As a model system to study the elasticity of bottle-brush polymers, we here introduce self-assembled DNA bottle brushes, consisting of a DNA main chain that can be very long and still of precisely defined length, and precisely monodisperse polypeptide side chains that are physically bound to the DNA main chains. Polypeptide side chains have a diblock architecture, where one block is a small archaeal nucleoid protein Sso7d that strongly binds to DNA. The other block is a net neutral, hydrophilic random coil polypeptide with a length of exactly 798 amino acids. Light scattering shows that for saturated brushes the grafting density is one side chain per 5.6 nm of DNA main chain. According to small-angle X-ray scattering, the brush diameter is D = 17 nm. By analyzing configurations of adsorbed DNA bottle brushes using AFM, we find that the effective persistence of the saturated DNA bottle brushes is Peff = 95 nm, but from force-extension curves of single DNA bottle brushes measured using optical tweezers we find Peff = 15 nm. The latter is equal to the value expected for DNA coated by the Sso7d binding block alone. The apparent discrepancy between the two measurements is rationalized in terms of the scale dependence of the bottle-brush elasticity using theory previously developed to analyze the scale-dependent electrostatic stiffening of DNA at low ionic strengths.
As a model system to study the elasticity of bottle-brush polymers, we here introduce self-assembled DNA bottle brushes, consisting of a DNA main chain that can be very long and still of precisely defined length, and precisely monodisperse polypeptide side chains that are physically bound to the DNA main chains. Polypeptide side chains have a diblock architecture, where one block is a small archaeal nucleoid protein Sso7d that strongly binds to DNA. The other block is a net neutral, hydrophilic random coil polypeptide with a length of exactly 798 amino acids. Light scattering shows that for saturated brushes the grafting density is one side chain per 5.6 nm of DNA main chain. According to small-angle X-ray scattering, the brush diameter is D = 17 nm. By analyzing configurations of adsorbed DNA bottle brushes using AFM, we find that the effective persistence of the saturated DNA bottle brushes is Peff = 95 nm, but from force-extension curves of single DNA bottle brushes measured using optical tweezers we find Peff = 15 nm. The latter is equal to the value expected for DNA coated by the Sso7d binding block alone. The apparent discrepancy between the two measurements is rationalized in terms of the scale dependence of the bottle-brush elasticity using theory previously developed to analyze the scale-dependent electrostatic stiffening of DNA at low ionic strengths.
A type of nonlinear polymer architectures
that occurs regularly
in biology is the bottle-brush polymer architecture, in which a main
chain is grafted with side chains. Natural examples of bottle-brush
polymers are aggrecan,[1,2] lubricin,[3] and neurofilaments.[4,5] Bottle-brush polymers with side-chain
spacings down to less than 1 nm have been prepared synthetically,
and their physical properties have been studied using various methods.[6,7] Some specific applications that seem to benefit from the bottle-brush
polymer architecture are surface modification and lubrication. Synthetic
bottle brushes with hydrophilic side chains and adsorbing main chains
self-assemble into nonfouling polymer brushes.[8,9] Surface
layers of bottle-brush polymers with hydrophilic side chains have
very good lubrication properties,[10] especially
if the side chains are highly charged.[11] Fredrickson predicted that grafting side chains to a flexible main
chain should dramatically increase the effective stiffness of the
main chain and lead to the possibility of nematic ordering of bottle-brush
polymers.[12] Induced stiffening in bottle-brush
polymers is indeed qualitatively obvious from the amply available
experimental data on both natural and synthetic bottle brushes.[1−7] However, quantitative understanding of the configurational statistics
of bottle-brush polymers is still lacking.Various scaling approaches
for the induced main chain stiffening
have been proposed, but they have significant limitations that restrict
them from being applicable to most experimental systems. A first limitation
is that the scaling theories are only valid in the limit of extremely
long side chains (at least hundreds, but preferably thousands of monomers[13−15]), grafted on main chains that should be even (much) longer than
the side chains. This scaling limit is unaccessible for both experimental
bottle-brush systems and computer simulations, although it can be
shown to exist in numerical self-consistent field calculations.[13]A second limitation relates to the fact
that stiffening is usually
expressed in terms of an effective persistence length for the whole
bottle brush. Such a description applies only for main-chain deformations
with length scales or wavelengths that are much longer than the thickness
of the bottle brush. This implies, for example, that for bottle brushes
with flexible main chains (Figure a) and which are not extremely long the whole concept
of an effective persistence length is not very useful, as has been
clearly shown in recent computer simulations.[14,15]
Figure 1
Different
types of bottle brushes. (a) Flexible main chain, side
chains consist of N monomers of diameter a, side-chain spacing is h, brush diameter
is D. (b) Semiflexible main chain, main-chain persistence
length Lp,0. (c) Self-assembled bottle
brush with semiflexible main chain. Side chains attach via equilibrium
binding of binding block to the main chain.
