Wei Zhou1,2, Naoe Kaneko1,3, Tomoya Nakagita2, Hiroyuki Takeda4, Junya Masumoto5,6. 1. Department of Analytical Pathology, Ehime University Graduate School of Medicine, Toon, Ehime, Japan. 2. Division of Proteo-Drug-Discovery Sciences, Ehime University Proteo-Science Center, Matsuyama, Ehime, Japan. 3. Division of Pathology, Ehime University Proteo-Science Center, Toon, Ehime, Japan. 4. Division of Proteo-Drug-Discovery Sciences, Ehime University Proteo-Science Center, Matsuyama, Ehime, Japan. takeda.hiroyuki.mk@ehime-u.ac.jp. 5. Department of Analytical Pathology, Ehime University Graduate School of Medicine, Toon, Ehime, Japan. masumoto@m.ehime-u.ac.jp. 6. Division of Pathology, Ehime University Proteo-Science Center, Toon, Ehime, Japan. masumoto@m.ehime-u.ac.jp.
Abstract
Human death domain superfamily proteins (DDSPs) play important roles in many signaling pathways involved in cell death and inflammation. Disruption or constitutive activation of these DDSP interactions due to inherited gene mutations is closely related to immunodeficiency and/or autoinflammatory diseases; however, responsible gene mutations have not been found in phenotypical diagnosis of these diseases. In this study, we comprehensively investigated the interactions of death-fold domains to explore the signaling network mediated by human DDSPs. We obtained 116 domains of DDSPs and conducted a domain-domain interaction assay of 13,924 reactions in duplicate using amplified luminescent proximity homogeneous assay. The data were mostly consistent with previously reported interactions. We also found new possible interactions, including an interaction between the caspase recruitment domain (CARD) of CARD10 and the tandem CARD-CARD domain of NOD2, which was confirmed by reciprocal co-immunoprecipitation. This study enables prediction of the interaction network of human DDSPs, sheds light on pathogenic mechanisms, and will facilitate identification of drug targets for treatment of immunodeficiency and autoinflammatory diseases.
Human death domain superfamily proteins (DDSPs) play important roles in many signaling pathways involved in cell death and inflammation. Disruption or constitutive activation of these DDSP interactions due to inherited gene mutations is closely related to immunodeficiency and/or autoinflammatory diseases; however, responsible gene mutations have not been found in phenotypical diagnosis of these diseases. In this study, we comprehensively investigated the interactions of death-fold domains to explore the signaling network mediated by human DDSPs. We obtained 116 domains of DDSPs and conducted a domain-domain interaction assay of 13,924 reactions in duplicate using amplified luminescent proximity homogeneous assay. The data were mostly consistent with previously reported interactions. We also found new possible interactions, including an interaction between the caspase recruitment domain (CARD) of CARD10 and the tandem CARD-CARD domain of NOD2, which was confirmed by reciprocal co-immunoprecipitation. This study enables prediction of the interaction network of human DDSPs, sheds light on pathogenic mechanisms, and will facilitate identification of drug targets for treatment of immunodeficiency and autoinflammatory diseases.
The human death domain (DD) superfamily is one of the largest and most studied domain superfamilies. It comprises four subfamilies called the DD subfamily, the death effector domain (DED) subfamily, the caspase recruitment domain (CARD) subfamily, and the pyrin domain (PYD) subfamily [1, 2]. Death domain superfamily proteins (DDSPs) are characterized by containing death-fold domains (DFDs) and function in various signaling pathways involved in apoptosis and inflammation by assembling oligomeric complexes via homotypic binding and inducing caspase and/or kinase activation [3].Genetic mutations in DFD-containing proteins often cause various immunodeficiency and autoinflammatory diseases [4]. For example, Fas-associated death domain (FADD) interacts with Fas through its DD and recruits pro-caspase‐8 through its DED to form the death-inducing signaling complex (DISC) [5]. Mutations of Fas that lead to the disruption of DISC formation cause autoimmune lymphoproliferative syndrome [6, 7]. NLRP3 interacts with apoptosis-associated speck-like protein containing a CARD (ASC) through its PYD and recruits pro-caspase‐1 through the CARD of ASC to form the inflammasome. Mutations of NLRP3 that lead to constitutive activation of the inflammasome cause an autoinflammatory disease called cryopyrin-associated periodic syndrome [8, 9]. Many autoinflammatory diseases are regarded as rare diseases, with few patients, and their pathogenesis has not been fully elucidated [10, 11].Although much evidence have been accumulated, no mutations of responsible genes for these diseases have been identified, even in phenotypically diagnosed cases [12]. This prompted us to comprehensively analyze the interactions between all DDSPs, which may provide clues to decipher the pathways and factors associated with immunodeficiency and autoinflammatory diseases.In this study, we focused on domain–domain interactions rather than on full-length protein–protein interactions. As shown in the diagram in Fig. 1, many DDSPs are inactive in the absence of upstream signals and therefore fail to interact with their partner proteins [13]. However, the domains of DDSPs are theoretically expected to be able to bind to the domains of their partners without interference.
