Protein Crystallization Hits

Protein researchers of the world: here's your chance to make a lasting impact with information, ideas and comments on the topic of future disruptive proteomics technologies. The NIH has an RFI (Request for Information, NOT-RM-12-015) out, asking you to provide input in to how to accelerate research in disruptive proteomics technologies.

There are simple online forms where you can provide your anonymous feedback on the following topics:

1. MS-based comprehensive protein identification and quantification. Realistic goals and associated challenges for orders-of-magnitude improvements in dynamic range, sensitivity, throughput or cost. Specific areas of instrumentation (e.g., source design/analyzer geometry, coupling with other instrumentation, etc.) more likely to yield disruptive improvements.
2. Non-MS-based comprehensive protein identification and quantification. Opportunities and challenges for other technologies that could in the near or far term approach/exceed MS-based methods with respect to: accuracy, dynamic range, throughput, and cost in analyzing proteomes.
3. Potential benefits and challenges in incorporation of informatics approaches and/or integration of large protein datasets into the development of the proteomic technologies.
4. Potential important impacts of proteomics technology breakthroughs in basic, discovery and translational biomedical research.

This unique opportunity is available until March 26.

          Quick! Disruptive proteomics technologies. The NIH wants to know what you're thinking.

What are you going to get out of this? No immediate grant awards. But your information may be included in planning  future grant funding opportunities that seek to fund disruptive technologies that have occurred in DNA sequencing technologies in the past few years.

And that impact may be larger than any of the papers you have ever published.

This week there are two fascinating stories in Nature Methods each giving us a glimpse of what structural biology might look like in a decade or so. Both papers describe a technical tour de force, shooting jets of micro crystals into the beam of a X-ray free electron laser and collecting X-ray diffraction images.

The first report utilizes recombinant protein (TbCatB) crystals that are grown in Sf9 insect cells. Yes, that's right: protein crystals grown in vivo, no crystallization setups necessary here. 

Koopmann, R., Cupelli, K., Redecke, L., Nass, K., DePonte, D., White, T., Stellato, F., Rehders, D., Liang, M., Andreasson, J., Aquila, A., Bajt, S., Barthelmess, M., Barty, A., Bogan, M., Bostedt, C., Boutet, S., Bozek, J., Caleman, C., Coppola, N., Davidsson, J., Doak, R., Ekeberg, T., Epp, S., Erk, B., Fleckenstein, H., Foucar, L., Graafsma, H., Gumprecht, L., Hajdu, J., Hampton, C., Hartmann, A., Hartmann, R., Hauser, G., Hirsemann, H., Holl, P., Hunter, M., Kassemeyer, S., Kirian, R., Lomb, L., Maia, F., Kimmel, N., Martin, A., Messerschmidt, M., Reich, C., Rolles, D., Rudek, B., Rudenko, A., Schlichting, I., Schulz, J., Seibert, M., Shoeman, R., Sierra, R., Soltau, H., Stern, S., Strüder, L., Timneanu, N., Ullrich, J., Wang, X., Weidenspointner, G., Weierstall, U., Williams, G., Wunderer, C., Fromme, P., Spence, J., Stehle, T., Chapman, H., Betzel, C., & Duszenko, M. (2012). In vivo protein crystallization opens new routes in structural biology Nature Methods, 9 (3), 259-262 DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.1859 

The second paper describes a similar experiment, carried out with small crystals of the Blastochloris viridis photosynthetic reaction center grown within lipidic phases. The resulting images actually resemble conventional X-ray diffraction images with proper Bragg spots, good enough to build a somewhat meager 8.2 Å resolution electron density map.

Johansson LC, Arnlund D, White TA, Katona G, Deponte DP, Weierstall U, Doak RB, Shoeman RL, Lomb L, Malmerberg E, Davidsson J, Nass K, Liang M, Andreasson J, Aquila A, Bajt S, Barthelmess M, Barty A, Bogan MJ, Bostedt C, Bozek JD, Caleman C, Coffee R, Coppola N, Ekeberg T, Epp SW, Erk B, Fleckenstein H, Foucar L, Graafsma H, Gumprecht L, Hajdu J, Hampton CY, Hartmann R, Hartmann A, Hauser G, Hirsemann H, Holl P, Hunter MS, Kassemeyer S, Kimmel N, Kirian RA, Maia FR, Marchesini S, Martin AV, Reich C, Rolles D, Rudek B, Rudenko A, Schlichting I, Schulz J, Seibert MM, Sierra RG, Soltau H, Starodub D, Stellato F, Stern S, Strüder L, Timneanu N, Ullrich J, Wahlgren WY, Wang X, Weidenspointner G, Wunderer C, Fromme P, Chapman HN, Spence JC, & Neutze R (2012). Lipidic phase membrane protein serial femtosecond crystallography. Nature methods PMID: 22286383

Granted, all of this is currently in the proof-of-concept stage - no actual high resolution structure determined yet - but this is how new exciting breakthrough technologies often start out.  I'm wondering how long it will take for these technologies to mature to a state where they produce useful resolution structures and when they will become applicable to 'the rest of us'. Ten years, mid of the century maybe?

No protein crystallization setups, no crystal harvest, no cryo. X-FEL kills the crystallization champ.

This might change our game quite a bit.

