Samuel Lenton1, Stefan Hervø-Hansen1, Anton M Popov2, Mark D Tully2, Mikael Lund1,3, Marie Skepö1,3. 1. Theoretical Chemistry, Lund University, P.O. Box 124, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden. 2. BM29 BIOSAXS, European Synchroton Radiation Facility, 71 avenue des Martyrs, Grenoble, Isère 38043, France. 3. LINXS-Lund Institute of Advanced Neutron and X-ray Science, Scheelevägen 19, SE-223 70 Lund, Sweden.
Abstract
Re-entrant condensation results in the formation of a condensed protein regime between two critical ion concentrations. The process is driven by neutralization and inversion of the protein charge by oppositely charged ions. Re-entrant condensation of cationic proteins by the polyvalent anions, pyrophosphate and tripolyphosphate, has previously been observed, but not for citrate, which has similar charge and size compared to the polyphosphates. Therefore, besides electrostatic interactions, other specific interactions between the polyphosphate ions and proteins must contribute. Here, we show that additional attractive interactions between arginine and tripolyphosphate determine the re-entrant condensation and decondensation boundaries of the cationic, intrinsically disordered saliva protein, histatin 5. Furthermore, we show by small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) that polyvalent anions cause compaction of histatin 5, as would be expected based solely on electrostatic interactions. Hence, we conclude that arginine-phosphate-specific interactions not only regulate solution properties but also influence the conformational ensemble of histatin 5, which is shown to vary with the number of arginine residues. Together, the results presented here provide further insight into an organizational mechanism that can be used to tune protein interactions in solution of both naturally occurring and synthetic proteins.
Re-entrant condensation results in the formation of a condensed protein regime between two critical ion concentrations. The process is driven by neutralization and inversion of the protein charge by oppositely charged ions. Re-entrant condensation of cationic proteins by the polyvalent anions, pyrophosphate and tripolyphosphate, has previously been observed, but not for citrate, which has similar charge and size compared to the polyphosphates. Therefore, besides electrostatic interactions, other specific interactions between the polyphosphate ions and proteins must contribute. Here, we show that additional attractive interactions between arginine and tripolyphosphate determine the re-entrant condensation and decondensation boundaries of the cationic, intrinsically disordered saliva protein, histatin 5. Furthermore, we show by small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) that polyvalent anions cause compaction of histatin 5, as would be expected based solely on electrostatic interactions. Hence, we conclude that arginine-phosphate-specific interactions not only regulate solution properties but also influence the conformational ensemble of histatin 5, which is shown to vary with the number of arginine residues. Together, the results presented here provide further insight into an organizational mechanism that can be used to tune protein interactions in solution of both naturally occurring and synthetic proteins.
The interactions between
proteins in solutions are governed by
a delicate balance of attractive and repulsive forces.[1,2] A range of additives are used to tune the properties of protein
solutions, including salt, and small organic molecules such as amino
acids.[3,4] The addition of salt to protein solutions
can also increase protein–protein interactions, resulting in,
for example, precipitation, aggregation, or oligomerization.[5−7] The precise influence of ionic species on the interactions between
proteins in solution is nontrivial and dependent on the concentration
and specific properties of both the ion and the protein.[8,9] Multivalent ions have been shown to modulate protein–protein
interactions when added to solutions of oppositely charged proteins,
resulting in rich phase behaviors including re-entrant condensation
(RC) and liquid–liquid phase separation.[10−15]Originally observed in solutions of anionic proteins in the
presence
of trivalent cations, RC is characterized by the presence of a condensed
protein regime between two critical anion concentrations, thus creating
a window of mutual miscibility.[16−18] The physical principles that
cause RC have been described by the re-entrant liquid condensation
(RLC) model,[14,19,20] and according to this model, protein condensation is caused by the
binding of oppositely charged ions to the protein surface, resulting
in neutralization of the long-ranged electrostatic interactions, allowing
the formation of short-ranged ion-bridging attractive forces between
the proteins.[14,19] At higher concentrations of ions,
the RLC model describes the decondensation process as being driven
by screening and consequent inversion of the protein charge.[15,21,22] Two critical parameters can be
used to describe the RC process, the ion concentration at the condensation
and at the decondensation boundaries, (C*) and (C**), respectively.[23]RC
has also been observed in other oppositely charged tertiary
mixtures including multivalent anions in the presence of cationic
proteins, cationic proteins in RNA solutions, and DNA in solutions
containing multivalent cations.[24−27] Recently, Bye and Curtis have shown that the polyvalent
anions, pyrophosphate (PP) and tripolyphosphate (TPP), where SPP and
STPP refer to the sodium salts, respectively, were able to induce
the RC of the cationic protein lysozyme.[28] In agreement with the RLC model, with increasing concentrations
of PP and TPP, charge neutralization followed by charge inversion
of the protein was observed.[28] Interestingly,
the polyvalent anion citrate, which has similar charge and size as
PP, did not induce the RC of lysozyme, despite its ability to neutralize
and subsequently invert its charge,[28] which
suggests that the RLC model is limited in ability to fully explain
the condensation process observed in biological systems. This limitation
stems from the fact that the RLC model considers only electrostatic
interactions between the proteins and the ions. However, in addition
to accumulation via electrostatic interactions, counterions can also
be coordinated in a specific manner by charged residues.[27,29−32] Hence, different anions may have different affinities with proteins,
despite their similar charges. Subsequently, other, more specific,
attractive interactions between the polyphosphate ions and lysozyme
must be considered to understand the RC process observed.The
polyvalent anions, PP and TPP, are di- and tripolyphosphates,
whereas citrate contains carboxyl groups, indicating the possibility
that interactions between lysozyme and phosphate may play a key role
in the RC process. Several proteins bind to DNA through interactions
between the phosphate backbone of the DNA and positively charged arginine
(Arg) and lysine (Lys) residues.[33,34] Despite having
similar charges, the interaction between Arg–phosphate is considerably
stronger than that of Lys–phosphate.[35] This is because the side chain, guanidinium present on Arg, can
form additional interactions with phosphate groups.[33,34] The lysozyme’s cationic nature is in part due to an abundance
of the solvent-exposed Arg. We hypothesize that the interactions between
Arg and the phosphate groups present in TPP and PP may provide the
basis for the additional specific attractive interaction that causes
the RC of lysozyme by TPP/PP but not by citrate.In this paper,
we investigate the role of Arg on the RC of the
intrinsically disordered protein (IDP) histatin 5 (Hst5). Unlike globular
proteins, IDPs do not adopt well-defined three-dimensional structures
in solution but instead sample an ensemble of structures.[36] Due to their innate flexibility and the high
prevalence of charged residues, IDPs are often treated as polyelectrolytes.
