Nicholas A W Bell1, Ulrich F Keyser. 1. Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge , JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 0HE, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Nanopores are a versatile technique for the detection and characterization of single molecules in solution. An ongoing challenge in the field is to find methods to selectively detect specific biomolecules. In this work we describe a new technique for sensing specific proteins using unmodified solid-state nanopores. We engineered a double strand of DNA by hybridizing nearly two hundred oligonucleotides to a linearized version of the m13mp18 virus genome. This engineered double strand, which we call a DNA carrier, allows positioning of protein binding sites at nanometer accurate intervals along its contour via DNA conjugation chemistry. We measure the ionic current signal of translocating DNA carriers as a function of the number of binding sites and show detection down to the single protein level. Furthermore, we use DNA carriers to develop an assay for identifying a single protein species within a protein mixture.
Nanopores are a versatile technique for the detection and characterization of single molecules in solution. An ongoing challenge in the field is to find methods to selectively detect specific biomolecules. In this work we describe a new technique for sensing specific proteins using unmodified solid-state nanopores. We engineered a double strand of DNA by hybridizing nearly two hundred oligonucleotides to a linearized version of the m13mp18 virus genome. This engineered double strand, which we call a DNA carrier, allows positioning of protein binding sites at nanometer accurate intervals along its contour via DNA conjugation chemistry. We measure the ionic current signal of translocating DNA carriers as a function of the number of binding sites and show detection down to the single protein level. Furthermore, we use DNA carriers to develop an assay for identifying a single protein species within a protein mixture.
Nanopores have emerged
to become an important tool in biophysics
and single molecule sensing. The simple detection principle of nanopore
sensing is that an analyte modulates the ionic current as it binds
or translocates an isolated nanopore. In this paper we focus on the
ability of nanopores to sense and analyze protein molecules. Biological
pores used for nanopore sensing have typical diameters on the order
1–2 nm, which limits the range of analytes that will freely
translocate. For instance, α-hemolysin has a narrowest constriction
of 1.4 nm,[1] which allows the translocation
of single-stranded DNA,[2] but globular proteins
cannot translocate without unfolding from their native state. Stochastic
binding of a protein to a ligand attached to the entrance of a biological
nanopore has therefore been used extensively as a method for detection
of folded proteins.[3−6] Alternatively several strategies based on stochastic blocking of
α-hemolysin by single stranded DNA–protein complexes
have been reported[7] and some proteins can
also be detected by their effect on current–voltage curves
due to binding to biological pores.[8] Denaturation
by chemical[9] or thermal[10] means has been used to unfold globular proteins and permit
studies of their translocations through α-hemolysin. Recently
techniques of unfolding using high mechanical force with oligonucleotide
tethers[11,12] or unfoldase[13,14] enzymes have
been developed which provide new avenues for biological nanopore based
protein detection.Solid-state nanopores can be made with arbitrary
dimensions and
therefore permit the analysis of proteins that translocate the pore
in their native state.[15−19] It is also possible to use solid-state nanopores to detect patches
of DNA binding proteins randomly attached along a DNA double strand.[20−22] A central finding for translocations of single, unbound proteins
has been that, at the typical experiment bandwidths used, most proteins
pass through too quickly to be measured and only events in the tail
of the distribution are detected.[23] Recent
advances based on thin membranes and high bandwidth amplifiers have
shown improvement in resolution.[24] However,
even with sufficient bandwidth and signal to measure all proteins,
it remains a challenge to differentiate single, similarly sized proteins
translocating a solid-state nanopore since simple Coulter counter-like
measurements without binding do not yield any chemical information.The addition of a binding motif on a solid-state nanopore to impart
selectivity to single molecule protein measurements has been used
in several examples. For instance, self-assembly of monolayers can
immobilize a single nitriltriacetic acid receptor for stochastic sensing
of His-tagged proteins.[25] It is also possible
to create mobile lipid bilayers on the nanopore and its support surface.[26] Protein binding sites are then introduced into
the lipids enabling detection at low sample concentrations. However,
both these methods require significant engineering of the nanopore
and its surface. Also it remains unclear how well they would work
for targeting a single protein in an analyte mixture due to the difficulty
in separating out translocations due to nontarget molecules.[27]In this paper we introduce a versatile
approach for specific protein
measurement with unmodified solid-state nanopores. We designed carrier
DNA molecules 7.2 kbp in length with chemical motifs at tailored positions
for binding of one or a few protein molecules of interest. The presence
or absence of specific proteins in solution is indicated by studying
the characteristic ionic current signatures of these DNA carriers.