Fig. 1
Domains are more suitable than full-length proteins for studying domain–domain interactions between DDSPs.
Full-length DDSPs are inactive in the absence of upstream signals. Domains are theoretically expected to bind to their partner domains without interference.
Domains are more suitable than full-length proteins for studying domain–domain interactions between DDSPs.
Full-length DDSPs are inactive in the absence of upstream signals. Domains are theoretically expected to bind to their partner domains without interference.We synthesized FLAG- and biotin-tagged recombinant DDs, DEDs, CARDs, and PYDs using the wheat germ cell-free synthesis system and investigated domain–domain interactions using the amplified luminescence proximity homogeneous assay (ALPHA) to elucidate the interaction network of DDSPs.
Materials and methods
Collection of cDNA clones encoding human DDSP domains
cDNA clones encoding human DDSP domains (Supplementary Table S1) were collected from the cDNA resources of the Kazusa DNA Research Institute [14], the Mammalian Gene Collection [15], and the nonprofit repository of Addgene.
Construction of tagged recombinant cDNA plasmids
Genes encoding DDSP domains were amplified by PCR using cDNA as templates. Overlapping sequences were added at the 5′ and 3′ ends for seamless cloning. DNA fragments encoding 27 DDSP domains were prepared by the GeneArt Gene Synthesis service (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Amplified DNA fragments were subcloned into the pEU-E01-GW-FLAG and pEU-E01-GW-bls vectors using Gibson Assembly seamless cloning. After subcloning, pEU expression plasmids were arranged in a 96-well format and stored as glycerol stocks. The glycerol stocks were diluted with TE buffer and used as templates of PCR. Template DNA fragments for transcription were PCR-amplified using the SPu-2 primer (5′-CAGTAAGCCAGATGCTACAC-3′) and AODA2306 primer (5′-AGCGTCAGACCCCGTAGAAA-3′).
Preparation of recombinant DDSP domains using a wheat germ cell-free synthesis system
The tagged recombinant human DDSP domains were synthesized using a wheat germ cell-free synthesis system [16]. Transcription and translation reactions were conducted using a WEPRO7240 Expression Kit (CellFree Sciences, Matsuyama, Japan). The transcription reaction mixture was prepared by mixing 2.5 µL of transcription buffer LM, 1.25 µL of NTP mixture (25 mM each), 0.25 µL of RNase inhibitor, 0.5 µL of SP6 polymerase, and 2.5 µL of PCR product in a 96-well plate. The transcription reaction was incubated at 37 °C for 18 h. Twenty-five microliters of the translation mixture containing 12.5 µL of mRNA, 8 µL of WEPRO 7240 wheat germ extract, 0.1 µL of creatine kinase (20 mg/mL) (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland), and 0.5 µL of RNase inhibitor was prepared and overlaid with 125 µL of translation buffer (SUB-AMIX SGC) in a 96-well plate. The biotin ligation site was biotinylated enzymatically by adding BirA biotin ligase and biotin (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) to the translation mixture [17]. The plate containing the translation reaction was incubated at 15 °C for 24 h.
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)
Cell-free synthesized DDSP domains were diluted 20-fold, injected into a 96-well MaxiSorp plate (Nunc, Rochester, NY, USA), and incubated overnight at 4 °C. After washing with Tris-buffered saline containing 0.1% Tween 20 (TBST), the plate was blocked with TBST containing 5% skimmed milk for 1 h at room temperature. Next, the plate was incubated with an anti-DYKDDDDK tag monoclonal antibody (012–22384, FUJIFILM Wako Pure Chemical, Osaka, Japan) or anti-biotin antibody (A4541, Sigma-Aldrich) diluted 1:2000 and 1:1000, respectively, in TBST containing 5% skimmed milk for 1 h at room temperature. Thereafter, the plate was washed three times with TBST and incubated with a horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse IgG secondary antibody (GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL, USA) diluted in TBST containing 5% skimmed milk for 1 h at room temperature. Finally, 50 µL of tetramethylbenzidine liquid substrate (Sigma-Aldrich) was injected into the plate and incubated for 15–30 min at room temperature. The reaction was terminated by injecting the same volume of 1 M HCl. Absorbance at 450 nm was measured using a SpectraMAX M3 plate reader (Molecular Devices, San Jose, CA, USA).