Previous studies have shown that IDPs also undergo RC in the presence
of multivalent ions.[25,37,38] Due to the polyelectrolytic nature of IDPs, the RC of this type
of protein is more frequently referred to as coacervation.[39] We selected Hst5 as a model protein for this
study for several reasons:Hst5
is a cationic protein partly due to three Arg residues
in the primary sequence.Arg residues
are distributed evenly throughout the sequence, i.e., close to either termini and midsequence (see Figure a).
Figure 1
(a) Annotated histatin 5 sequence, where the negatively
charged
residues are colored red, the positively charged residues are colored
blue, and arginine residues are indicated by a blue star. The molecular
structure of the totally deprotonated states of the (b) citrate, (c)
pyrophosphate, and (d) tripolyphosphate anions, respectively. The
numbers below the structures correspond to the calculated net charge
at infinite dilution of the anions at pH 8.4 used in this study.
The unfolded nature of Hst5 results in a high solvent
accessibility of all residues within the sequence.Hst5 is well characterized by both experimental and
computational techniques.[40−42]RC of IDP solutions are less studied, and a comparison
with globular proteins may prove insightful.The combination of distribution, frequency, and solvent accessibility
of Arg within Hst5 yields an ideal model system to study the impact
of Arg on the RC process in the presence of the polyvalent anion citrates,
PP and TPP (see Figure b–d). By determining the phase behavior
of Hst5 variants, which maintain the net positive charge but differ
in the amount and distribution of Arg, we observe that while long-ranged
electrostatic interactions drive the process of RC, specific Arg–phosphate
interactions determine the location of both the condensation and decondensation
boundaries. Comparison with lysozyme reveals similarities between
the RC process observed, despite the differences between size, charge,
and disordered versus globular structure of the proteins. We hypothesize
that these differences can be accounted for based on the increased
net charge and the higher content of Arg in lysozyme. By utilizing
small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) and computer simulations, we observe
that specific Arg–phosphate interactions result in a compaction
of Hst5 at anion concentrations above the decondensation boundary.
Altogether, our results indicate not only the importance of specific
Arg–phosphate interactions in regulating RC but also provides
insight for the rational modification of protein sequences to either
promote or inhibit RC.(a) Annotated histatin 5 sequence, where the negatively
charged
residues are colored red, the positively charged residues are colored
blue, and arginine residues are indicated by a blue star. The molecular
structure of the totally deprotonated states of the (b) citrate, (c)
pyrophosphate, and (d) tripolyphosphate anions, respectively. The
numbers below the structures correspond to the calculated net charge
at infinite dilution of the anions at pH 8.4 used in this study.
Experimental Section
Hst5 Variants
A selection of Hst5 variants was designed
and synthesized by TAG (Copenhagen) with a purity between 97.0 and
99.0%. The variants used are listed in Figure .
Figure 2
Variants of histatin 5 used in this study. Histatin
5 WT represents
the wild-type sequence; modifications to the sequence are indicated
by red font.
Variants of histatin 5 used in this study. Histatin
5 WT represents
the wild-type sequence; modifications to the sequence are indicated
by red font.
Sample Preparation
To remove any residual salt and
contaminants, the protein was dialyzed exhaustively against Milli-Q
water, using a dialysis membrane with an MWCO of 500 Da (BioTech).
The resulting solution was then freeze-dried and stored at −20
°C. Prior to experimental measurements, the freeze-dried powder
was dissolved in, nd further dialyzed against the buffer. The concentration
of the protein solutions was measured by UV absorption at 280 nm using
the extinction coefficient previously determined for Hst5 by amino
acid analysis and mass spectroscopy (2560 M–1 cm–1). The ionic strengths of the prepared solutions were
calculated based on the molar concentration of all ions present in
the solution according towhere I is the total ionic
strength and c and z are the concentration and
charge of each ion constituent of the solution, respectively.
SAXS Experiments
SAXS experiments were performed at
the B21 beamline at the Diamond synchrotron (Oxford U.K.) and at the
BM29 beamline at the ESRF synchrotron (Grenoble, France).[43,44] At both B21 and BM29, sample delivery and measurements were performed
using the automated BioSAXS robot.[45] Prior
and after each sample measurement, the corresponding buffer from dialysis
was measured and averaged. Sequential sample frames were investigated
for radiation damage prior to averaging and consequent subtraction
of the buffer. Standards of known concentration and molecular mass
were measured to calibrate the forward scattering angle (I0).
SAXS Analysis
The buffer-subtracted
averaged frames
were analyzed for the presence of aggregation through investigation
of the low-q region. The Guinier approximation was
applied to extract the radius of gyration (Rg) and t I0, from the scattering
data using the limits q·Rg < 0.8. Measurements of a known standard protein (bovine
serum albumin (BSA)) were used to calibrate I0 to obtain the association number (Nass.)
Protein Precipitation Measurements
Protein precipitation
measurements were completed using the method of Bye et al.[28] In brief, the lyophilized Hst5 protein was dissolved
in water and dialyzed exhaustively against Milli-Q H2O,
followed by dialysis against the buffer three times for 12 h, which
consisted of 10 mM Tris at pH 8.4. The concentration of the resulting
solution was determined through UV measurements at 280 nm. Solutions
were then made by addition of the stock protein to fresh buffer to
which stock solutions of the polyvalent anions were added, yielding
the desired anion concentration. The samples were incubated at room
temperature on a shaking platform for 2 h. After incubation, the samples
were centrifuged (10 000 rpm for 5 min), followed by a further
incubation of 1 h, and thereafter centrifuged (10 000 rpm for
5 min) again. Thereafter, the concentration of the supernatant was
directly measured using UV absorption. Turbidity of the same samples
was monitored by UV measurements of the absorbance at 600 nm.
