Nucleic acid probes are used for diverse applications in vitro, in situ, and in vivo. In any setting, their power is limited by imperfect selectivity (binding of undesired targets) and incomplete affinity (binding is reversible, and not all desired targets bound). These difficulties are fundamental, stemming from reliance on base pairing to provide both selectivity and affinity. Shielded covalent (SC) probes eliminate the longstanding trade-off between selectivity and durable target capture, achieving selectivity via programmable base pairing and molecular conformation change, and durable target capture via activatable covalent cross-linking. In pure and mixed samples, SC probes covalently capture complementary DNA or RNA oligo targets and reject two-nucleotide mismatched targets with near-quantitative yields at room temperature, achieving discrimination ratios of 2-3 orders of magnitude. Semiquantitative studies with full-length mRNA targets demonstrate selective covalent capture comparable to that for RNA oligo targets. Single-nucleotide DNA or RNA mismatches, including nearly isoenergetic RNA wobble pairs, can be efficiently rejected with discrimination ratios of 1-2 orders of magnitude. Covalent capture yields appear consistent with the thermodynamics of probe/target hybridization, facilitating rational probe design. If desired, cross-links can be reversed to release the target after capture. In contrast to existing probe chemistries, SC probes achieve the high sequence selectivity of a structured probe, yet durably retain their targets even under denaturing conditions. This previously incompatible combination of properties suggests diverse applications based on selective and stable binding of nucleic acid targets under conditions where base-pairing is disrupted (e.g., by stringent washes in vitro or in situ, or by enzymes in vivo).
Nucleic acid probes are used for diverse applications in vitro, in situ, and in vivo. In any setting, their power is limited by imperfect selectivity (binding of undesired targets) and incomplete affinity (binding is reversible, and not all desired targets bound). These difficulties are fundamental, stemming from reliance on base pairing to provide both selectivity and affinity. Shielded covalent (SC) probes eliminate the longstanding trade-off between selectivity and durable target capture, achieving selectivity via programmable base pairing and molecular conformation change, and durable target capture via activatable covalent cross-linking. In pure and mixed samples, SC probes covalently capture complementary DNA or RNA oligo targets and reject two-nucleotide mismatched targets with near-quantitative yields at room temperature, achieving discrimination ratios of 2-3 orders of magnitude. Semiquantitative studies with full-length mRNA targets demonstrate selective covalent capture comparable to that for RNA oligo targets. Single-nucleotide DNA or RNA mismatches, including nearly isoenergetic RNA wobble pairs, can be efficiently rejected with discrimination ratios of 1-2 orders of magnitude. Covalent capture yields appear consistent with the thermodynamics of probe/target hybridization, facilitating rational probe design. If desired, cross-links can be reversed to release the target after capture. In contrast to existing probe chemistries, SC probes achieve the high sequence selectivity of a structured probe, yet durably retain their targets even under denaturing conditions. This previously incompatible combination of properties suggests diverse applications based on selective and stable binding of nucleic acid targets under conditions where base-pairing is disrupted (e.g., by stringent washes in vitro or in situ, or by enzymes in vivo).
Nucleic acids play
myriad essential roles in the cell, including
storage of genetic information, regulation of genetic expression,
and catalysis of chemical reactions. Synthetic nucleic acid probes
are at the heart of many of the techniques used to study how the parts
and circuits encoded by the genome build and sustain life, relying
on the programmable chemistry of base-pairing to recognize their endogenous
nucleic acid targets. In vitro and in situ, nucleic acid probes are
used to identify species within a community and genotypes within a
species, to detect nucleic acid–protein interactions, and to
measure gene expression patterns in time and space.[1−4] In vivo, synthetic nucleic acid
probes enable gene knockdown, providing essential research tools for
the study of endogenous genetic circuitry[5,6] and
suggesting the potential for powerful therapeutic interventions.[7−10]An ideal nucleic acid probe would fulfill three criteria:
high
affinity (complementary targets are bound durably and with high yield),
high selectivity (mismatched targets are not bound), and robustness
(insensitivity to environmental perturbations, enabling consistent
measurements across laboratories). Failure on any of these counts
will lead to false negatives, false positives, or irreproducible results
that can confound interpretation of data and harm patients.Existing probe technologies are unable to meet these goals simultaneously.
A crucial difficulty is the reliance on base-pairing to provide both
affinity and selectivity. Increasing probe length increases affinity
for both complementary and mismatched targets, thus reducing selectivity.
The handling of this fundamental affinity/selectivity trade-off is
central to the design and performance of nucleic acid probes.[3,11] Using DNA or RNA probes, single nucleotide mismatches are not sufficiently
destabilizing to enable equilibrium binding of complementary targets
with high yield and mismatched targets with low yield (section S2.1
in Supporting Information [SI]).[12,13] Faced with this affinity/selectivity trade-off, simultaneous pursuit
of quantitative on- and off-target binding yields is abandoned, and
emphasis is placed on maximizing the ‘discrimination ratio’
(the ratio of on- and off-target binding yields). The discrimination
ratio has more to gain from a small denominator than from a large
numerator, so selectivity is prioritized over affinity. After several
decades of optimization, two different probe concepts are widely used:
(1) unstructured probes are fully complementary to their targets and
achieve selectivity by destabilizing the probe/complement duplex using
stringent hybridization conditions, while (2) structured probes achieve
selectivity by destabilizing the probe/complement duplex using internal
probe base pairs (Figure 1). Both approaches
have significant conceptual limitations that undermine their performance
in applications.
