Crystallization from lipidic mesophase matrices is a promising route to diffraction-quality crystals and structures of membrane proteins. The microfluidic approach reported here eliminates two bottlenecks of the standard mesophase-based crystallization protocols: (i) manual preparation of viscous mesophases and (ii) manual harvesting of often small and fragile protein crystals. In the approach reported here, protein-loaded mesophases are formulated in an X-ray transparent microfluidic chip using only 60 nL of the protein solution per crystallization trial. The X-ray transparency of the chip enables diffraction data collection from multiple crystals residing in microfluidic wells, eliminating the normally required manual harvesting and mounting of individual crystals. We validated our approach by on-chip crystallization of photosynthetic reaction center, a membrane protein from Rhodobacter sphaeroides, followed by solving its structure to a resolution of 2.5 Å using X-ray diffraction data collected on-chip under ambient conditions. A moderate conformational change in hydrophilic chains of the protein was observed when comparing the on-chip, room temperature structure with known structures for which data were acquired under cryogenic conditions.
Crystallization from lipidic mesophase matrices is a promising route to diffraction-quality crystals and structures of membrane proteins. The microfluidic approach reported here eliminates two bottlenecks of the standard mesophase-based crystallization protocols: (i) manual preparation of viscous mesophases and (ii) manual harvesting of often small and fragile protein crystals. In the approach reported here, protein-loaded mesophases are formulated in an X-ray transparent microfluidic chip using only 60 nL of the protein solution per crystallization trial. The X-ray transparency of the chip enables diffraction data collection from multiple crystals residing in microfluidic wells, eliminating the normally required manual harvesting and mounting of individual crystals. We validated our approach by on-chip crystallization of photosynthetic reaction center, a membrane protein from Rhodobacter sphaeroides, followed by solving its structure to a resolution of 2.5 Å using X-ray diffraction data collected on-chip under ambient conditions. A moderate conformational change in hydrophilic chains of the protein was observed when comparing the on-chip, room temperature structure with known structures for which data were acquired under cryogenic conditions.
Integral
membrane proteins are
of paramount importance in the regulation of physiological processes
in the cell, and consequentially, they account for over 60% of all
drug targets known to date.[1] However, crystal
structures of membrane proteins, the primary source for atomic-level
information on their functional mechanisms, are only scarcely available
compared to soluble proteins. This disparity originates in part in
the inherent amphiphilicity of membrane proteins that limits their
solubility and stability in aqueous solutions even in the presence
of solubilizing detergents, leading to a very low success rate of
crystallization efforts.A powerful alternative to crystallization
from solutions has emerged
in recent years where membrane proteins are crystallized from lipidic
cubic phases (LCP),[2] leading to structural
determination of several important proteins from the GPCR family.[3] In the LCP method, membrane proteins are embedded
in a lipidic mesophase matrix that mimics a native lipid bilayer environment
throughout the crystallization process.[2] The mesophases form spontaneously when aqueous solutions are mixed
with certain lipids, typically of the monoacylglycerol family,[4] to form different bilayer phases.[5] As in other protein crystallization approaches, the success
of the LCP method relies on screening a large number of crystallization
conditions,[2,6] which is difficult due to the high viscosity
and stickiness of lipidic mesophases and requires specialized tools
that make handling many samples cumbersome.[2,7] Automated
screening approaches and novel crystallization protocols alleviate
some of these problems,[7,8] but harvesting of protein crystals
from mesophases is still performed manually. Harvested crystals are
cooled in liquid nitrogen and maintained under cryogenic conditions
to prevent radiation damage and dehydration during data collection.[7] The typically small size, 2–70 μm,[6] of membrane protein crystals makes this procedure
highly challenging. The damage caused to the delicate crystals in
this step may severely compromise the quality of resulting structures.Numerous examples of microfluidic technologies that automate fluid
metering and drastically reduce sample consumption have been demonstrated
for protein crystallization from solutions.[9] Furthermore, a number of X-ray transparent microfluidic devices
that eliminate manual crystal handling are available.[10] In contrast, only two microfluidic platforms have been
reported for LCP crystallization.[11] Both
platforms rely on complex operation strategies and have a number of
limitations due to the difficulties of manipulating viscoelastic materials
in microscale compartments.