All ALPHA reactions were conducted in an AlphaPlate-384 microplate (PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA, USA). All proteins and reagents were diluted in reaction buffer [100 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 0.01% Tween 20, and 1 mg/mL bovine serum albumin]. Twenty microliters of solution containing 0.4 μL of a biotin-tagged domain in reaction buffer was dispensed into the reaction plate (two domains per plate, 192 replicates) using a Viaflo automated multichannel pipette and the Viaflo Assist system (Integra, Hudson, NH, USA). Next, 0.4 µL of FLAG-tagged domain was transferred to the reaction plate (96 domains per plate, four replicates) using the Janus automated dispensing workstation (PerkinElmer) and Nanohead, a 384-well micro-syringe head (PerkinElmer). This procedure allowed 192 combinations of FLAG- and biotin-tagged domains to be mixed together in duplicate per assay plate. Then, 9.6 μL of detection mixture containing 0.02 μL of an anti-DYKDDDDK tag monoclonal antibody, 0.06 μL of streptavidin-conjugated AlphaScreen donor beads, and 0.06 μL of protein A-conjugated AlphaScreen acceptor beads in reaction buffer was added to each well of the reaction plate using a FlexDrop dropper (PerkinElmer). The detailed dispensing scheme and well layout are shown in Supplementary Fig. S1. After incubation at 25 °C for 24 h, the ALPHA chemiluminescence signal was detected by an EnVision Multilabel Plate Reader (PerkinElmer). The signal data obtained were exported to Microsoft Excel, and the median values of duplicate reactions were calculated. For the heat map, the color scale feature of Microsoft Excel was used to visualize the signal strength. MA plots and bubble charts were drawn using DataGraph (http://www.visualdatatools.com/DataGraph/).
Immunoprecipitation
Genes encoding DDSP domains were inserted into the pcDNA3 mammalian expression vector with a FLAG or a 3×AGIA tag [18] at the C-terminus. HEK293T cells were maintained in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle’s Medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific) supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, penicillin, and streptomycin. Transfection was performed using the calcium phosphate method. Briefly, plasmids were diluted in 440 μL of distilled water and 60 μL of 2 M CaCl2, mixed with 500 μL of 2× HEPES buffer [50 mM HEPES (pH 7.00), 280 mM NaCl, and 1.5 mM Na2HPO4], and added to each 10 mL well containing HEK293T cells. A total of 1 × 106 HEK293T cells were transfected with 1 μg of each of the following expression plasmid sets: pcDNA3-AIM2-PYD-AGIA and pcDNA3-NLRP9-PYD-FLAG, pcDNA3-AIM2-PYD-AGIA and pcDNA3-ASC-CARD-FLAG, pcDNA3-NLRC4-CARD-AGIA and pcDNA3-ASC-CARD-FLAG, and pcDNA3-NOD2-CARD1-CARD2-AGIA and pcDNA3-CARD10-CARD-FLAG. Transfected cells were lysed in 1000 μL of NP-40 buffer [1% Nonidet P-40, 142.5 mmol/L KCl, 5 mmol/L MgCl2, 10 mmol/L HEPES (pH 7.6), and 1 mmol/L ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid] supplemented with a cOmplete Mini Protease Inhibitor Cocktail tablet (Roche Diagnostics). Cell lysates were centrifuged. Supernatants were mixed with an anti-AGIA tag monoclonal antibody (in-house made) [18] or with an anti-FLAG M2 monoclonal antibody (F3165, Sigma-Aldrich) together with protein A beads (Invitrogen) and incubated for 3 h at 4 °C. The beads were washed with NP-40 buffer and precipitates were subjected to SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting. Blotting membranes were incubated with the anti-FLAG M2 monoclonal antibody or an anti-AGIA tag monoclonal antibody.
Results
Human DDSP domain expression plasmids were constructed
Tagged expression plasmids were constructed for cell-free synthesis of DDSP domains. We first collected the cDNA sequences of human DFD-containing proteins from public databases such as RefSeq (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/refseq/) and UniProt (https://www.uniprot.org/). Next, we extracted the DFD fragments using their annotations and domain prediction tools including PROSITE (https://prosite.expasy.org/) and SMART (http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de/). Eventually, we identified 108 DDSP domains, including 36 DDs, 11 DEDs, 39 CARDs, and 22 PYDs. In addition, there were eight DDSP domains containing tandem DFDs, such as CARD–CARD, DED–DED, CARD–DD, PYD–CARD, and DED–DD. Including all such tandem domains, the total number of DDSP domains in this study was 116 (Supplementary Table S1). We constructed cell-free expression plasmids to synthesize all the domains tagged with FLAG or biotin at the C-terminus.
Human DDSP domains were synthesized using the wheat germ cell-free synthesis system
Using the wheat germ cell-free protein synthesis system and expression plasmids, we synthesized 232 recombinant DDSP domains, including 116 FLAG-tagged and 116 biotin-tagged domains. In addition, we used dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) and Venus fluorescent protein (Venus) tagged with FLAG and biotin respectively as control proteins for cell-free synthesis and ALPHA [19, 20].To evaluate the expression levels of DDSP domains, ELISAs were performed using an anti-FLAG antibody (Fig. 2A) and an anti-biotin antibody (Fig. 2B), respectively (Supplementary Table S2). All the domains, both FLAG- and biotin-tagged, were expressed at a level equal to or higher than expression of DHFR, which was used as a positive control. Furthermore, the expression levels of the DDSP domains were 50–900% of that of Venus, indicating that all the DDSP domains were sufficiently expressed for the comprehensive interaction assay.