Figure 1
Temperature-dependent selectivity/affinity trade-off for
unstructured
and structured nucleic acid probes. (a) Probe and target sequences
used for calculations of panels b–d. Nucleotides contributing
net base pairs in green. Mismatches in orange. (b) At room temperature,
the unstructured probe is not selective, binding both the complementary
target (C) and the 2-nt mismatch target (M) with high affinity. The
structured hairpin probe exploits internal probe base pairs to shift
the binding free energies along the yield curve and exploits the large
discrimination energy gap (ΔΔG) to bind
C with high affinity while selectively rejecting M. (c) At elevated
temperature, both probes are selective, but ΔΔG is small, requiring precise control over temperature and
reducing the achievable discrimination ratio (complement yield/mismatch
yield). Chemical denaturants will have a qualitatively similar effect
as they similarly reduce free energy benefit per base pair. (d) The
discrimination energy gap, ΔΔG, between
complementary and mismatched targets decreases monotonically with
increasing temperature. Free energy calculations performed using NUPACK[29] ([probe] = 3 μM, [target] = 1.8 μM,
[Na+] = 195 mM).
Temperature-dependent selectivity/affinity trade-off for
unstructured
and structured nucleic acid probes. (a) Probe and target sequences
used for calculations of panels b–d. Nucleotides contributing
net base pairs in green. Mismatches in orange. (b) At room temperature,
the unstructured probe is not selective, binding both the complementary
target (C) and the 2-nt mismatch target (M) with high affinity. The
structured hairpin probe exploits internal probe base pairs to shift
the binding free energies along the yield curve and exploits the large
discrimination energy gap (ΔΔG) to bind
C with high affinity while selectively rejecting M. (c) At elevated
temperature, both probes are selective, but ΔΔG is small, requiring precise control over temperature and
reducing the achievable discrimination ratio (complement yield/mismatch
yield). Chemical denaturants will have a qualitatively similar effect
as they similarly reduce free energy benefit per base pair. (d) The
discrimination energy gap, ΔΔG, between
complementary and mismatched targets decreases monotonically with
increasing temperature. Free energy calculations performed using NUPACK[29] ([probe] = 3 μM, [target] = 1.8 μM,
[Na+] = 195 mM).Long unstructured probes (20–500 nt) are the most
common
approach for chromatographic applications and for profiling gene expression
on microarrays or in fixed specimens. Selectivity is achieved using
elevated temperature and/or stringent buffer conditions to operate
near the melting temperature of the probe/complement duplex (Figure 1b,c).[2,3,14] While
this approach can be effective, there are serious drawbacks. Stringent
hybridization conditions intentionally weaken base pairing but also
reduce the energetic penalty for mismatches, shrinking the energy
gap that is the basis for discrimination between complementary and
mismatched targets (Figure 1c,d). As a result,
precise control over temperature and buffer conditions are required
in order to avoid deviation from the melting temperature, and the
maximum achievable discrimination ratio is reduced. Significantly,
multiplexed experiments require the design of multiple probes that
all bind marginally to their complements at the same temperature.
In practice, these requirements are difficult to meet, leading to
inconsistent and irreproducible results that limit the utility of
microarray and in situ hybridization assays for quantitative expression
profiling.[3,15−20] Furthermore, use of elevated temperature or stringent buffer conditions
also precludes in vivo applications.To achieve selectivity
in permissive hybridization conditions where
the discrimination energy gap is maximized, it is desirable to decrease
the net number of base pairs gained during probe/complement hybridization
in order to lower the melting temperature of the resulting duplex.
In principle, this can be accomplished by using a short unstructured
probe (7–15 nt), but this approach has the fundamental flaw
that the recognition sequence is then too short to uniquely address
genes in the context of a genome.[3,11,21] One approach to increasing the length of the recognition
sequence while maintaining selectivity is to use the target to template
reactions between two unstructured probes.[21] Alternatively, structured probes (of which molecular beacons are
the most familiar example) exploit internal base-pairing to compete
with probe/complement hybridization, making it possible to adjust
the trade-off between affinity and selectivity at a temperature of
choice while maintaining a large recognition sequence (Figure 1b,c).[22−28] Structured probes can be designed to achieve selective detection
of single-nucleotide mismatches at room or physiological temperatures[22,23,27,28] and are suitable for in vivo applications.[24,25] However, because structured probes achieve selectivity by operating
near the melting temperature of the probe/complement duplex, they
are unable to stably capture their targets, precluding the use of
washes which are critical to applications in vitro and in situ (e.g.,
removing unbound targets on a microarray or unbound probes within
a fixed embryo).A parallel thread of research has focused on
the development of
antisense and antigene agents based on covalent binding of an unstructured
nucleic acid probe to a complementary RNA or DNA target, inhibiting
expression by steric blockade. A variety of reactive groups have been
developed to achieve durable covalent capture of nucleic acid targets.[30−39] Stringent hybridization conditions are unavailable in vivo, but
selective reactivity of the cross-linker (e.g., reactivity only with
pyrimidines) can be used to augment the poor hybridization selectivity
of unstructured probes.[31,34,36,40] This approach applies only to
mismatches located at the cross-linker’s target base and is
susceptible to inadvertent covalent cross-linking of off-targets that
hybridize transiently to a portion of the probe. Given the potential
harm resulting from covalent capture of off-targets, the poor selectivity
of unstructured probes is a major drawback for these efforts.This article describes shielded covalent (SC) probes, a new class
of probes that eliminates the longstanding trade-off between selectivity
and durable target capture, combining the sequence selectivity of
a structured probe with the durable target capture of a covalent probe.
Figure 2a shows a schematic of the SC probe
concept. One or more activatable cross-linkers are shielded within
the duplex stem of a nucleic acid hairpin probe (DNA, RNA, or artificial
variants). The single-stranded toehold rapidly hybridizes to potential
targets, mediating a competitive branch migration process[41,42] in which probe/probe base pairs are isoenergetically replaced by
probe/target base pairs if the target is fully complementary to the
probe sequence. Any mismatches destabilize the probe/target duplex
and introduce a kinetic barrier to branch migration due to the need
to break a probe/probe pair without formation of a corresponding probe/target
pair. Completion of the branch migration process shields the cross-linker
within the probe/target duplex and opens the hairpin loop, providing
an entropic anchor to maintain binding. Activation of the cross-linker
produces a covalent bond between the probe and target. Notably, the
cross-linker is shielded within a duplex both before and after target
hybridization, limiting the opportunity for covalent capture of biomolecules
that are not hybridized to the probe. Hence, base pairing and molecular
conformation change contribute to both hybridization selectivity and
to cross-linking selectivity.
