
     <p>Chen, X., Zaro, J. L., &amp; Shen, W.-C. (2013). Fusion protein linkers: Property, design and functionality.
 
       <i>Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews</i>, 65(10), 1357–1369. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2012.09.039"
 
       <i>Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews</i>, 65(10), 1357–1369. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2012.09.039"
 
         target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2012.09.039</a>
 
         target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2012.09.039</a>
 
     </p>
 
     </p>
 
 
     <p>Google DeepMind. (2024). AlphaFold Server. <a href="https://alphafoldserver.com/terms"
 
     <p>Google DeepMind. (2024). AlphaFold Server. <a href="https://alphafoldserver.com/terms"
 
         target="_blank">https://alphafoldserver.com/terms</a></p>
 
         target="_blank">https://alphafoldserver.com/terms</a></p>
 
 
     <p>Guo, H.-B., Perminov, A., Bekele, S., Kedziora, G., Farajollahi, S., Varaljay, V., Hinkle, K., Molinero, V.,
 
     <p>Guo, H.-B., Perminov, A., Bekele, S., Kedziora, G., Farajollahi, S., Varaljay, V., Hinkle, K., Molinero, V.,
       Meister, K., Hung, C., Dennis, P., Kelley-Loughnane, N., & Berry, R. (2022). AlphaFold2 models indicate that
+
       Meister, K., Hung, C., Dennis, P., Kelley-Loughnane, N., &amp; Berry, R. (2022). AlphaFold2 models indicate that
 
       protein sequence determines both structure and dynamics. <i>Scientific Reports</i>, 12(1), 10696. <a
 
       protein sequence determines both structure and dynamics. <i>Scientific Reports</i>, 12(1), 10696. <a
 
         href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14382-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14382-9</a>
 
         href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14382-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14382-9</a>
Line 618: Line 621:
 
         href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2023.104579" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2023.104579</a>
 
         href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2023.104579" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2023.104579</a>
 
     </p>
 
     </p>
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   </section>
 
   </section>
 +
</section>
  
 
</html>
 
</html>

Revision as of 02:13, 2 October 2024

BBa_K5237009

Mini staple: bGCN4

The bGCN4 Mini Staple is a fusion of the basic leucine zipper GCN4 and rGCN4, offering a smaller, compact protein staple. With its well-characterized subunits and strong in silico and experimental validation, this Mini Staple serves as a versatile foundation for expanding to similar staples.

 



The PICasSO Toolbox
Figure 1: How our part collection can be used to engineer new staples


Next to the well-studied linear DNA sequence, the 3D spatial organization of DNA plays a crucial role in gene regulation, cell fate, disease development and more. However, the tools to precisely manipulate this genomic architecture remain limited, rendering it challenging to explore the full potential of the 3D genome in synthetic biology. We - iGEM Team Heidelberg 2024 - have developed PICasSO, a powerful molecular toolbox based on various DNA-binding proteins to address this issue.

The PICasSO part collection offers a comprehensive, modular platform for precise manipulation and re-programming of DNA-DNA interactions using protein staples in living cells, enabling researchers to recreate natural 3D genomic interactions, such as enhancer hijacking, or to design entirely new spatial architectures for gene regulation. Specifically, the fusion of two DNA binding proteins enables to artifically bring distant genomic loci into proximty. To unlock the system's full potential, we introduce versatile chimeric CRISPR/Cas complexes, connected either on the protein or the guide RNA level. These1 complexes are reffered to as protein- or Cas staples. Beyond its versatility, PICasSO includes robust assay systems to support the engineering, optimization, and testing of new staples, ensuring functionality in vitro and in vivo. We took special care to include parts crucial for testing every step of the cycle (design, build, test, learn) when engineering new parts.

At its heart, the PICasSO part collection consists of three categories.
(i) Our DNA-binding proteins include our finalized enhancer hijacking Cas staple as well as half staples that can be used by scientists to compose entirely new Cas staples in the future. We also include our Simple staples that serve as controls for successful stapling and can be further engineered to create alternative, simpler and more compact staples.
(ii) As functional elements, we list additional parts that enhance the functionality of our Cas and Basic staples. These consist of protease-cleavable peptide linkers and inteins that allow condition-specific, dynamic stapling in vivo. Besides staple functionality, we also include the parts to enable the efficient delivery of PICasSO's constructs with our interkingdom conjugation system.
(iii) As the final category of our collection, we provide parts that support the use of our custom readout systems. These include components of our established FRET-based proximity assay system, enabling users to confirm accurate stapling. Additionally, we offer a complementary, application-oriented testing system for functional readouts via a luciferase reporter, which allows for straightforward experimental simulation of enhancer hijacking in mammalian cells.