Different
types of bottle brushes. (a) Flexible main chain, side
chains consist of N monomers of diameter a, side-chain spacing is h, brush diameter
is D. (b) Semiflexible main chain, main-chain persistence
length Lp,0. (c) Self-assembled bottle
brush with semiflexible main chain. Side chains attach via equilibrium
binding of binding block to the main chain.In order to gain insight, we have recently introduced a versatile
experimental model system for self-assembled bottle brushes with semiflexible
main chains (Figure c). As the semiflexible main chain we employ double-stranded DNA,
which can be obtained in monodisperse form from very small up to extremely
long contour lengths. Rather than chemically attaching the side chains,
we have developed diblock polypeptides, produced via recombinant DNA
technology, consisting of long hydrophilic block and a small DNA binding
block. Hydrophilic blocks are based on a previously developed, de
novo designed 98 amino acid long polypeptide with a high proportion
of glycines, prolines, and other hydrophilic residues. These polypeptides
adopt a random coil configuration for a wide range of (aqueous) solvent
conditions.[16] Initially, we have used a
tetramer of the hydrophilic block (C4) and, for physical
attachment to DNA, a simple cationic binding block B consisting of
12 lysine residues (BK12). The C4–BK12diblock polypeptides very precisely coat double-stranded
DNA molecules, leading to the formation of well-defined supramolecular
DNA–protein bottle brushes.[17] The
reason that well-defined supramolecular DNA–protein bottle
brushes are formed rather than larger aggregates is the extreme assymmetry
in the lengths of the two blocks of the diblock polypeptide and the
fact that the template is semiflexible.[17,18] Note that
a similar supramolecular approach to bottle-brush formation was recently
developed by Mezzenga and co-workers,[19] who used rigid β-lactoglobilin amyloid fibrils as a main chain.The bottle-brush coating leads to significant induced stiffening,
increasing the persistence length by an amount ΔP ≈ 200 nm for DNA fully saturated with C4-BK12 at low ionic strength.[20] The
C4–BK12 DNA bottle brushes form nematic
phases at low weight concentrations,[21] but
at high concentrations, excess C4-BK12 acts
to screen excluded volume interactions,[22] such that the bottle brushes become more flexible and the nematic
ordering decreases.[23]The nonspecific
DNA binding by the oligolysineBK12 binding
block may be disadvantageous in applications in which components other
than DNA are also present. With this in mind, a new diblock was developed
in which the oligolysine binding block was replaced by the small (7
kDa) basic DNA binding protein B = Sso7d, a highly stable and well-characterized
nucleoid protein[24−26] from the thermophile Sulfolobus solfataricus. Additionally, the length of the side chain was doubled to C8, resulting in the new diblock polypeptide C8-BSso7d. This new diblock has proven to be very useful for modifying
and stabilizing DNA nanostructures.[27,28]Rather
than focusing on the technological implications of the new
the new diblock polypeptide C8-BSso7d, we here
focus on the physics of the induced stiffening effect, which we quantify
using both atomic force microscopy (AFM) imaging and single molecule
force extension measurements using optical tweezers (OT). While AFM
shows there is significant induced stiffening due to the bottle brush
in the absence of external forces, the OT experiments show that the
induced stiffening disappears under applied force (with deformations
occurring at short length scales), signaling the breakdown of the
concept of an effective persistence length for deformations at short
length scales, as expected on theoretical grounds.
Experimental Section
Chemicals
NoLimits DNA fragments
of 300 bp, 2 kbp,
and 3 kbp were obtained Thermo Scientific. λ-DNA was obtained
from New England Biolabs. Nucleotides dATP, dTTP, dGTP, and biotin
14-dCTP were obtained from Invitrogen. Streptavidin-coated beads were
obtained from Bang Laboratories. Klenow fragment was obtained from
Promega Corp., and streptavidin-coated coverslips were obtained from
Xenopore Corp.
Protein Polymer Production and Purification
The production
and purification of the recombinant C8-BSso7d diblock protein polymer were done essentially as described before.[26] In short, we used a Pichia pastoris strain harboring a gene for the secreted expression of the diblock
protein C8-BSso7d. For the fermentation process,
we used a 2.5 L Bioflo3000 fermentor. Fed-batch fermentation was done
for 2 days, from the moment of induction. During fermentation, the
pH was kept at pH 3 by the controlled addition of ammonium hydroxide.
The methanol content of the broth was maintained at 0.2% (w/v). When
the fermentation was completed, the protein containing supernatant
was separated from the yeast cells by centrifugation at 16000g for 30 min at 20 °C (SLA-rotor) and subsequent filtration
using 0.2 μm AcroPak 200 capsules with a Supor membrane (Pall
Corp.). After acquiring the cell-free protein solution, medium salts
were precipitated by NaOH addition until a pH of 8 was reached. The
protein solution was separated from the precipitated medium salt by
centrifugation (16000g, 30 min, 4 °C, SLA-1500
rotor). The C8-BSso7d protein was selectively
precipitated from secreted Pichia pastoris proteins
by the addition of ammonium sulfate (45% saturation) for 30 min at
4 °C and subsequent centrifugation (16000g,
30 min, 4 °C, SLA-1500 rotor). This precipitation step was repeated,
and the precipitate was resuspended in 10% of the original cell-free
broth volume of 50 mM formic acid and extensively dialyzed against
50 mM formic acid. After refreshing the formic acid for four times,
the protein solution was dialyzed once against 10 mM formic acid and
subsequently frozen and freeze-dried.
