Magdalena Gebala1, Steve Bonilla2, Namita Bisaria1, Daniel Herschlag1,3,4. 1. Department of Biochemistry, Stanford University , Stanford, California 94305, United States. 2. Department of Chemical Engineering, Stanford University , Stanford, California 94305, United States. 3. Department of Chemistry, Stanford University , Stanford, California 94305, United States. 4. ChEM-H Institute, Stanford University , Stanford, California 94305, United States.
Abstract
Electrostatics are central to all aspects of nucleic acid behavior, including their folding, condensation, and binding to other molecules, and the energetics of these processes are profoundly influenced by the ion atmosphere that surrounds nucleic acids. Given the highly complex and dynamic nature of the ion atmosphere, understanding its properties and effects will require synergy between computational modeling and experiment. Prior computational models and experiments suggest that cation occupancy in the ion atmosphere depends on the size of the cation. However, the computational models have not been independently tested, and the experimentally observed effects were small. Here, we evaluate a computational model of ion size effects by experimentally testing a blind prediction made from that model, and we present additional experimental results that extend our understanding of the ion atmosphere. Giambasu et al. developed and implemented a three-dimensional reference interaction site (3D-RISM) model for monovalent cations surrounding DNA and RNA helices, and this model predicts that Na(+) would outcompete Cs(+) by 1.8-2.1-fold; i.e., with Cs(+) in 2-fold excess of Na(+) the ion atmosphere would contain an equal number of each cation (Nucleic Acids Res. 2015, 43, 8405). However, our ion counting experiments indicate that there is no significant preference for Na(+) over Cs(+). There is an ∼25% preferential occupancy of Li(+) over larger cations in the ion atmosphere but, counter to general expectations from existing models, no size dependence for the other alkali metal ions. Further, we followed the folding of the P4-P6 RNA and showed that differences in folding with different alkali metal ions observed at high concentration arise from cation-anion interactions and not cation size effects. Overall, our results provide a critical test of a computational prediction, fundamental information about ion atmosphere properties, and parameters that will aid in the development of next-generation nucleic acid computational models.
Electrostatics are central to all aspects of nucleic acid behavior, including their folding, condensation, and binding to other molecules, and the energetics of these processes are profoundly influenced by the ion atmosphere that surrounds nucleic acids. Given the highly complex and dynamic nature of the ion atmosphere, understanding its properties and effects will require synergy between computational modeling and experiment. Prior computational models and experiments suggest that cation occupancy in the ion atmosphere depends on the size of the cation. However, the computational models have not been independently tested, and the experimentally observed effects were small. Here, we evaluate a computational model of ion size effects by experimentally testing a blind prediction made from that model, and we present additional experimental results that extend our understanding of the ion atmosphere. Giambasu et al. developed and implemented a three-dimensional reference interaction site (3D-RISM) model for monovalent cations surrounding DNA and RNA helices, and this model predicts that Na(+) would outcompete Cs(+) by 1.8-2.1-fold; i.e., with Cs(+) in 2-fold excess of Na(+) the ion atmosphere would contain an equal number of each cation (Nucleic Acids Res. 2015, 43, 8405). However, our ion counting experiments indicate that there is no significant preference for Na(+) over Cs(+). There is an ∼25% preferential occupancy of Li(+) over larger cations in the ion atmosphere but, counter to general expectations from existing models, no size dependence for the other alkali metal ions. Further, we followed the folding of the P4-P6 RNA and showed that differences in folding with different alkali metal ions observed at high concentration arise from cation-anion interactions and not cation size effects. Overall, our results provide a critical test of a computational prediction, fundamental information about ion atmosphere properties, and parameters that will aid in the development of next-generation nucleic acid computational models.
The polyelectrolyte
nature of nucleic acids renders their structure,
interactions, and function strongly dependent on the presence of ions.
DNA condensation,[1−4] packing of genomes into viral capsids,[2,5,6] and the folding of functional RNAs[7−10] require the repulsive forces
between closely packed phosphate residues to be abated by positively
charged cations. The vast majority of the cations that play this role
are not site-specifically bound but rather are part of a mobile cloud
of ions surrounding molecules, referred to as the ion atmosphere.
Thus, the ion atmosphere is a critical structural, dynamic, and energetic
component of nucleic acids, and dissection of its properties and behavior
is necessary for understanding nucleic acid structure, dynamics, and
function.Yet, progress in experimental study of the ion atmosphere
has been
difficult,[11] in part because there is no
unique structure for this highly mobile cloud. An additional complication
is that the ions in this atmosphere are under the influence of long-range
electrostatic forces and do not conform to the mass action laws that
are the basis for our understanding of nearly all ligand-binding interactions.[12−14] Consequently, distinct theoretical frameworks have been needed and
have been heavily relied upon. These frameworks date back to Manning’s
early counterion condensation model[15,16] and include
Poisson–Boltzmann (PB) theory[17−19] and more recent coarse-grain
and atomistic approaches that are currently in use.[20−26]Indeed, progress in computational simulations has made it
possible
to obtain atomic-level descriptions of the ions in the ion atmosphere,
including their positions with respect to the nucleic acid and one
another and their hydration status.[27−33] These simulations typically reveal cations in helical grooves, with
a size dependence to this occupancy,[29,31,32,34−39] and greater accumulation of smaller cations around phosphoryl oxygen
atoms.[30,31,37,40,41] Thus, computational
approaches have provided general support for cation size as an important
determinant of cation position in and occupancy of the ion atmosphere
and of the ion atmosphere’s ability to screen nucleic acid
charge.[31,36,37,41,42]Nevertheless,
whether this information is accurate, or not, can
only be gauged empirically, through specific predictions that are
made by these models and subsequently tested experimentally.[39,41,43,44] Recently, York and colleagues[41] quantitatively
computed the ion atmosphere occupancy for a series of monovalent cations
using a three-dimensional reference interaction site model (3D-RISM)
based on the ff10 AMBER force field for nucleic acids,[45] Joung and Cheatham ion potentials,[46] and the SPC/E solvation model.[47] Importantly, in addition to providing comparisons to previously
measured cation occupancies,[48] this work
also provided a blind prediction for the ability of Cs+ to compete with smaller alkali metal cations for occupancy in the
ion atmosphere. In other words, as Cs+ occupancy had not
been previously determined experimentally, its measurement would represent
a true test of the computational model. As for the test of any model,
disagreement would require the model to be rejected or modified, whereas
agreement would allow the model to stand, with the expectation that
the model would be subject to additional tests in the future.An experimental approach that has been particularly effective for
testing theoretical predictions concerning the ion atmosphere is ion
counting.[48−51] The most basic expectation from polyelectrolyte theories is that
the ion atmosphere, as a whole, neutralizes nucleic acids such that
the overall charge of a nucleic acid and the ions that constitute
the ion atmosphere sum to zero. This prediction has been verified
by ion counting experiments that used buffer-exchange atomic emission
spectroscopy (BE-AES; Figure ) to fully account for the ion atmosphere constituents. These
experiments also determined the cation accumulation in and anion exclusion
from the ion atmosphere, quantities that also can be obtained from
polyelectrolyte theories[48,49,51,52] (see also ref (50)).