Microfluidic Chip for LCP Crystallization
Here we present
a microfluidic chip that combines LCP crystallization capabilities
with X-ray transparency in a simple design that only requires a vacuum
pump to introduce reagents. In the 12-well chip (Figure 1A), each well relies on diffusion to mix 60 nL of protein
solution, 10.5 nL of dry lipid for mesophase formulation, and 244
nL of precipitant solution to induce crystallization. The
protein solution is layered on top of the lipid (Figure 2A,B), significantly reducing the diffusional
path and, consequently, the mixing time compared to the traditional
side-by-side placement of microfluidic compartments.(10g,10k,12) The chip screens two crystallization
conditions in parallel and can be easily modified for more extensive
screening.
Figure 1
(A) Photograph of the 2 × 6-well array chip. Lilac dotted
lines (1–5) indicate the different control lines connected
to control valves. (B) Magnified top view schematic of a single crystallization
well comprising three patterned layers and a top unpatterned COC layer:
first layer (PDMS, lilac) contains control lines and valves, and second
(PDMS, black) and third (COC, red outlines) layers contain sample
compartments. (C) Cross section of a crystallization well showing
the layered assembly of the chip.
Figure 2
(A–E) Sequence of steps in the LCP protein crystallization
protocol on-chip; (F–H) corresponding optical micrographs of
the mesophase chamber. (A,F) The hybrid COC/PDMS/PDMS assembly is
placed on the COC substrate prefilled with lipid. COC, yellow; PDMS,
blue; lipid, gray. (B) Protein solution is combined with the lipid
through the corresponding fluid line by applying negative pressure
(vacuum) to control lines 1 and 2. (C) Protein-enriched mesophase
forms spontaneously upon incubation, and (D) precipitant is introduced
by applying negative pressure to control lines 3, 4, and 5. Line 2
in panel B and lines 3 and 5 in panel D serve to increase the rate
of air withdrawal from their respective sample chambers. (E,H) Protein
crystals form in the mesophase after incubation. (I) Representative
example of RC crystals grown on-chip.
(A) Photograph of the 2 × 6-well array chip. Lilac dotted
lines (1–5) indicate the different control lines connected
to control valves. (B) Magnified top view schematic of a single crystallization
well comprising three patterned layers and a top unpatterned COC layer:
first layer (PDMS, lilac) contains control lines and valves, and second
(PDMS, black) and third (COC, red outlines) layers contain sample
compartments. (C) Cross section of a crystallization well showing
the layered assembly of the chip.(A–E) Sequence of steps in the LCP protein crystallization
protocol on-chip; (F–H) corresponding optical micrographs of
the mesophase chamber. (A,F) The hybrid COC/PDMS/PDMS assembly is
placed on the COC substrate prefilled with lipid. COC, yellow; PDMS,
blue; lipid, gray. (B) Protein solution is combined with the lipid
through the corresponding fluid line by applying negative pressure
(vacuum) to control lines 1 and 2. (C) Protein-enriched mesophase
forms spontaneously upon incubation, and (D) precipitant is introduced
by applying negative pressure to control lines 3, 4, and 5. Line 2
in panel B and lines 3 and 5 in panel D serve to increase the rate
of air withdrawal from their respective sample chambers. (E,H) Protein
crystals form in the mesophase after incubation. (I) Representative
example of RC crystals grown on-chip.For X-ray transparency, the chip is assembled from four polymeric
layers with a combined thickness of only ∼200 μm.[10k] Fluid manipulation in the chip relies on channels
and compartments patterned in two layers of elastomeric polydimethylsiloxane
(PDMS) (Figure 1B,C). Top and bottom cyclic
olefin copolymer (COC) layers (Figure 1C) impart
rigidity and serve as as a barrier against water evaporation. Fluid
flow and compartment filling in the PDMS fluid layer is achieved by
applying negative pressure (vacuum) to microfluidic control lines
in the PDMS control layer (Figures 1B,C and 2A–E).To fabricate the chip, the PDMS
fluid and control layers are patterned
and sealed irreversibly with each other and the top COC layer. For
crystallization experiments, the 3-layer assembly is reversibly sealed,
exploiting the adhesive properties of PDMS,[10k] to the COC bottom substrate containing solid lipid (Figures 2A and S3, Supporting Information). Further detail on the fabrication procedure is provided in the Supporting Information (Figures S1–S3).