ζ-Potential
Measurements
ζ-Potential measurements
were performed on a Malvern Zetasizer Nano ZS (Malvern Instruments
Ltd., Malvern, U.K.) using DTS1070 folded capillary cells (Malvern
Instruments Ltd., Malvern, U.K.). Prior to measurements, the samples
were passed through a 0.22 μm filter (Whatman Syringe filters).
The temperature was kept constant at 25 °C, and the samples were
equilibrated at the set temperature for 180 s. For these experiments,
an F(ka) of 1.5 (Smoluchowski’s approximation) and the dielectric
constant of water, at the selected temperature (25 °C), were
used. Three independent repeats were performed, and the results were
averaged.
Circular Dichroism
CD spectra in the far-UV region
(190–260 nm, depending on the absorbance of the sample) were
obtained using a Jasco J-7715 CD spectrometer, where the temperature
was controlled using a PTC-348WI Peltier control system (Hachioji,
Tokyo, Japan). The samples of Hst5 were prepared by dialyzing the
protein powder against Milli-Q H2O (three changes) followed
by dialysis against the specific buffer (three changes). The dialysis
was completed in dialysis tubing with a 500 Da molecular weight cutoff
(Biotech), performed at room temperature while stirring continuously.
The samples were subsequently diluted in the dialysis buffer yielding
a final protein concentration in the range of 0.2–0.25 mg/mL.
Prior to each measurement, the samples were filtered through a Millex-GV
filter with a 0.22 μm pore size (Merck Millipore Ltd., Ireland)
into a quartz cuvette with a 0.1 cm path length and a total volume
of approximately 400 μL. The temperature was set using the Peltier
system and allowed to equilibrate for 10 min. For all measurements,
a scan rate of 20 nm/min was used, with a 2 s response time and a
2.0 nm bandwidth. Each temperature measurement consisted of an average
of five scans. The background spectra, consisting of the dialysis
buffer, were collected under similar conditions for each temperature
and subtracted from the sample spectra.
Coarse-Grained Model
A coarse-grained model, previously
applied to a range of IDPs, was used in this study.[6,46,47] Despite the granular nature, this model
provides excellent agreement with more detailed atomistic approaches
and has been widely used.[6,40,46,48] In the implemented model, individual
amino acids are described by hard spheres connected by harmonic bonds,
where the spheres mimic the excluded volume of the amino acid, including
the hydration layer. Both the N- and C-termini were treated explicitly
and included to account for their charge, while each sphere, or “bead”,
had the charge of the corresponding amino acid. The bead radius was
set to 2 Å, providing a realistic contact separation between
a short-ranged attractive interaction and electrostatic interactions.
The total potential energy of the system contained both bonded and
nonbonded contributions and is described bywhere the nonbonded
energy was assumed to
be pairwise additive according towhere r = |R – R| is the center-to-center
distance between two monomers/amino acids, and R refers
to the coordinate vector. The excluded volume was taken into account
through the hard-sphere potential Uhswhich is summed up over all amino acids. The
hard-sphere potential between beads in the model is given bywhere R and R denote
the bead radii. The electrostatic interactions were modeled by an
extended Debye–Hückel potential according towhere e is the elementary
charge, κ denotes the inverse Debye screening
length, ϵ0 is the vacuum permittivity, and ϵr is the relative dielectric constant of water. The short-ranged
attractive interaction between the monomers was included through an
approximate arithmetic average over all amino acidswhere ϵ reflects the excess polarizability
of the amino acid and thus sets the strength of the interaction. The
bonded interaction is described by a harmonic potentialwhere r denotes the distance in Ångstrom
between two connected
beads with the equilibrium separation r0 = 4.1 Å, where N denotes the number of amino
acids in the protein. The force constant was set to kbond = 0.4 N/m. Interactions between Arg residues and
polyphosphate ions were modeled explicitly by representing the polyvalent
ions as hard spheres with equivalent radius to the amino acids. A
short-ranged attractive interaction was added between Arg and the
polyvalent ion, using eq . The interaction strength, ϵ, was set to 8.0 × 104 kJ Å6/mol, giving an attractive potential
of 8.0 kT at the closest contact.
Monte Carlo
Simulations
The equilibrium properties
of the systems were obtained by applying Metropolis Monte Carlo simulations[49] in the canonical ensemble, i.e., the number
of particles, the volume, and the temperature were constant. The protein
chains were placed in a box with lengths of 250 Å with periodic
boundary conditions in the x-, y-, and z-directions. The effect of box volume was
investigated and none was observed. Long-ranged Coulomb interactions
were truncated using the minimum image convention. In total, four
different types of displacements were allowed: translational displacements
of a single amino acid, pivot rotations, translation of the entire
protein, and a slithering move. The probability of the different moves
was weighted so that single-particle moves occurred 20 times more
often than the other three. The protein chains were initially placed
in the box in a random configuration, and an equilibration run of
5 × 105 steps was performed. The production run consisted
of a further 1 × 106 steps. The simulations were performed
using the integrated Monte Carlo/molecular dynamics/Brownian dynamics
simulation package Molsim.[50]
Results
and Discussion
Reentrant Condensation of Hst5 by the Polyvalent
Anion TPP
The ability of TPP to induce the RC of Hst5 was
assessed by preparing
solutions containing a fixed concentration of Hst5 (5 mg/mL) with
varying concentrations, ranging from 0.02 to 100 mM, of the selected
polyvalent anions. The instantaneous formation of a white precipitate
was observed in the solutions that contained between 1.1 and 11 mM
TPPs. The visual observations were confirmed by measurements of the
soluble protein retained in the supernatant after centrifugation,
which is shown in Figure a, against the ratio of anions per protein molecule (Cs/Cp) in the initial
solution. No effect was observed in solutions containing either PP
or citrate. However, in response to increasing TPP concentration,
Hst5 displays characteristic RC phase behavior, undergoing sequential
liquid-to-solid and solid-to-liquid phase transitions. The turbidity
of the solutions did not change for the solutions containing PP or
citrate. The turbidity of the SPP solutions showed the same concentration
dependence as observed for the precipitation measurements. ζ-Potential
measurements revealed that the charge of the protein steadily decreases
and eventually changes sign with increasing TPP concentration, as
shown in Figure b.
