The synthetic challenges in glycobiology and glycochemistry hamper the development of glycobiomaterials for biomedicine. Here we report the use of molecular self-assembly to sidestep the laborious synthesis of complex glycans for promoting the proliferation of murine embryonic stem (mES) cells. Our study shows that the supramolecular assemblies of a small molecule conjugate of nucleobase, amino acids, and saccharide, as a de novo glycoconjugate, promote the proliferation of mES cells and the development of zygotes into blastocysts of mouse. Molecular engineering confirms that each motif (i.e., adenine, Arg-Gly-Asp (RGD) domain, and glucosamine) is indispensable for the observed activity of the conjugate. As the first example of using assemblies of the molecular conjugates of multiple fundamental biological building blocks to control cell behaviors, this work illustrates an unprecedented approach to use supramolecular assemblies as multifunctional mimics of glycoconjugates.
The synthetic challenges in glycobiology and glycochemistry hamper the development of glycobiomaterials for biomedicine. Here we report the use of molecular self-assembly to sidestep the laborious synthesis of complex glycans for promoting the proliferation of murineembryonic stem (mES) cells. Our study shows that the supramolecular assemblies of a small molecule conjugate of nucleobase, amino acids, and saccharide, as a de novo glycoconjugate, promote the proliferation of mES cells and the development of zygotes into blastocysts of mouse. Molecular engineering confirms that each motif (i.e., adenine, Arg-Gly-Asp (RGD) domain, and glucosamine) is indispensable for the observed activity of the conjugate. As the first example of using assemblies of the molecular conjugates of multiple fundamental biological building blocks to control cell behaviors, this work illustrates an unprecedented approach to use supramolecular assemblies as multifunctional mimics of glycoconjugates.
Because tissue regeneration
requires the integration of new cells with their surroundings, the
intricate relationship between stem cells[1] and their microenvironment (i.e., stem cell niches) has to be regulated
properly and effectively. Now, we know that stem cell niches interact
with stem cells via a number of ways, including cell-to-cell contact,
cell-extracellular matrix (ECM) adhesion, and presentation of soluble
growth factors.[2] A common feature of these
modes of action is that they all associate with glycoproteins and
proteoglycans. For example, every living cell is covered with a complex
array of glycans (i.e., glycocalyx);[3] almost
half of ECM proteins are either glycoproteins or proteoglycans;[4] most secreted proteins of eukaryotes carry large
amounts of covalently attached glycans;[5] and actions of growth factors usually are mediated by proteoglycans.[6] These facts, clearly, underscore the pivotal
roles of glycans in stem cell biology. Despite the prevalence of glycans
in the cellular environment,[7] the development
of glycobiomaterials for biomedical applications is rather limited
because of the challenges in glycobiology and glycochemistry. Barriers
to progress include limited a priori structural information
on glycans and no “codons” for a particular saccharide
structure,[8] along with the daunting nature
of glycan chemical synthesis.[9,10] Unlike nucleic acids
and proteins, glycans are more difficult to synthesize due to (i)
their typically branched structures, (ii) their anomeric linkages
(i.e., α or β glycosidic bond), and (iii) the need for
multiple selective protection and deprotection steps. Therefore, no
general methods are available for the preparation of complex glycans.[11] These factors greatly impede the development
and application of glycobiomaterials for biomedicine.Thus, to sidestep the laborious
synthesis of complex glycans, we
choose self-assembly of small glycoconjugates, as a new approach,
for mimicking the functions of glycoproteins/proteoglycans. We make
this choice based on three facts. First, the tremendous advance of
and the understanding of supramolecular chemistry[13,14] have established the foundation for exploring more complex features
of molecules such as the emergent properties of the assemblies of
small molecules.[13,15] In fact, our recent observation
that the nanofibers of small molecules selectively inhibit cancer
cells[16] validates that supramolecular assemblies
of small molecules can exhibit emergent properties drastically different
from the constituent small molecules. Second, and most importantly,
it is known that the clustered saccharide patches can mimic the binding
of a disparate glycan,[17] which implies
that the assemblies of small saccharides are able to function as glycans.