Static Light Scattering
(SLS)
SLS experiments were
performed at a scattering angle of 173° on a Malvern Instrument
zetasizer nanoseries, using a small volume quartz cell. A light scattering
titration was performed by adding successive small aliquots of concentrated
protein solution to a solution of dsDNA and measuring the light scattering
intensity. From the light scattering intensities, we calculated the
ratio of the scattering intensities of the samples with complexed
protein and the free DNA sample, Icomplex/IDNA, correcting for the sample dilution
caused by the additions of the titrant. Previously[18] we showed that in the limit of small scattering angles
and low concentrations it is reasonable to neglect the scattering
of excess free diblock protein polymers, such that the scattering
ratio is directly proportional to the mass ratio of the complexes
and the free DNA. The length of the DNA template for this experiment
is deliberately chosen to be small (300 bp) such that qR < 1, where q is the magnitude of the wave vector
and R is the solution size of the complexes. For
this case we have to a good approximation[18]where
the mass ratio Γbound iswith c and M being the molar concentrations and molar mass, and the indices refer
to (bound) protein and DNA, respectively. ζ is the ratio of
the respective refractive index increments of protein and DNA:where we use the same values we have previously
used to analyze similar experiments:[22] (dn/dC)prot = 0.18 and (dn/dC)DNA = 0.165, giving ζ
= 1.091. We obtain the number of proteins cprot,b/cDNA bound per DNA molecule versus the
total number of proteins per DNA molecule, cprot,t/cDNA, from the experimentally
determined mass ratio Γbound, by using the molar
masses of the protein and the DNA, Mprot = 80.37 kDa and MDNA = 182.38 kDa.
Small-Angle X-ray Scattering (SAXS)
SAXS experiments
were performed at MAXlab II, Lund, Sweden, on the I911-4 beamline.
The detector distance was chosen such that the range of the wavevector q covered was 0.008 < q < 0.550 Å–1, for a wavelength of the incident radiation of 1.2
Å. For detection, a PILATUS 1M detector (Dectris) was used. The
sample environment was a high throughput solution scattering setup,
for which the acquisition time was typically 20 min per sample. Scattering
data were analyzed using SASview 3.0.0 software.
Atomic Force
Microscopy (AFM)
For AFM of DNA–protein
complexes on mica, 20 μL of DNA–protein complex was deposited
on freshly cleaved mica. After 1 min, the substrate was carefully
dipped deionized water filtered with into a 0.22 μm cutoff syringe
filter and gently dried using N2(g). AFM imaging was performed
on the mica substrates in air, at ambient temperatures, and controlled
humidity (RH 30–35%), using a model NTEGRA AFM (NT-MDT-Russia)
in tapping mode, using NanoWorld Supersharp Silicon tips with a reported
force constant of 100 N/m and tip radius of 2 nm. Images were analyzed
manually to extract end-to-end distances for the estimation of persistence
lengths. For AFM on silica wafers, 5 μL of the DNA–protein
complexes was deposited on pieces of plasma-cleaned silicon wafer.
After 10 min, samples were washed by the careful application of 0.3
mL of Milli-Q water, followed by gentle drying of the sample with
N2(g). Samples on pieces of silica wafer were analyzed
using a Digital Instrument Nanoscope V, with a silicon tip on a nitride
lever (Bruker) with a reported spring constant of 0.4 N/m. For the
imaging process the ScanAsyst mode in air was used with a scanning
speed of 0.977 Hz and a resolution of 512 samples/line (each scan
line has 512 pixels). AFM images were produced using Nanoscope Analysis
1.4 software. These images were analyzed using “Easyworm”
software[29] to extract persistence-length
estimates from end-to-end distances. At least 50 complexes were analyzed
for each persistence length estimate.
Optical Tweezer Experiments
For the optical tweezer
experiment, λ-DNA molecules (New England Biolabs) are end-labeled
with biotin attached by one end to a streptavidin-coated bead of 3
μm diameter (Bangs Laboratories) and by the other end to a streptavidin-coated
coverslip (Xenopore Corp.). An O-ring is glued onto the coverslip
to form a sample chamber. The optical tweezers consist of a 1064 nm
ytterbium-doped fiber laser (IPG Photonics) mounted on a Nikon Ti–S
inverted microscope with a 100× N.A. 1.4 objective. DNA molecules
are stretched by moving the microscope stage and consequently the
coverslip with controlled velocity (100 nm/s) using a piezoelectric
device (PINano P-545, Physik Instrumente). Each optical tweezer experiment
with added protein is preceded by the recording of 5–7 stretching
curves on the same DNA molecule without added protein. By analyzing
these experiments, we obtain mean values of the persistence and contour
lengths for the bare DNA, by fitting the experimental force–extension
curves measured in the low-force entropic regime (f < 2.5 pN) to the Marko–Siggia wormlike chain (WLC) expression.[30] Average results obtained for various λ-DNA
molecules are 45 ± 3 nm for the persistence length and 16.5 ±
1 μm for the contour length, which are within the expected values
for λ-DNA. Next we change the surrounding buffer solution, introducing
the protein at a certain chosen concentration. We wait about 30 min
for protein–DNA equilibration and then repeat the stretching
experiments, performing 5–7 measurements and thus obtaining
the average values and the error bars of the mechanical parameters
for each protein concentration. Note that we do not remove unbound
DNA from the sample chamber. Using UV spectrophotometry, the bulk
DNA concentration in the OT sample chamber (which was constant for
all OT experiments) was determined to be CDNA = 1.58 μg/mL.
