Liang Wang1, Yujing Han, Shuo Zhou, Guihua Wang, Xiyun Guan. 1. Department of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Illinois Institute of Technology , 3101 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60616, United States.
Abstract
We report a label-free real-time nanopore sensing method for the detection of anthrax lethal factor, a component of the anthrax toxin, by using a complementary single-stranded DNA as a molecular probe. The method is rapid and sensitive: sub-nanomolar concentrations of the target anthrax lethal factor DNA could be detected in ∼1 min. Further, our method is selective, which can differentiate the target DNA from other single-stranded DNA molecules at the single-base resolution. This sequence-specific detection approach should find useful application in the development of nanopore sensors for the detection of other pathogens.
We report a label-free real-time nanopore sensing method for the detection of anthrax lethal factor, a component of the anthrax toxin, by using a complementary single-stranded DNA as a molecular probe. The method is rapid and sensitive: sub-nanomolar concentrations of the target anthrax lethal factor DNA could be detected in ∼1 min. Further, our method is selective, which can differentiate the target DNA from other single-stranded DNA molecules at the single-base resolution. This sequence-specific detection approach should find useful application in the development of nanopore sensors for the detection of other pathogens.
Despite
the significant advances in new diagnostic tools and therapeutic
drugs, and better ways to prevent diseases, humans remain vulnerable
to health threats posed by infectious diseases. According to the World
Health Organization, infectious diseases cause 16.2% of global deaths
each year, and are the second leading cause of death worldwide only
after cardiovascular disease.[1] Although
proper use of personal protection, effective public policy, and advances
in vaccine development are efficient means of controlling the spread
of these diseases, early detection of related pathogens is crucial
to enable efficient prevention and treatment of infectious diseases,
and is vital to the development of an appropriate timely national
response to an infectious disease outbreak or a bioterrorist attack,
which can greatly reduce mortality.Conventional and standard
methods for pathogen detection include
cell culture, enzyme immunoassay, and polymerase chain reaction.[2−5] These methods are often laborious and time-consuming, which usually
take hours or even days to provide results. To overcome these limitations,
developing rapid, sensitive, and selective biosensors or nanobiotechnologies
for pathogen detection is currently under intense investigation. Most
of the bio- and nanomaterial-based pathogen sensors developed so far
rely on antigen–antibody interaction or sequence-specific nucleic
acid detection, and employ optical, electrochemical, piezoelectric,
or mass-based transduction to achieve good detection limit and high
specificity.[6−15]In this work, we demonstrate a rapid nanopore sensing method
for
the sensitive and selective detection of pathogens. Nanopore technology
is an emerging label-free and amplification-free technique for measuring
single molecules. By monitoring the ionic current modulations produced
by the passage of target analytes through a single nanopore bathed
in high salt solutions at a fixed applied potential, the concentration
of the analyte can be obtained by the frequency of occurrence of the
blockage events, while its identity can be determined from the mean
residence time of the analyte coupled with the extent of current blockage
(amplitude). Under experimental conditions of constant electrolyte
pH, temperature, and applied potential, the event blockage amplitude
is related to the size (or diameter) of the analyte molecule, while
the event residence time depends on the length of the analyte and
the strength of the interaction between the analyte and the nanopore.
Over the past 15 years, nanopore sensors have successfully been utilized
for various applications, including biosensing,[16−25] studying covalent and non-covalent bonding interactions,[26,27] investigating biomolecular folding and unfolding,[28,29] probing enzyme activity and kinetics,[30−33]and so on.
Experimental Section
Chemicals
and Reagents
DNA samples
with standard purification (desalting) were purchased from Intergrated
DNA Technologies (Coralville, IA). All the other chemicals were ordered
from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). All of the DNA samples and chemicals
were dissolved in HPLC-grade water (ChromAR, Mallinckrodt Baker).
All the stock solutions of DNA polymers were prepared at 5 mM each,
and kept at −20 °C before and after use. Three electrolyte
solutions were used in this work, which contained 0.15/1.0/3.0 M NaCl
buffered with 10 mM Trizma base, with the pH adjusted to 7.5 using
hydrochloride acid. Lipid1, 2-diphytanoylphosphatidylcholine was
obtained from Avanti Polar Lipids (Alabaster, AL). Teflon film (25
μm thick) was purchased from Goodfellow (Malvern, PA).