Using streptavidin as an example protein, we show the measurement
of single protein molecules on a specifically designed DNA carrier
and develop an assay for detecting streptavidin out of a mixture of
four proteins. Finally we show the generic applicability of this system
by designing multiple binding locations on the DNA carrier and adapting
the binding site chemistry for detection of single antidigoxigenin
antibodies.
Materials and Methods
DNA Carrier Synthesis
M13mp18 ssDNA genome was purchased
from New England Biolabs. A 39 base nucleotide was hybridized to allow
cutting at the EcoRI and BamHI restriction
sites. The DNA carrier was then formed by mixing the cut m13mp18 DNA
with a 10x molar excess of each binding oligonucleotide and annealing
in a buffer containing 10 mM Tris (pH = 8), 1 mM EDTA and 10 mM MgCl2. The excess oligonucleotides were subsequently removed by
centrifugation using Amicon Ultra centrifugal filters (see Supporting Information for further details).
For atomic force microscopy, DNA samples were adsorbed onto mica using
a magnesium containing buffer and tapping mode was used.
Nanopore Fabrication
Glass nanopores were fabricated
as previously described.[28] Briefly, glass
capillaries with inner diameter 0.2 mm and outer diameter 0.5 mm were
cleaned in acetone before drying under a stream of nitrogen. Nanopores
were made by pulling these capillaries with a laser based puller (Sutter
P2000) to form a tip with inner diameter of 15 ± 3 nm estimated
by scanning electron microscopy (see Supporting
Information). Glass nanopores were integrated into multichannel
devices which facilitated experimental throughput.[28]
Nanopore Measurements
All proteins
were purchased in
powder form, diluted in 10 mM Tris (pH = 8), 1 mM EDTA before being
aliqouted and stored at −20 °C until use. Streptavidin,
lysozyme, β-lactoglobulin, β-galactosidase and bovine
serum albumin were all purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. Antidigoxigenin
antibody (sheep polyclonal) was purchased from Roche Life Sciences.
Before each nanopore experiment, the DNA carrier was first incubated
with its protein or protein mixture for 30 min before adding to the
nanopore reservoir. All nanopore translocation measurements were carried
out in a buffer containing either 10 mM Tris (pH = 8), 1 mM EDTA,
4 M LiCl or 10 mM Tris (pH = 8), 1 mM EDTA, 4 M LiCl, 5 mM MgCl2 (we noticed no systematic difference between these two solutions).
The applied voltage for all experiments was 600 mV. Ionic currents
were recorded and analyzed with custom written Labview programs. All
ionic current measurement was performed using an Axopatch 200B (Molecular
Devices) with the current signal filtered at 49.9 kHz with an external
8 pole Bessel filter (Frequency Devices) followed by digitization
at a sampling frequency of 250 kHz with a 16 bit data acquisition
card (National Instruments).
Results
DNA Carrier
Design
Our basic design principle was to
make a long double strand of DNA which allowed for simple functionalization
at selected positions along its contour. To achieve this we followed
the strategy used in DNA origami[29] where
a long, single stranded DNA genome is formed into a desired shape
by hundreds of synthesized oligonucleotides. We used the commercially
available 7249 base single stranded circular genome of the m13mp18
virus. This circular single strand was cut at the EcoRI and BamHI restriction sites yielding a linear
single strand 7228 bases in length. 190 oligonucleotides were designed
to hybridize along the length of this 7228 base strand. Each oligonucleotide
was 38 bases in length except for the two oligonucleotides at the
ends which were each 46 bases long. These two oligonucleotides, at
either end, include a four thymine overhang to prevent dimerization.
The structure formed is therefore essentially a 7228 bp double strand
with nicks on one strand occurring every 38 bases. The sequences of
all the oligonucleotides used are given in the Supporting Information. We refer to the double stranded DNA
formed in this way as a “DNA carrier” since we use it
to selectively drive protein molecules through a solid-state nanopore.Figure 1a–c shows a schematic and
atomic force microscope images of the DNA carrier synthesis. The single
stranded m13mp18 genome forms a compact globular shape. After cutting
and hybridization of the complementary oligonucleotides, an extended
coil-like structure is formed as expected for double stranded DNA.