Results
Grafting Density from Light
Scattering
Previously[26] we have
qualitatively characterized the amount
of bound C8-BSso7d diblock using an agarose
electrophoresis mobility assay, which indicated that dsDNA templates
become saturated with C8-BSso7d diblock at a
protein-to-DNA ratio of about 0.3 pt/bp (protein per basepair). This
is consistent with the reported size of the binding site of Sso7d
at saturation of about 4 bp.[25] Here we
use light scattering to also estimate the grafting density of C8-BSso7d diblocks along the DNA main chain. As explained
previously,[21,18] we obtain the binding isotherms
from the ratio of the scattering intensities of the bare and coated
DNA templates. Results for the mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]bound/[DNA(bp)] of bound proteins bound per basepair
as a function of the mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)]
of total proteins per basepair are shown in Figure .
Figure 2
Grafting density as deduced from light scattering.
Mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]bound/[DNA(bp)]
of bound proteins
per DNA basepair as a function of the mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] of total proteins per DNA basepair. Scattering
experiments were performed in 10 mM Tris-HCl buffer at pH 7.6, using
300 bp DNA at an initial concentration of 100 μg/mL, by titration
with a 4 mg/mL solution of C8-BSso7d.
Grafting density as deduced from light scattering.
Mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]bound/[DNA(bp)]
of bound proteins
per DNA basepair as a function of the mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] of total proteins per DNA basepair. Scattering
experiments were performed in 10 mM Tris-HCl buffer at pH 7.6, using
300 bp DNA at an initial concentration of 100 μg/mL, by titration
with a 4 mg/mL solution of C8-BSso7d.As in a previously published electrophoretic
mobility shift assay,[26] we observe saturation
of binding for protein
to DNA mole ratio’s larger than about 0.3 ptn/bp. Full saturation
of the DNA template with C8-BSso7d protein polymers
would imply a grafting density of about 0.25 ptn/bp, in view of the
reported binding site of Sso7d. We observe a substantially (4-fold)
lower saturation binding, of around 0.06 ptn/bp, corresponding to
a grafting density of one side chain for every 5.6 nm of DNA main
chain. Possibly, the binding strength of the Sso7d domain is not sufficient
to overcome the strong steric repulsion that is associated with adding
additional side chains to a high-density bottle brush.
Brush Thickness
from Small-Angle X-ray Scattering
In
order to determine the solution diameter D of C8-BSso7d-coated DNA, we have performed small-angle
X-ray scattering (SAXS) for values of the magnitude q of the wavevector in the range of 0.1 < q <
2 nm–1. Scattering curves I(q) are shown in Figure for both the free C8-BSso7d protein
polymer (30 mg/mL in 10 mM Tris-HCl buffer, pH 7.6) and for its complexes
with DNA (100 μg/mL ds λ-DNA and 0.5 ptn/bp of C8-BSso7d protein polymer in a 10 mM Tris-HCl buffer, pH
7.6). Data for the free protein polymers can be fitted with a polymer
coil with excluded volume model,[31] resulting
in an estimated radius of gyration of 6.9 nm.
Figure 3
Bottle-brush thickness
from small-angle X-ray scattering. Scattering
intensity (arbitrary units, a.u.) versus magnitude q of the wavevector in nm–1. Solution conditions
are 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.6. Blue squares are the scattering intensities
for 100 μg/mL λ-DNA coated with the C8-BSso7d diblock protein polymer at a protein to DNA ratio of
[C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] of 0.5 ptn/bp; black circles
are the scattering intensities for 30 mg/mL free C8-BSso7d protein polymer. In the figure, the scattering intensity
for the free C8-BSso7d protein polymer is scaled
to match the high-q scattering of the of C8-BSso7d/DNA bottle-brush complex. The red line is a fit
to a polymer coil model with excluded volume; the orange line is the
sum of a contribution due to excluded volume polymer coils (representing
the excess unbound protein polymers) and a contribution due to randomly
oriented rigid cylinders. Separate contributions of polymer coils
and cylinders are indicated in gray.
Bottle-brush thickness
from small-angle X-ray scattering. Scattering
intensity (arbitrary units, a.u.) versus magnitude q of the wavevector in nm–1. Solution conditions
are 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.6. Blue squares are the scattering intensities
for 100 μg/mL λ-DNA coated with the C8-BSso7d diblock protein polymer at a protein to DNA ratio of
[C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] of 0.5 ptn/bp; black circles
are the scattering intensities for 30 mg/mL free C8-BSso7d protein polymer. In the figure, the scattering intensity
for the free C8-BSso7d protein polymer is scaled
to match the high-q scattering of the of C8-BSso7d/DNA bottle-brush complex. The red line is a fit
to a polymer coil model with excluded volume; the orange line is the
sum of a contribution due to excluded volume polymer coils (representing
the excess unbound protein polymers) and a contribution due to randomly
oriented rigid cylinders. Separate contributions of polymer coils
and cylinders are indicated in gray.In order to make the bottle brushes, protein polymers had
to be
added in excess; consequently, there will also be free protein polymers
in the solution, and I(q) reflects
a mixture of the two objects. In fitting the data for the complexes,
we therefore assume two independent contributions to the scattering:
one due to randomly oriented cylindrical rods,[31] representing the bottle brushes, and one due to excluded
volume polymer chains, representing the free protein in solution.