Third, the dendrimers[18] or the nanofibers
of glucosamine improve wound healing in animal models,[19,20] which further supports that assemblies of small glycoconjugates
can provide a facile way to mimic certain aspects of glycoproteins
or proteoglycans.Based on the above-described rationales and
encouraged by progress
in glycochemistry and glycobiology,[9,21] particularly
the generation of self-assemblies of saccharide derivatives,[20,22] we examine the functions of assemblies of a new type of small glycoconjugates,[23,24] which consist of nucleobases, amino acids, and saccharides, for
promoting the proliferation of mES cells and the development of zygotes
of mouse. Our results indicate that the simple conjugate of adenine,
Phe-Arg-Gly-Asp, and glucosamine (1 in Scheme 1) self-assembles to form supramolecular assemblies
that contain nanoparticles and nanofibers. When they interact with
cells, the assemblies of 1 nearly double the proliferation
of mES cells without compromising their pluripotency. This stimulating
effect requires the conjugation of the saccharide, the binding between
the RGD epitope on 1 and integrins[25] on the cell surface (Scheme 1),
and the presence of adenine because the removal of any one of the
three motifs results in an ineffective analogue of 1 (Scheme 2). Moreover, the assemblies of 1 promote
the development of zygotes of mice into blastocysts, implying the
multiple functions of 1 and its assemblies. These results,
together, establish the feasibility of using nanoscale assemblies
of small glycoconjugates to emulate natural multifunctional glycans
(e.g., heparan sulfate[6]), which may lead
to a general approach that bypasses the laborious synthesis of glycans
and focuses on the functional mimics (not the structural mimics) of
glycoconjugates for regulating the behaviors of cells in vitro and in vivo.
Scheme 1
Promoting
the Proliferation of mES Cells via Plausible Interactions
of Supramolecular Assemblies with Integrins[12]
Scheme 2
Molecular Structures and Representations of the Multifunctional
Small
Glycoconjugate (1) and Its Analogues
Toward the goal of developing
supramolecular assemblies of small
molecules to mimic functional glycoconjugates, we examine the cell
response to the nanoscale assemblies of 1 and its analogues.
We specifically include the RGD sequence in 1 because
RGD, as the well-established functional tripeptide motif[26] binding to integrins,[27] can carry out multiple functions. Meanwhile, we synthesize three
analogues of 1 (Scheme 2) for
evaluating the contribution of each module to the activity of the
conjugate. For example, the removal of glucosamine from 1 gives 2, which should help determine the necessity
of the glucosamine, the replacement of aspartic acid in 1 to glutamic acid results in 3 that has a RGE sequence
instead of RGD sequence, which would verify the interactions between
the conjugate and integrin,[28] the substitution
of adenine by thymine affords 4, which could further
help determine the role of the nucleobase for the observed biological
activities of the conjugates.We first characterize the supramolecular
assemblies of 1. As shown in Figure 1A, static light scattering
(SLS) of the solutions of 100, 200, and 500 μM of 1 show much higher intensities than that of the PBS buffer, suggesting
that 1 starts to form assemblies in the PBS buffer even
at 100 μM. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) of the solution of 1 at 100 μM indicates the average hydrodynamic radii
of the particles is about 140 nm, further supporting the results from
SLS. Moreover, the intensity of SLS of 1 increases nonlinearly
with decreasing detection angle, suggesting that the assemblies exhibit
anisotropic shapes (especially at the concentration of 500 μM).
Consistent with SLS and DLS, transmission electron microscopy (TEM)
of 1 (Figure 1B) at 500 μM
shows a significant amount of assemblies that consist of dense clusters
(diameter at about 200–400 nm) and short nanofibrils (width
at about 20 nm and length at about 100 nm), which agrees with 1 forming a hydrogel at higher concentration.[24] At concentration higher than 100 μM, TEM images (Figure S1) show that 1 results in
assemblies (around 100 nm), which agrees with DLS. These results confirm
that 1 forms nanoscale, heterogeneous assemblies at a
concentration below its critical gelation concentration (36 mM).[24] The ability of 1 to form assemblies
in PBS buffer suggests that 1, at and above 100 μM,
is able to self-assemble to form assemblies, either in culture medium
or on the surface of cells (Scheme 1).
