Covalent inhibitors have recently seen a resurgence of interest in drug development. Nevertheless, compounds, which do not rely on an enzymatic activity, have almost exclusively been developed to target cysteines. Expanding the scope to other amino acids would be largely facilitated by the ability to globally monitor their engagement by covalent inhibitors. Here, we present the use of light-activatable 2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles that allow quantifying 8971 aspartates and glutamates in the bacterial proteome with excellent selectivity. Using these probes, we competitively map the binding sites of two isoxazolium salts and introduce hydrazonyl chlorides as a new class of carboxylic-acid-directed covalent protein ligands. As the probes are unreactive prior to activation, they allow global profiling even in living Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Taken together, this method to monitor aspartates and glutamates proteome-wide will lay the foundation to efficiently develop covalent inhibitors targeting these amino acids.
Covalent inhibitors have recently seen a resurgence of interest in drug development. Nevertheless, compounds, which do not rely on an enzymatic activity, have almost exclusively been developed to target cysteines. Expanding the scope to other amino acids would be largely facilitated by the ability to globally monitor their engagement by covalent inhibitors. Here, we present the use of light-activatable 2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles that allow quantifying 8971 aspartates and glutamates in the bacterial proteome with excellent selectivity. Using these probes, we competitively map the binding sites of two isoxazolium salts and introduce hydrazonyl chlorides as a new class of carboxylic-acid-directed covalent protein ligands. As the probes are unreactive prior to activation, they allow global profiling even in living Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Taken together, this method to monitor aspartates and glutamates proteome-wide will lay the foundation to efficiently develop covalent inhibitors targeting these amino acids.
Covalent
inhibitors have recently re-emerged as important entities
in drug development.[1] This is best exemplified
by the approval of several kinase inhibitors for clinical use in cancer.[2] Moreover, covalent inhibitors are prevalent among
antibiotics. Key examples are the large class of β-lactams[1] but also other antibiotics like fosfomycin,[3] showdomycin,[4] and
optimized arylomycins.[5] Nevertheless, covalent
inhibitors, which do not rely on an enzymatic activity, still almost
exclusively bind to cysteine residues. Targeting additional amino
acids could largely help to address protein pockets that do not contain
a suitable cysteine and, in this way, enlarge the scope of proteins
accessible for covalent inhibitor development.In the antibiotics
field, identifying new binding sites for covalent
inhibitors is urgently needed in order to efficiently treat multiresistant
bacterial infections.[6] Covalent inhibitors
are uniquely suited to identify new targets that can be addressed
with small molecules, as they allow efficient mapping of many potential
binding sites in parallel using chemoproteomics.[7,8] In
bacteria, the almost exclusive focus on cysteine-directed covalent
inhibitors raises a severe issue as cysteine is even less frequent
in many bacteria (e.g., 0.6% of all amino acid residues in Staphylococcus aureus are cysteine) than in human cells
(2.3%).[9] Therefore, many important binding
pockets in bacterial proteins lack a suitable cysteine residue. Covalent
inhibitors that target other amino acid residues would thus be important
for antibiotic development, and methods to broadly profile their target
engagement with chemoproteomics are highly desirable.One technology
that was key to facilitating the development of
covalent inhibitors at cysteines is residue-specific profiling that
is usually based on the isoTOP-ABPP (isotopic tandem orthogonal proteolysis
activity-based protein profiling) platform (Figure A).[7] In this technology,
a proteome is split into two samples. One is treated with a covalent
inhibitor and the other one with only the solvent as a control. In
this way, the inhibitor will covalently bind to its target residues
and block their intrinsic reactivity. In the second step, a broadly
reactive alkyne probe is used to label many amino acid residues with
alkynes. Thereby, binding of the covalent inhibitor is translated
into a lack of alkynylation by the probe at the specific interaction
sites of the covalent inhibitor. The relative degree of alkynylation
in the compound- and solvent-treated samples is quantified by modification
with isotopically differentiated affinity tags using copper-catalyzed
azide–alkyne cycloaddition (CuAAC). Biotin tags that have an
isotopically labeled linker that is cleaved by the tobacco-etch (TEV)
protease are most commonly used.[10] Recently,
isotopically labeled desthiobiotin azide (isoDTB) tags (Figure B) have been introduced that
obliviate the need to use a cleavable linker (isoDTB-ABPP).[11] After the combination of the samples, enrichment,
and proteolytic digestion, the probe-modified peptides are identified
and quantified by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Because the peptides modified with the
probe are directly detected, not only the target protein of the covalent
inhibitor but also its exact interaction site are identified. Here,
residues that are not bound by the inhibitor will show ratios of around
one (R ≈ 1), whereas residues that are strongly
engaged by the covalent inhibitor will show high ratios (R ≫ 1). In this way, quantitative information on the sites
that are modified by the covalent inhibitor is obtained.
Figure 1
Concept of
this study. (A) Workflow of competitive residue-specific
proteomics using the isotopically labeled desthiobiotin azide (isoDTB)
tags.[11] RG, reactive group; D, desthiobiotin.
(B) Structure of the isoDTB tags.[11] (C)
Light-induced reactivity of 2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles 1–3 with carboxylic acids in proteins. While other
nucleophiles might attack the nitrilimine, only for carboxylic acids
a stable product can be formed via an O,N-acyl-shift.
Concept of
this study. (A) Workflow of competitive residue-specific
proteomics using the isotopically labeled desthiobiotin azide (isoDTB)
tags.[11] RG, reactive group; D, desthiobiotin.