Parameters for the free proteins were taken from the fit for the pure
C8-BSso7d protein polymers. We find that at
large wavevectors (0.1 < q < 2 nm–1) the scattering due to the cylindrical rods is masked by the scattering
of the free proteins. Only at low wavevectors (0.1 < q < 0.3 nm–1) the scattering of the mixture has
a major contribution from the rods. By fitting the low wave vector
data, we can extract an estimated value for the diameter of the cylindrical
rods, for which we find D = 16.8 nm. This is more
than twice the gyration radius for the free protein. Hence, the C8 chains decorating the DNA are moderately stretched and form
a true “bottle brush” around the central DNA chain.
The moderate stretching that we find from SAXS is also consistent
with our conclusion from light scattering that side chain binding
by Sso7d is not so strong that it can lead to full coverage and to
the concomitant strong side-chain stretching.
Atomic Force Imaging of
Dried Complexes
For unperturbed
DNA bottle brushes with a main chain contour length L ≫ D, we expect that the end-to-end distance
is mainly governed by the effective bottle-brush persistence length Peff. In order to estimate this effective persistence
length, we have measured contour lengths L and end-to-end
distances R for DNA bottle brushes adsorbed on mica
and silica wafers using atomic force microscopy. Typical images of
the coated DNA deposited on mica as a function of the protein concentration
are shown in Figure .
Figure 4
Representative AFM images (in air) of 3 kb linear dsDNA complexed
with C8-BSso7d diblock protein polymer, adsorbed
on mica. DNA concentration CDNA = 1 μg/mL.
Buffer conditions: 10 mM Tris HCl pH = 7.4. Mole ratios [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] are (a) 0, (b) 1/32 ptn/bp, (c) 1/16
pt/bp, (d) 1/8 ptn/bp, (e)1/4 ptn/bp, and (f) 1/2 ptn/bp.
Representative AFM images (in air) of 3 kb linear dsDNA complexed
with C8-BSso7d diblock protein polymer, adsorbed
on mica. DNA concentration CDNA = 1 μg/mL.
Buffer conditions: 10 mM TrisHCl pH = 7.4. Mole ratios [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] are (a) 0, (b) 1/32 ptn/bp, (c) 1/16
pt/bp, (d) 1/8 ptn/bp, (e)1/4 ptn/bp, and (f) 1/2 ptn/bp.At higher and higher protein concentrations it
is clear that the
background is showing more and more roughness that we believe is caused
by the excess protein sticking to the mica. As a consequence, with
mica as a substrate, we have not been able to extend the measurements
to protein to DNA mole ratio’s higher than 1 protein per 2
basepairs. In further experiments we found that for silicon wafers
as a substrate the problem of protein polymer background adsorption
is much less severe, which allowed us to also explore higher protein
to DNA ratios. Typical images are shown in Figure . In all cases complexes have a contour length
roughly equal to that expected for the bare DNA, indicating that the
C8-Sso7d proteins are indeed coating individual DNA molecules.
Figure 5
Representative
AFM images (in air) of complexes of C8-BSso7d with 2 kbp linear dsDNA, adsorbed on silicon wafers.
Complexes were prepared at a DNA concentration CDNA = 25 μg/mL in 10 mM Tris-HCl solution, pH 7.6, and
incubated 24 prior to deposition onto the silicon wafer and imaging.
Protein to DNA mole ratios [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)]
are (a) 1 ptn/bp and (b) 2 ptn/bp.
Representative
AFM images (in air) of complexes of C8-BSso7d with 2 kbp linear dsDNA, adsorbed on silicon wafers.
Complexes were prepared at a DNA concentration CDNA = 25 μg/mL in 10 mM Tris-HCl solution, pH 7.6, and
incubated 24 prior to deposition onto the silicon wafer and imaging.
Protein to DNA mole ratios [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)]
are (a) 1 ptn/bp and (b) 2 ptn/bp.As has been shown in great detail by Rivetti et al.,[32] obtaining accurate DNA persistence lengths by
analyzing end-to-end distances from AFM images of adsorbed and dried
DNA is possible but requires great care. Specifically, it requires
an explicit demonstration that, under the given experimental conditions,
the adsorption process leads to either 2D equilibrated states or to
a 2D projection of 3D configurations (if adsorption is very rapid
and essentially irreversible). In addition, the magnitude of excluded
volume effects needs to be quantified or shown to be negligible.[32] Instead of repeating the elaborate tests performed
by Rivetti for the case of DNA bottle brushes adsorbing on mica and
silicon wafers, we take a more pragmatic approach and simply assume
that the adsorbed DNA bottle brushes are in a 2D equilibrated state
and that (given the fact that rather short DNA is used) excluded volume
interactions can indeed be neglected. Then, the expected mean-square
end-to-end distances ⟨Re2⟩ according to the wormlike chain model are given byExperimental results for the effective persistence
lengths (estimated using eq ) as a function of the protein to DNA ratio are shown in Figure .
Figure 6
Effective persistence
lengths of C8-BSso7d-coated DNA as a function
of the C8-BSso7d protein
to DNA ratio, as deduced from analysis of end-to-end distances of
complexes imaged using AFM assuming 2D equilibrated configurations
(eq ), versus protein
to DNA mole ratio (ptn/bp). Dashed line is a guide to the eye.