Figure 3
Histatin
5 undergoes re-entrant condensation and charge inversion
in the presence of TPP. (a) Precipitation experiments performed at
a fixed protein concentration of 5.2 mg/mL with varying concentrations
of the anion indicated, performed at pH 8.4, depicting the concentration
of the supernatant (SN) as a function of the anion-to-protein ratio.
The dashed vertical line and solid line represent the location of C* and C**, respectively, in the Hst5/TPP
solution. (b) Electrophoretic mobility of histatin 5 in the presence
of varying concentrations of TPP, depicted as a function of the anion-to-protein
ratio. The horizontal dashed line represents ζ-potential = 0,
and the vertical dashed lines represent the C* and C** shown in Figure a. (c) Phase diagram of histatin 5 at the indicated protein
concentrations in varying concentrations of TPP, where the C* and C** are indicated by horizontal
dashed lines. The vertical dashed line represents the merge of C* and C** at low protein concentrations.
RI, RII, and RIII correspond to regions below, between, and above C* and C**, respectively. Gray circles
indicate no change in the concentration, whereas red crosses indicate
a decrease in the soluble protein concentration (less than 95%). (d)
The same data are shown in (c) as a function of the anion-to-protein
ratio. Here, the solid horizontal lines represent the point of maximum
precipitation.
Histatin
5 undergoes re-entrant condensation and charge inversion
in the presence of TPP. (a) Precipitation experiments performed at
a fixed protein concentration of 5.2 mg/mL with varying concentrations
of the anion indicated, performed at pH 8.4, depicting the concentration
of the supernatant (SN) as a function of the anion-to-protein ratio.
The dashed vertical line and solid line represent the location of C* and C**, respectively, in the Hst5/TPP
solution. (b) Electrophoretic mobility of histatin 5 in the presence
of varying concentrations of TPP, depicted as a function of the anion-to-protein
ratio. The horizontal dashed line represents ζ-potential = 0,
and the vertical dashed lines represent the C* and C** shown in Figure a. (c) Phase diagram of histatin 5 at the indicated protein
concentrations in varying concentrations of TPP, where the C* and C** are indicated by horizontal
dashed lines. The vertical dashed line represents the merge of C* and C** at low protein concentrations.
RI, RII, and RIII correspond to regions below, between, and above C* and C**, respectively. Gray circles
indicate no change in the concentration, whereas red crosses indicate
a decrease in the soluble protein concentration (less than 95%). (d)
The same data are shown in (c) as a function of the anion-to-protein
ratio. Here, the solid horizontal lines represent the point of maximum
precipitation.The phase diagram of Hst5 in the
presence of TPP was determined
by performing precipitation experiments at different protein concentrations
(see Figure c). Both
the condensation and decondensation boundaries, C* and C**, respectively, are linearly dependent
on the protein concentration. Strikingly, when the phase diagram is
depicted as a function of the number of anions per protein (Cs/Cp) as in Figure d, C* is located at an almost constant ratio of anion per protein, fluctuating
from 1.1 to 0.9 from the lowest to the highest concentration investigated.
Both C** and the point of maximum precipitation vary
slightly with the protein concentration, where the latter ranges from Cs/Cp = 2.5, at the
lowest protein concentration, to Cs/Cp = 2 at the highest. Irrespective of the starting
protein concentration, at maximum precipitation, the protein concentration
of the supernatant (SN) decreases to 1 mg/mL. Readers should notice
that fresh solutions containing 1 mg/mL protein did not display protein
precipitation under any of the TPP concentrations measured (see Figure c).
The locations
of both C* and C** Are Determined
by the Presence of Arg within the Sequence
To investigate
the potential influence of short-ranged interactions
between the Arg in Hst5 and the phosphate on TPP, variants of Hst5
with constant linear charge density, but with varying number of Arg
were designed, by the substitution of Arg with Lys, in the wild-type
(WT) sequence. Three different variants were initially designed, Hst5
0R, Hst5 1R, and Hst5 2R, containing zero, one, or two Arg residues,
respectively. Precipitation measurements showed that all variants
depicted RC behavior in the presence of TPP as shown in Figure a, where the precipitation
measurements performed for Hst5 WT and Hst5 2R yielded similar results,
indicating that the presence of two Arg residues is sufficient to
mimic the RCP of the WT. Quantitatively, the concentration range for
the phase-separated regime becomes narrower upon decreasing the Arg
contents of Hst5 below two. Similarly, the amount of protein precipitated
from solution also decreases with decreasing Arg content. Figure a displays C* determined for Hst5 and the variants at different protein
concentrations. The C* boundary is located at the
same Cs/Cp concentration for all variants that contain at least a single Arg
residue, while the complete depletion of Arg from the sequence increases
the location of C* to a higher TPP concentration.
Figure 4
Comparison
of the RC behavior of histatin 5 with variants of constant
linear charge density and variant number of Arg. (a) Precipitation
experiments performed at a fixed protein concentration of 5.2 mg/mL
shown for the indicated variants of histatin 5 as a function of the
protein concentration remaining in the supernatant against the anion-to-protein
ratio (Cs/Cp). Histatin 5 WT is shown for reference (same as Figure ). Dashed and solid vertical
lines depict the location of the C* and C** boundaries, respectively. (b) The location of the C* boundary, determined by precipitation experiments performed at
the indicated protein concentrations; the linear fit shown is according
to eq . (c) ζ-Potential
measurements performed at the indicated anion concentration and fixed
protein concentration shown for histatin 5 and variants. (d) Variation
of the measured supernatant concentration upon the addition of NaCl
measured at the TPP concentration corresponding to the maximum point
of precipitation. The dashed line corresponds to the NaCl required
to reach ionic strengths equivalent to those calculated in solutions
at the C** boundaries depicted in (a).