Figure 1
Scheme of the buffer
equilibration–mass spectroscopy experiment,
referred to as “ion counting” herein. The scheme is
adapted from refs (48, 51). A detailed description of the ion counting methodology is presented
in Experimental Methods and refs (48, 51, 58).
Scheme of the buffer
equilibration–mass spectroscopy experiment,
referred to as “ion counting” herein. The scheme is
adapted from refs (48, 51). A detailed description of the ion counting methodology is presented
in Experimental Methods and refs (48, 51, 58).Prior ion counting studies[48] suggested,
consistent with theoretical expectations, that smaller cations preferentially
occupy the ion atmosphere around DNA helices. Studies on the relaxation
of short DNA helices attached by a short, flexible linker[53] and other experiments[54−57] revealed an analogous trend.
However, there are limitations to each of these measurements. The
observed differences in ion association of the alkali metal ions around
the double-stranded DNA were very small, less than 20%, and in general
difficult to distinguish from experimental uncertainty.[48,54] The relaxation studies,[53] we now recognize
based on very recent studies,[51] could have
been affected by nonideal behavior of simple electrolytes (i.e., ion–ion
correlations and ion clustering) at the high salt concentrations required
for these experiments, Thus, the conclusions from these and other
experimental studies[54−57] require further investigation.The blind predictions by York
and colleagues have allowed us to
carry out an experimental test of a quantitative prediction from theory.[41] We show, counter to the
theoretical prediction, that Cs+ is not excluded from the
ion atmosphere of DNA and RNA helices relative to Na+,
thereby providing information required for progress toward accurate
electrostatic models of nucleic acids and their electrostatics. Given
the importance of basic knowledge about the ion atmosphere, and the
limited and generally complex experimental information available,
we also took advantage of recent enhancements in the capabilities
of ion counting to expand prior studies of cation competition for
ion atmosphere occupancy.[48] Our results
confirm the preferential ion atmosphere occupancy of Li+, consistent with the current 3D-RISM model[41] and prior experimental studies,[48] but
show that there is no significant size preference for other alkali
metal ions. Finally, we provide evidence, following folding of P4–P6
RNA, that different effects on folding at high salt concentrations
arise from nonideal behavior of simple electrolytes that causes differential
electrostatic screening, rather than from cation size effects.
Experimental Methods
Reagents
DNA and
RNA oligonucleotides were purchased
from IDT (Integrated DNA Technologies, USA). The following DNA sequences
were used S1: 5′GGT GAC GAG TGA GCT ACT GGG CGG3′ and S2: 5′CCG CCC AGT AGC TCA CTC
GTC ACC3′. RNA sequences were the same except for
containing uracil instead of thymine bases. All salts were of the
highest purity (TraceSELECT or BioXtra, Sigma-Aldrich USA). All solutions
were prepared in high purity water, ultralow TOC biological grade
(Aqua Solutions, USA).
Preparation of DNA and RNA Samples
DNA and RNA constructs
used in this study were duplexes assembled from chemically synthesized
oligonucleotides. The DNA construct was the same as used in previous
ion counting studies.[48] Oligonucleotides
were purified by reverse-phase HPLC (XBridge Oligonucleotide BEH C18;
Waters, MA) and desalted using centrifugal Amicon Ultra-3K filers
(Millipore, MA). Equimolar complementary strands (0.1–0.3 mM)
were annealed in 20 mM Na-EPPS (sodium 4-(2-hydroxyehyl)piperazine-1-propanesulfonic
acid), pH 8.4; samples were incubated at 70 °C for 1 min and
gradually cooled to ambient temperature over 1 h. Nondenaturing polyacrylamide
gel electrophoresis (PAGE, stained by Stains-All, Sigma-Aldrich, USA)
showed no detectable single stranded DNA and RNA in samples, corresponding
to >90% duplex.
Buffer Equilibration-Inductively Coupled
Plasma Mass Spectroscopy
(BE-ICP MS)
Buffer equilibration for DNA and RNA was carried
out using Amicon Ultracel-30K filters (Millipore, MA), replacing Microcon
YM-30 (Millipore, MA) used previously.[48] Salt samples were prepared in 2 mM Na-EPPS, Li-EPPS or Mg-EPPS,
pH 8.5 and their concentrations were determined by ICP MS. The initial
500 μL of 0.2 to 2 mM 24-bp DNA or 24-bp RNA samples, with the
salt of interest, was spun down to ∼100 μL at 7000g in Amicon Ultracel-30K filters (Figure , i) at 4 °C (to minimize solution evaporation).[58] As shown previously,[51] equilibration between ions associated with nucleic acids and the
bulk ions was completed after five rounds of the buffer exchange without
any loss of the DNA or RNA; no DNA or RNA was detected in flow-through
samples, as determined by ICP MS, assaying the phosphorus content.