Effective persistence
lengths of C8-BSso7d-coated DNA as a function
of the C8-BSso7d protein
to DNA ratio, as deduced from analysis of end-to-end distances of
complexes imaged using AFM assuming 2D equilibrated configurations
(eq ), versus protein
to DNA mole ratio (ptn/bp). Dashed line is a guide to the eye.In the limit of low protein concentration,
we find values for Peff that are close
to the expected value, P0 = 50 nm, which
lends some support to the assumptions
of 2D equilibrated configurations and negligble excluded volume interactions.
It appears that upon progressively coating the DNA with more diblock
copolymers there is initially a small decrease in the persistence
length, possibly as a consequence of static bends, which the Sso7d
and homologous binding blocks are known to induce.[24−26] At higher densities,
as the polymer brush starts to build up around the DNA, the persistence
length increases and saturates at values of Peff ≈ 95 nm at high protein to DNA mole ratios.
Single-Molecule
Force–Extension Curves
We measured
force–extension curves f(z) for bottle-brush DNA using an optical tweezer (OT) setup, as described
previously.[33,34] The force range for which accurate
force–extension data can be obtained with the setup is approximately
0.2–2.5 pN. This is not particularly broad, but as has been
shown by other authors, it is enough to obtain reliable values of
persistence lengths by fitting to models such as the worrmlike chain
model.[35,36] For ligand-induced changes of the nanomechanical
properties of DNA it is well-known that the effective persistence
length Peff may become force dependent.[37] To check for possible force dependence of Peff over the range of forces probed in our OT
experiments, we follow the analysis of Marko and Siggia in their treatment
of the force-dependent electrostatic stiffening of DNA that occurs
at low ionic strengths.[30] Their analysis
starts from the analytical approximation for the force–extension
curve for the full wormlike chain (WLC) model:where kBT is the thermal energy. By inverting the high-force limit
of eq (for z/L > 0.5), the effective persistence
length Peff(f) is expressed
as a function
of the force f:By computing Peff versus f from this equation using experimental
force–extension data, one can test to which degree the assumption
of a constant Peff is justified for a
certain force range. Experimental values for Peff as a function for f (for z/L > 0.5) for the force curves of Figure a are shown in Figure b. We find very little force
dependence of Peff, both for bare DNA
(as expected) and for the same DNA molecule incubated with 7000 nM
of the C8-BSso7d protein. This means that within
the range of forces probed by our OT measurements we can neglect force
dependence of Peff and use the WLC equation, eq , to estimate a single Peff valid at forces on the order of pN. Representative
force–distance curves for DNA with and without the C8-BSso7d protein with associated fits to the WLC model, eq , are given in Figure a. Values of the
effective persistence lengths versus the mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] of protein per basepair derived from
the fits are shown in Figure .
Figure 7
Force–extension curves from optical tweezer experiments.
(a) Representative force–extension curve (averaged over Brownian
motion to remove thermal fluctuations at low forces[33]) for bare DNA (open squares) and the same DNA molecule
incubated with 7000 nM C8-BSso7d (corresponding
to a mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] = 2.88).
Solid lines are fits to the WLC equation, eq , for a contour length L =
16.7 ± 0.03 μm and effective persistence length Peff = 52 ± 1.6 nm (bare DNA, open squares)
and for a contour length L = 16.2 ± 0.05 μm
and persistence length Peff = 19.3 ±
0.5 nm (DNA + 7000 nM C8-BSso7d, open squares).
(b) Force-dependent effective persistence lengths for z/L > 0.5, according to eq .
Figure 8
Effective persistence lengths of C8-BSso7d-coated
λ-DNA versus the mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] of protein to DNA basepairs, as deduced by fitting optical
tweezer force extension curves with the wormlike chain model (eq ). Solution conditions:
10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, DNA concentration CDNA = 1.58 μg/mL. Note that the upper x-axis
shows the protein concentration in nM. Dashed line is a guide to the
eye.
Force–extension curves from optical tweezer experiments.
(a) Representative force–extension curve (averaged over Brownian
motion to remove thermal fluctuations at low forces[33]) for bare DNA (open squares) and the same DNA molecule
incubated with 7000 nM C8-BSso7d (corresponding
to a mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] = 2.88).
Solid lines are fits to the WLC equation, eq , for a contour length L =
16.7 ± 0.03 μm and effective persistence length Peff = 52 ± 1.6 nm (bare DNA, open squares)
and for a contour length L = 16.2 ± 0.05 μm
and persistence length Peff = 19.3 ±
0.5 nm (DNA + 7000 nM C8-BSso7d, open squares).
(b) Force-dependent effective persistence lengths for z/L > 0.5, according to eq .Effective persistence lengths of C8-BSso7d-coated
λ-DNA versus the mole ratio [C8-BSso7d]/[DNA(bp)] of protein to DNA basepairs, as deduced by fitting optical
tweezer force extension curves with the wormlike chain model (eq ). Solution conditions:
10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, DNA concentration CDNA = 1.58 μg/mL. Note that the upper x-axis
shows the protein concentration in nM. Dashed line is a guide to the
eye.Note that in this experiment there
is a known background DNA concentration CDNA = 1.58 μg/mL of nonimmobilized DNA,
which ensures control over the protein polymer to DNA ratio so that
we can directly compare to the AFM experiments.We find again
that estimated persistence lengths are close to the
expected P0 = 50 nm at low protein concentrations.