Fig. 2
Expression levels of DDSP domains were evaluated by ELISA.
DHFR and Venus were used as positive controls. The longitudinal axis shows the ELISA values representing expression levels and the horizontal axis shows the 116 domains and 2 controls listed in Supplementary Table S2. A Expression levels of 116 FLAG-tagged domains and 2 FLAG-tagged controls. B Expression levels of 116 biotin-tagged domains and 2 biotin-tagged controls.
Expression levels of DDSP domains were evaluated by ELISA.
DHFR and Venus were used as positive controls. The longitudinal axis shows the ELISA values representing expression levels and the horizontal axis shows the 116 domains and 2 controls listed in Supplementary Table S2. A Expression levels of 116 FLAG-tagged domains and 2 FLAG-tagged controls. B Expression levels of 116 biotin-tagged domains and 2 biotin-tagged controls.
Human DDSP domain interactions were comprehensively analyzed by ALPHA
A total of 13,924 domain–domain reactions [118 FLAG-tagged domains (116 DDSP domains plus 2 negative controls) × 118 biotin-tagged domains (116 DDSP domains plus 2 negative controls)] were conducted in duplicate in the ALPHA assay.The results are listed in Supplementary Table S3, which shows the median ALPHA signals detected in two repeats. The highest value was 119,174 relative luminescence units (RLU) (APAF1_CARD-FLAG × CASP9_CARD-biotin) and the lowest value was 166 RLU. The median value was 296 RLU. A total of 799 pairs had signals higher than 1 × 103 RLU, among which 236 pairs had signals higher than 2 × 103 RLU and 95 pairs had signals higher than 5 × 103 RLU (Fig. 3 and Supplementary Table S3).
Fig. 3
Heat map displays all the ALPHA results.
There were 13,924 reactions between FLAG-tagged (116 domains plus 2 negative controls) and biotin-tagged (116 domains plus 2 negative controls) domains. The longitudinal axis shows FLAG-tagged domains and the horizontal axis shows biotin-tagged domains. The position of each point indicates the specific domain pair. Red points represent positive domain–domain interactions. The shade of red indicates the median value of two repeats in the ALPHA.
Heat map displays all the ALPHA results.
There were 13,924 reactions between FLAG-tagged (116 domains plus 2 negative controls) and biotin-tagged (116 domains plus 2 negative controls) domains. The longitudinal axis shows FLAG-tagged domains and the horizontal axis shows biotin-tagged domains. The position of each point indicates the specific domain pair. Red points represent positive domain–domain interactions. The shade of red indicates the median value of two repeats in the ALPHA.To clarify the distribution and strength of the interactions, the values in Supplementary Table S3 were visualized as a heat map (Fig. 3). The longitudinal axis shows FLAG-tagged domains and the horizontal axis shows biotin-tagged domains. The position of each point indicates the combination of each domain–domain pair. The color of each point indicates the strength of ALPHA signals, indicating possible interactions between DDSP domains. Darker shades of red indicate stronger ALPHA signals, which are highly suggestive of interactions between the specific domains. White, which accounts for the majority of the heat map, indicates that an interaction was not detected.We assessed the reproducibility of the assay between two repeats using an MA plot (Fig. 4). Each point represents the log2 fold change (0.5–2) in two repeats. The red dashed lines represent the fold change threshold (±1). A total of 98.74% of the points were located between the two red dashed lines. This shows that more than 98% of the reactions were reproducible, demonstrating that this assay was highly reproducible and reliable.
Fig. 4
The ALPHA is highly reproducible between two repeats.
An MA plot shows the reproducibility of 13,924 reactions between two repeats in the ALPHA. Each point represents the log2 fold change (0.5–2) in two repeats. The red dashed lines represent the fold change threshold (±1). A total of 98.74% of the points were located between the two red dashed lines, demonstrating that this assay was highly reproducible and reliable.
The ALPHA is highly reproducible between two repeats.
An MA plot shows the reproducibility of 13,924 reactions between two repeats in the ALPHA. Each point represents the log2 fold change (0.5–2) in two repeats. The red dashed lines represent the fold change threshold (±1). A total of 98.74% of the points were located between the two red dashed lines, demonstrating that this assay was highly reproducible and reliable.