Preparation and Formation of Protein Pores
The mutant
αHL M113F gene was constructed by site-directed
mutagenesis (Mutagenex, Piscataway, NJ) with a wild-type αHL
gene in a T7 vector (pT7-αHL).[34] The
mutant αHL monomers were first synthesized by coupled in vitro
transcription and translation (IVTT) using the Escherichia
coli T7 S30 Extract System for Circular DNA from Promega
(Madison, WI). Subsequently, they were assembled into homoheptamers
by adding rabbit red cell membranes and incubating for 1–2
h. The heptamers were then purified by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis
and stored in aliquots at −80°C.
Single-Channel
Recording
A bilayer
of 1,2-diphytanoylphosphatidylcholine was formed on an aperture (150
μm) in a Teflon septum that divided a planar bilayer chamber
into cis and trans compartments. The formation of bilayer was achieved
using Montal–Mueller method.[35] Unless
otherwise noted, all the experiments were performed under symmetrical
buffer conditions with a 2.0 mL solution comprising 1 M NaCl, and
10 mM Tris·HCl (pH 7.5) at 26 ± 1 °C. Both the αHL
protein and the DNA polymers were added to the cis compartment, which
was connected to “ground”. The final concentration of
the αHL proteins used for the single channel insertion was 0.2–2.0
ng·mL–1. The transmembrane potential, which
was applied with Ag/AgCl electrodes with 3% agarose bridges containing
3 M KCl, was +180 mV, unless otherwise noted. A positive potential
indicates a higher potential in the trans chamber of the apparatus.
Currents were recorded with a patch clamp amplifier (Axopatch 200B,
Molecular Devices; Sunnyvale, CA, USA). They were low-pass filtered
with a built-in four-pole Bessel filter at 5 kHz and sampled at 50
kHz by a computer equipped with a Digidata 1322A/D converter (Molecular
Devices).
Data Analysis
Data were analyzed
with the following software: pClamp 10.3 (Molecular Devices), Origin
8.0 (Microcal, Northampton, MA), and SigmaPlot 12.0 (Systat Software
Inc., San Jose, CA). Conductance values were obtained from the amplitude
histograms after the peaks were fit to Gaussian functions. The values
of τon (the mean interevent interval) and τoff (the mean residence time) for DNA polymers were obtained
from the dwell time histograms by fitting the distributions to single
exponential functions by the Levenberg–Marquardt procedure.[36] Thermodynamics of hairpin folding and DNA hybridization
was obtained from the DINAMelt web server.[37]
Results and Discussion
The principle
for nanopore detection of pathogens is based on the
hybridization between a characteristic single-stranded gene segment
of the target pathogen and an unmodified complementary single-stranded
DNA (cDNA) probe, which takes advantage of our finding
that although their diameters are larger than the channel constriction,
short double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) molecules could be rapidly unzipped
through an appropriately engineered α-hemolysin (αHL)
protein nanopore.[38] As shown in Scheme 1, in the absence of the target pathogen gene segment,
the translocation of the cDNA probe through the nanopore
produces only one major type of current modulation events. In contrast,
in the presence of the target DNA sequence, two complementary DNA
monomers will be hybridized in the solution to form dsDNA molecules.
Because of their larger molecular sizes than those of ssDNA molecules,
the interaction between the dsDNA and the nanopore may result in a
new type of current modulation events having different signatures
from those of the cDNA probe and the single stranded
pathogen gene segment, for example, with longer residence times or
showing complicated substate current modulation features.[39]
Scheme 1
Detection of Pathogens in a Nanopore
The hybridization of the target
pathogen gene segment by an unlabeled complementary DNA probe produces
current modulation events in the nanopore having significantly different
signatures from those of the cDNA probe.
