María C. Cardona-Echavarría , Carmen Santillán , Ricardo Miranda-Blancas , Vivian Stojanoff , Enrique Rudiño-Piñera
{"title":"Unveiling success determinants for AMB-assisted phase expansion of fusion proteins in ARP/wARP","authors":"María C. Cardona-Echavarría , Carmen Santillán , Ricardo Miranda-Blancas , Vivian Stojanoff , Enrique Rudiño-Piñera","doi":"10.1016/j.jsb.2024.108089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Fusion proteins (FPs) are frequently utilized as a biotechnological tool in the determination of macromolecular structures using X-ray methods. Here, we explore the use of different protein tags in various FP, to obtain initial phases by using them in a partial molecular replacement (MR) and constructing the remaining FP structure with ARP/wARP. Usually, the tag is removed prior to crystallization, however leaving the tag on may facilitate crystal formation, and structural determination by expanding phases from known to unknown segments of the complex. In this study, the Protein Data Bank was mined for an up-to-date list of FPs with the most used protein tags, Maltose Binding Protein (MBP), Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP), Thioredoxin (TRX), Glutathione transferase (GST) and the Small Ubiquitin-like Modifier Protein (SUMO). Partial MR using the protein tag, followed by automatic model building, was tested on a subset of 116 FP. The efficiency of this method was analyzed and factors that influence the coordinate construction of a substantial portions of the fused protein were identified. Using MBP, GFP, and SUMO as phase generators it was possible to build at least 75 % of the protein of interest in 36 of the 116 cases tested. Our results reveal that tag selection has a significant impact; tags with greater structural stability, such as GFP, increase the success rate. Further statistical analysis identifies that resolution, Wilson B factor, solvent percentage, completeness, multiplicity, protein tag percentage in the FP (considering amino acids), and the linker length play pivotal roles using our approach. In cases where a structural homologous is absent, this method merits inclusion in the toolkit of protein crystallographers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":17074,"journal":{"name":"Journal of structural biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of structural biology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1047847724000297","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Fusion proteins (FPs) are frequently utilized as a biotechnological tool in the determination of macromolecular structures using X-ray methods. Here, we explore the use of different protein tags in various FP, to obtain initial phases by using them in a partial molecular replacement (MR) and constructing the remaining FP structure with ARP/wARP. Usually, the tag is removed prior to crystallization, however leaving the tag on may facilitate crystal formation, and structural determination by expanding phases from known to unknown segments of the complex. In this study, the Protein Data Bank was mined for an up-to-date list of FPs with the most used protein tags, Maltose Binding Protein (MBP), Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP), Thioredoxin (TRX), Glutathione transferase (GST) and the Small Ubiquitin-like Modifier Protein (SUMO). Partial MR using the protein tag, followed by automatic model building, was tested on a subset of 116 FP. The efficiency of this method was analyzed and factors that influence the coordinate construction of a substantial portions of the fused protein were identified. Using MBP, GFP, and SUMO as phase generators it was possible to build at least 75 % of the protein of interest in 36 of the 116 cases tested. Our results reveal that tag selection has a significant impact; tags with greater structural stability, such as GFP, increase the success rate. Further statistical analysis identifies that resolution, Wilson B factor, solvent percentage, completeness, multiplicity, protein tag percentage in the FP (considering amino acids), and the linker length play pivotal roles using our approach. In cases where a structural homologous is absent, this method merits inclusion in the toolkit of protein crystallographers.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Structural Biology (JSB) has an open access mirror journal, the Journal of Structural Biology: X (JSBX), sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review. Since both journals share the same editorial system, you may submit your manuscript via either journal homepage. You will be prompted during submission (and revision) to choose in which to publish your article. The editors and reviewers are not aware of the choice you made until the article has been published online. JSB and JSBX publish papers dealing with the structural analysis of living material at every level of organization by all methods that lead to an understanding of biological function in terms of molecular and supermolecular structure.
Techniques covered include:
• Light microscopy including confocal microscopy
• All types of electron microscopy
• X-ray diffraction
• Nuclear magnetic resonance
• Scanning force microscopy, scanning probe microscopy, and tunneling microscopy
• Digital image processing
• Computational insights into structure