We report the rational construction of de novo-designed biliverdin-binding proteins by first principles of protein design, informed by energy minimization modeling in Rosetta. The self-assembling tetrahelical bundles bind biliverdin IXa (BV) cofactor autocatalytically in vitro, like photosensory proteins that bind BV (and related bilins or linear tetrapyrroles) despite lacking sequence and structural homology to the natural counterparts. Upon identification of a suitable site for ligation of the cofactor to the protein scaffold, stepwise placement of residues stabilized BV within the hydrophobic core. Rosetta modeling was used in the absence of a high-resolution structure to inform the structure-function relationships of the cofactor binding pocket. Holoprotein formation stabilized BV, resulting in increased far-red BV fluorescence. Via removal of segments extraneous to cofactor stabilization or bundle stability, the initial 15 kDa de novo-designed fluorescence-activating protein was truncated without any change to its optical properties, down to a miniature 10 kDa "mini", in which the protein scaffold extends only a half-heptad repeat beyond the hypothetical position of the bilin D-ring. This work demonstrates how highly compact holoprotein fluorochromes can be rationally constructed using de novo protein design technology and natural cofactors.
We report the rational construction of de novo-designed biliverdin-binding proteins by first principles of protein design, informed by energy minimization modeling in Rosetta. The self-assembling tetrahelical bundles bind biliverdin IXa (BV) cofactor autocatalytically in vitro, like photosensory proteins that bind BV (and related bilins or linear tetrapyrroles) despite lacking sequence and structural homology to the natural counterparts. Upon identification of a suitable site for ligation of the cofactor to the protein scaffold, stepwise placement of residues stabilized BV within the hydrophobic core. Rosetta modeling was used in the absence of a high-resolution structure to inform the structure-function relationships of the cofactor binding pocket. Holoprotein formation stabilized BV, resulting in increased far-red BV fluorescence. Via removal of segments extraneous to cofactor stabilization or bundle stability, the initial 15 kDa de novo-designed fluorescence-activating protein was truncated without any change to its optical properties, down to a miniature 10 kDa "mini", in which the protein scaffold extends only a half-heptad repeat beyond the hypothetical position of the bilin D-ring. This work demonstrates how highly compact holoprotein fluorochromes can be rationally constructed using de novo protein design technology and natural cofactors.
De novo-designed proteins are
useful tools for
exploring principles of protein folding, assembly, and biochemical
functions that build on structure–function and sequence diversity
landscapes distinct from those of natural protein scaffolds.[1−3] Self-assembling tetrahelical bundles,[4−10] created by binary patterning of hydrophobic and hydrophilic residues
with high α-helical propensity,[11] comprise the best-established class of de novo-designed
scaffolds. They provide stable frames for binding cofactors, as protein
maquettes[5−7,12] for rationally engineering
artificial holoproteins in which the cofactor-interacting contributions
of individual residues are largely isolated from one another (Figure a).
Figure 1
Engineering de
novo-designed proteins to stabilize
biliverdin. (a) Self-assembling single-chain tetrahelical bundles
created by binary patterning of hydrophobic and hydrophobic residues
with a high α-helix formation propensity, described by the helical
wheel. (b) Strategy for stabilizing biliverdin within the core. (c)
Holoprotein stepwise construction.
Engineering de
novo-designed proteins to stabilize
biliverdin. (a) Self-assembling single-chain tetrahelical bundles
created by binary patterning of hydrophobic and hydrophobic residues
with a high α-helix formation propensity, described by the helical
wheel. (b) Strategy for stabilizing biliverdin within the core. (c)
Holoprotein stepwise construction.Previously reported maquette holoproteins incorporated rigid,
planar
cofactors such as hemes, chlorins, porphyrins, and flavins. Recently,
we reported that they also bind flexible bilins or linear tetrapyrroles
and identified determinants for autocatalytic ligation of phycocyanobilin
(PCB), namely, a free cysteine and the stabilization of the bilin
propionates.[6]Here, we report the
rational construction of compact de
novo-designed proteins that bind biliverdin (BV), the optically
active cofactor in bacteriophytochromes (Bph) and Bph-derived protein
tools.[13−16] Energy minimization modeling in Rosetta[8,9,17,18] informed the
placement of residues for stabilizing BV, which increased its far-red
fluorescence. Despite lacking sequence or structural homology to natural
biological fluorochromes, fluorescent bili-proteins were successfully
forward-engineered with molecular weights as small as 10 kDa or half
that of a minimal fluorescent domain engineered from a Bph.[14]