Comparison
of the RC behavior of histatin 5 with variants of constant
linear charge density and variant number of Arg. (a) Precipitation
experiments performed at a fixed protein concentration of 5.2 mg/mL
shown for the indicated variants of histatin 5 as a function of the
protein concentration remaining in the supernatant against the anion-to-protein
ratio (Cs/Cp). Histatin 5 WT is shown for reference (same as Figure ). Dashed and solid vertical
lines depict the location of the C* and C** boundaries, respectively. (b) The location of the C* boundary, determined by precipitation experiments performed at
the indicated protein concentrations; the linear fit shown is according
to eq . (c) ζ-Potential
measurements performed at the indicated anion concentration and fixed
protein concentration shown for histatin 5 and variants. (d) Variation
of the measured supernatant concentration upon the addition of NaCl
measured at the TPP concentration corresponding to the maximum point
of precipitation. The dashed line corresponds to the NaCl required
to reach ionic strengths equivalent to those calculated in solutions
at the C** boundaries depicted in (a).In solutions containing trivalent and polyvalent salts, the
location
of C* has previously been described using the empirical
relationship[17]eq is valid when c* occurs at a critical value
of bound ions per protein given by m* at a specific
protein concentration (cp). The empirical
relationship considers the free solution salt concentration (cf) in equilibrium with the protein–ion
complex, when m* ions are bound. Table lists the values of cf and m*, obtained by determining C* at a range of protein concentrations (shown in Figure b). The molar amount
of ions bound per protein at C* does not vary significantly
between the variants, on average 0.7 ions per protein. We next calculated
the charge contribution of ions bound to the protein, defined as the
charge contribution in Table , by multiplying m* by −4 (the net
charge of TPP); for each variant, the calculated contribution lies
between 3.7 and 3.8. The free ion concentration does, however, differ
between variants containing Arg and Hst5 0R, ranging from 0.35 to
1.456, respectively. Thus, the major difference between variants containing
Arg and Hst5 0R is the ability of TPP to bind at lower concentrations
when Hst5 contains at least a single Arg residue.
Table 1
Parameters Extracted from Fitting
the Data from the Precipitation Diagrams, Shown in Figure b, by Using eq
m*
charge contribution
cf
Hst5
WT
0.762 ± 0.04
3.81
0.355 ± 0.012
Hst5 2R
0.741 ± 0.03
3.80
0.379 ± 0.09
Hst5 1R
0.723 ± 0.04
3.61
0.384 ± 0.09
Hst5 0R
0.760 ± 0.09
3.70
1.456 ± 0.12
ζ-Potential measurements performed on
the Hst5 variants (see Figure c) revealed similar
charge inversion transitions as for Hst5 WT, confirming that it is
not sufficient to fully describe the observed RC behavior. As previously
highlighted, Arg is capable of mediating a stronger short-range multimodal
interaction network with phosphate groups, compared to the similarly
charged Lys. We determined experimentally whether this was a contributing
factor in the RC of Hst5 by TPP by performing precipitation measurements
of Hst5 and Hst5 0R with increasing ionic strengths, which should
decrease the propensity to phase-separate due to electrostatic screening.[51] The measurements were performed at TPP concentrations
corresponding to the maximum point of precipitation (see Figure a). For both proteins,
a decrease in precipitation with increasing ionic strength is observed,
consistent with a process that is electrostatically driven as shown
in Figure d. Increasing
the Arg contents of Hst5 requires higher ionic strengths to completely
inhibit protein precipitation. The ionic strengths of the solutions
at the C** boundaries were evaluated, and the equivalent
concentration of NaCl required to reach the same ionic strength was
determined (see Figure d). Interestingly, the determined ionic strength is close to where
the precipitation reaches zero, and the C** boundary
is therefore located at ionic strengths where the interaction is screened.
These results support the hypothesis that the interactions between
Arg–TPP interactions are stronger than those of Lys–TPP,
where the latter can be tuned by the ionic strength. Hence, electrostatic
screening is responsible for the increased C** boundary
observed with increasing Arg contents. Since C**
is not affected by an increase from two to three Arg residues, we
conclude that for Hst5 a maximum of two Arg residues participate in
the RC process.
RC of Hst5 by PP Depends on the Protein Charge
and the Number
of Arg Residues but Not on Their Sequence Distribution
Both
the position and the properties of the amino acids surrounding Arg
residues may potentially influence the interaction with TPP. For example,
for globular proteins, charged amino acids are often collectively
described by charge-patch regions. To determine the significance of
the position and local environment, precipitation experiments were
performed on variants of Hst5 that maintained a single Arg residue
close to the N-terminus (Ra), the middle of the sequence (Rb), or
C-terminus (Rc), as shown in Figure a. No significant effect on the RC behavior was observed;
hence, the position of the Arg and the properties of the surrounding
amino acids have no significant influence on the location of C* or C**. This was further confirmed by
determining the RC behavior of a randomized Hst5 sequence, which shows
similar behavior to the WT sequence (see Figure b). In all of the experiments listed so far,
the overall linear charge density of Hst5 has been conserved while
varying the number of Arg. To determine the extent to which the protein
net charge influences the RC process, a variant of Hst5 was designed
that maintained the three Arg residues present in WT while substituting
all four Lys for alanine (Hst5 0K), thereby decreasing the overall
positive net charge .
Figure 5
Precipitation experiments performed at a fixed protein
concentration
(5.2 mg/mL) with varying TPP concentrations, as a function of the
supernatant concentration against the anion-to-protein ratio (Cs/Cp). (a) Histatin
5 variants containing only single Arg at different positions, keeping
the linear charge density constant, compared with histatin 5 WT. (b)
Randomized histatin 5 sequence and histatin 5 0K, where the charge
of the sequence has been reduced by replacing lysine with alanine,
compared with histatin 5 WT.
Precipitation experiments performed at a fixed protein
concentration
(5.2 mg/mL) with varying TPP concentrations, as a function of the
supernatant concentration against the anion-to-protein ratio (Cs/Cp). (a) Histatin
5 variants containing only single Arg at different positions, keeping
the linear charge density constant, compared with histatin 5 WT. (b)
Randomized histatin 5 sequence and histatin 5 0K, where the charge
of the sequence has been reduced by replacing lysine with alanine,
compared with histatin 5 WT.Precipitation experiments of Hst5 0K show a decrease in C*, C**, and Cmax and
the total amount of protein precipitated from solution compared
to that of Hst5 WT, as shown in Figure b. The shift of the whole RC regime to lower Cs/Cp can be explained
by the decreased net positive charge of Hst5 0K, which results in
a reduction in the number of ions required to both screen the charge
of Hst5 0K and invert the charge of the protein, compared to the WT
and variants, where the protein charge is maintained. Together, these
results confirm that the observed RC process depends on a combination
of the protein net charge and the number of Arg present in the sequence.