Figure 2
Shielded covalent (SC) probes achieve high sequence
selectivity
and stable target capture at a temperature of choice. (a) Concept.
High sequence selectivity is achieved at a temperature of choice via
competition between internal probe base pairs and probe/target base
pairs. Durable target capture is achieved via activation of one or
more covalent cross-linkers which are shielded within a duplex both
before and after target hybridization, limiting side reactions. Covalent
bonds are stable even when base pairing is disrupted, enabling diverse
applications. (b) Photoactivated cross-linker used in the current
study. The vinyl bond (blue) of the 3-cyanovinylcarbazole (CNVK) nucleoside analogue undergoes [2 + 2] cycloaddition to the double
bond (red) in an opposite-strand pyrimidine (T depicted) when exposed
to 365 nm UV light, forming a stable photoadduct.[43,44] If desired, the target can be recovered by reversing the cross-link
in denaturing conditions with 311 nm UV light.
Shielded covalent (SC) probes achieve high sequence
selectivity
and stable target capture at a temperature of choice. (a) Concept.
High sequence selectivity is achieved at a temperature of choice via
competition between internal probe base pairs and probe/target base
pairs. Durable target capture is achieved via activation of one or
more covalent cross-linkers which are shielded within a duplex both
before and after target hybridization, limiting side reactions. Covalent
bonds are stable even when base pairing is disrupted, enabling diverse
applications. (b) Photoactivated cross-linker used in the current
study. The vinyl bond (blue) of the 3-cyanovinylcarbazole (CNVK) nucleoside analogue undergoes [2 + 2] cycloaddition to the double
bond (red) in an opposite-strand pyrimidine (T depicted) when exposed
to 365 nm UV light, forming a stable photoadduct.[43,44] If desired, the target can be recovered by reversing the cross-link
in denaturing conditions with 311 nm UV light.The SC probe concept is suitable for use with diverse cross-linker
chemistries. The cross-linker employed in the current work is 3-cyanovinylcarbazole
(CNVK; Figure 2b), a photoactive
nucleoside analogue developed by Yoshimura et al.[43,44] that can be incorporated into nucleic acids using standard solid-phase
synthesis protocols. CNVK can be activated rapidly using
low-cost UV-A light sources, and the resulting cross-links are durable
and, if desired, can be reversed with UV-B light. The only sequence
requirement for CNVK cross-linking is a single opposite-strand
pyrimidine, allowing a wide choice of target sequences.[43,44]Like conventional structured probes, SC probes can be designed
to achieve high selectivity at a temperature of choice (including
room temperature), but with the crucial difference that SC probes
capture targets covalently so that binding persists even when base
pairing is disrupted (e.g., by stringent washes in vitro or in situ,
or by enzymes in vivo). Like conventional unstructured covalent probes,
SC probes provide durable target capture, but with the crucial difference
that SC probes employ molecular conformation change to achieve hybridization
selectivity at a temperature of choice and to shield the cross-linker
from undesired side reactions. Combining the advantages of structured
probes and covalent cross-linking yields profound conceptual and practical
advantages over existing probe chemistries for many applications.
Results
To characterize the performance of the SC probe concept, we designed
a battery of experiments in which DNA or RNA probes were hybridized
with complementary or mismatched DNA or RNA targets (including mixtures),
and then cross-linked using UV-A light. Reactions are analyzed by
denaturing gel electrophoresis to demonstrate covalent target capture.
Oligonucleotide targets are fluorophore-labeled to enable quantification
of capture yields by comparison of band intensities within a lane.
Near-Quantitative
Discrimination of 2-Nucleotide Substitutions
Figure 3 demonstrates the performance of
SC probes in discriminating complementary targets and mismatched targets
containing 2-nt substitutions. For both DNA and RNA targets, SC probes
with 5-nt toeholds achieve two key goals: (1) near-quantitative covalent
capture of the complementary target, (2) near-quantitative rejection
of the mismatched targets. As a result, discrimination ratios of 2–3
orders of magnitude are achieved. Mismatches are detected at different
positions along the probe stem and for disruption of either strong
(G·C) or weak (A·T/U) base pairs. By contrast, an unstructured
DNA probe complementary to the same target is completely unable to
discriminate the mismatches (Figure S14, SI). As expected, the probes are found in one of two states after irradiation:
cross-linked to the target or internally cross-linked (section S6
in SI). The cross-links are durable in
highly stringent conditions (e.g., 50% formamide at 95 °C; see
section S4.1 in SI).
Figure 3
Near-quantitative capture
of complementary targets and rejection
of 2-nt mismatched targets for DNA and RNA. (a) Denaturing polyacrylamide
gels. Fluorescent channels: Cy5 (red) and SYBR Gold poststain (green).
ssDNA ladder at left. (b) Probe, complementary target (C), and mismatched
target (M1, M2, M3) sequences. Probe: 5-nt toehold in green, CNVK cross-linker in red, 6-nt hairpin loop. Targets: Mismatches
in orange, thymidine cross-link partner in blue (uracil for RNA targets),
Cy5 fluorophore label at the 5′-end of a 6-nt linker. (c) Cross-linking
yield (mean ± standard deviation, N = 3) determined
as the ratio of Cy5 fluorescence in the cross-link band to the lane
total. Complementary targets are cross-linked in high yield, and mismatched
targets are cross-linked in low yield, resulting in large discrimination
ratios (complement yield/mismatch yield).