Figure 1
Supramolecular
assemblies of 1. (A) The intensity
of SLS of 1 at 100, 200, and 500 μM. (B) TEM image
of 1 at 500 μM. The sizes of the circled parts
are congruous with those indicated by dynamic light scattering. Scale
bar = 100 nm; all compounds are in PBS buffer, pH 7.4; the PBS buffer
is the control in (A). (C) Cluster of nine molecules of 1, with saccharide atoms in orange, nucleobase in dark green, and
amino acid in blue; the two unseen saccharides are located on the
solvent-exposed back face of the cluster. (D) Adenine and phenylalanine
side chain π-stacking in the cluster. (E) Salt bridge between
arginine and aspartate side chains, and π-stacking of arginine
with adenine.
Supramolecular
assemblies of 1. (A) The intensity
of SLS of 1 at 100, 200, and 500 μM. (B) TEM image
of 1 at 500 μM. The sizes of the circled parts
are congruous with those indicated by dynamic light scattering. Scale
bar = 100 nm; all compounds are in PBS buffer, pH 7.4; the PBS buffer
is the control in (A). (C) Cluster of nine molecules of 1, with saccharide atoms in orange, nucleobase in dark green, and
amino acid in blue; the two unseen saccharides are located on the
solvent-exposed back face of the cluster. (D) Adenine and phenylalanine
side chain π-stacking in the cluster. (E) Salt bridge between
arginine and aspartate side chains, and π-stacking of arginine
with adenine.Although the precise
and complete molecular interactions of 1 within assemblies
remain to be elucidated, all-atom explicit-solvent
molecular dynamics simulations[29] provide
insight into the molecular interactions stabilizing small clusters
that can seed formation of larger assemblies. In a 100 ns trajectory
of a system consisting of nine molecules of 1 with sodium
and chloride ion concentrations and titratable residue protonation
states consistent with PBS, formation of a single stable cluster is
observed. The individual molecules, initially constructed with a linear
peptide backbone and evenly spaced from each other, readily associate
upon intermolecular collision. The final conformation at 100 ns has
several notable features (Figure 1C,D,E): the
saccharide moieties are solvent-exposed and poised on the periphery
of the cluster, there are numerous intra- and intermolecular π-stacking
interactions involving both adenine and the phenylalanine side chain
(and occasionally the guanidinium group in arginine), and salt bridges
form between the arginine and aspartate side chains. These features
point toward π-stacking for the cohesion of assemblies, and
toward the importance of the saccharide moiety for solubility and
for interfacing with pockets of water in the assembled state.The self-assembly and proteolytic resistance[24] of 1 allow us to test 1 in mES
cell culture. Our result shows that the assemblies of 1 promote the proliferation of mES cells. As shown in Figures 2A and S3, the growth
of mES cells is 162%, 196%, or 135% after being incubated with 100
μM, 200 μM, or 500 μM of 1 for 48 h,
respectively. This result clearly indicates that the molecules of 1 stimulate the proliferation of mES cells. The decrease of
the agonistic effect for cell proliferation at 500 μM (Figure S3) is consistent with the formation of
assemblies of the conjugates as a recent study has shown “bell-shaped”
dose–response curves associated with the formation of aggregates
of both antagonists and agonists.[30] Moreover,
it is not uncommon for a growth-factor (e.g., PDGF) to exhibit positive
signal at low concentration and negative signal at high concentration.[31] Thus, the non-monotonic dose-dependence of 1, in fact, supports that the assemblies of 1 are able to mimic certain features of growth factors, most of which
are glycoproteins.[4] Moreover, at the concentrations
tested (100, 200, and 500 μM), 1 likely exists
as molecular assemblies to promote cell proliferation. In addition,
the effect of 1 appears to depend on the number of mES
cells. When the initial number of cells is 2.0 × 103 per well, the respective growth of the mES cells is 105%, 151%,
or 118% after 48 h and 214%, 168%, or 178% after 72 h (Figure S4). Only slightly promotion of the proliferation
of mES cells incubated with 100 μM or 500 μM of 1 for 48 h fits with “bell-shaped” dose–response
of agonists of assemblies.[30] That stimulation
effects differ at 48 and 72 h reveals that proliferation depends on
cell numbers, which implies that the assemblies of 1 likely
play a role in cell–cell communication. These results indicate
that the stimulating effects of 1 apparently correlate
both with the concentrations of 1 and the numbers of
mES cells.