Solution Behavior of Hst5 and Variants above C**
To rule out any changes to the protein structure caused
by varying the sequence of Hst5, SAXS spectra were collected in 100
mM NaCl. No changes in structural properties between Hst5 WT and the
variants were visible (see Figure a).
Figure 6
SAXS analysis of histatin 5 and variants performed at
a fixed protein
concentration (5 mg/mL). (a) SAXS spectra of histatin 5 and variants
as indicated in 100 mM NaCl. (b) Radius of gyration (Rg) determined from the SAXS spectra of histatin 5 and
histatin 5 0R in citrate at varying Cs/Cp ratios. (c) Radius of gyration (Rg) determined from the SAXS spectra of histatin
5 and histatin 5 0R in TPP at varying Cs/Cp ratios. (d) Association number (Nass) determined from I0 for histatin 5 and histatin 5 0R in TPP at varying Cs/Cp ratios. The
dashed lines represent the location of C** determined
from the precipitation experiments.
SAXS analysis of histatin 5 and variants performed at
a fixed protein
concentration (5 mg/mL). (a) SAXS spectra of histatin 5 and variants
as indicated in 100 mM NaCl. (b) Radius of gyration (Rg) determined from the SAXS spectra of histatin 5 and
histatin 5 0R in citrate at varying Cs/Cp ratios. (c) Radius of gyration (Rg) determined from the SAXS spectra of histatin
5 and histatin 5 0R in TPP at varying Cs/Cp ratios. (d) Association number (Nass) determined from I0 for histatin 5 and histatin 5 0R in TPP at varying Cs/Cp ratios. The
dashed lines represent the location of C** determined
from the precipitation experiments.Having established that specific Arg–phosphate interactions
affect interprotein interactions of Hst5, we next investigated the
influence of polyvalent anions on the intramolecular interactions
of Hst5 above C** using SAXS. Figure b shows the Rg of Hst5 and Hst5 0R determined in the presence of citrate at varying Cs/Cp ratios. Both
of the peptides show the same tendency of reduction in Rg with increasing citrate concentration, caused by the
formation of larger oligomers at low Cs/Cp, which indicates that even though
no RC is observed in these solutions, clusters or oligomeric species
are formed. Similar oligomeric behavior was also observed in the presence
of TPP (see Figure c), although there is a discrepancy between Hst5 WT and Hst5 0R,
caused by the tendency of Hst5 WT to form oligomers at lower Cs/Cp, as determined
by r Nass, as shown in Figure d. The reader should note that
the association number is higher in the TPP solutions, yet for several
samples, the determined Rg is lower. The
formation of larger clusters by Hst5 WT, compared to that of Hst5
0R, in TPP is not surprising considering that the C** boundary is located at higher Cs/Cp for the WT sample (see the dashed lines in Figure d), indicating that
even above C** the attractive interactions between
Arg and TPP lead to the formation of higher-order oligomers compared
to Hst5 0R. Similarly, although the association number is significantly
higher for WT, the Rg is only higher at
the lowest Cs/Cp value measured. This can be explained by the fact that the stronger
interactions between TPP and the Arg residues of Hst5 WT result in
the compaction of the peptide chain. Comparison of the Kratky plots
obtained at the highest Cs/Cp ratio with those obtained at the lowest values (see Figure ) shows that Hst5
WT forms larger oligomers that are more compact than those formed
by Hst5 0R at low concentrations of TPP. Hence, the interprotein interactions
persist above C**, although the clusters are soluble
in nature.
Figure 7
Comparison between the solution behavior of histatin 5 WT and histatin
5 0R in solutions containing TPP at various anion per protein
ratios (s/Cp ratios compared
to NaCl SAXS data. (a) Precipitation results of histatin 5 WT at 5
mg/mL; data are the same as in Figure . (b) Histatin 5 0R precipitation results for histatin
5 0R. (c) Kratky plots of the histatin 5 SAXS data collected in TPP
solutions at various Cs/Cp ratios. (d) Kratky plots of the histatin 5 0R SAXS data
collected at various Cs/Cp ratios. The horizontal lines in (a) and (b) correspond
to the Cs/Cp ratios shown in (c) and (d).
Comparison between the solution behavior of histatin 5 WT and histatin
5 0R in solutions containing TPP at various anion per protein
ratios (s/Cp ratios compared
to NaCl SAXS data. (a) Precipitation results of histatin 5 WT at 5
mg/mL; data are the same as in Figure . (b) Histatin 5 0R precipitation results for histatin
5 0R. (c) Kratky plots of the histatin 5 SAXS data collected in TPP
solutions at various Cs/Cp ratios. (d) Kratky plots of the histatin 5 0R SAXS data
collected at various Cs/Cp ratios. The horizontal lines in (a) and (b) correspond
to the Cs/Cp ratios shown in (c) and (d).
Influence of Polyvalent Anions on Conformational Properties
of Hst5
In contrast to globular proteins, IDPs lack a well-defined
conformation in solution and instead sample an ensemble of conformations.
Due to the polyelectrolytic nature of IDPs, the conformational ensemble
is influenced by the presence of ions and other cosolutes.[52] For example, divalent cations induce compaction
of an anionic IDP, compared to monovalent salt, and theoretical studies
have suggested that polyvalent ions may cause compaction of polyelectrolytes.[53,54] According to Figure b,c, minor differences were observed between the Rg determined for Hst5 WT and Hst5 0R in TPP, but not citrate.
To exclude that the formation of the secondary structure caused the
compaction, circular dichroism measurements were performed at a low
protein concentration (0.25 mg/mL) in the presence of TPP and compared
with monovalent salt (see Figure ). Only insignificant changes were observed between
the two proteins; thus, the differences in Rg between the two anions were not caused by ion-induced folding.
Figure 8
Circular
dichroism spectra collected at 0.2 mg/mL in 100 mM of
the indicated anion shown for (a) histatin 5 WT and (b) histatin 5
0R.