We extensively analyzed the yield of DNA carriers and found that approximately
20% are shorter than expected due to the presence of ∼10% linear
m13mp18 DNA before the restriction digestion (Figures S1–S3).
Figure 1
Design, synthesis and nanopore characterization
of DNA carriers.
(a) Schematic overview–the circular single stranded m13mp18
is cut by restriction enzymes and subsequently mixed with 190 complementary
oligonucleotides which hybridize to form a 7.2 kbp DNA double strand
which we term a “DNA carrier”. (b) Atomic force microscope
image of m13mp18 genomes showing their compact globular shape. (c)
Atomic force microscope of synthesized DNA carriers showing the extended
coil-like structure. (d) Schematic of DNA carriers translocation through
a conical glass nanopore. (e) Typical ionic current blockades showing
quantized states due to hairpin configurations. (f) Scatter plot of
first 1000 translocations recorded for a glass nanopore. The main
band of translocations follows the relationship that the mean event
current is inversely proportional to the event duration, which is
typical for a single DNA length.[30] (g)
Histogram of event charge deficit for the 1000 events shown in (f).
The main peak at approximately 124 fC is due to the full length 7.2
kbp DNA carriers. The tail of events at smaller values is attributed
to fragments.[31]
Design, synthesis and nanopore characterization
of DNA carriers.
(a) Schematic overview–the circular single stranded m13mp18
is cut by restriction enzymes and subsequently mixed with 190 complementary
oligonucleotides which hybridize to form a 7.2 kbp DNA double strand
which we term a “DNA carrier”. (b) Atomic force microscope
image of m13mp18 genomes showing their compact globular shape. (c)
Atomic force microscope of synthesized DNA carriers showing the extended
coil-like structure. (d) Schematic of DNA carriers translocation through
a conical glass nanopore. (e) Typical ionic current blockades showing
quantized states due to hairpin configurations. (f) Scatter plot of
first 1000 translocations recorded for a glass nanopore. The main
band of translocations follows the relationship that the mean event
current is inversely proportional to the event duration, which is
typical for a single DNA length.[30] (g)
Histogram of event charge deficit for the 1000 events shown in (f).
The main peak at approximately 124 fC is due to the full length 7.2
kbp DNA carriers. The tail of events at smaller values is attributed
to fragments.[31]Initially, we investigated the ionic current signals due
to translocations
of the double stranded DNA carrier through solid-state nanopores.
All nanopore experiments were performed using conical shaped glass
nanopores with final opening diameters of 15 ± 3 nm (mean ±
s.d.) (Figures S4–S6 and Table S1). We use glass nanopores due to their ease of manufacture and low
levels of high frequency noise.[28,32] A salt concentration
of 4 M LiCl was used to reduce the DNA translocation velocity.[33] Figure 1e shows typical
ionic current translocations when 1 nM of DNA carrier is added to
the sample reservoir and a potential of +600 mV is applied. We measure
multilevel ionic current blockades, which are in line with previous
observations for double stranded DNA translocations.[30,34,35] These events are caused by the
hairpin conformations a DNA molecule can take as it passes through
the nanopore. We compared the DNA carrier translocations to a 7 kbp
DNA plasmid fragment and both gave similar statistics for the percentage
of folded translocations (Figures S7 and S8). Therefore, the 38 base interval nicks on one strand of the DNA
carrier do not create a significant difference compared to DNA with
a phosphate backbone without regular breaks.
Analysis of Proteins Bound
to DNA Carrier
Our DNA carrier
design allows for easy and highly controlled positioning of functional
motifs along the DNA carrier contour at 38 bp (13 nm) spacings. These
motifs can be attached at the 5′ or 3′ end of any of
the 38mer oligonucleotides which form one strand of the double helix.