Near-quantitative capture
of complementary targets and rejection
of 2-nt mismatched targets for DNA and RNA. (a) Denaturing polyacrylamide
gels. Fluorescent channels: Cy5 (red) and SYBR Gold poststain (green).
ssDNA ladder at left. (b) Probe, complementary target (C), and mismatched
target (M1, M2, M3) sequences. Probe: 5-nt toehold in green, CNVK cross-linker in red, 6-nt hairpin loop. Targets: Mismatches
in orange, thymidine cross-link partner in blue (uracil for RNA targets),
Cy5 fluorophore label at the 5′-end of a 6-nt linker. (c) Cross-linking
yield (mean ± standard deviation, N = 3) determined
as the ratio of Cy5 fluorescence in the cross-link band to the lane
total. Complementary targets are cross-linked in high yield, and mismatched
targets are cross-linked in low yield, resulting in large discrimination
ratios (complement yield/mismatch yield).
Efficient Discrimination of Single-Nucleotide Substitutions
Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are the most common type
of genetic variation in the human genome and are associated with numerous
disease phenotypes.[45,46] They are also the most challenging
mutation to discriminate with hybridization assays because they impose
the smallest energetic penalties on probe/target duplex formation.[3,11,28] To achieve a high discrimination
ratio for SNPs, the SC probe toehold can be shortened to simultaneously
achieve moderate yield in capturing complementary targets and low
yield in capturing SNPs. Figure 4 shows that
DNA SC probes with 3-nt toeholds efficiently reject six SNP mismatches
that disrupt either strong or weak base pair stacks, while covalently
capturing the complementary DNA target with ∼35% yield. The
resulting discrimination ratios are 1–2 orders of magnitude
(median 90). Due to the greater energetic benefit of RNA/RNA base
pairs, the same 5-nt toehold RNA probe used to achieve near-quantitative
discrimination of 2-nt mismatches (Figure 3) also discriminates RNA SNPs efficiently (median 20), with the exception
of A-to-G substitutions. This exception is not surprising, as the
resulting G·U wobble pair is predicted to be nearly isoenergetic
with the A·U pair it replaces.[12] By
reducing the probe toehold to 4 nt (section S6.4 in SI), it is possible to efficiently reject even these SNPs,
at the cost of reduced capture yield for the complementary target
(∼12%). With this probe, the resulting discrimination ratios
for seven RNA SNPs range from 7 to 49 (median 31; Figure S16 in SI). Notably, two of these mismatched targets
contain only RNA wobble SNPs.
Figure 4
Efficient discrimination of single-nucleotide
substitutions for
DNA and RNA. (a) Denaturing polyacrylamide gels. Fluorescent channels:
Cy5 (red) and SYBR Gold poststain (green). ssDNA ladder at left. (b)
Probe, complementary target (C), and mismatched target (S1, S2, S3,
...) sequences, color coded as in Figure 3.
(c) Cross-linking yields (mean ± standard deviation, N = 3). See section S6.4 in SI for enhanced discrimination of RNA wobble mismatches (S5 and S6)
with a 4-nt toehold probe.
Efficient discrimination of single-nucleotide
substitutions for
DNA and RNA. (a) Denaturing polyacrylamide gels. Fluorescent channels:
Cy5 (red) and SYBR Gold poststain (green). ssDNA ladder at left. (b)
Probe, complementary target (C), and mismatched target (S1, S2, S3,
...) sequences, color coded as in Figure 3.
(c) Cross-linking yields (mean ± standard deviation, N = 3). See section S6.4 in SI for enhanced discrimination of RNA wobble mismatches (S5 and S6)
with a 4-nt toehold probe.
Selective Capture in a Large Pool of Mismatched Targets
For most applications, SC probes must selectively capture the complementary
target within a large and diverse pool of mismatched targets. Figure 5 demonstrates SC probe performance in capturing
a complementary DNA or RNA target within a pool of 96 mismatched targets
(24 1-nt mismatches and 72 2-nt mismatches) when all of the targets
are at approximately the same concentration. In this needle-in-a-haystack
situation, where the complementary target is outnumbered by ∼100:1,
SC probes covalently capture the complementary target with high yield
and efficiently reject mismatched targets.
Figure 5
Selective capture of
a complementary DNA or RNA target in a pool
containing 24 1-nt and 72 2-nt mismatched targets. (a) Denaturing
polyacrylamide gel. Fluorescent channels: 6-FAM (blue) and Cy5 (red).
Probe at 3 μM, each target at ∼30 nM. See section S6.5
in SI for additional probe toehold length
studies and examination of the unexpected band splitting observed
for the complementary RNA target. (b) Probe, complementary target
(C), and mismatched target (P1–P8) sequences, color coded as
in Figure 3 (4-nt toehold probe for DNA, 5-nt
toehold probe for RNA). Targets: fluorophore label at the 5′-end
of a 6-nt linker (6-FAM for complement, Cy5 for mismatches), IUB nucleotide
codes (N = A, C, G, or T; D = A, G or T; H = A, C
or T; V = A, C or G). (c) Cross-linking yields (mean ± standard
deviation, N = 3).
Selective capture of
a complementary DNA or RNA target in a pool
containing 24 1-nt and 72 2-nt mismatched targets. (a) Denaturing
polyacrylamide gel. Fluorescent channels: 6-FAM (blue) and Cy5 (red).
Probe at 3 μM, each target at ∼30 nM. See section S6.5
in SI for additional probe toehold length
studies and examination of the unexpected band splitting observed
for the complementary RNA target. (b) Probe, complementary target
(C), and mismatched target (P1–P8) sequences, color coded as
in Figure 3 (4-nt toehold probe for DNA, 5-nt
toehold probe for RNA). Targets: fluorophore label at the 5′-end
of a 6-nt linker (6-FAM for complement, Cy5 for mismatches), IUB nucleotide
codes (N = A, C, G, or T; D = A, G or T; H = A, C
or T; V = A, C or G). (c) Cross-linking yields (mean ± standard
deviation, N = 3).