Circular
dichroism spectra collected at 0.2 mg/mL in 100 mM of
the indicated anion shown for (a) histatin 5 WT and (b) histatin 5
0R.More detailed information about
the influence of the anions on
the conformational ensemble was obtained by SAXS measurements performed
at protein concentrations of 1 mg/mL, below the C* boundary, in the presence of the polyvalent ion TPP. Both Rg and I0 were extracted
by the Guinier analysis of the low-q scattering,
where the I0 values did not show any evidence
of interparticle effects at low protein concentrations. The Rg values determined are shown in Figure . A clear dependence of Rg on the added salt can be observed, where TPP
yields the most compact conformations and NaCl the most extended,
which is in agreement with what one might expect based on the ability
of higher charged ions to induce stronger structural changes of polyelectrolytes.[53,54] It has previously been shown that the structural properties of Hst5
can be accurately captured by computer simulations using a coarse-grained
model, taking into consideration the charges of each amino acid and
the properties of the buffer solution. The simulations were performed
by treating the anions as spheres with charges corresponding to the
charge of each polyvalent anion. The simulations yielded results that
were in agreement with the experimental SAXS data for both Cl and
citrate anions (Figure ); however PP, which has a similar charge to citrate, gave a larger Rg than expected from the experimental SAXS data.
A similar overestimation of Rg was also
observed for TPP. The results suggest that the interaction between
citrate and Hst5 agrees well with that expected of an interaction
between the anion and protein based on electrostatic interactions,
but those of PP and TPP did not. Based on the possible interaction
between Arg and phosphate, an extra attractive term between Arg and
the anion was included in the model to mimic specific nonelectrostatic
interactions. These simulations yielded more accurate results compared
to the experimental data (see Figure ). SAXS data was also collected for Hst5 0R under similar
conditions, where comparison between the SAXS and simulations showed
a closer agreement with the purely electrostatic model, which indicates
that the properties of the polyvalent anion influence not only the
RC behavior but also the properties of the protein conformational
ensemble when Arg residues reside within the sequence.
Figure 9
Radius of gyration (Rg) determined
from experimental SAXS for histatin 5 (blue bars) and histatin 5 0R
(green bars), bead-necklace simulations (orange circles) and bead-necklace
simulation with an added attractive interaction between arginine residues
and the anions (red plus).
Radius of gyration (Rg) determined
from experimental SAXS for histatin 5 (blue bars) and histatin 5 0R
(green bars), bead-necklace simulations (orange circles) and bead-necklace
simulation with an added attractive interaction between arginine residues
and the anions (red plus).
Comparing the RC Behavior of Hst5 with the Globular Lysozyme
Protein
We have shown that the IDP Hst5 can, like globular
proteins, undergo RC despite their different conformational properties.
The RC behavior of the globular protein lysozyme, in the presence
of TPP, has previously been characterized at pH 9.0.[28] The precipitation experiments were repeated at the pH used
for Hst5 in this study, pH 8.4 (see Figure a), and compared with Hst5 solutions containing
the same molar concentration of protein. The observed maximum point
of precipitation is 1.5 times higher for lysozyme compared to that
of Hst5. For the lysozyme measurements, C* is located
at Cs/Cp =
0.5, lower than observed for Hst5, which is Cs/Cp = 0.9, while C** is located at much higher Cs/Cp ratios compared to Hst5. Indeed, inhibiting
the precipitation at Cmax of lysozyme
solutions required fourfold as much NaCl, compared to Hst5 (see Figure b). Similarly to
Hst5, we observed that the concentration of NaCl required to inhibit
precipitation corresponded to the same ionic strength as observed
in solutions at the C** boundary. Combined, there
are some differences between lysozyme and Hst5 RC. We propose that
these differences can be explained based on the increased charge,
size, and number of Arg residues present on lysozyme combined with
the globular nature of the protein. However, despite these differences,
fundamentally similar Arg–phosphate interactions contribute
to the RC of lysozyme in PP/TPP solutions.
Figure 10
Comparison between the
rentrant condensation behavior of histatin
5 and lysozyme. (a) Supernatant concentration as a function of the
anion per protein ratio (Cs/Cp). The dashed line depicts the C* boundary,
the arrows indicate the location of Cmax, and the solid vertical lines depict the C** boundary.
(b) Concentration of the supernatant at the TPP concentration corresponding
to Cmax, performed at varying NaCl concentrations.
The orange dashed line represents the addition of NaCl required to
reach the ionic strength of the solution corresponding to C**.
Comparison between the
rentrant condensation behavior of histatin
5 and lysozyme. (a) Supernatant concentration as a function of the
anion per protein ratio (Cs/Cp). The dashed line depicts the C* boundary,
the arrows indicate the location of Cmax, and the solid vertical lines depict the C** boundary.
(b) Concentration of the supernatant at the TPP concentration corresponding
to Cmax, performed at varying NaCl concentrations.
The orange dashed line represents the addition of NaCl required to
reach the ionic strength of the solution corresponding to C**.The ionic strengths of the solutions
at C**, at
the same protein concentrations, are listed in Table . Based on the Hst5 results, we can speculate
at the ionic strength contribution per Arg residue. Going from Hst5
1R to Hst5 2R, it requires almost double the ionic strength to reach C**. If we make assumptions based on these two data points,
we speculate that four to five combined Arg residues of lysozyme may
participate in the interparticle attractive interactions. This number
does not seem unrealistic as each lysozyme contains 10 solvent-exposed
residues. However, we emphasize that this is based on extrapolation
from two data points. In this estimation, we ignore the contribution
of the increased ionic strength found at C** of lysozyme
solutions; thus, the number of Arg residues is probably higher than
the estimated 4–5.
Table 2
Calculated Ionic
Strengths of the
Solutions at the C** Boundarya
IatC**(mol/L)
I/Arg
Hst5 0R
0.04
Hst5 1R
0.08
0.08
Hst5 2R
0.16
0.08
Hst5 WT
0.16
0.08
lysozyme
0.36
For histatin 5 with one or more
Arg residues, the ionic strength divided by the number of Arg residues
is listed (I/Arg).
For histatin 5 with one or more
Arg residues, the ionic strength divided by the number of Arg residues
is listed (I/Arg).The observed
shifts of C*, Cmax, and C** to different Cs/Cp values (shown in Figure a), in lysozyme/TPP
solutions compared to those in the Hst5/TPP solutions, can be explained
by the contribution of both electrostatic and specific interactions
to the RC behavior of the respective proteins. The decrease in C* is caused by the increased attractive interactions between
lysozyme and TPP due to the higher net positive charge of lysozyme
compared to that of Hst5. The increased positive net charge of lysozyme
may also explain why previous studies observed RC in lysozyme/PP solutions
that we did not observe in Hst5/PP solutions.[28] There is also a modest increase in Cmax (see the arrows in Figure ) caused by the higher ionic strength required to neutralize
the more highly charged lysozyme protein compared to that of Hst5.