As an initial proof of concept, we studied the binding of streptavidin
at designed positions along the DNA carrier. Streptavidin is a tetrameric
protein which binds strongly to biotin[36] with a dissociation constant KD on the
order 10–14 M. We created designs where 5, 3, and
1 of the oligonucleotides at the center of the DNA carrier were functionalized
with biotin (Figure 2a–c). The biotin
group was attached to three thymine nucleotides so that it slightly
protruded from the DNA carrier double helix. In the 5B and 3B designs,
each biotin plus three thymine motif was separated by 38 bp (∼13
nm) along the DNA carrier to avoid one streptavidin linking to two
biotins (streptavidin having a diameter of ∼6 nm[16]). Streptavidin was added at a significant excess
of five times compared to the number of biotin modified oligonucleotides
to avoid multimerization of DNA carriers.
Figure 2
Tailoring the number of binding sites on DNA carriers.
(a), (b)
and (c) show schematics of DNA carrier designs with 5, 3, and 1 biotin
groups after incubation with streptavidin. For each design three typical
translocation events are shown in (d), (e) and (f). Only events beginning
and ending with one DNA double strand were selected. (g) The size
and duration of the current spike in the center was measured relative
to the double stranded DNA level. (h) Normalized histograms of the
current change ΔI for the three designs. Each
graph shows three lines which are independent nanopores. The minimum
(threshold) ΔI was set to 40 pA. The total
number of detected protein current spikes are 407 (5B), 288 (3B) and
166 (1B).
The three designs
called 5B, 3B and 1B (containing 5, 3, and 1 biotin sites respectively)
were incubated with the five times excess of streptavidin for 30 min
before adding the samples for analysis by electrophoretic translocations
through a glass nanopore. The final DNA carrier concentration in the
nanopore reservoir was 1–4 nM meaning that nearly all binding
sites will be occupied for KD ∼
10–14 M. Crucially, DNA carrier events could be
easily distinguished from translocations of unbound streptavidin since
the event duration is significantly larger giving a much larger event
charge deficit (Figures S10–S12).
An event sorting algorithm was used to select translocations of only
the full length DNA carrier (based on ECD as in Figure 1g) and also where the DNA carrier passed without a hairpin
at the beginning or end of the event (Figures
S13–S15). This excludes nearly all translocations with
DNA folds, as quantified later in Figure 3,
a small background remains after this algorithm and gives ∼5%
false positives. For these selected translocations which are primarily
unfolded DNA carriers, we expect a signal in the center of the translocation
due to the centrally located streptavidin binding site. Indeed for
all three designs we observe a characteristic current spike close
to the center of the translocation event corresponding to the passage
of the protein (typical events shown in Figure 2d–f).
Figure 3
Analysis of detection efficiency for different
numbers of bound
proteins. (a) A 400 μs window is created at the center of the
translocation. The threshold ΔI (from the one
double strand DNA level) is varied, and in (b) the percentage of translocations
exceeding ΔI in the 400 μs window is
calculated. The percentage is shown for designs 5B, 3B, 1B and 0B
with 5, 3, 1, and 0 streptavidin attached, respectively. Error bars
are the standard deviation from N independent nanopores
with N = 3 (for 5B and 1B), N =
5 (for 3B) and N = 6 (for 0B) (raw values given in Tables S2–S5).
Tailoring the number of binding sites on DNA carriers.
(a), (b)
and (c) show schematics of DNA carrier designs with 5, 3, and 1 biotin
groups after incubation with streptavidin. For each design three typical
translocation events are shown in (d), (e) and (f). Only events beginning
and ending with one DNA double strand were selected. (g) The size
and duration of the current spike in the center was measured relative
to the double stranded DNA level. (h) Normalized histograms of the
current change ΔI for the three designs. Each
graph shows three lines which are independent nanopores. The minimum
(threshold) ΔI was set to 40 pA. The total
number of detected protein current spikes are 407 (5B), 288 (3B) and
166 (1B).The amplitude of the protein signal
increases as we increase the
number of protein binding sites (Figure 2h).
Glass nanopores have a conical shape and behave similarly to a cylindrical
nanopore with length of a few hundred nanometers. The increase in
current change with increasing number of streptavidin binding sites
can therefore be explained as a direct consequence of the higher exclusion
volume for ions. Our results show we do not resolve independent spikes
from each individual protein when the spacing is only 38 bp (13 nm).