Kinetic vs Thermodynamic Discrimination
We wished to
determine the physical basis for the high discrimination ratios observed
in these studies. One hypothesis is that discrimination is kinetic,
with the mismatch creating an energetic barrier that blocks completion
of branch migration, preventing the cross-linker from coming into
contact with the target. If this hypothesis is correct, mismatch discrimination
should be independent of probe toehold length, provided that the toehold
is long enough for initial binding to occur. Accordingly, we synthesized
a series of DNA probes with different toehold lengths and measured
their cross-linking yield with both complementary and 2-nt mismatch
DNA targets. As shown in Figure 6a, the data
appear inconsistent with the kinetic discrimination hypothesis: mismatch
targets are cross-linked with substantial yield by probes with long
toeholds. Efficient rejection of mismatches on the loop side of the
cross-linker (Figure 3, target M3; Figure 5, target pool P7) provides additional evidence that
appears inconsistent with the kinetic barrier hypothesis.
Figure 6
Kinetic vs
thermodynamic discrimination for DNA probes and targets.
Capture yields are mean ± standard deviation, N = 3. (a) Cross-linking yield vs probe toehold length for complementary
and 2-nt mismatch targets (C and M1 from Figure 3). When the toehold becomes sufficiently long, the mismatch is cross-linked
with substantial yield, indicating that this 2-nt substitution does
not produce a prohibitive kinetic barrier to branch migration. (b)
Cross-linking yield for complementary and SNP targets (from Figure 4) using SC probes with 3-, 4-, and 5-nt toeholds.
The pattern of yields is the same across toehold lengths, and the
mismatch yields fall more rapidly than the complement yield as the
toehold is shortened. (c) Cross-linking yield vs calculated reaction
free energies for probe/target hybridization. Probes and targets from
Figure 6b plus five 2-nt mismatched targets with 4- and 5-nt toehold
probes (section S6.6 in SI). Data cluster
around the predicted yield curve for two-state equilibrium (black
line).
Kinetic vs
thermodynamic discrimination for DNA probes and targets.
Capture yields are mean ± standard deviation, N = 3. (a) Cross-linking yield vs probe toehold length for complementary
and 2-nt mismatch targets (C and M1 from Figure 3). When the toehold becomes sufficiently long, the mismatch is cross-linked
with substantial yield, indicating that this 2-nt substitution does
not produce a prohibitive kinetic barrier to branch migration. (b)
Cross-linking yield for complementary and SNP targets (from Figure 4) using SC probes with 3-, 4-, and 5-nt toeholds.
The pattern of yields is the same across toehold lengths, and the
mismatch yields fall more rapidly than the complement yield as the
toehold is shortened. (c) Cross-linking yield vs calculated reaction
free energies for probe/target hybridization. Probes and targets from
Figure 6b plus five 2-nt mismatched targets with 4- and 5-nt toehold
probes (section S6.6 in SI). Data cluster
around the predicted yield curve for two-state equilibrium (black
line).If 2-nt mismatches do not produce
a large kinetic barrier to branch
migration, an alternative hypothesis is that the probe/target interaction
rapidly reaches equilibrium, and that the yield is therefore determined
by the thermodynamics of probe/target hybridization. The toehold data
of Figure 6a appear consistent with this hypothesis:
longer toeholds compensate for the mismatch to allow high-yield cross-linking.
Our DNA SNP detection data (Figure 6b) are
also consistent with the thermodynamic hypothesis: discrimination
improves as the toehold is shortened, with the pattern of yields remaining
constant across SNPs. Figure 6c plots measured
cross-linking yields vs calculated reaction free energy changes based
on nearest-neighbor thermodynamic parameters.[13,29]CNVK is expected to destabilize hybridization,[43,44] but the sequence context is similar in the SC probe stem and in
the probe/target duplex, and therefore this destabilization is not
expected to significantly alter the hybridization yield. Data are
shown for DNA SC probes detecting complementary and mismatched targets
with 1- and 2-nt substitutions. The data cluster around the sigmoidal
curve predicted for two-state equilibrium (section S2.1 in SI), suggesting that for these sequences and
toehold lengths, mismatch discrimination is dominated by the thermodynamics
of probe/target hybridization, rather than by a kinetic barrier to
branch migration.Annealing (heating followed by slow cooling)
is commonly used to
promote equilibration of nucleic acid systems.[47,48] Anneals involving hairpins must be interpreted with caution because
intramolecular base pairing can cause kinetic traps to form during
cooling, preventing equilibration.[49,50] To test for
equilibration of probe/target hybridization, we annealed probes and
targets together prior to cross-linking. Across a range of toehold
lengths, and for both complementary and 2-nt mismatch targets, annealing
produced yield patterns similar to the isothermal case (Figure 6a), though with somewhat higher capture yields for
data that were not already saturated at high yield. These results
may indicate that probe/target hybridization has not fully equilibrated
in the isothermal experiments, or alternatively, that annealing does
not relax the system to equilibrium. Further study is warranted.
Selective Target Capture from a Mixture of Closely Related Fluorescent
Protein Sequences
The results of Figures 3 and 6c suggest that, for probe concentrations
in the micromolar range, high-yield cross-linking of the complementary
DNA target and low-yield cross-linking of 2-nt (and larger) mismatches
can be achieved simultaneously by designing probes to bind the complementary
target with a calculated reaction free energy change of approximately
−12 kcal/mol (section S2.3 in SI). We tested the utility of this design criterion by designing a
pair of DNA probes (section S7 in SI) to
selectively hybridize to one of a pair of targets drawn from the DsRed2
and mCherry red fluorescent protein sequences;[51,52] these targets differ by only a 2-nt substitution. Probe sequences
and target sequences are shown in Figure 7,
together with results demonstrating selective capture of one target
or the other from a mixture of the two targets. Each probe captures
its complementary target and rejects its mismatched target with near-quantitative
yield, achieving a discrimination ratio of approximately 3 orders
of magnitude for both DNA and RNA targets.