(B) Structure of the isoDTB tags.[11] (C)
Light-induced reactivity of 2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles 1–3 with carboxylic acids in proteins. While other
nucleophiles might attack the nitrilimine, only for carboxylic acids
a stable product can be formed via an O,N-acyl-shift.In order to expand the scope of the described residue-specific
proteomics workflow to amino acid residues other than cysteine, broadly
reactive alkyne probes are needed that specifically address a subset
of amino acids of interest. For cysteines, iodoacetamide-alkyne (IA-alkyne)
is most widely used.[12] For lysines, acylation
reagents have been shown to efficiently label a large number of residues
in the proteome.[8,13] Recently, sulfonyl triazoles
have successfully been applied to study tyrosines.[14] Many other chemistries have been developed to target, e.g.,
lysines,[8,13,15−17] tyrosines,[18−20] methionines,[21,22] histidines,[23] tryptophanes,[24] as
well as aspartates and glutamates[25−27] in proteins, but their
exploration as broadly reactive alkyne probes for residue-specific
proteomics is still lacking.We were especially enticed by targeting
aspartates and glutamates
in the proteome as these amino acids frequently occur in the bacterial
proteome (∼12% of all residues),[9] tend to be in pockets or on the proteome surface due to their polarity,
and could show unique reactivity over all other nucleophilic amino
acids as their initially nucleophilic character can be turned into
an electrophilic reactivity by suitable activators. Nevertheless,
only a few chemotypes including sulfonate esters,[28] diazonium salts,[27] and oxazolium
salts[25,26] have been studied for the development of
carboxylic-acid-directed covalent inhibitors. Therefore, we reasoned
that the development of additional selective chemotypes could be fostered
by the availability of an isoDTB-ABPP-based platform that allows investigating
aspartates and glutamates proteome-wide.Previously, isoxazolium
salts based on Woodward’s reagent
K have been investigated as probes for a chemoproteomic study of carboxylic
acids.[26] These studies led to the identification
of a few target proteins, but residue-specific information could not
be obtained on a global level.Another very interesting chemotype
for targeting carboxylic acids
is light-activatable 2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles (Figure C).[29] These compounds are inherently unreactive but, upon light activation,
produce nitrilimines through liberation of nitrogen.[29] These nitrilimines are highly reactive intermediates that
were originally described as bio-orthogonal moieties to address alkenes
in proteins.[29] Lately, it has been shown
that they can also react with a number of proteinogenic nucleophiles
including carboxylic acids.[30−33] This prompted us to explore their usage as broadly
reactive alkyne probes. These probes would have several advantages
over other strategies targeting carboxylic acids. First, by changing
the substituent at the 5-position,
their electronic properties can be fine-tuned, which should allow
adjusting their reactivity, selectivity, and target profile.[31] Second, they would form very stable 1,2-diacyl-1-arylhydrazines
after reaction with carboxylic acids, which should facilitate the
chemoproteomics analysis.[33] Third, they
are unreactive and therefore stable and potentially nontoxic before
activation, which could enable their usage in living cells as has
been previously shown for light-activatable cysteine-directed electrophiles.[34] 2,5-Disubstituted tetrazoles have been used
in a proteomic context before in order to broadly identify their target
proteins, but these studies have not investigated the global specificity
of the probes toward certain amino acids or looked at the interactions
in a residue-specific manner.[33]Therefore,
we set out to study the reactivity and selectivity of
2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles in a proteome-wide context. We demonstrate
their ability to act as broadly reactive alkyne probes to study aspartates
and glutamates in vitro and in situ with high specificity even in challenging Gram-negative bacteria.
Furthermore, we study the binding of covalent ligands and introduce
a new class of carboxylic-acid-directed protein ligands, namely, hydrazonyl
chlorides.
Results
Synthesis of 2,5-Disubstituted Tetrazoles
In order
to investigate the proteome-wide reactivity of 2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles,
we set out to synthesize three different probes (1–3, Figure C). Due to the different effects of the substituents at the 5-position
(aromatic phenyl group for 1, aliphatic methyl group
for 2, and electron-withdrawing carboxamide group for 3), we reasoned that these probes should allow us to tailor
their reactivity and selectivity.[31] All
three probes were synthesized according or similar to literature-known
procedures (Scheme S1).[33] For probes 1 and 3 we synthesized
the diazonium salt starting from para-aminobenzoic
acid and reacted it with benzaldehydephenylsulfonylhydrazone or ethyl
glyoxylate para-tosylhydrazone to give the respective
tetrazoles.[33] These were coupled to propargyl
amine using N-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-N′-ethylcarbodiimide hydrochloride (EDC·HCl) to give probe 1 and the ethyl ester precursor of probe 3. This
precursor was reacted with ammonia to give the final carboxamide 3. For the synthesis of probe 2, we synthesized
the diazonium salt starting from methyl para-amino-benzoate
and reacted this with acetamidine hydrochloride using subsequent oxidation
with iodine and potassium iodide.[37] Saponification
of the ester with sodium hydroxide and coupling to propargyl amine
using EDCHCl yielded probe 2.[33]We first studied the activation of the probes to
the nitrilimine in PBS solution by UV light using LC-MS detection.