A control experiment with no added protein gave P = 48 ± 3 nm. At protein to DNA mole ratios between 0.1 and
0.3 ptn/bp (corresponding to C8-BSso7d protein
concentrations between 300 and 700 nM), there is a sharp drop in the
effective persistence length down to a value Peff ≈ 15 nm. This behavior is very similar to that found
by Driessen et al.[26] for the archaeal DNA
binding proteins Sac7d and Sul7d that are heterologous to Sso7d and
which was attributed to the introduction of static bends into the
DNA helix by the binding of the proteins. Hence, it appears that the
C8 tail does not at all contribute to the measured effective
persistence length in the OT experiment, and we only observe the effect
induced by the Sso7d binding domain that reduces the measured apparent
persistence length by the introduction of static bends.
Discussion
The complete disappearance of DNA bottle-brush stiffening at pN
forces should not have been a big surprise: it is well-known that
at high forces f the typical wavelengths λ
of thermal undulations of stretched DNA are very small, as illustrated
in Figure a. Given
a persistence length P, the typical wavelength of
its thermally induced deformations is the Odijk deflection length[38] λ:For example, for P = 50 nm
and f = 1 pN, we find λ ≈ 14 nm, which
is on the order or smaller than the brush thickness D, which from the SAXS experiment we estimated to be D ≈ 17 nm. Earlier theoretical treatments of bottle-brush elasticity[13] have already pointed out that a description
of bottle-brush elasticity in terms of an effective persistence length
only makes sense if the length scale of the deformation is much larger
than the thickness of the brush. For deformations at shorter length
scales, the elasticity is expected to become scale-dependent, where
the relevant length scale ξ should be on the order of the thickness
of the brush. Eventually, for very short wavelength ripples, with
wavelengths λ ≪ ξ, there will be no impact on the
configurations of the polymers making up the brush, and hence in this
limit, the brush elasticity is expected to vanish.
Figure 9
Scale-dependent elasticity
of DNA bottle brushes results in different
apparent persistence lengths measured in optical tweezer and AFM experiments.
(a) In optical tweezer experiments forces f are so
high that the typical wavelength λ of the thermal deformations
is of the order of the brush thickness or less, such that the stiffening
due to the bottle brush is negligble. (b) In the AFM experiment there
is no external force and the end-to-end distance is governed by the
large-length scale effective bottle-brush persistence length, Peff.
Scale-dependent elasticity
of DNA bottle brushes results in different
apparent persistence lengths measured in optical tweezer and AFM experiments.
(a) In optical tweezer experiments forces f are so
high that the typical wavelength λ of the thermal deformations
is of the order of the brush thickness or less, such that the stiffening
due to the bottle brush is negligble. (b) In the AFM experiment there
is no external force and the end-to-end distance is governed by the
large-length scale effective bottle-brush persistence length, Peff.The whole situation is very analogous to that of the scale-dependent
electrostatic stiffening of polyelectrolytes at low ionic strength.
This problem has been studied in great detail, both theoretically
and experimentally.[30,39] Electrostatic stiffening only operates at deformation
wavelengths and length scales λ ≫ κ–1, where κ–1 is the Debye screening length,
the thickness of the electric double layer, surrounding the polyelectrolytes.
At very low ionic strengths, the Debye length can be quite large,
such that there is quite a large range of deformation wavelengths
where the stiffening does not operate.Single molecule force–extension
measurements for DNA at
low ionic strength were analyzed in detail by Marko and Siggia,[30] and we can follow their treatment of scale-dependent
polymer elasticity in terms of a wave-vector-dependent persistence
length P(q). In the high-force limit, z/L > 0.5, where the chain configurations
can be described in terms of small undulations around an average straight
configuration (Figure a), the extension z at a force f isIn the absence of a detailed model for the
scale-dependent elasticity of bottle brushes, we postulate that there
is full stiffening due to side chains only above a certain wavelength
ξ of the thermal deformations and no stiffening at shorter wavelengths:The resulting force–extension
relation
isThe correction factor γ
accounts for the stiffening that only occurs for long wavelength deformations:Following Marko and Siggia,[30] for z/L > 0.5, an apparent,
force-dependent persistence length Papp(f) can then again be calculated from eq . Plots for the predicted apparent
persistence length Papp as a function
of the force f, computed from eqs –13, are shown
in Figure .
Figure 10
Force dependence
of the apparent persistence length Papp according to eq and eqs –13, for different values of the crossover wavelength,
ξ, and for P0 = 15 nm and ΔP = 80 nm. From top to bottom: ξ = 10, 25, 50, and
100 nm. The dotted horizontal lines enclose the values of the high-force
persistence length found in the OT experiments, Peff = 15 ± 5 nm (Figure ), while the dotted vertical lines enclose
the range of forces f = 0.2–2.5 pN probed
in the OT experiment. Hence, we conclude that an approximate lower
bound for ξ is ξ > ξmin ≈ 100
nm.