More positive interactions tend to be from the self-interacting pairs than those nonself-interacting ones
Human DDSP domains function in various signaling pathways involved in cell death and inflammation by oligomerizing with each other, which promotes interactions between proteins [2]. In this assay, therefore, we particularly compared self-interacting and nonself-interacting pairs. The 116 self-interacting pairs are located along the diagonal in Fig. 3, including six DDSPs containing homogeneous tandem DFDs (No. 028, 035, 039, 057, 092, and 102) and three DDSPs containing heterogeneous tandem DFDs (Nos. 010, 041, and 052). Among the 116 self-interacting pairs, the interactions of 38, which accounts for 32.8%, were strong with ALPHA signals higher than 1 × 103 RLU. Meanwhile, among the 13,340 nonself-interacting pairs located on either side of the diagonal, the interactions of 761 (5.7%) were strong with ALPHA signals higher than 1 × 103 RLU. Comparison of the percentages of positive results between self-interacting (32.8%) and nonself-interacting (5.7%) pairs implies that self-interacting pairs, which interact via homotypic binding, tend to interact more readily than nonself-interacting pairs.
Symmetrically distributed nonself-interacting pairs in the heat map confirm previously identified heterotypic interacting pairs and indicate new interacting pairs
We focused on the red points of nonself-interacting pairs symmetrically distributed on both sides of the diagonal in the heat map (Fig. 3, hereafter called double-sided interactions). They correspond to interactions of nonself-interacting pairs that were unaffected by swapping the tag (FLAG and biotin), indicating they are highly reliable interactions. All such double-sided interactions with ALPHA signals higher than 1 × 103 RLU irrespective of the tags used (FLAG × biotin and biotin × FLAG) were extracted and listed in Table 1. Among the 57 pairs, 39 were homotypic and 11 were heterotypic. Thirty-seven (65%) interactions have been previously reported, including 29 homotypic domain interactions and 1 heterotypic domain interaction, demonstrating the high reliability of the results (Table 1). The remaining ten homotypic domain interactions (CARD14_CARD × CARD19_CARD, CARD16_CARD × CARD8_CARD, CARD16_CARD × NLRC4_CARD, CRADD_DD × IRAK1_DD, IRAK1_DD × TNFRSF25_DD, PYRIN_PYD × NLRP4_PYD, PYRIN_PYD × NLRP9_PYD, NLRP14_PYD × NLRP4_PYD, NLRP14_PYD × NLRP9_PYD, and NLRP4_PYD × NLRP9_PYD) and ten heterotypic domain interactions (ANKDD1A_DD × CASP12_CARD, ANKDD1A_DD × NLRC3_CARD, DAPK1_DD × PYDC2_PYD, IRAK1_DD × NLRP4_PYD, IRAK1_DD × NLRP8_PYD, IRAK4_DD × NLRP9_PYD, MYD88_DD × NLRC3_CARD, MYD88_DD × NOD2_CARD2, NLRC3_CARD × NLRP4_PYD, and NLRC5_CARD × NLRP9_PYD) have not been previously reported (Fig. 5). These interactions must be confirmed by in vitro and in vivo studies.
Table 1
Double-sided interacting pairs.
Combination of death domains
ALPHA signal (RLU)
Interaction
DFD 1
DFD 2
Homo/hetero
VaProS (updated: December 8, 2020)
BioGRID (build 4.1.190)
Others
No.
Name
No.
Name
DFD 1: DFD 2:
FLAG Biotin
Biotin FLAG
Description
PubMed ID
Interaction confirmed by
PubMed ID
Description/PubMed ID
001
AIM2_PYD
009
ASC_PYD
Homotypic
8602
4522
Association
24630722
N/A
AIM2 inflammasome
005
ANKDD1A_DD
029
CASP12_CARD
Heterotypic
2058
1148
N/A
N/A
Not found
005
ANKDD1A_DD
071
NLRC3_CARD
Heterotypic
964
3554
N/A
N/A
Not found
007
APAF1_CARD
036
CASP9_CARD
Homotypic
119,174
104,846
Direct interaction
9390557
Affinity Capture-MS
17643375
Apoptosome
008
ASC_CARD
018
CARD16_CARD
Homotypic
1972
2184
N/A
N/A
25973362
008
ASC_CARD
025
CASP1_CARD
Homotypic
1924
11,030
Direct interaction
24630722
Affinity Capture-Western
26121674
Inflammasome
008
ASC_CARD
072
NLRC4_CARD
Homotypic
2690
12,412
Association
12646168