Ion Counting
Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry
(ICP-MS) measurements were carried out using a XSERIES 2 ICP-MS (Thermo
Scientific, USA), which has a higher precision and a lower detection
limit compared to IRIS Advantage 1000 radial ICAP Spectrometer (Thermo
Jarrell Ash) used in earlier studies.[48] Additionally, the ICP MS can assay halogens, allowing us to measure
anion exclusion from the ion atmosphere and in turn to independently
calculate the total charge of the atmosphere, a value that provides
a powerful quality control by comparison the theoretical expectation
of overall charge neutrality. Herein, ion counting measurements were
carried out with bromide salts, as the detection of Br– anion by ICP MS has highest accuracy and precision compared to other
halogens.Samples were analyzed as described in ref (51). Briefly, aliquots (5–20
μL) of DNA- or RNA-containing sample, the flow-through from
the final equilibration, and the equilibration buffer were diluted
to 5 mL in 15 mL Falcon tubes with water. Dilution factors, the ratio
of diluted to total sample volume, were used to maintain sample concentrations
within the linear dynamic range of detection.[51] Calibrations were carried out using standards from SpexCertiPrep
(USA). Quality control samples, containing each element of interest
at 50 μM, were assayed every ten samples to estimate measurement
precision.[59] To minimize memory effects
in Br– detection, a solution of 5% ammonium hydroxide
in highly pure, ion-free water (Mili Q) was used as a wash-out solution
between measurements.[60]Tetramethylammonium
(TMA+) and tetrabutylammonium (TBA+) were not
directly assayed by ICP-MS. (Carbon and nitrogen
atoms, which are present in TMA+ and TBA+, could
in principle be used to determine the concentration, but their presence
in DNA and RNA precludes direct determination of the cations.) In
these cases, the number of accumulated cations was calculated based
on the charge neutrality principle from the measured number of depleted
Br– ions and the total charge of 24-bp DNA (eq ), as established by prior
results.[48,51]In eq , q indicates
the charge of ionic species i, Γ is the preferential interaction coefficient (i.e.,
the number of associated ion), and qNA is the charge of the DNA or RNA, which is equal to −46 for
the 24-bp DNA and 24-bp RNA studied herein. Calculated cation counts
are represented by open instead of closed circles in figures throughout
the text.For each ion counting data point reported, at least
three measurements
were made on three different days with independently prepared samples.
Errors are the standard deviation of all measurements.The number
of associated ions around the 24-bp DNA and 24-bp RNA
is reported here as a preferential interaction coefficient[61] Γ (i = + or – , indicating cation or anion, respectively),
where Γ is the difference in the
ion concentration between the equilibrated nucleic acid-containing
sample (cionNA) and the bulk solution (cionbulk), divided
by the DNA or RNA concentration (cNA;
determined by phosphorus measurements using ICP MS) (eq ).For DNA
or RNA, the cation preferential interaction
coefficient, Γ+, is expected to be greater than zero,
indicating their accumulation around the negatively charged polyelectrolytes,
and Γ– for an anion is expected to be less
than zero due to repulsive interactions with the DNA or RNA.
Quantification
of Cation Competition
To evaluate differences
in the association between two cation species with the 24-bp DNA and
24-bp RNA, we used the same method as described previously.[48] Briefly, the number of competing cations (CC)
and background cations (BC) around the DNA was measured over a range
of CC concentrations at a given constant concentration of BC (see Figures , 4, 5, and 8 below).
The competition constant (β) was defined as the concentration
of competing cation at which half of the number of BC associated with
the DNA or RNA in the absence of the CC are replaced by the CC. The
competition constant (β) was computed via an empirical two-state
model as the midpoint ([M]1/2) of the background cation
association, using Hill analysis:where Γ is the number of associated
background cations at a given concentration of the competing cation,
[M], Γ0 and Γ1 are the number of
associated background cations in the absence of the competing cation
and extrapolated to infinite competing cation, respectively, and n is the Hill coefficient. Hill analysis is complex for
polyelectrolytes[62] and we use it here as
an empirical description of the competition behavior.
Figure 2
Competitive
association of monovalent cations with a 24-bp DNA
duplex. (A–F) The number of ions in the ion atmosphere for
a series of cations (red circles, Li+, K+, Rb+, Cs+, TMA+ and TBA+) versus
Na+ (gray circles; [Na+] = 50 mM, except A and
F where [Na+] = 40 mM); excluded Br– anion
is represented by the black triangles. The total charge of the ion
atmosphere summed from the individual ion measurements is shown as
the black squares, and the lines at Γ = +46 represent the charge
needed to neutralize the total DNA charge of −46. Cations that
could not be directed assayed (TMA+ and TBA+) were estimated from the number of Na+ and Br– ions and assuming overall charge neutrality and are shown as open
symbols. Solid lines (red and gray) are fits with the Hill equation
and provide an empirical guide. Errors are the standard deviation
of all measurements. (G) Cation competition constants for monovalent
cations against Na+. (eq ), where β = [M]1/2 is the competition
constant
of the competing cation defined by eq and [BG] is the concentration of the background cation,
Na+. The arrow for the α value for TBA+ depicts that this value is a limit. Each data point in panels A–F
is the average of 3–5 independent measurements. See Tables
S1–S7 in Supporting Information for
raw data.
Figure 4
Competitive
association of monovalent cations versus Mg2+ for a 24-bp
DNA duplex. (A–C) The number of ions in the ion
atmosphere for a series of monovalent salts: Li+, Na+, Cs+ (orange circles) versus Mg2+ (A:
[Mg2+] = 5 mM; B and C: [Mg2+] = 6 mM, gray
circles); excluded Br– anions are represented by
the black triangles, and the total charge of the ion atmosphere summed
from the individual ion measurements is shown as the black squares.
The lines at Γ = +46 represent the charge needed to neutralize
the total DNA charge of −46. Solid lines (orange and gray)
are fits to the Hill equation to provide an empirical guide. (D) Cation
competition constants for monovalent cations against Mg2+. (eq ), where β is the competition constant of the
competing
cation, defined in eq , and [BG] is the concentration of the background cation, Mg2+. Each data point is the average of three independent measurements.
Error bars as in Figure . See Tables S15–S17 in Supporting Information for raw data.
Figure 5
Competitive association of monovalent cations with a 24-bp RNA
duplex. The number of ions in the ion atmosphere for Cs+ (red circles) versus Na+ (gray circles; [Na+] = 50 mM); excluded Br– anion is represented by
the black triangles, and the total charge of the ion atmosphere summed
from the individual ion measurements is shown as the black squares.
The line at Γ = +46 represents the charge needed to neutralize
the total RNA charge of −46. The solid line (red and gray)
are fits to the Hill equation to provide an empirical guide. Each
data point is the average of 3–5 independent measurements.
Error bars as in Figure . See Table S18 in Supporting Information for raw data.
Figure 8
Competitive association
of Cs+ versus Na+ (300 mM) for a 24-bp DNA duplex.