Finally, the increase in C** observed in the lysozyme
solutions, compared to that of Hst5, is due to a combination of the
higher net charge of lysozyme and the increased abundance of Arg residues
on the surface of the lysozyme protein.
Conclusions
RC
caused by the charge inversion of cationic and anionic proteins
in the presence of oppositely charged multivalent ions is thought
to be a universal phenomenon.[55] However,
recent experimental studies have shown that in the case of polyphosphate
anions, the process cannot be described by electrostatics alone.[19,28]We hypothesized that specific Arg–phosphate interactions
(Figure a) may provide
additional attractive interactions required to explain the RC of lysozyme
in the presence of TPP/PP solutions. We have shown that Hst5 can,
like lysozyme, undergo RC in the presence of TPP (Figure b). In a similar manner to
lysozyme, the charge of Hst5 decreases, passes through zero, and becomes
negative upon increasing TPP concentrations (see Figure b). Quantitatively, the concentration
range for the RC regime is more narrow for Hst5 compared to that for
lysozyme, caused by an increase in C* and a decrease
in C**. Measurements of variants that differed in
the amount of Arg indicated that the locations of both C* and C** are determined by the number of Arg residues,
as shown in Figure b. By increasing the ionic strength of the solutions at the maximum
point of precipitation by the addition of NaCl, we showed that the
location of C** is determined by the ionic strength
of the solution and thus can be described by an electrostatic-screening
effect, while C* only increased upon complete depletion
of Arg from the sequence. We propose the mechanism depicted in Figure c–e: at
low Cs/Cp,
the protein is positively charged and molecules repel each other,
increasing the anion concentration, which results in ion binding to
the protein surface. When Arg residues are present, this occurs at
a lower Cs/Cp due to the increased strength of interaction compared to Lys (Figure a); at Cs/Cp ratios above C**, the charge of the protein is inverted, reintroducing
repulsive interactions.[17,19,24] The presence of C** is determined by the ionic
strength required to screen the Arg– and Lys–phosphate
interactions. This requires a higher concentration for the former
and thus C** is located at a higher Cs/Cp ratio.
Figure 11
Schematic depiction
of results. (a) Arginine can form additional
attractive interactions with the phosphate groups, such as those present
on tripolyphosphate (TPP, compared to Lys. (b) Top: ζ-potential
measurements depict a similar charge inversion for both histatin 5
WT and histatin 5 0R in the presence of TPP. Bottom: comparison of
the reentrant condensation (RC) behavior between histatin 5 WT (red)
and histatin 5 0R (black). Distinct differences in both C* and C** are observed despite the similar net charges
of the proteins. C* is located at lower anion
per protein ratio ( ratios in histatin 5 WT due to the additional
attractive interactions between Arg and phosphate, while C** is located at higher ratios due to the additional ionic strength
required to screen out the interactions. (c–e) Schematic depiction
of the RC process of histatin 5. At low Cs/Cp, histatin 5 maintains its net positive
charge inducing repulsion. Between C* and C**, ion-bridging is observed causing cross-linking effect
and consequent precipitation, whereas above C**,
the charge of histatin 5 is inverted, and long-ranged electrostatic
repulsion is reintroduced.
Schematic depiction
of results. (a) Arginine can form additional
attractive interactions with the phosphate groups, such as those present
on tripolyphosphate (TPP, compared to Lys. (b) Top: ζ-potential
measurements depict a similar charge inversion for both histatin 5
WT and histatin 5 0R in the presence of TPP. Bottom: comparison of
the reentrant condensation (RC) behavior between histatin 5 WT (red)
and histatin 5 0R (black). Distinct differences in both C* and C** are observed despite the similar net charges
of the proteins. C* is located at lower anion
per protein ratio ( ratios in histatin 5 WT due to the additional
attractive interactions between Arg and phosphate, while C** is located at higher ratios due to the additional ionic strength
required to screen out the interactions. (c–e) Schematic depiction
of the RC process of histatin 5. At low Cs/Cp, histatin 5 maintains its net positive
charge inducing repulsion. Between C* and C**, ion-bridging is observed causing cross-linking effect
and consequent precipitation, whereas above C**,
the charge of histatin 5 is inverted, and long-ranged electrostatic
repulsion is reintroduced.The interactions between Arg and TPP were further characterized
by SAXS. While Hst5–citrate interactions gave an Rg close to those determined by simulations that only considered
the charge of the anions, the corresponding numbers for TPP and PP
were overestimated. The addition of an extra attractive interaction
between Arg and the anion provided more comparable results, indicating
that specific Arg–phosphate interactions not only determine
the RC behavior but also influence the conformational ensemble. The
RC behavior observed in protein–polyphosphate solutions can
therefore be explained by a combination of charge inversion and additional
Arg–phosphate interactions.The implication of RC-induced
polyphosphates may have more general
applications in the area of IDP aggregation. Reduction of solubility
of both IDPs and globular proteins by polyphosphates has been shown
to control fibril formation.[56] This topic
is of special interest in the field of amyloid proteins, where polyphosphates
have been shown to influence the morphology of amyloid fibrils formed.[57,58]
Authors: Anna Kubíčková; Tomáš Křížek; Pavel Coufal; Mario Vazdar; Erik Wernersson; Jan Heyda; Pavel Jungwirth Journal: Phys Rev Lett Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 9.161
Authors: Felix Roosen-Runge; Benjamin S Heck; Fajun Zhang; Oliver Kohlbacher; Frank Schreiber Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 2.991
Authors: Henry S Kim; Anne Martel; Eric Girard; Martine Moulin; Michael Härtlein; Dominique Madern; Martin Blackledge; Bruno Franzetti; Frank Gabel Journal: Biophys J Date: 2016-05-24 Impact factor: 4.033
Authors: Erin F Hammonds; Megan Cleland Harwig; Emeleeta A Paintsil; Emma A Tillison; R Blake Hill; Emma A Morrison Journal: Biophys Chem Date: 2022-02-02 Impact factor: 2.352