Detection of Pathogens in a Nanopore
The hybridization of the target
pathogen gene segment by an unlabeled complementary DNA probe produces
current modulation events in the nanopore having significantly different
signatures from those of the cDNA probe.To demonstrate this concept, a characteristic 20-base
gene segment
(sequence 5′-GGATTATTGTTAAATATTGA-3′, Supporting Information, Table S1) of anthrax
lethal factor (aLF), a component of the anthrax toxin, was employed
as the target pathogen molecule, while an engineered version of the
αHL protein, (M113F)7, was used as the nanopore sensing
element. It has been reported that dsDNA could be unzipped much more
rapidly in the (M113F)7 protein than in the wild-type αHL
pore.[38] Our initial experiments were carried
out at an applied potential bias of +120 mV and using a 20-base ssDNA
(sequence 5′-TCAATATTTAACAATAATCC-3′)
as the molecular probe, which can form blunt-ended double-stranded
DNA with the target analyte. The experimental results (Figure 1) showed that, without the target aLF DNA sample,
the single-stranded cDNA probe produced only one
major type of current modulation events in the nanopore, with a mean
residence time of 0.20 ± 0.01 ms. However, upon addition of the
target aLF DNA molecules to the cDNA probe-containing
solution, a new type of events with a mean residence time of 620 ±
63 ms was observed. Since the aLF sample alone also only produced
short-lived events with a mean residence time of 0.31 ± 0.01
ms, the three-order increase in the event residence time suggests
that the cDNA probe and the target aLF indeed formed
DNA duplexes. According to the theoretical prediction (using the DINAMelt
web server),[34] both the probe and target
DNA molecules could form thermodynamically stable hairpin loop structures
(the Tm values were 30.9 °C and 34.9
°C, respectively). Since the event residence times of these DNA
hairpins were not significantly different from those of the well-studied
ssDNA molecules with the same length,[40] our experimental results suggest that the closed states of these
hairpin loop structures could be rapidly unfolded and driven through
the nano-channel under our experimental conditions. Since the target
aLF DNA has a slightly larger folding free energy (ΔG = −0.72 vs −0.42 kcal/mol) and hence more
stable than the cDNA probe, it is not unreasonable
that the aLF sample is more difficult to be unfolded, thus producing
events with a longer mean residence time than the cDNA probe (0.31 vs 0.20 ms). This phenomenon has been reported in
our previous dsDNA unzipping study.[38] In
contrast, when both the cDNA probe and the target
aLF monomers are present in the solution, they would be able to form
a very stable fully-matched DNA duplex with ΔG of −12.2 kcal/mol. Hence, significantly longer residence
time events were observed.
Figure 1
Monitoring the hybridization of the target aLF
strand by the cDNA probe. (a) Representative single-channel
current recording
trace segments, and (b) the corresponding scatter plots of event residence
time vs. amplitude. The experiments were performed at +120 mV with
the (M113F)7 αHL pore in a 1 M NaCl solution buffered
with 10 mM Tris·HCl (pH 7.5).
Monitoring the hybridization of the target aLF
strand by the cDNA probe. (a) Representative single-channel
current recording
trace segments, and (b) the corresponding scatter plots of event residence
time vs. amplitude. The experiments were performed at +120 mV with
the (M113F)7 αHL pore in a 1 M NaCl solution buffered
with 10 mM Tris·HCl (pH 7.5).Similar to the previous observations made by our group and
other
researchers,[41−44] these long-lived dsDNA events also exhibited sub-state current modulations,
a clear indication that they might be attributed to the unzipping
and translocation of the DNA duplex through the αHL channel.