(A) Competitive association of
CsBr against NaBr. The number of ions in the ion atmosphere Cs+ (red circles) versus Na+ (gray circles); excluded
Br– anions are represented by the black triangles,
and the total charge of the ion atmosphere summed from the individual
ion measurements is shown as the black squares. (B) Competitive association
of CsF against NaF. The number of ions in the ion atmosphere Cs+ (red circles) versus Na+ (gray circles); excluded
F– anions are represented by the open triangles
and were estimated based on eq . Each data point is the average of 3–5 independent
measurements. The lines at Γ = +46 represent the charge needed
to neutralize the total DNA charge of −46. The solid line (red
and gray) are fits to the Hill equation to provide an empirical guide.
Error bars as in Figure . See Tables S13–S14 in Supporting Information for raw data.
P4–P6
RNA Preparation and Single Molecule FRET (smFRET)
Experiments
A P4–P6 RNA construct for smFRET studies
was prepared as previously reported.[51,63] The biotinylated
sample was diluted to a concentration of ∼50 pM and flowed
onto a BSA-streptavidin-coated quartz slide for surface attachment
and imaging. smFRET experiments were carried out in 40 mM Na-MOPS,
pH 7.0, 0.1 mM Na-EDTA with the salt of interest and with an oxygen
scavenging system of 2.0 mM Trolox, 60 units/mL protocatechuate-3,4-dioxygenase
(PCD) and 100 mM protocatechuic acid (PCA). Images were taken using
a custom total internal reflection (TIRF) setup with image acquisition
by Andor iXon Ultra camera and the Nikon Elements software at three
different acquisition rates: 48, 92, and 145 frames per second (fps).
Results were independent of the frame frequency (Figure S1). The FRET traces of individual molecules displayed
transitions between two FRET states: a high FRET state of 0.95, corresponding
to the folded states, and a low FRET state of ∼0.2 corresponding
to the unfolded state.[64] (smFRET data assessment
is shown in Figures S2-1 to S15-3.) To
determine equilibrium and folding rate constants, FRET traces were
analyzed with the SMART analysis package, as described previsouly.[63,65]
Results
Assessing Preferential Ion Atmosphere Occupancy
of Cations via
Competitive Association
We first studied the competitive
association of monovalent cations with a 24-bp model DNA in the presence
of Br– as the counterion (Figure ). A series of competing monovalent cations were titrated
at various concentrations (5–200 mM) into a 50 mM or 40 mM
solution of Na+ as a background cation (BG, see Experimental Methods). In the absence of a competing
cation, there are 37 ± 1 Na+ ions associated with
the DNA and 10 ± 1 Br– ions excluded, in agreement
with prior measurements.[51] Increasing concentration
of the competing cation led to an increase in the number of that cation
around the DNA and a decrease in the number of background Na+ cations, with little or no change in the number of excluded anions.Competitive
association of monovalent cations with a 24-bp DNA
duplex. (A–F) The number of ions in the ion atmosphere for
a series of cations (red circles, Li+, K+, Rb+, Cs+, TMA+ and TBA+) versus
Na+ (gray circles; [Na+] = 50 mM, except A and
F where [Na+] = 40 mM); excluded Br– anion
is represented by the black triangles. The total charge of the ion
atmosphere summed from the individual ion measurements is shown as
the black squares, and the lines at Γ = +46 represent the charge
needed to neutralize the total DNA charge of −46. Cations that
could not be directed assayed (TMA+ and TBA+) were estimated from the number of Na+ and Br– ions and assuming overall charge neutrality and are shown as open
symbols. Solid lines (red and gray) are fits with the Hill equation
and provide an empirical guide. Errors are the standard deviation
of all measurements. (G) Cation competition constants for monovalent
cations against Na+. (eq ), where β = [M]1/2 is the competition
constant
of the competing cation defined by eq and [BG] is the concentration of the background cation,
Na+. The arrow for the α value for TBA+ depicts that this value is a limit. Each data point in panels A–F
is the average of 3–5 independent measurements. See Tables
S1–S7 in Supporting Information for
raw data.The ion atmosphere screens the
charge of nucleic acids, and the
total number of ions within the ion atmosphere (i.e., the number of
accumulated cationic species and the number of excluded anions) should
be equal in number and opposite in sign to the charge of the macromolecule:
here a 24-bp DNA or 24-bp RNA of charge −46. In all cases where
both the cation and anion could be directly measured, the calculated
total charge agreed well with the charge of the DNA and RNA (Figures A–D, Figure , and Figure below, +46; squares vs solid
black line; see also refs (48, 51)). If a cation or an anion could not be directly assayed, we assumed
overall charge neutrality, based on the above-noted results, and used
this relationship (eq ) to calculate the accumulation or depletion of that cation or anion;
these values are represented as open symbols (circles for cations
and triangles for anions; e.g., Figures E, 2F, and Figure B).To estimate
how much stronger a given cation species interacts
with the DNA or the RNA, relative to a given background cation, we
introduce the unitless parameter α, defined aswhere β is the cation competition
constant,
i.e., the concentration of competing cation at which half of the initial
number of background cations is replaced by the competing cation (eq , Experimental
Methods), and [BG] is the concentration of the background cation.
The relative preferential cation occupancy from the data of Figure A–F is summarized
in Figure G in terms
of α. There is small but significant preference for Li+ over Na+ (α = 0.72 ± 0.05). However, K+, Rb+, Cs+, and TMA+ all
gave α values of unity, within error, indicating no net preferential
ion atmosphere occupancy between these ions (α = 0.95–0.99; Table S7). We expected, nevertheless, that a
sufficiently large cation with a low charge density would have a limited
ability to closely approach the duplex and thus have a lower ability
to compete with other cations for occupancy of the ion atmosphere.
To investigate a cation larger than Cs+ (3.06 Å, hydrated
ion radius)[66] and TMA+ (3.7
Å),[67,68] we turned to tetrabutylammonium (TBA+, 4.57 Å).[68] Indeed, we observed
approximately 3-fold weaker association of TBA+ compared
to Na+ (Figure F; α ≈ 2.8).[69]To further test the observed preference for Li+, we
carried out the converse experiment, titrating varying amounts of
Na+ into a background of 16 or 50 mM Li+ (Figure S16). The α values were larger than
1, consistent with the preferential association of Li+ over
Na+ (α = 1.25 ± 0.08 and 1.20 ± 0.07, at
16 and 50 mM Li+ respectively). We also counted Li+ ions around the 24-bp DNA in the absence of a secondary cation
over the concentration range 10–250 mM. There was, on average,
three more Li+ cations associated with the DNA compared
to Na+, Rb+, or Cs+, and correspondingly
fewer excluded anions, consistent with stronger association of Li+ with the duplex (Figure ).