Figure 7
Near-quantitative selective
target capture from a mixture of closely
related fluorescent protein sequences. (a) Probe and target sequences.
Probes: toehold in green, CNVK cross-linker in brown, DNA
probes used for both DNA and RNA targets. Targets: mismatches in blue
and red, cross-link partner in orange, 5′-fluorophore-labeled
(6-FAM for DsRed2, Cy5 for mCherry). (b) Denaturing polyacrylamide
gel. Fluorescent channels: 6-FAM (blue) and Cy5 (red). (c) Cross-linking
yields (mean ± standard deviation, N = 3). See
sections S7.4 and S7.5 in SI for additional
demonstrations of selective target capture in mixtures of fluorescent
protein sequences.
Near-quantitative selective
target capture from a mixture of closely
related fluorescent protein sequences. (a) Probe and target sequences.
Probes: toehold in green, CNVK cross-linker in brown, DNA
probes used for both DNA and RNA targets. Targets: mismatches in blue
and red, cross-link partner in orange, 5′-fluorophore-labeled
(6-FAM for DsRed2, Cy5 for mCherry). (b) Denaturing polyacrylamide
gel. Fluorescent channels: 6-FAM (blue) and Cy5 (red). (c) Cross-linking
yields (mean ± standard deviation, N = 3). See
sections S7.4 and S7.5 in SI for additional
demonstrations of selective target capture in mixtures of fluorescent
protein sequences.
Selective Cross-Linking
of Full-Length Fluorescent Protein mRNAs
We wished next to
examine whether these SC probes could selectively
capture the corresponding full-length mRNA targets. The switch to
long targets required three changes. First, because cross-linking
to a long target does not cause a discernible gel mobility shift,
the target-labeling scheme that we employed for short targets in Figures 3–7 is not applicable
here. Instead, we monitor probe/target cross-linking by observing
depletion of the cross-linked probe band after irradiation in the
presence of an excess of target mRNA. Second, to reduce the quantity
of mRNA needed for these studies, we operated at lower probe concentrations
than for Figure 7, necessitating a 1-nt increase
in the length of the SC probe toehold. Third, to make the target sites
accessible for binding, it was necessary to include auxiliary oligonucleotides
(so-called ‘helper strands’) that hybridize to the regions
flanking the target sites. Figure 8 demonstrates
that DsRed2 and mCherry DNA SC probes targeting either short RNAs
or full-length mRNAs selectively capture their cognate targets with
high yield, while efficiently rejecting their noncognate targets containing
2-nt mismatches. Within the context of this semiquantitative assay
(a property following from the need to compare bands between lanes
rather than within each lane; see section S5 in SI), this selective capture property is indistinguishable
for full-length mRNA targets and the short RNA targets that were studied
quantitatively in Figure 7.
Figure 8
Selective cross-linking
of full-length mRNA targets. DsRed2 and
mCherry DNA SC probes target full-length DsRed2 and mCherry mRNAs
at sites differing by only a 2-nt substitution (same target sites
as Figure 7a, 7-nt toehold probes). Denaturing
polyacrylamide gel poststained with SYBR Gold. Probes are open in
(−UV) lanes and covalently closed in (+UV) lanes. The covalently
closed probe band is depleted only for complementary targets (red
boxes). To combat native secondary structure in mRNA targets, each
SC probe is accompanied by RNA helper strands complementary to the
sequences flanking the intended target site.
Selective cross-linking
of full-length mRNA targets. DsRed2 and
mCherry DNA SC probes target full-length DsRed2 and mCherry mRNAs
at sites differing by only a 2-nt substitution (same target sites
as Figure 7a, 7-nt toehold probes). Denaturing
polyacrylamide gel poststained with SYBR Gold. Probes are open in
(−UV) lanes and covalently closed in (+UV) lanes. The covalently
closed probe band is depleted only for complementary targets (red
boxes). To combat native secondary structure in mRNA targets, each
SC probe is accompanied by RNA helper strands complementary to the
sequences flanking the intended target site.
Sensitive and Selective Capture As Target Concentration Is Decreased
For many applications, target concentration will not be under experimental
control and will often be significantly lower than the probe concentration.
Hence, sensitivity is an important aspect of probe performance. Ideally,
the capture yields for complementary and mismatched targets would
be independent of target concentration. Because the data of Figure 6 suggest that our covalent capture yields are consistent
with the thermodynamics of probe/target hybridization, we examine
equilibrium theory in setting expectations for probe sensitivity.
Equilibrium hybridization calculations predict that for any given
probe/target pair, the hybridization yield asymptotes to a constant
from below as the target concentration is decreased at fixed probe
concentration (section S2.2 in SI). To
test this prediction, we measured the cross-link yields for the complementary
and 2-nt mismatched DNA targets of Figure 3 across 3 orders of magnitude in target concentration (section S6.10
in SI). Consistent with equilibrium theory,
there is no observed degradation in SC probe performance as the target
concentration decreases, with near-quantitative capture of the complement
and rejection of the mismatch observed down to 1 nM (the sensitivity
limit of our gel-based assay using fluorophore-labeled targets). To
read out the signal at lower target concentrations, selective target
capture with an SC probe could be followed by postcapture signal amplification
(e.g., using PCR, catalytic reporter deposition,[14] or HCR[53]).
Photoreversal
of Probe/Target Cross-Links
Many applications
of nucleic acid probes require that targets are first captured and
then released once other materials have been washed away. For covalent
probes, target release requires reversal of the probe/target cross-link.