This interpretation was further supported by the voltage dependence
study, where the mean residence time of the long-lived events decreased
as the applied potential bias increased (Supporting
Information, Figure S1). More interestingly, we noticed that
these sub-state current modulation events showed two different intermediate
levels, level 1 and level 2 as shown in Figure 1. One likely reason is that these events were attributed to the two
different orientations in which the dsDNA entered the nanopore. Note
that observation of two types of events with different blockage amplitudes
and/or residence times has been previously reported in the experiments
with the translocation of single-stranded polynucleotides through
the αHL pores.[39,45] According to DINAMelt, in a mixture
of equal amounts of the cDNA probe and the target
aLF molecules, the cDNA-aLF hybrid duplexes (with
one end containing a GC base pair and the other having a AT base pair)
are the dominant species (>99.9%), while other DNA species or structures
such as homodimers and hairpins could be neglected.To study
the aLF sensor selectivity, two other DNA samples, aLF-1
and aLF-2 (Supporting Information, Table
S1), were examined at +120 mV. These two samples had sequences of
5′-GGATTATTGTGAAATATTGA-3′ and 5′-GGATTATGGTGAAATATTGA-3′,
respectively, which were different from the target analyte aLF (sequence
5′-GGATTATTGTTAAATATTGA-3′) only by a single
base and two bases (note that the mismatch portion are highlighted).
Our experimental results showed that the event mean residence times
of the aLF-1 and aLF-2 samples were 342 ± 35 ms and 57.4 ±
2.5 ms, respectively. These values were about two-folds and ten-folds
smaller than the residence time of the target aLF sample. The results
are not unreasonable considering that the aLF-1/aLF-2 and the cDNA probe are able to form double-stranded DNA having single
base-pair/two base-pair mismatches, which are less stable than the
fully-matched aLF-cDNA duplexes, thus needing less
time to be unzipped by the nanopore. This interpretation is supported
by the predicted theoretical hybridization free energy between these
DNA samples and the cDNA probe (using the DINAMelt
web server), which were −12.2, −10.9 kcal/mol, and −9.6
kcal/mol for aLF, aLF-1, and aLF-2, respectively. As added multiple-base
mismatch controls, two additional DNA polymers A20 (sequence
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA) and T20 (sequence TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT)
were also examined. Their event residence times were 11.7 ± 0.2
and 0.12 ± 0.01 ms, respectively, which was in agreement with
our observation that with an increase in the number of the base-pair
mismatches of the dsDNA sample, the DNA duplex became less stable,
leading to a decrease in the event mean residence time (Figure 2). Taken together, our experimental results (Supporting Information, Figure S3) suggest that
the hybridization free energy between the cDNA probe
and an analyte DNA could potentially be inferred from the mean residence
time of the DNA duplex events.
Figure 2
Selectivity of the aLF nanopore sensor.
The experiments were performed
with the (M113F)7 αHL pore in a buffer solution comprising
1.0 M NaCl and 10 mM Tris·HCl (pH 7.5) at +120 mV in the presence
of a 20-base ssDNA (sequence 5′-TCAATATTTAACAATAATCC-3′)
as the molecular probe.
Selectivity of the aLF nanopore sensor.
The experiments were performed
with the (M113F)7 αHL pore in a buffer solution comprising
1.0 M NaCl and 10 mM Tris·HCl (pH 7.5) at +120 mV in the presence
of a 20-base ssDNA (sequence 5′-TCAATATTTAACAATAATCC-3′)
as the molecular probe.Since the (M113F)7 protein pore/cDNA
probe system can selectively detect the target aLF sequence at the
single-base resolution, the sensitivity of this nanopore biosensor
was further investigated. Unlike most of the other nucleic acid hybridization-based
sensors, which rely on labeled nucleic acid probes or require time-consuming
incubation of the probe and the target DNA/RNA molecules to achieve
sensitive detection,[46−48] in our nanopore experiments, detection of aLF molecules
were monitored real time in the presence of an unlabeled cDNA probe. Under a symmetric electrolyte condition with 1 M NaCl
in both the cis and trans compartments, aLF could be detected with
a detection limit (defined as the concentration corresponding to three
times the standard deviation of a blank signal) as low as 15 nM (Supporting Information, Figure S2). To further
improve the sensitivity of this nanopore sensor, hybridization between
the target aLF and the cDNA probe was monitored at +180 mV in a salt