Figure 3
Preferential association of cations with a 24-bp DNA for
solutions
of individual salts over a range of bulk ion concentrations (10–350
mM). (A) Association of LiBr (gray) and NaBr (blue). Accumulated cations:
Li+ (gray circles) or Na+ (blue circles); depleted
anions: Br– (triangles). The line at Γ = +46
represents the charge needed to neutralize the total DNA charge of
−46. Each data point is the average of three independent measurements.
See Table S8 for raw data. (B) The number
of accumulated monovalent cations around 24-bp DNA at 10 mM and 50
mM: ΓLi was measured herein, and ΓNa, ΓRb, ΓCs were taken from ref (51), where the same methodology was used. Error
bars as in Figure .
Preferential association of cations with a 24-bp DNA for
solutions
of individual salts over a range of bulk ion concentrations (10–350
mM). (A) Association of LiBr (gray) and NaBr (blue). Accumulated cations:
Li+ (gray circles) or Na+ (blue circles); depleted
anions: Br– (triangles). The line at Γ = +46
represents the charge needed to neutralize the total DNA charge of
−46. Each data point is the average of three independent measurements.
See Table S8 for raw data. (B) The number
of accumulated monovalent cations around 24-bp DNA at 10 mM and 50
mM: ΓLi was measured herein, and ΓNa, ΓRb, ΓCs were taken from ref (51), where the same methodology was used. Error
bars as in Figure .As an additional independent test
of cation size effects, we carried
out cation competition experiments for Li+, Na+, and Cs+ in the presence of a Mg2+ background.
Again, there were no significant difference between Na+ and Cs+ in replacing the divalent cation, but, as above,
Li+ was more efficient at displacing Mg2+ (Figure ; α = 8.6 ± 0.5, 8.7 ± 0.8 and 7.0 ±
0.6 for Na+, Cs+, and Li+, respectively).Competitive
association of monovalent cations versus Mg2+ for a 24-bp
DNA duplex. (A–C) The number of ions in the ion
atmosphere for a series of monovalent salts: Li+, Na+, Cs+ (orange circles) versus Mg2+ (A:
[Mg2+] = 5 mM; B and C: [Mg2+] = 6 mM, gray
circles); excluded Br– anions are represented by
the black triangles, and the total charge of the ion atmosphere summed
from the individual ion measurements is shown as the black squares.
The lines at Γ = +46 represent the charge needed to neutralize
the total DNA charge of −46. Solid lines (orange and gray)
are fits to the Hill equation to provide an empirical guide. (D) Cation
competition constants for monovalent cations against Mg2+. (eq ), where β is the competition constant of the
competing
cation, defined in eq , and [BG] is the concentration of the background cation, Mg2+. Each data point is the average of three independent measurements.
Error bars as in Figure . See Tables S15–S17 in Supporting Information for raw data.Competition constants
were also predicted by York and colleagues
for monovalent cations around an RNA duplex.[41] We therefore carried out ion counting experiments with the RNA duplex
for which those predictions were made, and we used Cs+,
as the largest difference was predicted for this cation. We added
varying amounts of Cs+ in a background of 50 mM Na+ and observed, as we did for DNA (Figures D and 2G), no significant
differential association of Na+ versus Cs+ (α
= 0.99 ± 0.08; Figure and Table S18 in SI).Competitive association of monovalent cations with a 24-bp RNA
duplex. The number of ions in the ion atmosphere for Cs+ (red circles) versus Na+ (gray circles; [Na+] = 50 mM); excluded Br– anion is represented by
the black triangles, and the total charge of the ion atmosphere summed
from the individual ion measurements is shown as the black squares.
The line at Γ = +46 represents the charge needed to neutralize
the total RNA charge of −46. The solid line (red and gray)
are fits to the Hill equation to provide an empirical guide. Each
data point is the average of 3–5 independent measurements.
Error bars as in Figure . See Table S18 in Supporting Information for raw data.We compare the theoretical
predictions and experimental data for
both DNA and RNA in the next section and in the Discussion.
Comparison of Experimental Results to Theoretical Results and
Bona Fide Blind Predictions
As emphasized in the Introduction, the computation results from York
and colleagues[41] provide a rare blind prediction
of an ion atmosphere property that can be experimentally tested. The
authors benchmarked their 3D-RISM computational model against previous
ion counting results with a DNA helix[48] and were able to obtain good agreement (Figure S17). They then used this model, which utilized Joung and Cheatham
ion potentials[46] and the SPC/E solvation
model,[47] to predict the Cs+ occupancy
around DNA and RNA helices in the presence of Na+. Specifically,
the 3D-RISM model predicted that Na+ would outcompete Cs+ by 1.8-fold for the DNA helix investigated and 2.1-fold for
the RNA helix; i.e., with Cs+ in ∼2-fold excess
of Na+ the ion atmosphere would contain equal number of
each cation.We carried out ion counting experiments with the
DNA and RNA duplex for which those predictions were made. Whereas
the computational results were obtained with Cl– as the counterion, the experiments were carried out with Br– in order to maximize experimental precision (see Experimental Methods). Nevertheless, previous experiments
comparing anion effects[51] and additional
controls indicate that there is no difference in cation behavior with
Cl– or Br– under the conditions
of these experiments (Figure S18). We observed
no significant differential association of Na+ versus Cs+ for either DNA or RNA helices (Figures D and 5). Figure , comparing the predicted
and observed preferential ion atmosphere occupancies (i.e., the α
values, eq ) for all
of the cations tested, illustrates the clear difference between the
computed correlation with cation size and the observed absence of
a difference for all ions other than Li+.
Figure 6
Comparison of experimentally
determined versus 3D-RISM computationally
determined ion atmosphere cation competition (α values; eq ). Cations that were computationally
estimated, subsequent to prior experimental measurements,[48,51] are shown with open symbols, and those with blind computational
predictions[41] by closed symbols. The open
and gray symbols are for a 24-bp DNA, and the orange symbol for a
24-bp RNA. Each cation (identified in figure) was competed versus
Na+, so that α is 1 for Na+ and there
is no error. Experimental values shown are for the data obtained herein
(Figures , 5 and Table S1–S4 and S18), and the prior experimental data are compared to the computational
results in Figure S17.