However, we will show later that binding sites separated by ∼600
nm yield easily resolvable independent current spikes (see Figure 5a).
Figure 5
Adaptable binding
site positions and chemistry. (a) DNA carrier
design with three biotins separated at approximately one-quarter intervals
along the DNA carrier. (b) Translocations after incubation of design
(a) with streptavidin showing three spikes at approximately one-quarter,
two quarters and three-quarters of the total translocation time. (c)
Design of a DNA carrier with a digoxigenin tag at the central position
and bound to an antidigoxigenin antibody. (d) Typical translocations
after incubation with antidigoxigenin showing the presence of a current
spike in the center. (e) Percentage of translocation exceeding ΔI from one DNA strand level (as in Figure 3). Error bars show the standard deviation from three independent
nanopores with raw values given in Table S10.
The percentage of DNA carrier translocations
showing a central
current spike can vary depending on how many streptavidin binding
sites are designed. We therefore developed a method for quantifying
the detection efficiency for the 5B, 3B and 1B designs. For each DNA
carrier translocation, beginning and ending with a current level indicating
a single DNA double strand, we created a 400 μs window which
was ±200 μs either side of the center of the event (Figure 3a). We then determined whether the current exceeded
a threshold ΔI in this time window with ΔI measured relative to the dsDNA level. The minimum threshold
was set to 40 pA to give a sufficient signal-to-noise ratio for our
automated detection routine. In Figure 3b we
evaluate the percentage of DNA carrier translocations which show a
current spike in the central 400 μs with magnitude greater than
ΔI.Analysis of detection efficiency for different
numbers of bound
proteins. (a) A 400 μs window is created at the center of the
translocation. The threshold ΔI (from the one
double strand DNA level) is varied, and in (b) the percentage of translocations
exceeding ΔI in the 400 μs window is
calculated. The percentage is shown for designs 5B, 3B, 1B and 0B
with 5, 3, 1, and 0 streptavidin attached, respectively. Error bars
are the standard deviation from N independent nanopores
with N = 3 (for 5B and 1B), N =
5 (for 3B) and N = 6 (for 0B) (raw values given in Tables S2–S5).When there are no biotin groups on the DNA carrier design,
we measure
a background of ∼5% translocations showing a false positive
protein spike. These can be attributed to translocations where the
DNA has two folds in the center or more complicated folding events.
It is important to note that these constitute only a small proportion
of the total events in agreement with previous analysis for translocations
of double strand DNA through similar sized nanopores.[35] The designs with five streptavidin and three streptavidin
have means of 99 and 92%, respectively, for the number of detectable
current events at 40 pA threshold. Furthermore, the percentage of
detectable current spikes does not decrease significantly as the threshold
is increased. This strongly suggests that we nearly always detect
a protein signal when we have 5 or 3 streptavidin attached. For the
1B design where only a single streptavidin is attached we measure
a protein signal in 51% of translocations at 40 pA threshold. This
percentage decreases strongly as we increase the threshold to 50 and
60 pA.The low detection efficiency for a single bound streptavidin
on
the DNA carrier could be due to the presence of DNA carriers without
streptavidin attached or a current signal that is too small to pass
the threshold. The number of unbound biotin sites should be very low
due to the high biotin–streptavidin affinity. Therefore, we
believe that the low percentage of detected current spikes for the
one streptavidin design is due to the low signal-to-noise ratio for
a single streptavidin protein. This detection efficiency could possibly
be improved by using ultrathin membranes which give higher current
signals compared to glass nanopores.[37]
Detection of Streptavidin from Protein Mixtures
So
far our results show the ability to design and measure protein attachment
on the DNA carrier. As described above, the ionic current signatures
due to translocation of the DNA carrier are significantly different
to streptavidin that we can use the event charge deficit to easily
distinguish the two. Previous analysis[19] shows that a range of other globular proteins have similarly low
levels of event charge deficit compared to streptavidin. Because of
the possibility to impart binding specificity on the DNA carriers,
we reasoned that it should be possible to accurately detect and thus
identify a bound analyte against a background of different translocating
proteins.In order to test this hypothesis we made two protein
mixtures using proteins which have been characterized previously with
nanopores.[19] Mixture 1 (mix1) contained
streptavidin, β-lactoglobulin, β-galactosidase and lysozyme.