For all three probes, we detected quantitative light activation followed
by hydrolysis (probes 1–3) or reaction
with chloride (probe 3) within 10 min of UV irradiation
at 280–315 nm (Figure S1) detection
indicating efficient activation.[31]
Aspartate
and Glutamate-Specific Proteome-wide Labeling with
2,5-Disubstituted Tetrazoles
With these probes in hand, we
next evaluated their proteome-wide reactivity in the Staphylococcus
aureus (S. aureus) strain SH1000. After
optimization of the irradiation time (Figure S2) and probe concentration (Figure S3)
using a gel-based readout, we directly compared the labeling with
the three probes at 100 μM with irradiation for 10 min at 280–315
nm (Figure A). For
all three probes, we could detect strong labeling of many different
proteins in the gel. All probes are therefore in principle suitable
to investigate many binding sites in proteins. We observed no striking
differences in the overall labeling pattern but stronger labeling
with probe 1 in comparison to probe 2 and 3, which is most likely caused by its increased lipophilicity.
Figure 2
Light-activatable
2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles allow global monitoring
of aspartates and glutamates in the S. aureus proteome in vitro with high specificity. (A) Gel-based analysis of
labeling with probes 1–3. S. aureus lysate was treated with 100 μM of the indicated
probe, incubated for 30 min, irradiated with light (λ = 280–315
nm) for 10 min, and labeled with TAMRA-azide using CuAAC. Controls
were performed without irradiation. Gel-based analysis was performed
with in-gel fluorescence scanning and staining using Coomassie Brilliant
Blue (CBB). (B) Analysis of the mass of modification on tryptic peptides
after labeling of S. aureus lysate with 100 μM
probe 2. MSFragger software[35] was used to determine, which masses of modification occur in the
proteomic samples labeled with probe 2 after light activation
and CuAAC to the light and heavy isoDTB tags. Expected masses of modification
for tryptic peptides labeled with 2 according to the
reactivity shown in Figure C and additionally
modified with light or heavy isoDTB tag, respectively, are 694.3663
and 700.3738 Da. PSM: peptide-spectrum match. (C) Analysis of the
amino acid specificity of the probes. Proteomes labeled with the indicated
probe after light activation and modified by CuAAC with the light
and heavy isoDTB tags were analyzed with MaxQuant software[36] allowing the modification on any potentially
nucleophilic amino acid. Peptides were included in the analysis if
the localization probability for a single residue was more than 75%.
Data shows the mean ± the standard deviation. The total number
of identified PSMs is given in parentheses. (D) Venn diagram of the
number of quantified aspartates and glutamates with the three different
probes. (E) Plot of the ratios log2(R)
for aspartates and glutamates in proteomic samples, in which the heavy-
and light-labeled sample were both modified with 100 μM of the
indicated probe without pretreatment with an inhibitor. The expected
value of log2(R) = 0 is indicated by the
black line; the preferred quantification window (−1 < log2(R) < 1) is indicated by the two gray
lines. Each dot represents one quantified aspartate or glutamate.
All data for panels B–E originates from biologically independent
duplicates of technical duplicates.
Light-activatable
2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles allow global monitoring
of aspartates and glutamates in the S. aureus proteome in vitro with high specificity. (A) Gel-based analysis of
labeling with probes 1–3. S. aureus lysate was treated with 100 μM of the indicated
probe, incubated for 30 min, irradiated with light (λ = 280–315
nm) for 10 min, and labeled with TAMRA-azide using CuAAC. Controls
were performed without irradiation. Gel-based analysis was performed
with in-gel fluorescence scanning and staining using Coomassie Brilliant
Blue (CBB). (B) Analysis of the mass of modification on tryptic peptides
after labeling of S. aureus lysate with 100 μM
probe 2. MSFragger software[35] was used to determine, which masses of modification occur in the
proteomic samples labeled with probe 2 after light activation
and CuAAC to the light and heavy isoDTB tags. Expected masses of modification
for tryptic peptides labeled with 2 according to the
reactivity shown in Figure C and additionally
modified with light or heavy isoDTB tag, respectively, are 694.3663
and 700.3738 Da. PSM: peptide-spectrum match. (C) Analysis of the
amino acid specificity of the probes. Proteomes labeled with the indicated
probe after light activation and modified by CuAAC with the light
and heavy isoDTB tags were analyzed with MaxQuant software[36] allowing the modification on any potentially
nucleophilic amino acid. Peptides were included in the analysis if
the localization probability for a single residue was more than 75%.
Data shows the mean ± the standard deviation. The total number
of identified PSMs is given in parentheses. (D) Venn diagram of the
number of quantified aspartates and glutamates with the three different
probes. (E) Plot of the ratios log2(R)
for aspartates and glutamates in proteomic samples, in which the heavy-
and light-labeled sample were both modified with 100 μM of the
indicated probe without pretreatment with an inhibitor. The expected
value of log2(R) = 0 is indicated by the
black line; the preferred quantification window (−1 < log2(R) < 1) is indicated by the two gray
lines. Each dot represents one quantified aspartate or glutamate.
All data for panels B–E originates from biologically independent
duplicates of technical duplicates.As all probes showed promising labeling using gel-based detection,
we set out to investigate their reactivity and selectivity in a mass-spectrometry-based
setup using the isoDTB-ABPP workflow (Figure A). Here, we treated both samples with the
same concentration of the probe and did not pretreat with an inhibitor.