Comparison of experimentally
determined versus 3D-RISM computationally
determined ion atmosphere cation competition (α values; eq ). Cations that were computationally
estimated, subsequent to prior experimental measurements,[48,51] are shown with open symbols, and those with blind computational
predictions[41] by closed symbols. The open
and gray symbols are for a 24-bp DNA, and the orange symbol for a
24-bp RNA. Each cation (identified in figure) was competed versus
Na+, so that α is 1 for Na+ and there
is no error. Experimental values shown are for the data obtained herein
(Figures , 5 and Table S1–S4 and S18), and the prior experimental data are compared to the computational
results in Figure S17.In the 3D-RISM model, smaller cations, with higher charge
density
(e.g., Li+ and Na+) have higher occupancy near
the phosphoryl groups and are able to penetrate deeper into the minor
and major grooves. While this may be the case for Li+,
based on its preferential ion atmosphere occupancy, the predicted lower occupancy of Cs+ is not observed (Figure ), indicating that there is
no experimental support for the physical properties that underlie
the 3D-RISM model, specifically the phosphoryl group–cation
interactions.[32] These properties appear
to be common to other theoretical models,[37−39] although we
are not aware of blind predictions that have been made from the other
models that would allow their quantitative experimental assessment.
As highlighted in the Discussion, new models
and new types of experimental tests will be needed to develop and
test accurate and predictive models of the ion atmosphere and nucleic
acid electrostatics.
Experimental Considerations: Comparison with
Prior Ion Atmosphere
Occupancy Results
The preferential Li+ occupancy
of the ion atmosphere compared to Na+ and the absence of
a significant preference for Na+ versus K+ are
consistent with prior ion counting results.[48] However, our results did not match small preferences for Na+ over Rb+ and TMA+ (Figure ). The prior studies suggested
that Rb+ is disfavored with respect to Na+ by
∼10%, corresponding to α value of 1.10 ± 0.05 and
not clearly distinguishable from a value of one given the experimental
error of that study. In contrast, the TMA+ value was α
= 1.55 ± 0.04, beyond the error expected for ion counting.[48,51]
Figure 7
Preferential
competition of alkali metal ions as a function of
hydrated ion size. Competition constants, α, from data in Figure (closed symbols)
and from ref (48) (open
symbols) obtained from eq . Monovalent cations: Li+ (circles), Na+ (squares),
K+ (triangles), Rb+ (inverted triangles), and
Cs+ (diamond). The radii of the hydrated ions (metal–oxygen
bond distances) are from ref (66). The solid line at α = 1 is shown as an empirical
guide.
Preferential
competition of alkali metal ions as a function of
hydrated ion size. Competition constants, α, from data in Figure (closed symbols)
and from ref (48) (open
symbols) obtained from eq . Monovalent cations: Li+ (circles), Na+ (squares),
K+ (triangles), Rb+ (inverted triangles), and
Cs+ (diamond). The radii of the hydrated ions (metal–oxygen
bond distances) are from ref (66). The solid line at α = 1 is shown as an empirical
guide.The very small discrepancy in
the Rb+ results is likely
experimental error from the prior measurement, given that we see consistent
values of α = 1.04, 0.94, and 0.98 in three independent experiments.
In addition, the current methodology has higher precision and reproducibility
(see Experimental Methods and ref (51)). These factors, however,
cannot account for the larger prior apparent preference for Na+ over TMA+. We suspected that this might have arisen
from incorrect estimates of the stock solution concentration, as TMA+ salts are hygroscopic. The following observations support
this model. The TMACl used previously was purchased as anhydrous material
and the anhydrous molecular weight was presumably used. Correction
of the prior ion counting results for hydration of the salt (i.e.,
correcting to a molecular weight of 181.6 g/mol instead of 109.6 g/mol)
results in good agreement with the new data for TMABr, for which the
TMA+ concentration was directly confirmed by ion counting
of the stock solution[70] (Figure S19).
Evidence for an Alternative Model for Cation-Size
Effects at
High Salt Concentrations
Studies of the relaxation of short
DNA helices attached by a short, flexible linker[53] and related studies of nucleic acid association and condensation
showed stronger effects for smaller cations.[54,56,57,63,71] These studies have been interpreted to support a
preferential occupancy of smaller cations in the ion atmosphere and
preferential electrostatic screening by those smaller cations. However,
a recent experimental study demonstrated additional cation and anion accumulation in the ion atmosphere at high salt
concentrations for salts with cation–anion pairs that are similar
in size.[51] These results together with
computational studies[30,72] suggest that ion pairs or clusters
within the ion atmosphere and in the bulk of electrolyte solution
may alter electrostatic screening of nucleic acids potential. Thus,
the model in which the observed cation size dependences at high salt
are indirect activity effects, rather than direct effects, arising
from preferential anion interactions with cations of different size
that then diminish the cation screening ability needed to be tested.To test whether this activity model could account for the prior
cation-size effects observed at high salt concentrations we used series
of monovalent salts of varying cation size, Na+, K+, Rb+ and Cs+, and we varied the anion
identity to modulate the salt activity. We first demonstrate that
these nonideal effects can alter cation competition for ion atmosphere
occupancy at high salt. Subsequently, we show analogous anion-dependent
effects on the thermodynamics and kinetics of RNA folding. These findings
indicate that the prior cation-size effects cannot be considered as
evidence for size-dependent cation occupancy and screening within
the nucleic acid ion atmosphere.In an ion competition experiment
with equal bulk concentration
of 300 mM CsBr and 300 mM NaBr (Figure ), there was 2-fold
more Na+ ions accumulated around the 24-bp DNA than Cs+ ions (22.5 ± 1.4 Na+ vs 11 ± 1.2 Cs+, with ∼14 ± 1.4 Br– anions
excluded). The opposite effect was observed for 300 mM CsF and NaFsalts; these gave an excess of 14 ± 1.6 Na+ and 20
± 1.3 Cs+ ions (and 12 ± 1.8 F¯ anions excluded,
estimated based on eq ). This result indicates that the anion identity can affect the cation
occupancy of the ion atmosphere. As observed previously,[51] the anion effects mirror activity effects: CsBr
has lower activity than NaBr and Cs+ is less present in
the ion atmosphere with Br– as the anion, whereas
the opposite holds for CsF and NaF (Figures S20 and S21; Table S25). In summary, the cations present in the
ion atmosphere are strongly dependent on the anion identity, but only
at high salt concentrations, as expected for an activity and ion association-based
phenomenon.[73] At low and moderate concentrations
(below 100 mM), monovalent cations occupy the ion atmosphere independent
of size and anion identity (Figure S18 and Figure S22), as the nonideal effects become substantial only at higher
concentrations.[51]Competitive association
of Cs+ versus Na+ (300 mM) for a 24-bp DNA duplex.