Mixture 2 (mix2) contained bovine serum albumin (BSA), β-lactoglobulin,
β-galactosidase and lysozyme. Mix2 therefore acts as a control
with streptavidin replaced by BSA. We tested incubations of the 3B
DNA carrier (featuring three biotin sites at the center) with either
mix1 or mix2 (Figure 4b). In all mixture experiments
the final concentration in the nanopore reservoir was 15 nM of each
protein and 1 nM of DNA carrier. The 3B design was chosen as a compromise
between a design that needed relatively few binding sites and one
that had a good detection efficiency (as shown in Figure 3). We also performed separate controls where a DNA
carrier with no biotin modifications (0B) was incubated under the
same conditions (with mix1 or mix2) before being translocated through
a nanopore.
Figure 4
An assay
for selective protein detection on a DNA carrier. (a)
Events that begin and end with the one DNA double strand level are
selected. If the current exceeds 50 pA from the baseline one DNA strand
level within a central 400 μs window, the event is labeled positive
for protein detection. Left shows an example of a positive translocation,
right shows an example of a negative translocation. (b) Two DNA carrier
designs used for experiment and controls. Three biotin (3B) design
is as in Figure 3 with 3 biotin tags at the
center. No modifications (0B) design has no biotin groups. Each design
was incubated with one of two mixtures: mix1 contained the target
streptavidin protein and mix2 contained BSA as a substitute control.
A high percentage of threshold crossing events is only observed for
the correct combination of binding site (biotin) and target protein
(streptavidin). Error bars are the standard deviation from four independent
nanopores (raw data is given in Tables S6–S9).
Translocations were recorded in these four cases
(3B+mix1, 3B+mix2,
0B+mix1, 0B+mix2) and each case was repeated four times with separate
nanopores to determine experimental consistency. As before, DNA carrier
events were selected based on event charge deficit and those translocations
beginning and ending with the one DNA level. On the basis of our detection
efficiency analysis in Figure 3, we set a threshold
of 50 pA in a 400 μs central window for positive protein detection.An assay
for selective protein detection on a DNA carrier. (a)
Events that begin and end with the one DNA double strand level are
selected. If the current exceeds 50 pA from the baseline one DNA strand
level within a central 400 μs window, the event is labeled positive
for protein detection. Left shows an example of a positive translocation,
right shows an example of a negative translocation. (b) Two DNA carrier
designs used for experiment and controls. Three biotin (3B) design
is as in Figure 3 with 3 biotin tags at the
center. No modifications (0B) design has no biotin groups. Each design
was incubated with one of two mixtures: mix1 contained the target
streptavidin protein and mix2 contained BSA as a substitute control.
A high percentage of threshold crossing events is only observed for
the correct combination of binding site (biotin) and target protein
(streptavidin). Error bars are the standard deviation from four independent
nanopores (raw data is given in Tables S6–S9).We observe a significantly higher
percentage of threshold crossing
events only when biotin functionalized DNA carrier and streptavidin
are present in the mixture (Figure 4b). The
mean number of positive detections for the correct combination of
biotin functionalized DNA carrier and streptavidin is 87%. In the
control samples we consistently measure a mean of approximately 10%
false positives. We anticipate that further optimization of the detection
algorithm could help to decrease the number of false negatives and
false positives. Nevertheless, these results demonstrate that the
unique ionic current signature of the DNA carrier can be used for
selectively identifying the presence of a target protein in a mixture.
Adaptability of Binding Site Position and Chemistry
As a
simple demonstration of the possibilities of the DNA carrier
approach we present two further examples of DNA carrier designs. First
we designed a DNA carrier with three oligonucleotides functionalized
with biotin groups at approximately one-quarter (∼600 nm) intervals
along the DNA carrier. After incubation with five times excess of
streptavidin, the structure was translocated through a nanopore. Figure 5b shows three translocations
where we clearly resolve three separated spikes during the translocation.