On-Chip Crystallization Protocol
The on-chip crystallization
protocol follows the recently introduced LCP crystallization variant.[13] First, an auxiliary microfluidic assembly is
used to fill designated compartments of the bottom COC substrate with
lipid (Figure S2, Supporting Information). The auxiliary microfluidic chip is then removed, and the 3-layer
assembly is placed on the bottom COC substrate prefilled with lipid
(Figure 2A). Through a single inlet (Figure 1A), the protein solution is introduced into the
12 crystallization wells and is thus brought in contact with the lipid
(Figure 2B,C). In the crystallization compartment
only the area above the lipid, the mesophase chamber (Figure 1B), is filled. Filling of the rest of the crystallization
well with protein solution is prevented by a capillary valve geometry[14] (obtained by appropriate choice of channel dimensions
and wall angles) between the mesophase and the precipitant chambers
(Figure 1B). Incubation of the protein solution
with the lipid results in spontaneous formation of the protein-enriched
mesophase[13,15] (Figure 2C). After
several hours, precipitant solution is introduced, with the mesophase
staying in place due to its high viscosity[16] (Figure 2D). Under favorable conditions,
incubation of the precipitant with the protein-enriched mesophase
results in crystal formation in the mesophase (Figure 2E,I).
Validation of On-Chip Crystallization and
X-ray Diffraction
Data Collection
We validated our approach by crystallizing
photosynthetic reaction center (RC), a membrane protein from Rhodobacter sphaeroides, using previously reported crystallization
conditions[13] to obtain crystals of up to
80 μm in size (Figure 2I). We collected
X-ray diffraction data at room temperature (RT) from crystals in the
chips (“on-chip”) and solved the crystal structure of
RC to a resolution of 2.5 Å (Table S1, Supporting
Information). The chips were mounted directly, without modification,
on the goniometer at beamline 21-ID-F at the Advanced Photon Source
(APS), Argonne National Lab (ANL) (Figure 3A). Diffraction data from the crystals were easily resolved (Figure 3C), despite background scattering from chip materials
(Figure S4, Supporting Information). The
excellent optical properties of the chips facilitated crystal targeting
during data collection (Figure 3A,B). In contrast,
crystals grown in parallel using the classical LCP method in microplates
(see Supporting Information) were difficult
to locate in standard loop mounts because of the opacity of the mesophase
(Figure S5, Supporting Information).[6,17]
Figure 3
(A)
Optical micrograph of an X-ray transparent chip for LCP crystallization
mounted on beamline 21-ID-F at LS-CAT, ANL. (B) Section of a crystallization
well with crystals as seen in the on-axis video microscope during
X-ray data collection. The red circle represents the location and
the footprint of the 50 μm X-ray beam. (C) Example of X-ray
diffraction data from an RC crystal on-chip at RT. (D) rmsd visualization
along the periplasmic side of our RT structure and a cryogenic structure
(PDB ID: 2GNU). Residues in gray were not included in calculation. Image was generated
using the ColorByRMSD script in PyMOL.[24]
(A)
Optical micrograph of an X-ray transparent chip for LCP crystallization
mounted on beamline 21-ID-F at LS-CAT, ANL. (B) Section of a crystallization
well with crystals as seen in the on-axis video microscope during
X-ray data collection. The red circle represents the location and
the footprint of the 50 μm X-ray beam. (C) Example of X-ray
diffraction data from an RC crystal on-chip at RT. (D) rmsd visualization
along the periplasmic side of our RT structure and a cryogenic structure
(PDB ID: 2GNU). Residues in gray were not included in calculation. Image was generated
using the ColorByRMSD script in PyMOL.[24]Following our previously developed
on-chip data collection strategy,[10k,12d] small wedges
of data from multiple crystals were collected and merged
into a single data set for building electron density maps. The ease
of growing and analyzing multiple (tens to hundreds) isomorphous crystals
in a single chip enables data collection under ambient conditions
with minimal radiation damage effects. In contrast, traditional crystallographic
protocols rely on the harvesting and mounting of a single crystal
at a time, followed by the analysis of that crystal under cryogenic