As the two samples are in this case identical, the isotopic ratios R for all residues are expected to be around one, which
gives an additional quality control and can be used to investigate
if the method gives quantitative results.First, we wanted to
establish in an unbiased way if we detect peptides
with the expected modification in the samples. For this purpose, we
utilized the MSFragger software that allows an Open Search, in which
peptides are identified and assigned their modification state without
the need to predefine a modification (Figure B, and Figure S4 and Table S1).[35] Indeed, in all cases we were able to mainly detect the modification
with the expected mass for the 1,2-diacyl-1-aryl-hydrazine moiety
of the respective probe modified with the light or heavy isoDTB tag,
respectively. This indicates that the expected reactivity via the
nitrilimine intermediate is directly observed using the chemoproteomic
setup.Next, we set out to investigate the amino acid specificity
of the
probes. For this purpose, we used MaxQuant software[36] and allowed the modification with the respective probe
to be on any potentially nucleophilic amino acid (C, D, E, F, H, K,
M, N, Q, R, S, T, W, Y). We further analyzed all peptides with a high
localization probability for a single residue (>75%, analogous
to
class I phosphosites) as determined by the Andromeda algorithm implemented
in MaxQuant that uses a probabilistic scoring model for the localization.[38] The median localization probability for all
analyzed peptides across all probes was >95%. We manually verified
a selection of annotated modification sites using the respective MS2
spectra (Figure S5). For all three probes
(Figure C, Table S1), we detected that most peptides are
modified on aspartates and glutamates. Interestingly, probe 2 with a methyl group at the 5-position showed an increased
selectivity of more than 85% of all peptides modified at aspartates
and glutamates. In order to verify this selectivity, we utilized the
MSFragger software[35] that uses a fragment-ion
indexing algorithm for the localization of the modifications. Here,
we analyzed all spectra, for which the modification was uniquely assigned
to a single residue, and detected almost exactly the same amino acid
selectivity compared to MaxQuant analysis (Figure S6). Probe 2 is therefore a prime candidate as
a selective tool for aspartates and glutamate labeling in
vitro.In order to better understand the selectivity
of probe 2, we performed experiments with amino acids
protected at the Nα-position and at the α-carboxylic
acid in solution. For this purpose, we treated 100 μM of probe 2 with 5 mM of the respective amino acid and investigated
the reactivity after 10 min of UV irradiation using LC-MS. In PBS,
we detected only very limited adduct formation and mainly hydrolysis
in the presence of glutamate (Figure S7). We reasoned that the lipophilic nature of protein binding pockets
increases the reactivity of the nitrilimine. We, therefore, studied
the reactivity with increasing amounts of acetonitrile (Figure S7).[30,32] At 75% acetonitrile,
adduct formation with glutamate was detected as the main peak. Under
these conditions also aspartate mainly reacted to give the expected
product (Figure S8). While serine and tyrosine
exclusively showed hydrolysis of the nitrilimine, some adduct was
formed for lysine and histidine. For cysteine mainly products other
than hydrolysis were detected. Here, besides the adduct peak, we detected
a peak that had the mass of the thiohydrazide formed from probe 2. This corresponds to a formal thiolysis of the nitrilimine.
We reasoned that, in analogy to the light-induced reactivity of 2-thiazolines,[39] this indicates an initial adduct formation with
cysteine followed by homolytic bond cleavage of the adduct. When we
performed the reaction with different irradiation times (Figure S9), the activation of probe 2 was quantitative after 7 min. Next to the hydrolysis product, this
mainly resulted in the formation of the cysteine adduct and the thiohydrazide.
The cysteine adduct was converted to the thiohydrazide upon further
irradiation. This process was almost quantitative after 20 min of
irradiation. This shows that the instability of the cysteine adduct
toward UV irradiation might contribute to the selectivity of probe 2 for aspartate and glutamate labeling. As the final reaction
product with cysteine does not lead to a modification with an alkyne,
this reactivity does not compromise the use of 2,5-disustituted tetrazoles
as probes for proteome-wide monitoring of carboxylic acids. Nevertheless,
for the potential development of covalent inhibitors, this reactivity
will have to be carefully considered.Finally, we used MaxQuant
software to also quantify the modified
aspartates and glutamates.[36] For this purpose,
we allowed modification only at these residues. We were able to quantify
more than 3500 aspartates and glutamates with each of the three probes
(Figure D, Table S1). Probes 2 and 3 even quantified around 5000 residues, each. As the heavy and light
samples were mixed at a ratio of 1:1, all residues are expected to
be quantified with an R value close to one (log2(R) ≈ 0). In all cases, the number
of peptides that were outside of the preferred window of −1
< log2(R) < 1 was ≤1% indicating
that the probes allow reliable residue-specific quantification (Figure E, Table S1). There is a significant overlap between the residues
detected with each probe (Figure D), but there are also many residues that are exclusively
detected with one of the probes. Furthermore, digestion with chymotrypsin
instead of trypsin in an additional experiment led to an additional
increase in the total number of quantified residues for probe 2 to 6136 (Figure S10 and Table S1). By combining the data from the three probes and the additional
experiments with chymotrypsin digestion for probe 2,
we were able to quantify a total of 8971 aspartates and glutamates
in the proteome of S. aureus. It is striking that
probe 1 allowed quantification of fewer aspartates and
glutamates, while showing the most intense labeling by gel-based experiments
(Figure A). Due to
the lower specificity of the probe, it can be speculated that this
number is lowered by the higher number of peptides modified at other
sites as the total amount of detected modified peptides is similar
between all probes (Figure C). In order to obtain an estimate for the sensitivity of
the method, we added bovine serum albumin (BSA) at different concentrations
to the S. aureus lysate and performed isoDTB-ABPP
with probe 2. We were able to detect BSA down to
a concentration of 10 nM (Table S1). In
summary, probe 2 is an ideal tool for the global investigation
of carboxylic acids in the bacterial proteome in vitro.