Yoshimura et al. have shown that CNVK cross-links between
single-stranded oligonucleotides can be reversed by high-intensity
UV-B irradiation.[43,44] We observe efficient reversal
of SC probe/target cross-links by low-intensity UV-B irradiation (99%
after a 20 min exposure with 8 mW/cm2 at 311 nm; Figure
S7 in SI). Interestingly, we find that
efficient target recovery requires irradiation in denaturing conditions,
and that the SC probes are found in a mix of covalently closed and
open states after exposure, implying that irradiation at this wavelength
drives both the forward (cross-linking) and reverse reactions (section
S4.4 in SI). Subsequent investigations
revealed that 254 and 365 nm light also drive both the forward and
reverse reactions, with the forward reaction more favored at longer
wavelengths (section S4.5 in SI). This
phenomenon, which is not observed for psoralen,[54] a widely used [2 + 2] photoactive cross-linker, has significant
implications for applications utilizing CNVK, and to our
knowledge has not been reported in the literature.
Discussion
Shielded covalent probes combine the three key ingredients of programmable
base pairing, molecular conformation change, and activatable covalent
cross-linking to simultaneously achieve high sequence selectivity
and durable target capture at a temperature of choice. Existing probe
concepts lack at least one of these three key ingredients, undermining
the selectivity, stability, or robustness of target binding.The data presented here show that SC probes covalently capture
their complementary DNA or RNA targets with near-quantitative yield
(75–97%) while achieving near-quantitative rejection of mismatched
targets containing 2-nt substitutions (<1%). The resulting discrimination
ratios are 2–3 orders of magnitude. These results are obtained
for mismatches at a variety of locations along the probe stem that
disrupt either weak or strong base pairs, eliminating the need to
design probes for specific mismatches.SC probes are also capable
of discriminating single-nucleotide
substitutions, the most difficult type of mutations to detect, at
the cost of a modest reduction in capture yield for the complementary
target. For either DNA or RNA targets, SNPs disrupting either strong
or weak base pairs (including those leading to G·U wobbles) are
efficiently discriminated at different locations along the probe stem.
For DNA targets, discrimination ratios of 1–2 orders of magnitude
are achieved (median 90). This is roughly an order of magnitude better
than unstructured allele-specific microarray probes[18,20,55] and compares favorably with the discrimination
ratios of recent structured probe designs (ref (27): median 13; ref (28): median 26). Crucially,
unlike these earlier methods, SC probes capture their targets covalently,
achieving binding that is not only selective but also stable.Historically, a great deal of emphasis has been placed on discriminating
SNPs, leading to diverse probe technologies that produce nonquantitative
yields for complementary targets.[18−20,26−28,34,37,55,56] For quantitative expression profiling studies focused on discriminating
genes within a genome, where 1-nt resolution is not necessarily needed,
we believe it is highly significant that SC probes enable robust,
near-quantitative capture of complementary targets and near-quantitative
rejection of 2-nt mismatches, providing a powerful framework for genome-wide
analysis. Studies with large pools of DNA or RNA mismatched targets
demonstrate that SC probes efficiently capture complementary targets
and reject mismatched targets when the complementary targets are greatly
outnumbered.It was not clear a priori whether SC probes would
discriminate
mismatches based on the kinetics or thermodynamics of probe/target
hybridization. Although 1-nt mismatches have been shown to introduce
a substantial barrier to 4-way DNA branch migration in Holliday junctions,[57,58] the literature is conflicted as to their effect on the kinetics
of 3-way branch migration (which is central to SC probe/target hybridization).
Studies have reported that 1-nt mismatches effectively block 3-way
DNA branch migration,[41,56] have little effect on 3-way DNA
branch migration kinetics,[57] or sometimes
slow 3-way DNA branch migration.[23] Our
data suggest that even 2-nt mismatches do not produce a large kinetic
barrier to 3-way DNA branch migration. Given the importance of this
process to nucleic acid nanotechnology,[59] further study of the effect of mismatches on 3-way branch migration
kinetics is warranted; by trapping kinetically accessible states,
SC probes provide a convenient tool for examining this phenomenon.For our probe and target sequences, mismatch discrimination appears
to be governed primarily by the thermodynamics of probe/target hybridization.
The nearest-neighbor model of DNA secondary structure thermodynamics[13,29] usefully predicted capture yields, providing a basis for rational
SC probe design, as demonstrated for two pairs of target sequences
for closely related fluorescent proteins. The corresponding RNA model[12] should also provide a useful guide for design,
though salt corrections are needed for direct comparison to experimental
data. The length of the toehold (or, likely, the size of the loop)
can be adjusted to overcome native secondary structure or to optimize
yield or sequence selectivity. For long targets, helper strands complementary
to the regions flanking the target site can be used to combat native
secondary structure in the desired target. Because helper strands
will usually base pair imperfectly to off-targets, they also have
the potential to augment SC probe selectivity.SC probes are
unique in providing both high sequence selectivity
and covalent target capture. This combination of properties is desirable
for numerous applications, including profiling genetic expression
in vitro, mapping genetic expression in situ, and regulating genetic
expression in vivo. The ability to form covalent bonds with targets
is particularly valuable in the common situation in which unwanted
material including surplus probes or targets must be washed away while
preserving genuine probe/target interactions. Currently, washes are
often performed by adjusting stringency, but without a covalent link
between the probe and target, this process remains subject to the
same affinity/selectivity trade-off as the initial detection step.