Results and Discussion
Rational Design and Construction
Strategy
Fluorescent
proteins (FPs) have been engineered by directed evolution of Bph,[13−16] phytochromes (Phys),[19,20] allophycocyanins[21,22] (APs), and fatty acid-binding muscle proteins.[23] These engineered proteins are generally rigidified (i)
to stabilize the cofactor in a fluorescent conformation, (ii) to limit
access of the solvent and oxygen to the cofactor, and (iii) to prevent
protein structural rearrangements intrinsic to their signaling roles.Structural insights from Bph- and Phy-derived FPs[15,16,19] led to a design strategy for
stabilizing the bilin by hydrogen bonding to the BV propionates and
A-ring and adding hydrophobic core bulk around the D-ring (Figure b). In our rational
construction strategy (Figure c), we first experimentally identified a suitable cofactor
attachment site on a scaffold, which was derived from maquettes with
molten globular cores[5,24] that accommodate a range of cofactor
types and sizes. BV-stabilizing residues were subsequently introduced
stepwise to define a pocket within the apoprotein core. In the absence
of a high-resolution structure for this scaffold, the binding pocket
structure-function analysis was informed by energy minimization modeling
using Rosetta, given its reported ability to predict helical bundle
topologies and binding sites for rigid, planar cofactors.[8−10]
Cysteine Ligation Scanning
Bilin-containing holoproteins
can be reconstituted in vitro by autocatalytic ligation
of bilin to cysteine.[6,25,26] To identify suitable ligation positions around which to construct
a binding pocket, we scanned cysteine sites for BV covalent attachment
efficiency to purified apoproteins in vitro (Figure ). All core residues
(heptad repeat positions a and d) were leucines to limit potential
contributions to bilin stabilization by structured interactions within
the core.
Figure 2
Cysteine scanning for biliverdin (BV) attachment. (a) Rosetta-generated
Pymol model of the scaffold, with candidate attachment sites. (b)
Scaffold sequence. (c) Relative BV attachment, fluorescence, and brightness
summary (mean ± the standard error). Fluorescence measured at
fixed holoprotein concentrations (λex = 600 nm).
Brightness calculated as absorbance × fluorescence. Abbreviations:
AUC, area under the curve; Abs, absorbance; Em, emission; Q, Q-band.
Cysteine scanning for biliverdin (BV) attachment. (a) Rosetta-generated
Pymol model of the scaffold, with candidate attachment sites. (b)
Scaffold sequence. (c) Relative BV attachment, fluorescence, and brightness
summary (mean ± the standard error). Fluorescence measured at
fixed holoprotein concentrations (λex = 600 nm).
Brightness calculated as absorbance × fluorescence. Abbreviations:
AUC, area under the curve; Abs, absorbance; Em, emission; Q, Q-band.BV attachment levels trended with
cysteine solvent exposure, where
those in the solvent-exposed B-loop (S64C) or near the termini (L23C)
provided good relative balances of appreciable cofactor attachment
and baseline fluorescence from partitioning into the hydrophobic core
(Figure c). In selecting
construction starting points, we prioritized BV attachment efficiency
given the reported challenges in the uptake of the cofactor by Bph-FPs.[13,16] Subsequent engineering proceeded faster with the loop-bound S64C
maquette, the starting point of proteins hereafter. Rosetta modeling
suggested a favored BV placement in the core where an existing arginine
(R119) and lysine (K77) of the scaffold stabilize the cofactor propionates.
Rational Cofactor Stabilization
Stepwise modifications
had the intended hierarchical effects of increasing the BV attachment
efficiency, enhancing the fluorescence quantum yield (ϕF), and sharpening absorbance Q-bands (Figure and Figure S1), with the latter two events indicative of bilin rigidification.[26] The helix 4 terminus adjacent to the BV-binding
cysteine (C64) was rigidified and made more hydrophobic by placing
a valine (K124V) at the interfacial b-position of the last heptad
repeat (build step 2). Cofactor stabilization and placement continued
from the A-ring, the most constrained pyrrole from covalent attachment,
by introduction of a serine (L5S) intended to hydrogen bond the A-ring
nitrogen (build step 3).
Figure 3
Rational engineering of a biliverdin-binding de novo-designed fluorescence-activating protein (dFP).
(a) Homology-based
contact schematic (left) for BV stabilization (black, side chains;
green, BV) and Pymol visualization (right) of the BV-binding site
in the Rosetta-modeled core. (b) Sequence alignment of the build series
(yellow, mutated residues). The E66R mutation was introduced with
the S64C mutation based on “CXR” motifs of natural bili-proteins
but did not contribute to stabilization. (c) Excitation (dashed lines;
λem > 715 nm) and emission spectra (solid lines;
λex = 600 nm) of the stepwise construction. (d) Photophysical
summary. Abbreviations: QY, relative quantum yield vs Cy5; ε,
extinction coefficient. An asterisk indicates a value below the quantification
limit. In panels b–d, build step 4 = dFP.