Residue-Specific Profiling of Covalent Protein Ligands Targeting
Aspartates and Glutamates
With probe 2 as an
optimized probe in hand, we next wanted to take first steps toward
globally investigating carboxylic-acid-directed protein ligands in
the proteome of S. aureus. For this purpose, we initially
investigated established carboxylic-acid-directed chemistry. Here,
isoxazolium salts have been used as protein ligands in various instances.[25,26] We decided to investigate Woodward’s reagent K (4, Figure A) and isoxazolium
salt 5 (Figure B). By performing the chemoproteomic workflow with these ligands
at 500 μM (and additionally at 200 μM for 4, Figure S11 and Table S2) and probe 2 as an optimized broadly reactive
alkyne probe, we were able to identify 44 aspartates and glutamates
that are able to interact with these compounds in the S. aureus proteome. These hits, e.g., include the interaction of 5 with the residues E41/E42 in the ATP-binding site of the essential
protein pyruvate kinase (UniProt code, Q2FXM9; Figure B, Table S2).
For compound 4, we also detected 50 residues that increase
in labeling upon compound treatment. For eight of these residues,
we detected another aspartate or glutamate in the same protein that
is engaged by at least 50% indicating that this engagement might lead
to a structural change causing an increased labeling. Put together,
these competitive studies show that our method allows target engagement
studies at aspartates and glutamates in the whole proteome and could
verify that isoxazolium salts engage these residues also in bacterial
proteins.
Figure 3
Probe 2 reveals the targeted residues of carboxylic-acid-directed
covalent protein ligands proteome-wide using isoDTB-ABPP in
vitro. (A–C) Volcano plots of isoDTB-ABPP experiments
comparing samples pretreated with 500 μM of the indicated covalent
ligand to a solvent control. Plotted are the ratio (log2(R)) between the heavy (solvent-treated, 1% HCl
for 4, DMSO for 5, DMF for 6) and light (compound-treated) labeled samples and the probability
in a one-sample t test that R is
equal to one (−log10(p)). The targeted
E41/E42 of pyruvate kinase (UniProt code: Q2FXM9) and D452 of nicotinate
phosphoribosyltransferase (UniProt code: Q2G235) are highlighted in
red. All data originates from two (B and C) or three (A) biologically
independent experiments; performed in technical duplicates (A and
B) or triplicates (C).
Probe 2 reveals the targeted residues of carboxylic-acid-directed
covalent protein ligands proteome-wide using isoDTB-ABPP in
vitro. (A–C) Volcano plots of isoDTB-ABPP experiments
comparing samples pretreated with 500 μM of the indicated covalent
ligand to a solvent control. Plotted are the ratio (log2(R)) between the heavy (solvent-treated, 1% HCl
for 4, DMSO for 5, DMF for 6) and light (compound-treated) labeled samples and the probability
in a one-sample t test that R is
equal to one (−log10(p)). The targeted
E41/E42 of pyruvate kinase (UniProt code: Q2FXM9) and D452 of nicotinate
phosphoribosyltransferase (UniProt code: Q2G235) are highlighted in
red. All data originates from two (B and C) or three (A) biologically
independent experiments; performed in technical duplicates (A and
B) or triplicates (C).Enticed by the possibility
to address aspartates and glutamates
in the proteome with nitrilimines, we next explored if the reactive
nitrilimine could also be generated without the use of light and therefore
used as a covalent protein ligand. Previous studies that used nitrilimines
for conjugation to alkenes have utilized hydrazonyl chlorides for
this purpose, but to the best of our knowledge these chemotypes have
not been used as carboxylic-acid-directed protein ligands.[40] We therefore synthesized compound 6 (Scheme S2), which can liberate a nitrilimine
through elimination of hydrochloric acid. Using 6 at
500 μM in competitive experiments with probe 2,
we identified 13 residues that interact with 6 in the S. aureus proteome (Figure C, Table S2). These peptides
include the residue D452 of the essential protein nicotinate phosphoribosyl-transferase
(Npt) (UniProt code: Q2G235). In order to prove this interaction,
we recombinantly expressed and purified this protein. Upon treatment
with 6in vitro, we were able to detect
quantitative modification of Npt and a shift in the mass of the protein
that corresponds to the modification with one molecule of the nitrilimine
formed from 6 (Figure S12).
To a lower degree, we were also able to detect double and triple modification.
As the quite reactive hydrazonyl chloride was used at a high concentration
on an isolated protein, this points to the fact that multiple carboxylic
acid residues can be modified by 6 in this setup.In order to verify the binding sites on Npt and quantify their
engagement, we used a recently established protocol based on reductive
dimethyl labeling for quantification.[8] After
treatment of recombinant Npt with 6, we were able to
detect the 6-modified peptide
with modification at the expected residue D452 and quantified the
target engagement to approximately 50% (Figure S13 and Table S2), which is the highest engagement among all
quantified aspartates and glutamates in Npt. Nevertheless, we were
also able to detect modified peptides at other sites, which points
to the fact that other residues are also reactive when compound 6 is used on an isolated protein at this high concentration.Despite the considerable target engagement at D452, we could detect
no effect on enzyme activity (Figure S14), pointing toward the fact that Npt is not inhibited by covalent
modification of this residue by 6. Nevertheless, this
experiment shows that hydrazonyl chlorides are interesting warheads
for targeting carboxylic acids in proteomes and that the product of
the reaction with carboxylic acids in proteins is a 1,2-diacyl-1-arylhydrazine,
which is in agreement with the formation of an intermediate nitrilimine.Through compiling of the proteome-wide isoDTB-ABPP data for all
three competitors (4–6), we detected
a total of 56 aspartates and glutamates in 48 different proteins that
are targeted by at least one of these compounds in the proteome of S. aureus. These residues show a slightly increased probability
to be at functional sites (5.4%) compared to other quantified residues
(4.0%) or the genomic background (2.7%, Figure S15). This suggests that in functional sites higher residue
reactivity or additional noncovalent interactions might facilitate
high occupancy binding of the ligands. Due to the limited number of
identified liganded residues with the used three competitors, this
observation will need to be verified once a larger data set of ligandable
residues is available. Interestingly, residues in essential proteins
are strongly enriched among the quantified residues compared to the
genomic background (Figure S16). Concerning
the functional classes of proteins, the liganded residues and other
quantified residues show a very similar distribution to each other,
in which enzymes and proteins involved in gene expression are enriched,
and receptors, transporters, and channels are depleted in comparison
to the whole genome (Figure S17). These
facts point to the chance to functionally target diverse important
proteins with these compounds. Comparing the specific interactions
of the three compounds, one can see that most residues are exclusively
targeted by one of the compounds indicating some specificity even
with these very small compounds at high concentrations (Figure S18). Chemoproteomic profiling of proteomes
with probe 2 is therefore a very promising strategy for
the optimization of carboxylic-acid-directed protein ligands.