The following table gives a comprehensive overview of all parts in our PICasSO toolbox. The highlighted parts showed exceptional performance as described on our iGEM wiki and can serve as a reference. The other parts in the collection are versatile building blocks designed to provide future iGEMers with the flexibility to engineer their own custom Cas staples, enabling further optimization and innovation.

Our part collection includes:

DNA-binding proteins: The building blocks for engineering of custom staples for DNA-DNA interactions with a modular system ensuring easy assembly.
BBa_K5237000 fgRNA Entry vector MbCas12a-SpCas9 Entryvector for simple fgRNA cloning via SapI
BBa_K5237001 Staple subunit: dMbCas12a-Nucleoplasmin NLS Staple subunit that can be combined with sgRNA or fgRNA and dCas9 to form a functional staple
BBa_K5237002 Staple subunit: SV40 NLS-dSpCas9-SV40 NLS Staple subunit that can be combined witha sgRNA or fgRNA and dCas12avto form a functional staple
BBa_K5237003 Cas Staple: SV40 NLS-dMbCas12a-dSpCas9-Nucleoplasmin NLS Functional Cas staple that can be combined with sgRNA or fgRNA to bring two DNA strands into close proximity
BBa_K5237004 Staple subunit: Oct1-DBD Staple subunit that can be combined to form a functional staple, for example with TetR.
Can also be combined with a fluorescent protein as part of the FRET proximity assay
BBa_K5237005 Staple subunit: TetR Staple subunit that can be combined to form a functional staple, for example with Oct1.
Can also be combined with a fluorescent protein as part of the FRET proximity assay
BBa_K5237006 Simple staple: TetR-Oct1 Functional staple that can be used to bring two DNA strands in close proximity
BBa_K5237007 Staple subunit: GCN4 Staple subunit that can be combined to form a functional staple, for example with rGCN4
BBa_K5237008 Staple subunit: rGCN4 Staple subunit that can be combined to form a functional staple, for example with rGCN4
BBa_K5237009 Mini staple: bGCN4 Assembled staple with minimal size that can be further engineered
Functional elements: Protease-cleavable peptide linkers and inteins are used to control and modify staples for further optimization for custom applications
BBa_K5237010 Cathepsin B-cleavable Linker: GFLG Cathepsin B-cleavable peptide linker that can be used to combine two staple subunits to make responsive staples
BBa_K5237011 Cathepsin B Expression Cassette Expression Cassette for the overexpression of cathepsin B
BBa_K5237012 Caged NpuN Intein A caged NpuN split intein fragment that undergoes protein trans-splicing after protease activation. Can be used to create functionalized staples units
BBa_K5237013 Caged NpuC Intein A caged NpuC split intein fragment that undergoes protein trans-splicing after protease activation. Can be used to create functionalized staples units
BBa_K5237014 fgRNA processing casette Processing casette to produce multiple fgRNAs from one transcript, that can be used for multiplexed 3D genome reprograming
BBa_K5237015 Intimin anti-EGFR Nanobody Interkindom conjugation between bacteria and mammalian cells, as alternative delivery tool for large constructs
BBa_K4643003 incP origin of transfer Origin of transfer that can be cloned into the plasmid vector and used for conjugation as a means of delivery
Readout Systems: FRET and enhancer recruitment to measure proximity of stapled DNA in bacterial and mammalian living cells enabling swift testing and easy development for new systems
BBa_K5237016 FRET-Donor: mNeonGreen-Oct1 FRET Donor-Fluorpohore fused to Oct1-DBD that binds to the Oct1 binding cassette. Can be used to visualize DNA-DNA proximity
BBa_K5237017 FRET-Acceptor: TetR-mScarlet-I Acceptor part for the FRET assay binding the TetR binding cassette. Can be used to visualize DNA-DNA proximity
BBa_K5237018 Oct1 Binding Casette DNA sequence containing 12 Oct1 binding motifs, compatible with various assays such as the FRET proximity assay
BBa_K5237019 TetR Binding Cassette DNA sequence containing 12 Oct1 binding motifs, can be used for different assays such as the FRET proximity assay
BBa_K5237020 Cathepsin B-Cleavable Trans-Activator: NLS-Gal4-GFLG-VP64 Readout system that responds to protease activity. It was used to test cathepsin B-cleavable linker
BBa_K5237021 NLS-Gal4-VP64 Trans-activating enhancer, that can be used to simulate enhancer hijacking
BBa_K5237022 mCherry Expression Cassette: UAS, minimal Promotor, mCherry Readout system for enhancer binding. It was used to test cathepsin B-cleavable linker
BBa_K5237023 Oct1 - 5x UAS binding casette Oct1 and UAS binding cassette, that was used for the simulated enhancer hijacking assay
BBa_K5237024 TRE-minimal promoter- firefly luciferase Contains Firefly luciferase controlled by a minimal promoter. It was used as a luminescence readout for simulated enhancer hijacking