Cheers,

Peter

Every attendee received this SLAS2012 pin 

Cheers,

Peter

Some of you may know that Emerald BioStructures, as part of the Seattle Structural Genomics Center for Infectious Disease (SSGCID) has contributed to submitting more than 444 protein structures to the PDB in the past 4 years. That's quite an achievement and my congratulations go out to the project teams that are behind these structures, most of them determined via X-ray crystallography. Some of this output, including methods used to achieve this level of productivity, are described in the  September 2011 issue of Acta Cryst F.

One of the protein production methods that has been key for several of my own 2011 protein crystallization projects: lysis scouting with the Protein Maker instrument (described in this open access article "The Protein Maker: an automated system for high-throughput parallel purification". 

Smith, E., Begley, D., Anderson, V., Raymond, A., Haffner, T., Robinson, J., Edwards, T., Duncan, N., Gerdts, C., Mixon, M., Nollert, P., Staker, B., & Stewart, L. (2011). The Protein Maker: an automated system for high-throughput parallel purification Acta Crystallographica Section F Structural Biology and Crystallization Communications, 67 (9), 1015-1021 DOI: 10.1107/S1744309111028776

What is lysis scouting?

Stated simply, lysis scouting combines the testing of a set of cell-lysis buffer conditions with IMAC (ion metal affinity chromatography) . This is done to increase the yield of proteins that appear partially soluble or insoluble under standard lysis buffer conditions.  This procedure results in a clear path forward for scaled-up production of purified protein samples for protein crystallization trials.

How is lysis scouting done?

A single batch of protein expressing E.coli cells is split into 12 pools and lysed by sonication in 12 different buffer conditions. The paper shows as an example P450 51 A1 (CYP51A1) with a 6xHis-Smt tag. This is the outline of the lysis scouting protocol:

1. Prepare 12 aliquots, each corresponding to 3 g of wet cell paste
2. Resuspend in 30 mL lysis buffer (one out of an array of 12) - see table below.

Cell lysis buffers for testing lysis conditions of recombinantly expressed fungal cytochrome P450

3. Sonicate to lyse and spin to remove cell debris

4. Clarify lysates and load on 12 x 1 mL Ni-affinity matrix column

5. Wash, elute and analyze fractions

SDS-PAGE showing that buffers 1C and 1D extract much more of the target protein CYP51A1 (red boxes). L(load), W(wash) and E(elution) fractions are shown next to MW standards.

While well expressed, CYP51A seemed insoluble using standard cell-lysis methods. The lysis-scouting procedure yielded a buffer system with a detergent (CHAPS or octyl glucoside)  in the presence of high salt concentrations (500 mM NaCl).

The utility of the Protein Maker instrument in this process is the short time it takes to run a lysis scouting experiment. Total run time is approximately 1.5 hours (excluding sample analysis). I.e. many proteins can be tested for optimal lysis conditions in a single day - and since the instrument carries out the experiment for you and in parallel, there is plenty of time to strategize the next steps of mg-scale production of the protein sample for crystallization. 

There are many protein structures that we have produced in 2011 that would not exist without Protein Maker supported lysis optimization.

A true work horse.

Peter

For all those that are interested in simplifying membrane protein crystallization trials, you may want to check out this paper on the topic of 'simplifying LCP-based crystallization':

Wallace E, Dranow D, Laible PD, Christensen J, & Nollert P (2011). Monoolein lipid phases as incorporation and enrichment materials for membrane protein crystallization. PloS one, 6 (8) PMID: 21909395

Abstract: he crystallization of membrane proteins in amphiphile-rich materials such as lipidic cubic phases is an established methodology in many structural biology laboratories. The standard procedure employed with this methodology requires the generation of a highly viscous lipidic material by mixing lipid, for instance monoolein, with a solution of the detergent solubilized membrane protein. This preparation is often carried out with specialized mixing tools that allow handling of the highly viscous materials while minimizing dead volume to save precious membrane protein sample. The processes that occur during the initial mixing of the lipid with the membrane protein are not well understood. Here we show that the formation of the lipidic phases and the incorporation of the membrane protein into such materials can be separated experimentally. Specifically, we have investigated the effect of different initial monoolein-based lipid phase states on the crystallization behavior of the colored photosynthetic reaction center from Rhodobacter sphaeroides. We find that the detergent solubilized photosynthetic reaction center spontaneously inserts into and concentrates in the lipid matrix without any mixing, and that the initial lipid material phase state is irrelevant for productive crystallization. A substantial in-situ enrichment of the membrane protein to concentration levels that are otherwise unobtainable occurs in a thin layer on the surface of the lipidic material. These results have important practical applications and hence we suggest a simplified protocol for membrane protein crystallization within amphiphile rich materials, eliminating any specialized mixing tools to prepare crystallization experiments within lipidic cubic phases. Furthermore, by virtue of sampling a membrane protein concentration gradient within a single crystallization experiment, this crystallization technique is more robust and increases the efficiency of identifying productive crystallization parameters. Finally, we provide a model that explains the incorporation of the membrane protein from solution into the lipid phase via a portal lamellar phase.

This figure explains how this new PLI (post LCP formation incorporation [I know...]) method works:

Figure: Dispense lipid first, then add (purple protein solution), incubate a few hours, then add precipitation reagents.

The simpler, the better,

Peter