(A) Competitive association of
CsBr against NaBr. The number of ions in the ion atmosphere Cs+ (red circles) versus Na+ (gray circles); excluded
Br– anions are represented by the black triangles,
and the total charge of the ion atmosphere summed from the individual
ion measurements is shown as the black squares. (B) Competitive association
of CsF against NaF. The number of ions in the ion atmosphere Cs+ (red circles) versus Na+ (gray circles); excluded
F– anions are represented by the open triangles
and were estimated based on eq . Each data point is the average of 3–5 independent
measurements. The lines at Γ = +46 represent the charge needed
to neutralize the total DNA charge of −46. The solid line (red
and gray) are fits to the Hill equation to provide an empirical guide.
Error bars as in Figure . See Tables S13–S14 in Supporting Information for raw data.The prior studies that
showed a preference for smaller cations
were carried out at even higher salt concentrations,[53,54,56,57,63,71] concentrations
too high to obtain accurate ion counting results. We therefore looked
for a system to probe cation size and activity effects under the conditions
of these experiments. For example, the tethered DNA relaxation study[53] was carried out with Cl¯, which could have
preferentially associates with the larger cations[85] to give activity and ion pairing effects analogous to those
described above and in ref (51) to account for the observed cation size preferences. However,
these effects were small, the small-angle X-ray scattering readout
for relaxation is complex and tethered DNA relaxation is not two-state,
so we decided to look for a different experimental system to probe
these effects.The P4–P6 domain, derived from the Tetrahymena group I intron,[9,10,63,74,75] is 160 nucleotides
long and forms a stable, closely packed structure stabilized by two
tertiary contacts: the metal core-metal core receptor (MC-MCR) and
the tetraloop-tertaloop receptor (TL-TLR) (Figure A). We used this system because its folding
is two-state and because there is a well-established single molecule
FRET (smFRET) assay[64,65,76] that gives high accuracy and precision.
Figure 9
Folding kinetics and
thermodynamics of the A225U mutant of P4–P6
RNA as a function of monovalent salt identity. (A) Structure of the
P4–P6 domain of the Tetrahymena group I intron. Tertiary contacts
are colored as follows: the tetraloop/tetraloop receptor (blue), and
the metal core/metal core receptor (green); rendering based on the
PDB: 1GID.[77] (B) Tetraloop/tetraloop receptor with a mutation
site A225 indicated in red; rendering based on the PDB 1GID. (C) Equilibrium
constant, folding and unfolding rate constants for folding of A225U
P4–P6 RNA folding as a function of monovalent salt concentration.
Salts containing Cl– anion are presented in gray
with different symbols correspond to a different cation: Na+ (gray circles), K+ (gray triangles), Rb+ (gray
diamonds). RbF is indicated by orange diamonds. (D) Plots and symbols
as in (C) except plotted as a function of salt activity instead of
concentration. The folding equilibrium is defined as the ratio of
the folding rate constant to unfolding rate constant: . The
folding equilibrium constants were
fitted to a straight line as an empirical guide. Error bars correspond
to the bootstrap-estimated 95% confidence intervals (SD = 2σ).
See Tables S21–S24 in Supporting Information for raw data and data summaries.
Folding kinetics and
thermodynamics of the A225U mutant of P4–P6
RNA as a function of monovalent salt identity. (A) Structure of the
P4–P6 domain of the Tetrahymena group I intron. Tertiary contacts
are colored as follows: the tetraloop/tetraloop receptor (blue), and
the metal core/metal core receptor (green); rendering based on the
PDB: 1GID.[77] (B) Tetraloop/tetraloop receptor with a mutation
site A225 indicated in red; rendering based on the PDB 1GID. (C) Equilibrium
constant, folding and unfolding rate constants for folding of A225U
P4–P6 RNA folding as a function of monovalent salt concentration.
Salts containing Cl– anion are presented in gray
with different symbols correspond to a different cation: Na+ (gray circles), K+ (gray triangles), Rb+ (gray
diamonds). RbF is indicated by orange diamonds. (D) Plots and symbols
as in (C) except plotted as a function of salt activity instead of
concentration. The folding equilibrium is defined as the ratio of
the folding rate constant to unfolding rate constant: . The
folding equilibrium constants were
fitted to a straight line as an empirical guide. Error bars correspond
to the bootstrap-estimated 95% confidence intervals (SD = 2σ).
See Tables S21–S24 in Supporting Information for raw data and data summaries.In P4–P6, the MC-MCR preferentially binds divalent
cations,
and the TL-TLR is more stable in the presence of Na+ or
K+ as the solution monovalent cation.[9,62,77−80] In the present study, we were
primarily interested in understanding how monovalent ions within the
RNA ion atmosphere alleviate unfavorable electrostatic repulsions
during RNA folding; hence, we deliberately chose conditions that prevents
the formation of MC/MCR[78] and used a mutant
in the TL/TLR tertiary motif (A225U) that disrupts a monovalent cation-binding
site[63] (see also refs (79, 81)) (Figure B).Figure C shows
folding and unfolding rate constants and the equilibrium folding for
A225U P4–P6 in a series of monovalent salts in the concentration
range 1.8–2.9 M. Overall, the folding of A225U mutant of P4–P6
RNA is less favorable compared to wild-type P4–P6 RNA by nearly
2 orders of magnitude, as observed previously.[63] The A225U P4–P6 folding equilibrium constant was
the same, within experimental error, in the presence of NaCl, KCl,
or RbF (at 2.5 M, Keqobs = 0.45 ± 0.13, 0.38 ± 0.03, and
0.48 ± 0.03 for NaCl, KCl, and RbF, respectively). However, the
folding equilibrium constant was ∼5-fold lower in the presence
of RbCl (Keqobs = 0.09 ± 0.01 at 2.5 M). This differential
effect appears to arise predominantly from a folding rather than unfolding
effect (Figure C),
consistent with less effective screening in RbCl, although there is
more scatter in the individual rate constants than in the equilibrium
measurements.NaCl, KCl, and RbF solutions have similar activities,
but the activity
of RbCl solutions is lower (by 18% at 2.0 M, Table S25), due at least in part to the formation Rb+·Cl– ion pairs.[73,82,83] To take into account the differences in nonideal behavior of cations
and anions, the folding rate and equilibrium constants for A225U P4–P6
were plotted as a function of salt activity, which expresses the effective
concentration of free ions in the bulk solution (Figure D). The dependencies were essentially
the same in all salts, suggesting that monovalent cations are equally
adept at electrostatic screening and that the observed differences
arise from activity and ion pairing effects.[51,73,82,83] The electrostatic
relaxation of the tethered DNA duplexes[53] also correlates with the activity effects of the salts used in that
study (Figure S23), further underscoring
that the prior results do not provide evidence for cation size effects
on electrostatic screening.