Global
Investigation of Aspartates and Glutamates in Living
Bacteria
Having a working platform in hand that allows quantifying
many aspartates and glutamates in vitro, we next
wanted to investigate if this technology can also be transferred to
monitor these amino acids in living bacteria. As the probes are nonreactive
before light activation, we reasoned that they could be nontoxic in
bacteria. We therefore measured the minimum inhibitory concentration
(MIC) for all three probes for the growth of S. aureus (Figure S19). All three compounds had
no MIC or effect on the optical density of the culture up to a concentration
of 200 μM. The probes can therefore be used in living bacteria
without affecting their viability.We next checked for labeling in situ using a gel-based readout. Here, we pretreated living S. aureus cells with the probes and then labeled the aspartates
and glutamates using UV irradiation. After optimization of the pretreatment
(Figure S20) and irradiation time (Figure S21) using probe 1, we directly
compared all three probes (Figure A). We could detect that there is only very weak labeling
with probes 2 and 3 in comparison to probe 1. The difference is much larger than in vitro (Figure A). Probe 1 therefore seems to be taken up into cells much more efficiently
than the other probes. We, therefore, decided to utilize probe 1 for in situ experiments, although the selectivity
for aspartates and glutamates is not quite as high, because of the
observed striking difference in labeling intensity.
Figure 4
Specific labeling of
aspartates and glutamates with 2,5-disubstituted
tetrazoles in living bacteria. (A) Probe 1 efficiently
labels proteins in living S. aureus. Living bacteria were treated with the indicated probe for 1 h and
labeled by irradiation with light (λ = 280–315 nm) for
10 min. After lysis, TAMRA azide was attached using CuAAC, and labeling was analyzed using gel electrophoresis
with in-gel fluorescence scanning and Coomassie Brilliant Blue (CBB)
staining. Controls were performed without irradiation. (B) Analysis
of the amino acid specificity of probe 1in vitro and in living S. aureus. Samples
were analyzed with MaxQuant software[36] allowing
the modification with probe 1 and the heavy or light
isoDTB tag to be on any potentially nucleophilic amino acid. Peptides
were further analyzed if the localization probability for a single
residue was more than 75%. The total number of identified modification
sites is given in parentheses. Data shows the mean ± the standard
deviation. (C) Plot of the ratios log2(R) of samples, in which the heavy- and light-labeled sample were both
modified with the same concentration of the indicated probe in living S. aureus without pretreatment with an inhibitor.
The expected value of log2(R) = 0 is indicated
by the black line; the preferred quantification window (−1
< log2(R) < 1) is indicated by the
two gray lines. One data point in living bacteria at log2(R) = −8.9 is not shown for clarity. All
data for panels B and C originates from biologically independent duplicates
of technical triplicates for data in living bacteria and from biologically
independent duplicates of technical duplicates for data in
vitro. (D) Probe 1 efficiently labels proteins
in the living Gram-negative bacteria S. typhimurium and E. coli. The experiment was performed in the
indicated bacteria as described for S. aureus in part A.
Specific labeling of
aspartates and glutamates with 2,5-disubstituted
tetrazoles in living bacteria. (A) Probe 1 efficiently
labels proteins in living S. aureus. Living bacteria were treated with the indicated probe for 1 h and
labeled by irradiation with light (λ = 280–315 nm) for
10 min. After lysis, TAMRA azide was attached using CuAAC, and labeling was analyzed using gel electrophoresis
with in-gel fluorescence scanning and Coomassie Brilliant Blue (CBB)
staining. Controls were performed without irradiation. (B) Analysis
of the amino acid specificity of probe 1in vitro and in living S. aureus. Samples
were analyzed with MaxQuant software[36] allowing
the modification with probe 1 and the heavy or light
isoDTB tag to be on any potentially nucleophilic amino acid. Peptides
were further analyzed if the localization probability for a single
residue was more than 75%. The total number of identified modification
sites is given in parentheses. Data shows the mean ± the standard
deviation. (C) Plot of the ratios log2(R) of samples, in which the heavy- and light-labeled sample were both
modified with the same concentration of the indicated probe in living S. aureus without pretreatment with an inhibitor.