1. Sequence overview

Sequence and Features


Assembly Compatibility:
  • 10
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[10]
  • 12
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[12]
  • 21
    INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[21]
    Illegal BamHI site found at 175
  • 23
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[23]
  • 25
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[25]
  • 1000
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[1000]

2. Usage and Biology

Small basic-region leucine zipper (bZip) proteins are characterized by their DNA-binding. The bZip motif consists of a coiled-coil leucine zipper dimerization domain, and a highly charged basic region that binds to DNA (Hollenbeck & Oakley, 2000). One well characterized example is the General Control Protein 4 (GCN4), a well-characterized transcriptional activator from yeast (Arndt & Fink, 1986).
At its N-terminus, GCN4 contains basic residues, the so-called bZip domain, through which it binds specifically to the CRE (cyclic AMP response element) DNA sequence (5' ATGACGTCAT 3') (Hollenbeck et al., 2002). A variant of GCN4 with the DNA binding bZip-domain at the C-terminus (rGCN4) has been engineered to bind to the inverted CRE sequence, INV2 (5' GTCAtaTGAC 3', upper case letters indicate direct interaction between protein and DNA) with similar affinity (Hollenbeck et al., 2001). By genetically fusing GCN4 to rGCN4, we created a small, bivalent DNA binding staple with less than 150 amino acids.

3. Assembly and part evolution

The amino acid sequences for GCN4 and rGCN4 were obtained from literature (Hollenbeck et al. 2001), and codon-optimized for Escherichia coli. The two leucine zipper were combined with a GSG linker harbouring a BamHI site to adapt the construct with different linker designs, based on our dry lab DaVinci model. A FLAG-tag (DYKDDDDK) was added to the N-terminus for protein purification. The FLAG-tag can be cleaved off using an Enterokinase, if necessary. Expression of FLAG-GCN4 was done under an IPTG inducible T7 promoter in E. coli BL21 (DE3) cells.

4. Results

The current version of the part with GCN4-rGCN4 fusion, linked by a GSG peptide linker has not demonstrated any DNA binding in the tests conducted thus far. Nevertheless, we belive the part to still be a valuable addition, as it can be further engineered with different linker types to create a functioning staple. Through dry lab modelling, various linker designs have already been simulated to predict improved dimerization and DNA binding.

4.1 Protein Expression and Purification

The bZip proteins GCN4, rGCN4 and the fusion thereof, bGCN4, were fused N-terminally to a FLAG-tag (DYKDDDDK). All proteins could be readily expressed under the T7 promoter in E. coli BL21 DE3 and purified with Anti-FLAG affinity columns. The purity of the proteins was confirmed by SDS-PAGE (Figure 2).

Figure 2: SDS-PAGE analysis of protein purification.Analysis of fractions eluate of purified protein taken during Anti-FLAG affinity chromatography 1 µL of each sample was prepared with Leammli buffer and loaded on 4-15% TGX-Gel. Correct bands of interest are highlighted by red

4.2 Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay

Figure 3: Overview Image of Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA)

The Electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) is a widely adopted method used to study DNA-protein interactions. EMSA functions on the basis that nucleic acids, bound to proteins, have reduced electrophoretic mobility, compared to their counterpart. (Hellman & Fried, 2007). Mobility-shift assays can both be used to qualitatively assess DNA binding capabilities or quantitatively to determine binding stoichiometry and kinetics such as the apparent dissociation constant (Kd) (Fried, 1989).

4.2.1 Qualitative DNA binding analysis

To asses possible DNA binding, a qualitative EMSA was performed with the purified proteins. The same binding buffer conditions were used, as previously desribed for GCN4 and rGCN4 (Hollenbeck et al. 2001). DNA binding could only be shown for GCN4 and rGCN4, no visible band was observed for the bGCN4 fusion protein (Figure 4).

The Electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) is a widely adopted method used to study DNA-protein interactions. EMSA functions on the basis that nucleic acids, bound to proteins, have reduced electrophoretic mobility, compared to their counterpart. (Hellman & Fried, 2007). Mobility-shift assays can be used both to qualitatively assess DNA binding capabilities or quantitatively to determine binding stoichiometry and kinetics such as the apparent dissociation constant (Kd) (Fried, 1989).