Two-hybrid
11374873
NLRC4 inflammasome
010
ASC_PYD-CARD
025
CASP1_CARD
Homotypic
1728
4880
Direct interaction
24630722
Affinity Capture-Western
26121674
Inflammasome
010
ASC_PYD-CARD
072
NLRC4_CARD
Homotypic
1688
4502
Association
12646168
Two-hybrid
11374873
NLRC4 inflammasome
017
CARD14_CARD
021
CARD19_CARD
Homotypic
1834
956
N/A
N/A
Not found
018
CARD16_CARD
023
CARD8_CARD
Homotypic
1090
1434
N/A
N/A
Not found
018
CARD16_CARD
025
CASP1_CARD
Homotypic
14,594
11,976
N/A
Affinity Capture-MS
31091453
11432859
018
CARD16_CARD
072
NLRC4_CARD
Homotypic
958
13,094
N/A
N/A
Direct interaction not approved
019
CARD17_CARD
025
CASP1_CARD
Homotypic
1516
9228
Direct interaction
27043298
N/A
15383541
020
CARD18_CARD
025
CASP1_CARD
Homotypic
1458
12,258
Direct interaction
27043298
N/A
11051551
023
CARD8_CARD
025
CASP1_CARD
Homotypic
1610
11,702
N/A
N/A
11821383
028
CASP10_DED1-DED2
035
CASP8_DED1-DED2
Homotypic
5312
5596
Association
12887920
Affinity Capture-MS
19615732
028
CASP10_DED1-DED2
039
CFLAR_DED1-DED2
Homotypic
8826
24,620
Association
23541952
Affinity Capture-MS
21303910
23070002
028
CASP10_DED1-DED2
051
FADD_DED
Homotypic
6358
31,336
Direct interaction
11717445
Affinity Capture-MS
19615732
9184224
028
CASP10_DED1-DED2
052
FADD_DED-DD
10,204
20,660
Direct interaction
11717445
Affinity Capture-MS
19615732
9184224
030
CASP2_CARD
041
CRADD_CARD-DD
14,156
2416
Association
11156409
Affinity Capture-MS
20562859
033
CASP8_DED1
061
IRAK3_DD
Heterotypic
968
1346
N/A
N/A
30372424
034
CASP8_DED2
039
CFLAR_DED1-DED2
Homotypic
9886
5338
Protein cleavage
12887920
Affinity Capture-MS
21303910
035
CASP8_DED1-DED2
039
CFLAR_DED1-DED2
Homotypic
12,804
4088
Protein cleavage
12887920
Affinity Capture-MS
21303910
035
CASP8_DED1-DED2
051
FADD_DED
Homotypic
6866
6856
Protein cleavage
12887920
Affinity Capture-MS
19615732
9184224
035
CASP8_DED1-DED2
052
FADD_DED-DD
9378
11,018
Protein cleavage
12887920
Affinity Capture-MS
19615732
9184224
039
CFLAR_DED1-DED2
051
FADD_DED
Homotypic
2848
20,516
Association
17047155
Affinity Capture-MS
19369198
9184224
039
CFLAR_DED1-DED2
052
FADD_DED-DD
14,072
20,116
Association
17047155
Affinity Capture-MS
19369198
9184224
042
CRADD_DD
058
IRAK1_DD
Homotypic
1632
964
N/A
N/A
Direct interaction not approved
043
DAPK1_DD
097
PYDC2_PYD
Heterotypic
3536
970
N/A
N/A
Not found
050
FADD_DD
103
RIPK1_DD
Homotypic
3828
52,618
Association
19524513
Affinity Capture-MS
26186194
9184224
050
FADD_DD
111
TRADD_DD
Homotypic
1384
14,500
Association
30561431
Affinity Capture-MS
21145461
9184224
052
FADD_DED-DD
103
RIPK1_DD
20,016
30,588
Association
19524513
Affinity Capture-MS
26186194
8947041
052
FADD_DED-DD
111
TRADD_DD
39,570
31,748
Association
30561431
Affinity Capture-MS
21145461
8565075
052
FADD_DED-DD
108
TNFRSF1A_DD
964
5568
Physical association
30561431
Affinity Capture-Western
8565075
058
IRAK1_DD
059
IRAK2_DD
Homotypic
5756
1960
Physical association
10383454
Affinity Capture-MS
26186194
058
IRAK1_DD
061
IRAK4_DD
Homotypic
1644
1630
Physical association
12860405
Affinity Capture-MS
26496610
058
IRAK1_DD
067
MYD88_DD
Homotypic
4038
2594
Physical association
17567694
Affinity Capture-MS
22623428
058
IRAK1_DD
083
NLRP4_PYD
Heterotypic
980
1062
N/A
N/A
Not found
058
IRAK1_DD
087
NLRP8_PYD
Heterotypic
1158
2224
N/A
N/A
Not found
058
IRAK1_DD
110
TNFRSF25_DD
Homotypic
958
976
N/A
N/A
Direct interaction not approved
061
IRAK4_DD
088
NLRP9_PYD
Heterotypic
1176
1072
N/A
N/A
Not found
065
PYRIN_PYD
083
NLRP4_PYD
Homotypic
1280
3860
N/A
N/A
Not found
065
PYRIN_PYD
088
NLRP9_PYD
Homotypic
1064
4656
N/A
N/A
Not found
067
MYD88_DD
071
NLRC3_CARD
Heterotypic
1144
4342
N/A
N/A
Not found
067
MYD88_DD
091
NOD2_CARD2
Heterotypic
1432
3318
N/A
N/A
Direct interaction not approved
071
NLRC3_CARD
083
NLRP4_PYD
Heterotypic
1674
976
N/A
N/A
Not found
073