The expected value of log2(R) = 0 is indicated
by the black line; the preferred quantification window (−1
< log2(R) < 1) is indicated by the
two gray lines. One data point in living bacteria at log2(R) = −8.9 is not shown for clarity. All
data for panels B and C originates from biologically independent duplicates
of technical triplicates for data in living bacteria and from biologically
independent duplicates of technical duplicates for data in
vitro. (D) Probe 1 efficiently labels proteins
in the living Gram-negative bacteria S. typhimurium and E. coli. The experiment was performed in the
indicated bacteria as described for S. aureus in part A.Next, we performed a mass-spectrometry-based
experiment as described
above, in which two samples of living bacteria were individually treated
with probe 1, irradiated, lysed, clicked to the light
and heavy isoDTB tags, respectively, and mixed at a ratio of 1:1 before
analysis. We could verify the same selectivity for aspartates and
glutamates as seen in vitro for probe 1 (Figure B, Table S1). We were able to quantify 3928 residues
with the number of incorrectly quantified peptides again being ≤1%
(Figure C, Table S1). The method is therefore applicable
to also quantitatively monitor aspartates and glutamates in living S. aureus.Encouraged by this result,
we also investigated the Gram-negative
bacteria Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Salmonella typhimurium (S. typhimurium). Gram-negative
bacteria possess a very strong outer barrier consisting of the cell
wall and two cell membranes as well as efficient efflux mechanisms.
This renders the development of inhibitors and probes that efficiently
engage proteins in these cells very challenging.[6] After testing the three probes by gel-based experiments
and demonstrating that probe 1 again gives the strongest
labeling (Figures S22 and S23), we directly
compared the labeling in living S. aureus, E. coli, and S. typhimurium using probe 1 (Figure D). Probe 1 labeled the proteomes of the
Gram-negative bacteria to a similar degree as in S.
aureus, which indicates that this probe is efficiently
taken up also into these most challenging cells. Performing a mass-spectrometry-based
experiment in E. coli, we were able
to quantify 1905 residues with good selectivity (Figure S24 and Table S1). Our platform therefore allows global
profiling of aspartates and glutamates also in challenging Gram-negative
bacteria, which will have important implications for drug discovery
of covalent inhibitors through target engagement studies.
Discussion
We here describe the first method to globally map aspartates and
glutamates in a residue-specific fashion. We synthesized three light-activatable
2,5-disubstituted tetrazole probes and investigated them as broadly
reactive alkyne probes to study the proteome-wide interactions of
covalent, carboxylic-acid-directed protein ligands using isoDTB-ABPP.Initially, we optimized the labeling conditions in vitro in the proteome of S. aureus and could show that
probe 2 exhibits the highest selectivity with >85%
of
all peptides being labeled at aspartates and glutamates. In this way,
we were able to quantify more than 6000 residues using this probe
and, in aggregate, more than 8500 residues across all probes. This
corresponds to 8.9% of all aspartates and glutamates encoded in the S. aureus genome. Furthermore, we quantify 398 residues
at functional sites including 174 residues at functional sites of
essential proteins. Residues at functional sites of essential proteins
(Figure S5) include, e.g., E293 at the
ATP binding site of phosphoglycerate kinase (UniProt code: Q2G031),
E179 at the active site of the GMP synthase GuaA (UniProt code: Q2G0Y6),
E197 at a magnesium binding site of succinate-CoA ligase (UniProt
code: Q2FZ37), D233 at the active site of FabH (UniProt code: Q2FZS0),
E330 at the ATP binding site of the glycine-tRNA ligase GlyQS (UniProt
code: Q2FY08), and E453 at the substrate binding site of 6-phosphogluconate
dehydrogenase (UniProt code: Q2FY60). In this way, the method bears
great potential to identify functionally important effects on carboxylic
acids in the bacterial proteome. Future studies should be able to
further increase this coverage of carboxylic acids and especially
functional sites. For this purpose, the proteome can be prefractionated
using, e.g., strong cation exchange or high pH fractionation in order
to decrease the complexity of the samples in individual MS experiments.
Furthermore, it is tempting to speculate that more chemically diverse
2,5-disubstituted tetrazoles can be synthesized to cover more functional
sites by specific interactions. The 2,5-disubstituted tetrazole probe 2 offers great specificity and high
coverage for aspartate and glutamate residues in lysates. Thus, it
allows for the first time a broad study of effects on aspartates and
glutamates in the proteome.Next, we used this technology to
map the interactions of carboxylic-acid-directed
protein ligands. Here, we first profiled two isoxazolium salts (4 and 5) and identified several residues that
are modified by these compounds. These include many residues at functional
sites and in essential proteins. Furthermore, we proposed, synthesized,
and evaluated hydrazonyl chlorides as a new class of carboxylic-acid-directed
protein ligands. This design was based on the fact that they can liberate
nitrilimines upon elimination of hydrochloric acid that are similar
to those resulting from our light-activatable probes. We synthesized
one member of this compound class (6) and found 13 targeted
binding sites in the proteome of S. aureus. We verified
the interaction of 6 with the recombinant, essential
protein nicotinate phosphoribosyltransferase in vitro and verified the expected binding site and mass of the modification
on the protein. Nevertheless, due to the high reactivity and concentration
of 6, some additional labeling of other sites was also
observed indicating that further optimization of this chemotype will
be necessary. Taken together, this shows that our method gives residue-specific
target engagement information for carboxylic-acid-directed protein
ligands in the bacterial proteome.So far, all three tested
competitors did not show antibacterial
activity up to 500 μM (Figure S25). Compound 6 is nevertheless a most promising candidate
for further optimization into a specific carboxylic-acid-directed
covalent inhibitor with biological activity as it shows specific engagement
of several residues. Besides varying the substituents of the molecule
in order to introduce binding to specific proteins and to tailor its
reactivity, it would be especially interesting to investigate various
leaving groups instead of chloride in order to further tune the stability,
reactivity, and selectivity of these compounds as has recently been
shown for targeting tyrosines.[14] Furthermore,
future development will have to carefully investigate the possibility
to avoid reactivity with cysteine residues in order to develop inhibitors
that can be used in biologically relevant settings. The presented
method will be instrumental in evaluating these compounds in a proteome-wide
sense and using them to generate a more complete map of aspartates
and glutamates that can be addressed with covalent ligands.Finally, we could show that probe 1 can be used to
monitor close to 4000 aspartates and glutamates with good selectivity
when it is used in living S. aureus cells. The probe
even allows obtaining a broad map of these residues in living Gram-negative
bacteria, which are notoriously hard to penetrate with chemical probes.