To analyze the binding DNA affinity an EMSA was performed, in which bGCN4 was incubated in binding buffer with a 20 bp DNA probe containing the either the CRE (GCN4 binding) sequence (5' ATGACGTCAT 3') or the INVii (rGCN4 binding) sequence (5' GTCAtaTGAC 3') until equilibration. Subsequently the formed protein-DNA complexes were loaded on a native PAGE. Afterwards the DNA bands were stained with SYBR-safe.
The bGCN4 fusion protein did not show any DNA binding for both target sites.

Figure 4: Qualitative EMSA DNA binding 0.5 µM of annealed oligos (20 bp) containing either one CRE or INVii binding site were incubated with 200 µM of protein and equilibrated in binding buffer (137 mM NaCl, 2.7 mM KCl, 10 mM Na 2HPO4, 1.8 mM KH2HPO4, 0.1 % (v/v) IGEPAL® CA-360, 1 mM EDTA). Gel electorphoresis was performed with a pre-equilibrated TGX-Gel in TBE running buffer. Gel-bands were visualized by staining with SYBR Safe and imaged with an UV transilluminator.

4.2.2 Quantitative DNA binding analysis

To further analyze DNA binding of the staple subunits, quantitative shift assays were performed for GCN4 and rGCN4. Here 0.5 µM DNA were incubated with varying concentrations of protein until equilibration. After electrophoresis, bands were stained with SYBR-Safe and quantified based on pixel intensity. The obtained values were fitted to equation 1, describing formation of a 2:1 protein-DNA complex:

Θapp = Θmin + (Θmax - Θmin) × (Ka2 [L]tot2) / (1 + Ka2 [L]tot2) Equation 1

Here [L]tot describes the total protein monomer concentration, Ka corresponds to the apparent monomeric equilibration constant. The Θmin/max values are the experimentally determined site saturation values (For this experiment 0 and 1 were chosen for min and max respectively).

Figure 5: Kd Calculation of GCN4 and rGCN4 Quantitative assessment of binding affinity for GCN4 and rGCN4. Proteins of varying concentrations were incubated with 0.5 µM DNA (20 bp, containing one binding site for CRE or INVii) in Binding buffer 1, and the bound fraction analyzed by dividing pixel intensity of bound fraction with pixel intensity of bound and unbound fraction using ImageJ. At least three separate measurements were conducted for each data point. Values are presented as mean +/- SD

GCN4 binds to its optimal DNA binding motif with an apparent dissociation constant KD of (0.293 ± 0.033) × 10-6 M, which is almost identical to the rGCN4 dissociation constant to INVii a KD of (0.298 ± 0.030) × 10-6 M. Comparing them to literature values, our dissociation constants are approximately a factor 10 higher then those described in literature ((96) × 10-8 M for GCN4 and (2.90.8) × 10-8 M for rGCN4) (Hollenbeck et al., 2001). The differences could be due to the lower sensitivity of SYBR-Safe staining compared to radio-labeled oligos. Most likely, the protein concentration was miscalculated due to the presence of additional (lower intensity) bands in the SDS-PAGE analysis, indicating co-purification of small amounts of unspecific proteins.

The FLAG-tag fusion to the N-terminus of proteins could potentially decrease binding affinity, likely due to steric hindrance affecting the interaction with DNA. Interestingly, the differences in binding affinity between GCN4 and rGCN4 appear negligible. Since GCN4 binds to DNA via its N-terminus and rGCN4 binds C-terminally, the FLAG-tag likely does not directly influence DNA binding. However, it may influence the dimerization of the proteins, which is necessary for DNA binding. To further investigate this, the FLAG-tag can be cleaved using an enterokinase and potential changes in binding affinity analyzed. Furthermore, coiled coil formation, and the amount of dimeric and monomeric proteins could be further analyzed with circular dichroism spectroscopy (Greenfield, 2006).

4.3 In Silico Characterization using DaVinci

We developed the in silico model DaVinci for rapid engineering and development of our PiCasSO system. DaVinci acts as a digital twin to PiCasSO, designed to understand the forces acting on our system, refine experimental parameters, and find optimal connections between protein staples and target DNA. We calibrated DaVinci with literature and our own experimental affinity data obtained via EMSA assays and purified proteins.
DaVinci is divided into three phases: static structure prediction, all-atom dynamics simulation, and long-ranged dna dynamics simulation. We applied the first two to our parts, characterizing structure and dynamics of the dna-binding interaction.