NLRC5_CARD
088
NLRP9_PYD
Heterotypic
968
1088
N/A
N/A
Not found
080
NLRP14_PYD
083
NLRP4_PYD
Homotypic
1166
998
N/A
N/A
Not found
080
NLRP14_PYD
088
NLRP9_PYD
Homotypic
1044
970
N/A
N/A
Not found
083
NLRP4_PYD
088
NLRP9_PYD
Homotypic
2468
4868
N/A
N/A
Not found
103
RIPK1_DD
108
TNFRSF1A_DD
Homotypic
3886
11,094
Physical association
16611992
Affinity Capture-MS
21145461
9184224
103
RIPK1_DD
110
TNFRSF25_DD
Homotypic
1762
1122
N/A
Affinity Capture-MS
26186194
103
RIPK1_DD
111
TRADD_DD
Homotypic
6130
3896
Physical association
8612133
Affinity Capture-MS
18655028
9184224
108
TNFRSF1A_DD
110
TNFRSF25_DD
Homotypic
13,248
3080
N/A
N/A
9184224
108
TNFRSF1A_DD
111
TRADD_DD
Homotypic
33,190
43,604
Physical association
7758105
Affinity Capture-MS
21670149
9184224
110
TNFRSF25_DD
111
TRADD_DD
Homotypic
19,914
55,078
N/A
Affinity Capture-Luminescence
22939624
9184224
Combinations with ALPHA signals higher than 1 × 103 RLU in both FLAG × biotin and biotin × FLAG pairs, including 57 domain–domain pairs (53 protein–protein pairs). The interaction information was obtained from the following databases: VaProS (https://vapros.org/) and BioGRID (https://thebiogrid.org/). Representative references are listed.
Fig. 5
Twenty novel putative interactions were identified in this study.
Double-sided interacting pairs are indicated. The bars indicate the ALPHA signals detected using various combinations of FLAG- and biotin-tagged proteins.
Double-sided interacting pairs.Combinations with ALPHA signals higher than 1 × 103 RLU in both FLAG × biotin and biotin × FLAG pairs, including 57 domain–domain pairs (53 protein–protein pairs). The interaction information was obtained from the following databases: VaProS (https://vapros.org/) and BioGRID (https://thebiogrid.org/). Representative references are listed.
Twenty novel putative interactions were identified in this study.
Double-sided interacting pairs are indicated. The bars indicate the ALPHA signals detected using various combinations of FLAG- and biotin-tagged proteins.
Asymmetrically distributed nonself-interacting pairs in the heat map indicate possible interactions that require further confirmation
Some points were asymmetrically distributed across the heat map and there was no corresponding symmetric interaction on the opposite side of the diagonal (Fig. 3, hereafter called one-sided interactions). All such one-sided interactions that had ALPHA signals higher than 2 × 103 RLU with either the FLAG × biotin or biotin × FLAG pair were extracted and listed in Table 2. Among the 129 pairs, 45 were homotypic and 80 were heterotypic. Furthermore, 17 interactions have been previously reported, including 8 homotypic interactions and 4 heterotypic interactions.
Table 2
Combinations hinting at possible interactions.
Combination of death domains
AlphaScreen signal (RLU)
Interaction
Biotin-tagged domain
FLAG-tagged domain
Homo/hetero
VaProS (updated: December 8, 2020)
BioGRID (build 4.1.190)
No.
Name
No.
Name
Description
PubMed ID
Interaction confirmed by
PubMed ID
003
ANK2_DD
015
CARD10_CARD
Heterotypic
3296
N/A
N/A
003
ANK2_DD
047
DTHD1_DD
Homotypic
11,380
N/A
N/A
003
ANK2_DD
111
TRADD_DD
Homotypic
2292
N/A
N/A
005
ANKDD1A_PYD
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
2906
N/A
N/A
005
ANKDD1A_PYD
043
DAPK1_DD
Heterotypic
2558
N/A
N/A
005
ANKDD1A_PYD
058
IRAK1_DD
Heterotypic
5272
N/A
N/A
005
ANKDD1A_PYD
061
IRAK4_DD
Heterotypic
2228
N/A
N/A
005
ANKDD1A_PYD
091
NOD2_CARD2
Heterotypic
2254
N/A
N/A
005
ANKDD1A_PYD
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
3122
N/A
N/A
009
ASC_PYD
011
BCL10_CARD
Heterotypic
7302
Association
22267217
N/A
009
ASC_PYD
065
PYRIN_PYD
Homotypic
4142
Physical association
25006247
N/A
009
ASC_PYD
076
NLRP10_PYD
Homotypic
5626
N/A
N/A
009
ASC_PYD
082
NLRP3_PYD
Homotypic