conditions to minimize radiation damage.[18] The challenges associated with this one-at-a-time manual protocol
render analysis of multiple LCP-grown crystals at ambient conditions
impractical.Although RC crystallization conditions likely produce
a sponge
phase rather than a true LCP,[19] the term
“LCP crystallization of proteins” is commonly used regardless
of the exact mesophase type formed under specific crystallization
conditions and is also adopted throughout this communication.
On-Chip
RC Crystal Structure
The structure determined
from on-chip data (Table S1, Supporting Information) agreed well with previously published structures of LCP-crystallized
RC obtained using the traditional crystallization and data collection
approach (PDB ID: 2GNU(20) and 1OGV(21)). The merged
data set for our structure was complete (Table S1, Supporting Information), indicating that on-chip crystals
were oriented randomly. Our RC structure was isomorphous with the
structures reported previously[20,21] and had comparable
structural statistics, refinement parameters, and final structural
resolution. Values for Rsym and I/σ for the on-chip structure were typical of good
diffraction data.We also observed several important differences
between cryogenic structures of RC[20,21] and our RT
structure. First, the lattice parameters of our RC structure were
up to 1.8% larger than those reported previously, indicating unit
cell contraction upon flash cooling. Second, the mosaicity (long-range
order) of crystals analyzed on-chip was nearly an order of magnitude
lower (better order) compared to other high-resolution RC structures
crystallized in LCP.[20,21] The higher mosaicity (poorer
order) is typically related to the unit cell contraction caused by
flash-cooling to cryogenic temperatures.[22] The availability of low-mosaicity crystals and noncryogenic data
collection facilitated by the on-chip approach reported here may be
highly beneficial for time-resolved protein crystallography.[23]Root mean square deviation (rmsd) comparisons
revealed noticeable
nonuniformly distributed deviations in the positions of backbone alpha-carbons
in our RC structure compared to both available cryo-structures[20,21] (Figure 3D and Table S2, Supporting Information). The greatest deviations were located
along the hydrophilic chains at the periplasmic and cytosolic sides
of the protein (rmsd = 0.45 Å; Table S2, Supporting Information) and were as large as 2 Å at residues
268–271 of the l-subunit (Figures 3D and S6, Supporting Information). The hydrophobic chains embedded within the lipid bilayer showed
a significantly smaller deviation (rmsd = 0.28 Å; Table S2, Supporting Information). Conversely, the rmsd
values for superimposed cryogenic RC structures did not exceed 0.23
Å anywhere (Table S2, Supporting Information). The overall rmsd of 0.36–0.37 Å between the RT and
the cryogenic structures was in the range reported for independent
structure determinations of an identical protein[25] (Table S1, Supporting Information).For soluble proteins, cryo-cooling has been shown to affect
mechanistically
relevant side-chain conformations and, in extreme cases, backbone
conformations.[22] Similar analyses for LCP-crystallized
membrane proteins are largely unavailable because of the difficulties
of obtaining RT crystal structures that require screening of a larger
number of crystals, as highlighted in the impressive recent studies
of human membrane proteins under noncryogenic conditions.[26] While the transmembrane chains of the proteins
are likely to be constrained by the membrane-like LCP environment,
hydrophilic segments may undergo significant conformational changes
upon flash-cooling, as also observed by Liu et al.[26a] These changes may be of importance for mechanistic studies
and for protein docking, and the analysis of LCP-grown crystals under
near-physiological temperatures, as enabled by our on-chip approach,
may provide new insights into these phenomena.In summary, we
demonstrated the first X-ray transparent microfluidic
chip for LCP crystallization of membrane proteins and subsequent on-chip
X-ray diffraction data collection of multiple crystals on a single
chip at room temperature for protein structure determination. We validated
our approach by crystallizing a membrane protein and photosynthetic
reaction center and solving its structure to a resolution of 2.5 Å.