gradient of 3 M NaCl (trans)/0.15 M NaCl (cis) (Supporting Information, Figure S4). It has been well established
that, use of an asymmetric electrolyte gradient instead of the conventional
symmetric electrolyte solution can significantly increase the event
frequency for the translocation of DNA/RNA molecules through a nanopore,
thus improving the sensor sensitivity.[49,50] Our experimental
results showed that such a physical condition change didn’t
significantly affect the open channel current (160 ± 1.0 vs 160
± 1.5 pA) and the blockage residual current (7.9 ± 0.3 vs
8.2 ± 0.4 pA) of the DNA duplex events, but would lead to a ∼2-fold
increase in the event mean residence time (7.7 ± 0.3 vs 16.7
± 0.6 ms). Similar to the observation made in the case of symmetric
electrolyte solution, the mean residence time of the DNA duplex events
under an asymmetric electrolyte gradient was significantly (∼80
folds) larger than those of the cDNA probe alone
or aLF alone, which allows the DNA duplex events to be readily differentiated
from those of the free ssDNA molecules (Supporting
Information, Figure S5). With this approach, the detection
limit for aLF can be lowered to 100 pM (Figure 3). At present, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the dominant method
to detect nucleic acid sequences. Although PCR is highly accurate
and sensitive, it is also laborious and time-consuming, and challenging
to be used outside a laboratory. Therefore, rapid, sensitive, and
accurate detection of specific DNA or RNA sequences that could eliminate
the requirement for a PCR step is highly desired in a variety of applications
including identification of a disease or pathogen. Although the sensitivity
of our nanopore aLF sensor has the potential to be significantly improved
by utilizing a PNA probe[51,52] instead of the cDNA probe and/or replacing the (M113F)7 protein
pore with another engineered αHL nanopore (e.g., K131D7/K147D7),[53] which could catalyze
the translocation of biomolecules, the detection limit of our present
unoptimized sensor is still comparable with those (ranging from 1
pM to 10 nM) of most of the other cDNA-based approaches
to detect gene sequences.[7,11,47,54]
Figure 3
Dose–response curve for aLF detection.
The experiments were
performed with the (M113F)7 αHL pore at +180 mV in
the presence of a 20-base ssDNA (sequence 5′-TCAATATTTAACAATAATCC-3′)
as the molecular probe. An asymmetric buffer condition (with 3 M NaCl
and 10 mM Tris·HCl (pH 7.5) in the trans compartment, while 0.15
M NaCl and 10 mM Tris·HCl (pH 7.5) in the cis compartment) was
used. The event frequency was calculated by dividing the number of
long-lived DNA duplex events by the recording time. The concentration
of the cDNA probe used was 10 nM.
Dose–response curve for aLF detection.
The experiments were
performed with the (M113F)7 αHL pore at +180 mV in
the presence of a 20-base ssDNA (sequence 5′-TCAATATTTAACAATAATCC-3′)
as the molecular probe. An asymmetric buffer condition (with 3 M NaCl
and 10 mM Tris·HCl (pH 7.5) in the trans compartment, while 0.15
M NaCl and 10 mM Tris·HCl (pH 7.5) in the cis compartment) was
used. The event frequency was calculated by dividing the number of
long-lived DNA duplex events by the recording time. The concentration
of the cDNA probe used was 10 nM.It should be noted that, Figure 3 shows
the DNA blockage frequency increases linearly with the logarithm of
the analyte concentration. One interpretation for the nonlinear relationship
calibration curve is that under our experimental condition (i.e.,
detection of DNA hybridization real time without pre-incubation of
the cDNA probe and the target analyte DNA), not 100
percent of the aLF molecules were able to hybridize with the cDNA probe to form DNA duplexes. We speculate that if the cDNA probe and the target aLF molecules have been incubated
for a period of time before single-channel recording, more DNA duplexes
could be formed, thus improving the sensitivity and the detection
limit for nanopore detection of aLF. For this purpose, the probe and
aLF mixture solution was heated at 90°C for 5 min, and then gradually
cooled to room temperature. Then, this solution was examined using
the (M113F)7 protein pore. Our experimental results showed
that the frequency of the long-lived events of the incubated DNA sample
was ∼2.5 fold larger than that of the unincubated DNA sample
(Figure 4a), thus confirming our hypothesis.
Figure 4
(a) Effect
of incubation on the frequency of the long-lived DNA
duplex events and effect of matrix components on the (b) mean residence
time and (c) frequency of the aLF-cDNA duplex events.