Force dependence
of the apparent persistence length Papp according to eq and eqs –13, for different values of the crossover wavelength,
ξ, and for P0 = 15 nm and ΔP = 80 nm. From top to bottom: ξ = 10, 25, 50, and
100 nm. The dotted horizontal lines enclose the values of the high-force
persistence length found in the OT experiments, Peff = 15 ± 5 nm (Figure ), while the dotted vertical lines enclose
the range of forces f = 0.2–2.5 pN probed
in the OT experiment. Hence, we conclude that an approximate lower
bound for ξ is ξ > ξmin ≈ 100
nm.At low force, the apparent persistence
length has the limiting
value Papp = P0 + ΔP, whereas at high forces, it approaches
the limiting value Papp = P0. The force or scale dependence of the bottle-brush elasticity
is governed by the characteristic length scale ξ. For large
values of ξ, the apparent persistence length Papp already deviates from the limiting value Papp = P0 + ΔP at very low forces, on the order of than fξ = kBT/ξ.In the absence of a force, as is the case in our
AFM experiments
(Figure b), the enhanced
flexibility at short length scales merely leads to small corrections
to the mean-square end-to-end distance R2 of the bottle brushes. These corrections vanish if the contour length
of the main chain is sufficiently long (L ≫
ξ). An ad hoc approximation for this effect is obtained by postulating
that correlations between the unit tangents û(s) along the contour s = 0 to L of the semiflexible bottle brush are governed by a scale-dependent
rather than by a constant persistence length, as follows:where
for the scale-dependent persistence
length we make a similar assumption as done in the case of an applied
force:The mean-square end-to-end distance can then
be calculated in the usual way:For example, suppose we take L = 1 μm, P0 = 50 nm,
ΔP = 50 nm, and ξ = 50 nm. Then, if we
calculate the
root-mean-square distance ⟨R2⟩
using an effective persistence length Peff = 100 nm, the error that we make in the mean-square end-to-end distance
by neglecting the enhanced flexibility at short length scales, is
only 5%.From the AFM experiments, we obtain as limiting value
for the effective
persistence length at high protein concentrations, ≈ 95 nm. From the OT we found ≈ 15 nm, which is equal to the value
found by Driessen et al.[26] for the DNA-binding
domain alone. In order to compare with eq for Peff(f), we set P0 = 15 nm and ΔP = 80 nm. Plots of Peff(f) for this case are shown in Figure . The only unknown parameter in the comparison
with the experiments is the crossover wavelength ξ, and curves
for various values of ξ are presented in Figure . As follows from this figure, the OT observation
that ≈ 15 ± 5 nm for forces f = 0.2–2.5 pN implies an approximate lower bound
ξ > ξmin ≈ 100 nm. Unfortunately,
at
present we have no way to obtain an upper bound or to otherwise more
precisely fix the value of the crossover wavelength ξ. However,
we may expect ξ to scale with the thickness of the bottle brush,
ξ ∝ D. For saturated C8-BSso7d bottle brushes we have found D ≈
17 nm, and we would expect the crossover length scale to be at most
a few times the bottle-brush thickness D, which is
not very different from the lower bound of ξmin ≈
100 nm following from from the above analysis.
Conclusions
We
have shown experimentally that the main chain stiffening effect
of bottle brushes vanishes for deformations at length scales below
a crossover length ξ ∝ D, where D is the thickness of the bottle brush. Because at a force f the typical length scale λ for thermal deformations
is λ ≈ kBT/f, the main chain stiffening effect of bottle brushes
disappears at forces larger than fξ = kBT/ξ, where
ξ ∝ D is the crossover wavelength. Since
we considered a bottle brush for which D = 17 nm,
the estimated critical force for our case is than fξ = 0.2 pN, and only for forces much smaller than
this we can expect significnat stiffening due to the bottle-brush
coating. Forces in our optical tweezer experiment were quite high, f = O(pN), such that we were indeed above
the critical force fξ. More sensitive
magnetic tweezer experiments could possible quantify forces in both
regimes f > fξ and f < fξ as well the
transitional regime where the main-chain stiffening effect starts
to disappear.The Sso7d binding domain also binds to single-stranded
DNA (ssDNA),
albeit with a somewhat lower affinity than to double-stranded DNA
(dsDNA). Since the intrinsic persistence length of ssDNA is much lower
than that of dsDNA, sensitive magnetic tweezer experiments with ssDNA
as a template[41] could elucidate many details
for bottle brushes with flexible main chains.For the low force
and low stretching regime for which z/L < 0.5, Marko and Siggia[30] also noted
that dealing theoretically with the effect of
scale-dependent elasticity is much more difficult. Possibly, one may
take inspiration from theories previously developed for the force–extension
curves of excluded volume chains—a case that has been worked
out in significant detail[42,43] and that has also been
subjected to detailed experimentation using single-molecule experiments
using flexible ssDNA.[41] In that case, there
is a low force regime with full excluded volume interactions and a
high force regime in which excluded volume interactions no longer
operate. One would hope that the similar transition from full bottle-brush
elasticity at low forces to only main-chain elasticity at higher forces
can also be quantified experimentally in the near future.
Authors: Armando Hernandez-Garcia; Nicole A Estrich; Marc W T Werten; Johan R C Van Der Maarel; Thomas H LaBean; Frits A de Wolf; Martien A Cohen Stuart; Renko de Vries Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2016-12-12 Impact factor: 15.881