Figure 2
Promotion of the proliferation of mES cells. (A) Relative cell
viability (determined by counting the cell numbers; 100% represents
the control, i.e., 0 μM of 1) of the mES cells
incubated with 1, 2, 3, or 4 at the concentration of 200 μM. *Averaged from four
trials (Figure S6 and S7). The initial
number of mES cells is 2.0 × 104/well, and are cultured
for 48 h according to the protocol.[32] (B)
The treated mES cells (by 1 at 200 μM for 72 h)
and the control (by mES growth medium only for 72 h) were incubated
with EdU or alkaline phosphatase (AP) prior to imaging. (Left) nuclear
staining by HCS NuclearMaskTM Blue stain; (middle) EdU staining by
Alexa Fluor azide (scale bar = 100 μm); (right) photomicrographs
of AP staining of undifferentiated mES cells (scale bar = 50 μm).
The initial number of mES cells is 2.0 × 104/well.
Promotion of the proliferation of mES cells. (A) Relative cell
viability (determined by counting the cell numbers; 100% represents
the control, i.e., 0 μM of 1) of the mES cells
incubated with 1, 2, 3, or 4 at the concentration of 200 μM. *Averaged from four
trials (Figure S6 and S7). The initial
number of mES cells is 2.0 × 104/well, and are cultured
for 48 h according to the protocol.[32] (B)
The treated mES cells (by 1 at 200 μM for 72 h)
and the control (by mES growth medium only for 72 h) were incubated
with EdU or alkaline phosphatase (AP) prior to imaging. (Left) nuclear
staining by HCS NuclearMaskTM Blue stain; (middle) EdU staining by
Alexa Fluor azide (scale bar = 100 μm); (right) photomicrographs
of AP staining of undifferentiated mES cells (scale bar = 50 μm).
The initial number of mES cells is 2.0 × 104/well.Promotion of the development of zygotes of mouse.
(A) Percentage
of zygotes reaching the blastocyst stage after incubation without 1 (control) and with 1 at concentrations of 100
μM, 200 μM, and 500 μM for 4 days in KSOM medium.
(B) Photomicrographs of embryos incubated with 500 μM of 1 and without 1 (control) for 4 days (scale bar
= 50 μm). Red arrows point to blastocysts, and blue arrows to
morulas.According to Click-iT EdUHCS
assay,[33] after a 72 h treatment of the
mES cells with 1 (at
100, 200, or 500 μM), HCS-positive nuclei are EdU-positive by
characteristic bright green fluorescence within the nuclei (Figures 2B and S10), confirming
the proliferation of mES cells. However, the Click-iT EdUHCS assay
of the control mES cells (treated with the normal mES cell growth
medium without adding 1) shows mainly blue fluorescence
in the nuclei and little green fluorescence of the colonies. Moreover,
almost all the mES cells treated with 1 are EdU-positive
(89%), but less than half of the control mES cells are EdU positive
(18%) (Figure S11). These results further
confirm that the assemblies of 1 promote the proliferation
of the mES cells. In addition, alkaline phosphatase (AP) staining[34] shows that after 72 h of incubation, mES cells
treated with 1 (at 100, 200, and 500 μM) maintain
a relatively high rate of growth of colonies without losing the high
activity of AP (i.e., the ratio of AP-positive colonies is nearly
100%, Figures 2B and S12) and are morphologically normal, which is identical to control cells
(Figure 2B). This result confirms the pluripotency
of the mES cells treated with assemblies of 1.Moreover, assemblies of 1 promote the early development
of mouse zygote. At the early stage of embryogenesis, the growth from
a zygote to a blastocyst is a rather slow process since it starts
with a single cell. Since ES cells constitute the inner cell mass
of a blastocyst, promoting the proliferation of ES cells helps the
zygote reach blastocyst stage. As shown in Figures 3 and S13, after 4 days incubation
with KSOM medium containing 1 at 500 μM, 84% of
zygotes become blastocysts, which is much higher than the control
(where only 31% zygotes reach the blastocyst stage). This result further
confirms that assemblies of 1 promote the proliferation
of mES cells.
Figure 3
Promotion of the development of zygotes of mouse.
(A) Percentage
of zygotes reaching the blastocyst stage after incubation without 1 (control) and with 1 at concentrations of 100
μM, 200 μM, and 500 μM for 4 days in KSOM medium.