The experiments were performed at +180 mV using the (M113F)7 αHL pore in a solution comprising 1.0 M NaCl and 10 mM Tris·HCl
(pH 7.5). In the experiment with the unincubated aLF sample, the electrolyte
solution contained an additional 20-base ssDNA (sequence 5′-TCAATATTTAACAATAATCC-3′)
as the molecular probe. The concentrations of HSA, aLF, T20, and cDNA probe used in experiments shown in panels
b and c were 10 μg/mL, 100 nM, 100 nM, and 1 μM, respectively.
(a) Effect
of incubation on the frequency of the long-lived DNA
duplex events and effect of matrix components on the (b) mean residence
time and (c) frequency of the aLF-cDNA duplex events.
The experiments were performed at +180 mV using the (M113F)7 αHL pore in a solution comprising 1.0 M NaCl and 10 mM Tris·HCl
(pH 7.5). In the experiment with the unincubated aLF sample, the electrolyte
solution contained an additional 20-base ssDNA (sequence 5′-TCAATATTTAACAATAATCC-3′)
as the molecular probe. The concentrations of HSA, aLF, T20, and cDNA probe used in experiments shown in panels
b and c were 10 μg/mL, 100 nM, 100 nM, and 1 μM, respectively.To validate applicability of our
nanopore sensor to samples resembling
those relevant for clinical analysis, two samples were initially examined
with the (M113F)7 protein pore in the presence of the cDNA probe and under the symmetric electrolyte condition.
One sample contained human serum album (HSA), while the other contained
a mixture of aLF and HSA (note that HSA is the dominant protein in
human blood). As shown in Figure S6 (Supporting
Information), without aLF, the HSA sample only produced short-lived
events with a mean residence time of 0.04 ms. Since in the absence
of the cDNA probe, HSA alone didn’t produce
any current modulations (Supporting Information, Figure S6), it is apparent that these rapid events were attributed
to the cDNA probe. In sharp contrast, the mixture
sample produced significantly longer duration events with a mean residence
time of 7.5 ms, which was similar to that of the single aLF standard.
Furthermore, the frequency of the long-lived events of the aLF-cDNA duplexes didn’t change significantly in the
absence/presence of HSA. To demonstrate the feasibility of our developed
nanopore sensor in the analysis of aLF in the presence of other DNA
molecules or in more complicated mixtures, two additional samples
were examined: one contained a mixture of aLF and T20, while the other
was consisted of aLF, T20, and HSA. Our experimental results (Figure 4) showed that both the residence time and the frequency
of the long-lived events for the mixture samples were similar to those
of aLF alone. Taken together, the combined results suggest that our
developed nanopore sensor can effectively detect aLF in the presence
of other matrix components.
Conclusions
In summary,
a rapid and sensitive nanopore sensing method for the
label-free real-time detection of anthrax lethal factor was developed.
Unlike other reported nucleic acid hybridization-based nanopore sensors,
which rely on time-consuming incubation of the cDNA
probe and the target DNA/RNA molecules to achieve sensitive detection,[46−48] in our nanopore sensor design, detection of a target single-stranded
aLF gene segment was achieved by real-time monitoring of the hybridization
interaction between the target DNA and the cDNA probe.
Sub-nanomolar concentrations of aLF DNA could be detected in ∼1
min. Further, our method is selective, and other ssDNA molecules including
those differing by only a single base will not interfere with the
detection of the target aLF DNA. This sequence-specific detection
approach should find useful application in the development of nanopore
sensors for the detection of other pathogens.
Authors: Zuzanna Siwy; Lacramioara Trofin; Punit Kohli; Lane A Baker; Christina Trautmann; Charles R Martin Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2005-04-13 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Jérôme Mathé; Aleksei Aksimentiev; David R Nelson; Klaus Schulten; Amit Meller Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-08-19 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Blake Farrow; Sung A Hong; Errika C Romero; Bert Lai; Matthew B Coppock; Kaycie M Deyle; Amethist S Finch; Dimitra N Stratis-Cullum; Heather D Agnew; Sung Yang; James R Heath Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2013-10-08 Impact factor: 15.881