The covalent link afforded by SC probes should dramatically improve
and simplify such assays. The ability to photoreverse the cross-link
and recover the target after washing will be valuable for chromatographic
applications such as target enrichment for high-throughput sequencing[60,61] or pulldown of specific RNAs or RNA/protein complexes.[4] To date, nucleic acid cross-linkers developed
for antisense and antigene applications[30,32,33,37−39] have been studied in the context of unstructured probes that lack
the sequence selectivity of structured probes. SC probes offer a promising
conceptual framework for covalent inhibition of genetic expression
while minimizing off-target effects. While SC probes employing photoactivated
cross-linkers are conceptually suited for use in photoaccessible tissues
(e.g., cultured cells, small model organisms, or shallow tissue in
larger organisms), the capture of targets deep within opaque tissue
would require development of SC probes that employ conformation-activated
cross-linkers. SC probes may prove useful in multiple areas of nucleic
acid nanotechnology, including as (optionally reversible) covalent
elements for structural engineering[62] and
strand displacement cascades.[59]This
article has introduced the concept of shielded covalent probes
and explored their performance using the photoactivated CNVK cross-linker. Significant work will be required to realize SC probes’
full potential. Depending on the application, probes may need to be
immobilized on solid surfaces or introduced into fixed samples or
living cells. It also may be desirable to include materials other
than DNA or RNA (e.g., 2′-OMe RNA, LNA, PNA) in the probes
to improve their performance further, or to employ different cross-linker
chemistries. On the basis of these initial studies, it appears that
the shielded covalent probe concept offers a powerful new tool for
exploring the many essential functions of nucleic acids in biology.
Methods Summary
Target and Probe Sequences
Sequences of the oligonucleotides
used in this article are listed in section S1 in SI, as well as a discussion of how they were designed.
Oligonucleotide
Synthesis and Preparation
HPLC-purified
oligonucleotide targets were purchased from Integrated DNA Technologies
and used without further purification. SC probes were synthesized
using standard solid-phase protocols and purified by RP-HPLC (see
section S3 in SI for details). After quantification
by UV absorbance, the probes were stored in opaque microtubes to prevent
activation by ambient light.
mRNA Transcription
mRNA targets
were produced by in
vitro transcription using MegaScript kits (Invitrogen) as directed
by the manufacturer. The DsRed2 template was created by linearizing
pTNT-DsRed2 plasmid with NotI and transcribed with T7 polymerase.
The mCherry template was created by linearizing pCS2+mCherry:H2B (a
plasmid containing an mCherry-human histone H2B fusion) with KpnI
and transcribed with SP6 polymerase.
Probe Hybridization and
Cross-Linking
Hybridization
and cross-linking assays were performed in SSC buffer (150 mM NaCl,
15 mM trisodium citrate, pH 7.0) with probes at 3 μM and the
concentration of each target as follows: 1.8 μM for the single-target
studies of Figures 3, 4, and 6; ∼30 nM for the pool studies
of Figure 5; 1.5 μM for the mixture studies
of Figure 7. For all experiments except the
anneals in Figure 6a, probes in buffer were
annealed separately (5 min at 95 °C for DNA probes, 10 min at
70 °C for RNA, followed by cooling to RT over 35 min in the dark).
Targets were then added and the reactions incubated at 22 °C
for 35 min. For the anneal experiments, the probes and targets were
annealed together as above, and the incubation step was omitted. A
portion of each reaction was individually irradiated for 1 min with
a 365 nm LED (LED-100, Electro-Lite) at 4 °C in a clear 96-well
microplate. Alternative activation procedures are detailed in section
S4 in SI. For mRNA targets (Figure 8), SC probes (0.5 μM) were heated (65 °C,
15 min) with targets (1 μM) and 30-nt RNA helper strands (2
μM; complementary to the regions flanking the SC probe binding
site) in SSC buffer and incubated at RT for 3 h, then irradiated on
glass coverslips for 1 min.
Analysis
Cross-linking reactions
were analyzed using
two methods. All reactions were analyzed by denaturing polyacrylamide
gel electrophoresis and imaged with a Fujifilm FLA-5100 fluorescence
scanner. Additionally, some reactions were analyzed by HPLC in order
to confirm the values obtained from the gels. In all cases, the HPLC
and gel cross-linking yields agreed closely. Experimental details
for both methods and discussion of uncertainties can be found in section
S5 in SI.
Photoreversal of Cross-Links
For the photoreversal
experiments, 1.2 and 1 nmol of probe and complementary target were
hybridized and cross-linked as described above. Acetonitrile and urea
were then added to final concentrations of 50% and 2 M. The reaction
was irradiated at RT in a clear microplate using a small lamp fitted
with two Philips PL-S 9 W narrowband UVB bulbs. The nominal output
of these bulbs is 1.2 W with a narrow spectrum centered at 311 nm;
we measured an irradiance of 8 mW/cm2 at the reaction position
using a UVX-31 photometer (UVP). Aliquots were removed at various
time points, and the yields were determined as for the cross-linking
reactions.
Authors: Joseph N Zadeh; Conrad D Steenberg; Justin S Bois; Brian R Wolfe; Marshall B Pierce; Asif R Khan; Robert M Dirks; Niles A Pierce Journal: J Comput Chem Date: 2011-01-15 Impact factor: 3.376
Authors: Yi Xiao; Kory J I Plakos; Xinhui Lou; Ryan J White; Jiangrong Qian; Kevin W Plaxco; H Tom Soh Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2009 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Thomas Naiser; Oliver Ehler; Jona Kayser; Timo Mai; Wolfgang Michel; Albrecht Ott Journal: BMC Biotechnol Date: 2008-05-13 Impact factor: 2.563
Authors: Jocelyn Y Kishi; Ninning Liu; Emma R West; Kuanwei Sheng; Jack J Jordanides; Matthew Serrata; Constance L Cepko; Sinem K Saka; Peng Yin Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2022-10-10 Impact factor: 47.990
Authors: Dmitriy A Khodakov; Anastasia S Khodakova; David M Huang; Adrian Linacre; Amanda V Ellis Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2015-03-04 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Amjad Askary; Luis Sanchez-Guardado; James M Linton; Duncan M Chadly; Mark W Budde; Long Cai; Carlos Lois; Michael B Elowitz Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2019-11-18 Impact factor: 54.908