(B) Photomicrographs of embryos incubated with 500 μM of 1 and without 1 (control) for 4 days (scale bar
= 50 μm). Red arrows point to blastocysts, and blue arrows to
morulas.
We also examined the requirement for each motif
in the conjugate.
According to the SLS data (Figure S2A)
and TEM images (Figures S2B, C), the tendency
of 2 or 3 to form assemblies is comparable
to that of 1, suggesting that the removal of glucosamine
from 1 or the replacement aspartic acid (D) on 1 by glutamic acid (E) changes little with regard to the tendency
for self-assembly. Because thymine has fewer hydrogen bond donors
and acceptors than adenine has, it is plausible that 4 is less effective at self-assembly in water. TEM imaging, however,
shows assemblies of 4, at 500 μM (Figure S2D), to have similar morphologies as assemblies of 1. Despite this similarity, as shown in Figure 2A, 2, 3, or 4 hardly
promote the proliferation of mES cells. Since 2 and 3 have similar abilities for self-assembly as 1, the lack of stimulating effect of 2 and 3 on cell proliferation confirms that the glucosamine and/or RGD on 1 is indispensable for this biological activity. The incubation
of mES cells with 4 at 500 μM hardly promotes the
proliferation (Figure 2A). This result suggests
that the replacement of the nucleobase results in the ineffectiveness
of 4 for promoting cell proliferation. In addition, the
mixture of the three components (adenine, FRGD, and glucosamine) hardly
promotes proliferation of mES cells (Figure S8), further supporting that supramolecular assemblies of 1 act as the functional species for the promotion of stem cell proliferation.
Combined, our results confirm that assemblies of 1 are
critical for the observed simulative effects and that the glucosamine,
RGD domain, and adenine are all indispensable motifs for the activity
of 1.In conclusion, the study of assemblies of 1 on the
proliferation of mES cells confirms that self-assemblies of this conjugate
of nucleobase, amino acids, and saccharide promote the proliferation
of mES cells. In addition, analogues of 1 underscore
the critical importance of each component (i.e., glucosamine, RGD,
adenine) and reveal that the action of 1 involves integrin
mediated pathways. Cell proliferation depends on optimal clustering
of integrins,[35] and may explain the correlation
of the stimulative effects of 1 with both its concentration
and the number of cells. In fact, the “bell-shaped”
dose response not only is a feature of assemblies (or aggregates)
of small molecules[30,36] or amyloids,[37] but also has been observed in the phenotypes involving
glycans.[38] As experimental evidence, the
non-monotonic dose response, thus, supports the notion that assemblies
of 1 are able to mimic the function of glycoproteins
(e.g., growth factors) and contributes to the mechanistic understanding
of the functions of 1. Furthermore, the requirement for
both glucosamine and adenine suggests that assemblies of 1 may interact with proteins/enzymes other than integrins. Since one
unique feature of assemblies of 1 is heterogeneities
at nanometer to micrometer scales, this approach may provide a new
way to mimic certain aspects of glycoconjugates since microheterogeneity
is a hallmark of glycans in cellular environments.[5] Moreover, self-assemblies containing different biological
building blocks as described here may generate diverse structural
variations for interaction with cellular proteins in a fundamentally
new way, which ultimately may lead to broader applications of supramolecular
chemistry in cellular environment. And finally, the observed promotion
of development of the zygotes of mouse to blastocysts points toward
the in vivo application of such assemblies for directing
cell behavior.
Authors: Yanqiu Yuan; Dianah Barrett; Yi Zhang; Daniel Kahne; Piotr Sliz; Suzanne Walker Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-03-08 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: J A Thomson; J Itskovitz-Eldor; S S Shapiro; M A Waknitz; J J Swiergiel; V S Marshall; J M Jones Journal: Science Date: 1998-11-06 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Yi Kuang; Junfeng Shi; Jie Li; Dan Yuan; Kyle A Alberti; Qiaobing Xu; Bing Xu Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2014-05-12 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Fan Zhao; Balthasar A Heesters; Isaac Chiu; Yuan Gao; Junfeng Shi; Ning Zhou; Michael C Carroll; Bing Xu Journal: Org Biomol Chem Date: 2014-09-21 Impact factor: 3.876