The chip automates metering and sample formulation, eliminates manual
mesophase handling, and reduces the amount of sample per trial ∼7-fold
compared to similar macroscale protocols,[13,15] and ∼3-fold compared to standard protocols with premixed
mesophase.[2,3] In situ X-ray data collection on multiple
crystals obviates cumbersome manual harvesting of fragile protein
crystals. These features make our chips a valuable tool for the analysis
of membrane proteins by providing a facile route to crystal structures
and potentially to time-resolved studies of LCP-embedded proteins.
For example, our on-chip analysis of RC revealed conformational flexibility
in its hydrophilic chains at RT.
Authors: Abraham D Stroock; Stephan K W Dertinger; Armand Ajdari; Igor Mezic; Howard A Stone; George M Whitesides Journal: Science Date: 2002-01-25 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: James S Fraser; Henry van den Bedem; Avi J Samelson; P Therese Lang; James M Holton; Nathaniel Echols; Tom Alber Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-09-14 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Sarah L Perry; Sudipto Guha; Ashtamurthy S Pawate; Amrit Bhaskarla; Vinayak Agarwal; Satish K Nair; Paul J A Kenis Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2013-07-05 Impact factor: 6.799
Authors: Gera Kisselman; Wei Qiu; Vladimir Romanov; Christine M Thompson; Robert Lam; Kevin P Battaile; Emil F Pai; Nickolay Y Chirgadze Journal: Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr Date: 2011-05-12
Authors: Jeremy M Schieferstein; Ashtamurthy S Pawate; Chang Sun; Frank Wan; Paige N Sheraden; Jana Broecker; Oliver P Ernst; Robert B Gennis; Paul J A Kenis Journal: Biomicrofluidics Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 2.800
Authors: Shuo Sui; Yuxi Wang; Kristopher W Kolewe; Vukica Srajer; Robert Henning; Jessica D Schiffman; Christos Dimitrakopoulos; Sarah L Perry Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 6.799
Authors: Jeremy M Schieferstein; Ashtamurthy S Pawate; Michael J Varel; Sudipto Guha; Ieva Astrauskaite; Robert B Gennis; Paul J A Kenis Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 6.799
Authors: Marie Luise Grünbein; Gabriela Nass Kovacs; Marco Kloos; Alexander Gorel; R Bruce Doak; Robert L Shoeman; Thomas R M Barends; Ilme Schlichting Journal: Methods Mol Biol Date: 2022
Authors: Pushparani Micheal Raj; Laurent Barbe; Martin Andersson; Milena De Albuquerque Moreira; Dörthe Haase; James Wootton; Susan Nehzati; Ann E Terry; Ross J Friel; Maria Tenje; Kajsa G V Sigfridsson Clauss Journal: RSC Adv Date: 2021-09-07 Impact factor: 4.036
Authors: Jana Broecker; Viviane Klingel; Wei-Lin Ou; Aidin R Balo; David J Kissick; Craig M Ogata; Anling Kuo; Oliver P Ernst Journal: Cryst Growth Des Date: 2016-10-03 Impact factor: 4.076
Authors: Thomas D Murray; Artem Y Lyubimov; Craig M Ogata; Huy Vo; Monarin Uervirojnangkoorn; Axel T Brunger; James M Berger Journal: Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr Date: 2015-09-26