The spikes occur at approximately equal time points as expected from
the design. Multiple protein markers on the same DNA molecule provide
reference points which could help for probing DNA velocity during
an individual translocation rather than single protrusions of DNA
which was recently demonstrated.[38]Adaptable binding
site positions and chemistry. (a) DNA carrier
design with three biotins separated at approximately one-quarter intervals
along the DNA carrier. (b) Translocations after incubation of design
(a) with streptavidin showing three spikes at approximately one-quarter,
two quarters and three-quarters of the total translocation time. (c)
Design of a DNA carrier with a digoxigenin tag at the central position
and bound to an antidigoxigenin antibody. (d) Typical translocations
after incubation with antidigoxigenin showing the presence of a current
spike in the center. (e) Percentage of translocation exceeding ΔI from one DNA strand level (as in Figure 3). Error bars show the standard deviation from three independent
nanopores with raw values given in Table S10.As a second demonstration of the
adaptability of DNA carriers we
chose a different chemical tag for the selective sensing of antibodies.
A DNA carrier was modified with a digoxigenin and three thymine motif
covalently attached to the 38mer oligonucleotide at the central position
(Figure 5c). This DNA carrier was incubated
with antidigoxigenin antibodies which are known to form a high affinity
interaction with digoxigenin[39] with KD ∼ 1 nM.[40] The final concentration in the nanopore reservoir was 3 nM of DNA
carriers and 8 nM of antidigoxigenin so that a high proportion (∼85%)
of DNA carriers should have an antibody bound assuming equilibrium
and KD = 1 nM. We again observe current
spikes at the center of the translocation due to the protein (Figure 5d). The current spike is typically larger than that
for a single streptavidin which is consistent with the higher molecular
weight of the antidigoxigenin (∼150 kDa compared to ∼60
kDa for streptavidin) and results in a higher detection efficiency
compared to designs binding a single streptavidin (Figure 5e).
Discussion
In this paper we have
shown a method for fabricating DNA strands
designed for the selective detection of proteins with solid-state
nanopores. The ability to rationally create DNA strands in this way
has great potential for simple solid-state nanopore sensing of specific
proteins. In particular we have shown how information can be encoded
in the DNA structure: in this paper we incorporated protein binding
sites at specific locations along the length of the DNA. We have then
used the ability of solid-state nanopores to scan for individual molecules
attached on a long double strand of DNA which has previously been
shown for detecting fluorophores[41] and
PNA.[42] Single stranded DNA–protein
complexes have also been used for protein detection methods with α-hemolysin
based on monitoring stochastic blocking events.[7] Our method is distinguished from this since we use translocation
measurements through large solid-state nanopores that allow the proteins
to pass in their native state. Therefore, our technique could enable
larger binding sites like aptamers,[43−45] small peptides or antibody
fragments[46−48] to be readily used. There are also simple routes
open to multiplex measurements for example by attaching different
protein binding sites at different positions along the DNA strand.The protein measurement system described here has several potential
advantages over existing solid-state nanopore based methods for selective
protein detection. First, it does not rely on surface modification
of a nanopore but rather we do our engineering in the design of the
DNA carrier in solution. Second, in our method the affinity between
the binding site on the DNA carrier and its target protein can be
high. In contrast, protein sensing by stochastic binding at the mouth
of a nanopore requires that the binding strength must be adequately
tuned to give characteristic on–off times on the order of milliseconds
to seconds.Another potential advantage is that the transport
of the protein
attached to the DNA carrier becomes dominated by the electrokinetics
of the DNA. This means that the detection does not need to be optimized
for different proteins (dependent on eg charge, diffusion coefficient)
but rather will be dependent on the DNA transport which has been extensively
characterized in previous literature. For instance one improvement
that could be made, based on known DNA transport, is to apply a salt
gradient across the nanopore which can significantly enhance the DNA
capture rate and enable high throughput at pM concentration.[49] Finally we have also demonstrated the potential
to measure a specific protein from mixtures, which represents an important
step toward the goal of specific solid-state nanopore detection in
complex samples for diagnostics. The compatibility of this system
with more complex samples will require addressing potential background
due to DNA binding proteins and DNA nucleases.
Authors: Richard Janissen; Bojk A Berghuis; David Dulin; Max Wink; Theo van Laar; Nynke H Dekker Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Michelle H Lam; Kyle Briggs; Konstantinos Kastritis; Martin Magill; Gregory R Madejski; James L McGrath; Hendrick W de Haan; Vincent Tabard-Cossa Journal: ACS Appl Nano Mater Date: 2019-06-19