In our efforts to create a bivalent DNA binding protein with minimal size, we created a Mini staple (BBa_K5237009) consisting of GCN4 fused with an GSG-linker to rGCN4 (BBa_K5237008). The structure and binding affinity of GCN4 were predicted and calculated. Furthermore different possible linkers were tested.
We assessed the flexibility and rigidity of our constructs through the pLDDT values assigned during the predictions. Figure 2 illustrates the variation in linkers using the ('GGGGS')n sequence for flexible linkers and the ('EAAAK')n sequence for rigid linkers (Arai et al., 2001). The predictions are colored by their pLDDT scores, which act as a surrogate measure of chain rigidity (Akdel et al., 2022; Guo et al., 2022). The construct C (Fig. 5) was tested as part BBa_K5237009 in the Wetlab - it did not bind DNA on any side as the structure is to rigid which hinders dimerisation of the two subunits

Figure 5: Variation of linkers connecting our mini staples. Panels A (BBa_K5237007) and B (BBa_K5237008) show orientations of the leucine zipper, each bound to DNA. Panels C to I display linker variations colored by their pLDDT confidence score, which serves as a surrogate for chain flexibility (Akdel et al., 2022). Note that panels H and I are not bound to the second DNA strand. All structures were predicted using the AlphaFold server (Google DeepMind, 2024).

5. References

Akdel, M., Pires, D. E. V., Pardo, E. P., Janes, J., Zalevsky, A. O., Meszaros, B., Bryant, P., Good, L. L., Laskowski, R. A., Pozzati, G., Shenoy, A., Zhu, W., Kundrotas, P., Serra, V. R., Rodrigues, C. H. M., Dunham, A. S., Burke, D., Borkakoti, N., Velankar, S., … Beltrao, P. (2022). A structural biology community assessment of AlphaFold2 applications. Nat Struct Mol Biol, 29(11), 1056–1067. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-022-00849-w

Arai, R., Ueda, H., Kitayama, A., Kamiya, N., & Nagamune, T. (2001). Design of the linkers which effectively separate domains of a bifunctional fusion protein. Protein Engineering, Design and Selection, 14(8), 529–532. https://doi.org/10.1093/protein/14.8.529

Arndt, K., & Fink, G. R. (1986). GCN4 protein, a positive transcription factor in yeast, binds general control promoters at all 5’ TGACTC 3’ sequences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 83(22), 8516–8520. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.83.22.8516

Chen, X., Zaro, J. L., & Shen, W.-C. (2013). Fusion protein linkers: Property, design and functionality. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 65(10), 1357–1369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2012.09.039

Google DeepMind. (2024). AlphaFold Server. https://alphafoldserver.com/terms

Guo, H.-B., Perminov, A., Bekele, S., Kedziora, G., Farajollahi, S., Varaljay, V., Hinkle, K., Molinero, V., Meister, K., Hung, C., Dennis, P., Kelley-Loughnane, N., & Berry, R. (2022). AlphaFold2 models indicate that protein sequence determines both structure and dynamics. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 10696. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14382-9

Ellenberger, T. E., Brandl, C. J., Struhl, K., & Harrison, S. C. (1992). The GCN4 basic region leucine zipper binds DNA as a dimer of uninterrupted alpha helices: Crystal structure of the protein-DNA complex. Cell, 71(7), 1223–1237. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(05)80070-4

Hollenbeck, J. J., Gurnon, D. G., Fazio, G. C., Carlson, J. J., & Oakley, M. G. (2001). A GCN4 Variant with a C-Terminal Basic Region Binds to DNA with Wild-Type Affinity. Biochemistry, 40(46), 13833–13839.

Hollenbeck, J. J., McClain, D. L., & Oakley, M. G. (2002). The role of helix stabilizing residues in GCN4 basic region folding and DNA binding. Protein Science, 11(11), 2740–2747. https://doi.org/10.1110/ps.0211102

Hollenbeck, J. J., & Oakley, M. G. (2000). GCN4 Binds with High Affinity to DNA Sequences Containing a Single Consensus Half-Site. Biochemistry, 39(21), 6380–6389. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi992705n

Liu, J., Zheng, Q., Deng, Y., Cheng, C.-S., Kallenbach, N. R., & Lu, M. (2006). A seven-helix coiled coil. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(42), 15457–15462. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0604871103

Lupas, A. N., Bassler, J., & Dunin-Horkawicz, S. (2017). The Structure and Topology of α-Helical Coiled Coils. Fibrous Proteins: Structures and Mechanisms, 82, 95–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49674-0_4

Woolfson, D. N. (2023). Understanding a protein fold: The physics, chemistry, and biology of α-helical coiled coils. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 299(4), 104579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2023.104579