Rational engineering of a biliverdin-binding de novo-designed fluorescence-activating protein (dFP).
(a) Homology-based
contact schematic (left) for BV stabilization (black, side chains;
green, BV) and Pymol visualization (right) of the BV-binding site
in the Rosetta-modeled core. (b) Sequence alignment of the build series
(yellow, mutated residues). The E66R mutation was introduced with
the S64C mutation based on “CXR” motifs of natural bili-proteins
but did not contribute to stabilization. (c) Excitation (dashed lines;
λem > 715 nm) and emission spectra (solid lines;
λex = 600 nm) of the stepwise construction. (d) Photophysical
summary. Abbreviations: QY, relative quantum yield vs Cy5; ε,
extinction coefficient. An asterisk indicates a value below the quantification
limit. In panels b–d, build step 4 = dFP.The cofactor B-, C-, and D-rings were further immobilized
by positioning
histidines (L75H and F120H) to π-stack with the pyrroles and
to provide hydrophobic core bulk that restricts protein movement and
core water access (build step 4), which has stabilized tetrapyrroles
effectively in previous maquettes.[5,6] Rosetta modeling
of the final product suggests S5 may further constrain the A-ring
by hydrogen bonding to both the A-ring oxygen and H71 (Figure a).The resultant 15
kDa monomer fluoresced modestly in the far-red
spectrum (λex = 648 nm; λem = 662
nm; ϕF = 1.58%). The quantum yield is similar to
that of sandercyanin, a natural BV-binding fish pigment (ϕF = 1.6%),[27] and is smaller than
those of Bph- and AP-derived directed evolution products (ϕF ∼ 7–18%).[13−16,21] For the sake of simplicity, we hereafter call this de novo-designed fluorescence-activating protein (“dFP”).dFP was predominantly monomeric in analytical ultracentrifugation
(AUC) assays (Figure S1). Circular dichroism
measurements confirmed the bundle helicity and showed that cofactor
binding enhanced the overall protein thermal stability (Tm-apo = 44.7 °C, and Tm-holo = 50.8 °C) (Figure S2). Mass spectrometry and zinc acetate staining of denaturing protein
gels confirmed covalent bilin attachment (Figure S3a–c). Noncovalently adsorbed BV was sufficiently removed
by filtration on desalting columns (Figure S3d).Biliverdin formed a thioether bond between its vinyl group
and
C64, based on acidic denaturation studies in guanidinium chloride
(Figure S4a–d). The dFP(C64S) mutation
destabilized BV within the core, which is evident by the diminished
level of uptake, Q-band absorbance, and fluorescence quantum yield
(ϕF = 0.8%) (Figure S4b). BV was stripped from dFP(C64S) upon denaturation and column filtration
and, thus, noncovalently bound to this mutant. Similarly, cysteine-containing
dFP bound less mesobiliverdin (meso-BV), which differs from BV by
its reduced vinyl side chains (to ethyl), and was stripped from the
holoprotein upon denaturation (Figure S4c).Biliverdin of denatured dFP did not appreciably photoconvert
upon
stimulation (λ = 610 ± 5 or >650 nm) based on the difference
spectrum (Figure S5), suggesting that its
D-ring adopts a 15Z configuration[28] as designed (Figures a and 3b) and not the photoconverting
15E configuration.[28] A
future high-resolution structure would greatly inform dFP structure-function
analysis.
Miniature 10 kDa Bili-Protein (“mini”)
The 15 kDa dFP contains extraneous heptad repeats for cofactor binding
and stabilization needs. We sought to engineer a miniature dFP (hereafter
called “dFP-mini” or “mini”) (Figure a,b) by truncating
the scaffold down to where homology modeling predicts all BVpyrroles
remain solvent-shielded. To preserve bundle stability, truncation
began after the hydrophobic caps at the helical termini closest to
the D-ring. Loops 1 and 3 were also shortened.
Figure 4
Miniature 10 kDa de novo-designed bili-protein
(mini). (a) Pymol renders the BV-binding site in Rosetta-modeled full-length
and mini dFPs. (b) Sequence alignment. (c) Mini excitation (dashed
line; λem > 715 nm) and emission (solid line;
λex = 600 nm) spectra. ϕF = 1.48%.
ε
= 16209 cm–1 M–1; 16.44% attachment
efficiency.
Miniature 10 kDa de novo-designed bili-protein
(mini). (a) Pymol renders the BV-binding site in Rosetta-modeled full-length
and mini dFPs. (b) Sequence alignment. (c) Mini excitation (dashed
line; λem > 715 nm) and emission (solid line;
λex = 600 nm) spectra. ϕF = 1.48%.