Discussion
Models
of the ion atmosphere have highlighted the presence of cations
in the helical grooves of DNA and, in line with the restricted size
of these grooves, differential occupancy of cations of different size.[31,32,36,37,39,41,44,84−90] It has also been suggested that stronger interactions of smaller
cations with phosphoryl oxygen atoms favor smaller cations in the
ion atmosphere.[30,31,37,40,41]Our
experimental results suggest, surprisingly, that ion atmosphere
occupancy by monovalent cations is insensitive to the cation size
across the alkali metal ions Na+, K+, Rb+, and Cs+. The simplest interpretation of our results
is that the occupancy of these cations in the minor and major groove
is low and that direct binding to phosphate backbone is weak, a model
also consistent with the observation from quadrupolar cation NMR that
ions within the ion atmosphere remain well hydrated.[91] Alternatively, solvated cations could have very similar
phosphate interactions, as the stronger solvation of smaller cations
could compensate for the higher charge density of the cation itself,[92] or there might be interactions with partially
dehydrated cations, with the stronger interactions of smaller cations
compensated by more facile dehydration of larger cations. Significantly
different binding of TBA+ (3-fold weaker compared to Na+) might be attributed to its larger size, lower charge density,
and/or the distinct hydration of its hydrophobic “shell”.[93]Draper and co-workers observed differential
effects on RNA tertiary
stability in the presence of different monovalent cations,[81] and monovalent cation interactions might be
expected to be particularly common in the complex “nooks and
crannies” of junctions and tertiary interactions. The absence
of such effects on helix ion atmospheres, as observed herein, may
aid in dissecting and understanding specific and general cation effects
on RNA folding, association, and function.Li+ was
the only alkali metal cation for which a preference
was observed. The preference was ∼25% over the other cations,
highly reproducible, and observed across several different types of
competition experiments (Figures , 4 and S16). Given the high charge density of Li+, its
preference may arise from direct interactions with a small subset
of the anionic phosphoryl oxygen atoms, with such interactions being
considerably weaker and below detection for the larger alkali metal
ions.[83,94−96] The observed preference
of ∼2–4 Li+ ions at equimolar Na+ would, most simply, suggest interactions of Li+ with
∼5–10% of the phosphoryl groups (Figure A). Alternatively, some or all of the preferential
Li+ occupancy could occur in the helical grooves. Additional
experimental approaches that allow direct assessment of such interactions
will be needed to test these models and whether the preferentially
associated Li+ is partially dehydrated.Given the
extraordinary complexity and highly dynamic nature of
the ion atmosphere, it is hard to imagine achieving the needed level
of understanding in the absence of a strong theoretical foundation
and accurate computational models. Traditionally, computational biology
approaches have matched prior experimental observations. While this
is likely a necessary step in model development, the agreement of
a model with the data used to develop the model cannot be taken as
support for the model’s validity as highlighted by observations
in the field of protein folding.[97,98] Early protein
folding algorithms were developed by training on a portion of the
known folded structures and validating against a subset of the data
that were set aside for this purpose. However, such seemingly validated
models, when confronted with the challenge of making blind predictions
through the CASP cooperative, were unable to provide accurate structural
predictions.[99−102]Against this backdrop, the blind predictions for ion competition
for DNA and RNA helixes made by York and colleagues[41] is extraordinarily valuable. These predictions have allowed
us to experimentally evaluate the 3D-RISM ion atmosphere model in
an unbiased manner. Our results indicate that the predicted 2-fold
preferential occupancy of the ion atmosphere by Na+ over
Cs+ around DNA and RNA helices does not hold (Figure ). Thus, at a minimum,
some aspect of the 3D-RISM models requires adjustment. The 3D-RISM
model uses molecular mechanical force fields for solute–solvent
and solvent–solvent interactions, but it has been recognized
that the model predicts slightly stronger binding of cations to phosphoryl
groups on the backbone compared to those from MD simulations.[32] This difference could arise if the SPC/E rigid
water model does not accurately represent the hydration of cations
within the ion atmosphere. Our results will help guide the development
of these next-generation models, and analogous ion counting and additional
experiments will allow evaluation of these models.Other evidence
for cation size effects came from electrostatic
relaxation and similar experiments, but, as we have noted, these experiments
were carried out, by necessity, at salt concentrations in the range
0.1–2.0 M[53−57] and recent experiments indicate that nonideal electrolyte behavior
can alter ion atmosphere occupancy and presumably also affect screening.[51] To test electrostatic screening effects under
these high salt conditions we turned to precise smFRET measurements
of the folding of P4–P6 RNA. Our results demonstrate that the
identity of the anion can affect folding and that salt activity differences
can account for folding differences observed under these conditions
(Figures C, 9D, and S22).The
above analyses and observations underscore the need for cycles
that entail developing models, making testable predictions from those
models, and testing those predictions through experimental observation.
Indeed, these cycles are at the core of the scientific method,[103−106] and will help the field of nucleic acid electrostatics move forward.
Correspondingly, there will be an increased need for experimental
methods that can be unambiguously related to computational results,
like ion counting, but provide more detailed information about the
ion atmosphere shape and dynamics and its energetic consequences.
Authors: Yu Bai; Vincent B Chu; Jan Lipfert; Vijay S Pande; Daniel Herschlag; Sebastian Doniach Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2008-08-23 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Joon Ho Roh; Duncan Kilburn; Reza Behrouzi; Wokyung Sung; R M Briber; Sarah A Woodson Journal: J Phys Chem Lett Date: 2018-09-18 Impact factor: 6.475
Authors: Namita Bisaria; Max Greenfeld; Charles Limouse; Hideo Mabuchi; Daniel Herschlag Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2017-08-24 Impact factor: 11.205