In this way, the methodology will allow obtaining important insights
into the behavior of aspartates and glutamates in this biologically
relevant setting.Taken all of this together, we present a method
that for the first
time allows to globally and residue-specifically monitor aspartates
and glutamates in the bacterial proteome in vitro and in living bacteria. The method furthermore allows the identification
of sites that can be addressed with covalent ligands in the proteome.
In this way, we are convinced that this methodology will have important
implications for the design of new chemotypes for covalent inhibitors
that target carboxylic acids as well as to broadly understand the
target engagement at these amino acid residues in order to more efficiently
develop new antibiotics with a covalent mechanism-of-action.While this manuscript was under consideration, 2H-azirines were reported as additional probes to residue-specifically
monitor aspartates and glutamates in the proteome.[41] We are convinced that with these two complementary probe
technologies using constitutive and light-activatable electrophiles,
respectively, important progress will be made in the design of specific
carboxylic-acid-directed covalent inhibitors.
Authors: Shixian Lin; Xiaoyu Yang; Shang Jia; Amy M Weeks; Michael Hornsby; Peter S Lee; Rita V Nichiporuk; Anthony T Iavarone; James A Wells; F Dean Toste; Christopher J Chang Journal: Science Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: D Hendlin; E O Stapley; M Jackson; H Wallick; A K Miller; F J Wolf; T W Miller; L Chaiet; F M Kahan; E L Foltz; H B Woodruff; J M Mata; S Hernandez; S Mochales Journal: Science Date: 1969-10-03 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Pablo Martín-Gago; Eyad K Fansa; Michael Winzker; Sandip Murarka; Petra Janning; Carsten Schultz-Fademrecht; Matthias Baumann; Alfred Wittinghofer; Herbert Waldmann Journal: Cell Chem Biol Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 8.116
Authors: Thomas T Zengeya; Julie M Garlick; Rhushikesh A Kulkarni; Mikayla Miley; Allison M Roberts; Youfeng Yang; Daniel R Crooks; Carole Sourbier; W Marston Linehan; Jordan L Meier Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Peter A Smith; Michael F T Koehler; Hany S Girgis; Donghong Yan; Yongsheng Chen; Yuan Chen; James J Crawford; Matthew R Durk; Robert I Higuchi; Jing Kang; Jeremy Murray; Prasuna Paraselli; Summer Park; Wilson Phung; John G Quinn; Tucker C Roberts; Lionel Rougé; Jacob B Schwarz; Elizabeth Skippington; John Wai; Min Xu; Zhiyong Yu; Hua Zhang; Man-Wah Tan; Christopher E Heise Journal: Nature Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Tianyang Yan; Heta S Desai; Lisa M Boatner; Stephanie L Yen; Jian Cao; Maria F Palafox; Yasaman Jami-Alahmadi; Keriann M Backus Journal: Chembiochem Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 3.164
Authors: Mikail E Abbasov; Madeline E Kavanagh; Taka-Aki Ichu; Michael R Lazear; Yongfeng Tao; Vincent M Crowley; Christopher W Am Ende; Stephan M Hacker; Jordan Ho; Melissa M Dix; Radu Suciu; Matthew M Hayward; Laura L Kiessling; Benjamin F Cravatt Journal: Nat Chem Date: 2021-09-09 Impact factor: 24.274
Authors: Javier Antonio Alfaro; Peggy Bohländer; Mingjie Dai; Mike Filius; Cecil J Howard; Xander F van Kooten; Shilo Ohayon; Adam Pomorski; Sonja Schmid; Amit Meller; Chirlmin Joo; Aleksei Aksimentiev; Eric V Anslyn; Georges Bedran; Chan Cao; Mauro Chinappi; Etienne Coyaud; Cees Dekker; Gunnar Dittmar; Nicholas Drachman; Rienk Eelkema; David Goodlett; Sébastien Hentz; Umesh Kalathiya; Neil L Kelleher; Ryan T Kelly; Zvi Kelman; Sung Hyun Kim; Bernhard Kuster; David Rodriguez-Larrea; Stuart Lindsay; Giovanni Maglia; Edward M Marcotte; John P Marino; Christophe Masselon; Michael Mayer; Patroklos Samaras; Kumar Sarthak; Lusia Sepiashvili; Derek Stein; Meni Wanunu; Mathias Wilhelm; Peng Yin Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2021-06-07 Impact factor: 47.990
Authors: Jian Cao; Lisa M Boatner; Heta S Desai; Nikolas R Burton; Ernest Armenta; Neil J Chan; José O Castellón; Keriann M Backus Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2021-01-20 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Tao Huang; Seyyedmohsen Hosseinibarkooie; Adam L Borne; Mitchell E Granade; Jeffrey W Brulet; Thurl E Harris; Heather A Ferris; Ku-Lung Hsu Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 9.969