ε
= 16209 cm–1 M–1; 16.44% attachment
efficiency.A stable 10 kDa mini was formed with helices that
extend a half-heptad
repeat beyond the furthest modeled D-ring contact residue. Shorter
proteins terminating at the final hypothetical contact were unstable.
dFP-mini had photophysical properties nearly identical to those of
full-length dFP (Figure c). Likewise, the mini forms a thioether bond with the BV vinyl group
(Figure S4), and the cofactor D-ring adopts
a 15Z orientation (Figure S5).The mini is approximately one-third the size of GFP (27
kDa) and
Bph-derived FPs (30–35 kDa) and half that of a minimal domain
engineered from a Bph (18 kDa).[14] The facile
truncation and relative compactness reflect the structural simplicity
of the de novo-designed scaffold. Other than three
interhelical loops and hydrophobic caps, the mini lacks accessory
structural elements beyond the cofactor-binding pocket itself.Compact protein fluorochromes are advantageous in molecular sensors
because they shorten Förster distances and limit potential
interference with the activity of fusion partners. Because BV is endogenous
to eukaryotes, this study is a valuable step toward fully genetically
encoded and compact de novo-designed reporters, with
the primary next steps being increasing the quantum yield and bilin
uptake for robust performance.The uptake here reflects an in vitro autocatalytic
attachment efficiency, without an evolutionarily conserved bilin lyase
domain (BLD)[25,26] or accessory bilin lyase.[29] Analogous efficiencies of Bph-derived FPs (before
separating apoprotein from holoprotein) are largely unreported. BV
likely attaches to the de novo-designed scaffold
by partitioning into the core and stabilizing within the binding pocket
before thioether formation (as described for phytochromes[25,30]), given that cysteine-to-serine mutations only partially decrease
the level of holoprotein formation and that attachment efficiency
trended with quantum yield. We anticipate that improved cofactor stabilization
will enhance thioether formation and consequent fluorescence properties.These enhancements may result from complementary directed evolution
approaches and/or new computational design tools, including a recently
reported “rotamer interaction field” (RIF) algorithm
that decouples ligand-docking optimization from overall backbone optimization
in Rosetta.[18] This algorithm yielded a de novo-designed β-barrel[18] that binds exogenously supplied DFHBI (chromophore of GFP) and fluoresces
with a quantum yield (ϕF = 2%) similar to that described
above.To summarize, we rationally constructed compact de novo-designed proteins that covalently bound biliverdin
and stabilized
it in a fluorescent conformer. In keeping with the tenets of synthetic
biology and protein design, we built them from the bottom up from
first principles rather than from the top down using natural protein
starting points.
Authors: Tammer A Farid; Goutham Kodali; Lee A Solomon; Bruce R Lichtenstein; Molly M Sheehan; Bryan A Fry; Chris Bialas; Nathan M Ennist; Jessica A Siedlecki; Zhenyu Zhao; Matthew A Stetz; Kathleen G Valentine; J L Ross Anderson; A Joshua Wand; Bohdana M Discher; Christopher C Moser; P Leslie Dutton Journal: Nat Chem Biol Date: 2013-10-13 Impact factor: 15.040
Authors: Po-Ssu Huang; Gustav Oberdorfer; Chunfu Xu; David Baker; Xue Y Pei; Brent L Nannenga; Joseph M Rogers; Frank DiMaio; Tamir Gonen; Ben Luisi Journal: Science Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Swagatha Ghosh; Chi-Li Yu; Daniel J Ferraro; Sai Sudha; Samir Kumar Pal; Wayne F Schaefer; David T Gibson; S Ramaswamy Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Joshua A Mancini; Molly Sheehan; Goutham Kodali; Brian Y Chow; Donald A Bryant; P Leslie Dutton; Christopher C Moser Journal: J R Soc Interface Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 4.118
Authors: Erik A Rodriguez; Geraldine N Tran; Larry A Gross; Jessica L Crisp; Xiaokun Shu; John Y Lin; Roger Y Tsien Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2016-08-01 Impact factor: 28.547
Authors: Xiaokun Shu; Antoine Royant; Michael Z Lin; Todd A Aguilera; Varda Lev-Ram; Paul A Steinbach; Roger Y Tsien Journal: Science Date: 2009-05-08 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Konstantin A Rumyantsev; Daria M Shcherbakova; Natalia I Zakharova; Alexander V Emelyanov; Konstantin K Turoverov; Vladislav V Verkhusha Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2015-12-18 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Jiayi Dou; Anastassia A Vorobieva; William Sheffler; Lindsey A Doyle; Hahnbeom Park; Matthew J Bick; Binchen Mao; Glenna W Foight; Min Yen Lee; Lauren A Gagnon; Lauren Carter; Banumathi Sankaran; Sergey Ovchinnikov; Enrique Marcos; Po-Ssu Huang; Joshua C Vaughan; Barry L Stoddard; David Baker Journal: Nature Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 49.962