3288
Colocalization
24630722
N/A
009
ASC_PYD
096
PYDC1_PYD
Homotypic
4236
Colocalization
17178784
N/A
012
BFAR_DED
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
2784
N/A
N/A
012
BFAR_DED
058
IRAK1_DD
Heterotypic
3826
N/A
N/A
012
BFAR_DED
061
IRAK4_DD
Heterotypic
2286
N/A
N/A
012
BFAR_DED
062
LRRD1_DD
Heterotypic
2362
N/A
N/A
012
BFAR_DED
071
NLRC3_CARD
Heterotypic
2740
N/A
N/A
012
BFAR_DED
088
NLRP9_PYD
Heterotypic
2282
N/A
N/A
012
BFAR_DED
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
3026
N/A
N/A
016
CARD11_CARD
015
CARD10_CARD
Homotypic
4008
N/A
N/A
017
CARD14_CARD
058
IRAK1_DD
Heterotypic
2032
N/A
N/A
018
CARD16_CARD
020
CARD18_CARD
Homotypic
2064
N/A
N/A
020
CARD18_CARD
072
NLRC4_CARD
Homotypic
3806
N/A
N/A
021
CARD19_CARD
011
BCL10_CARD
Homotypic
2964
Colocalization
15637807
N/A
021
CARD19_CARD
015
CARD10_CARD
Homotypic
4128
N/A
N/A
021
CARD19_CARD
030
CASP2_CARD
Homotypic
2710
N/A
N/A
021
CARD19_CARD
052
FADD_DED-DD
Heterotypic
7894
N/A
N/A
021
CARD19_CARD
064
MAVS_CARD
Homotypic
31,768
N/A
N/A
021
CARD19_CARD
088
NLRP9_PYD
Heterotypic
2092
N/A
N/A
021
CARD19_CARD
108
TNFRSF1A_DD
Heterotypic
31,120
N/A
N/A
023
CARD8_CARD
072
NLRC4_CARD
Homotypic
5474
N/A
N/A
026
CASP10_DED1
037
CFLAR_DED1
Homotypic
5528
Association
12887920
Affinity Capture-MS
21303910
026
CASP10_DED1
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
3234
N/A
N/A
026
CASP10_DED1
047
DTHD1_DD
Heterotypic
4662
N/A
N/A
026
CASP10_DED1
071
NLRC3_CARD
Heterotypic
4320
N/A
N/A
026
CASP10_DED1
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
2982
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
011
BCL10_CARD
Homotypic
4998
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
037
CFLAR_DED1
Heterotypic
2042
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
3880
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
044
DEDD_PYD
Heterotypic
2244
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
047
DTHD1_DD
Heterotypic
2052
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
061
IRAK4_DD
Heterotypic
2518
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
062
LRRD1_DD
Heterotypic
2330
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
071
NLRC3_CARD
Homotypic
2600
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
088
NLRP9_PYD
Heterotypic
4390
N/A
N/A
029
CASP12_CARD
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
2976
N/A
N/A
033
CASP8_DED1
058
IRAK1_DD
Heterotypic
2774
N/A
N/A
033
CASP8_DED1
071
NLRC3_CARD
Heterotypic
2390
N/A
N/A
034
CASP8_DED2
038
CFLAR_DED2
Homotypic
2734
N/A
Affinity Capture-MS
21303910
034
CASP8_DED2
051
FADD_DED
Heterotypic
4662
Association
18946037
Affinity Capture-MS
19615732
034
CASP8_DED2
052
FADD_DED-DD
4062
Association
18946037
Affinity Capture-MS
19615732
034
CASP8_DED2
071
NLRC3_CARD
Heterotypic
2000
N/A
N/A
036
CASP9_CARD
011
BCL10_CARD
Homotypic
2182
N/A
N/A
036
CASP9_CARD
049
EDARADD_DD
Heterotypic
2740
N/A
N/A
036
CASP9_CARD
064
MAVS_CARD
Homotypic
28,754
N/A
N/A
045
DEDD2_DED
044
DEDD_PYD
Heterotypic
2556
N/A
Affinity Capture-MS
19738201
048
EDAR_DD
011
BCL10_CARD
Heterotypic
2040
N/A
N/A
050
FADD_DD
108
TNFRSF1A_DD
Homotypic
5854
Physical association
16611992
Affinity Capture-MS
19615732
053
FAS_DD
052
FADD_DED-DD
38,730
Physical association
7536190
Affinity Capture-MS
19615732
053
FAS_DD
103
RIPK1_DD
Homotypic
8838
Physical association
7538908
Affinity Capture-MS
19940151
054
IFI16_PYD
103
RIPK1_DD
Heterotypic
2604
N/A
N/A
055
IFIH1_CARD1
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
2136
N/A
N/A
055
IFIH1_CARD1
058
IRAK1_DD
Heterotypic
2690
N/A
N/A
055
IFIH1_CARD1
071
NLRC3_CARD
Homotypic
3378
N/A
N/A
055
IFIH1_CARD1
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
2366
N/A
N/A
057
IFIH1_CARD1-CARD2
071
NLRC3_CARD
Homotypic
3528
N/A
N/A
059
IRAK2_DD
042
CRADD_DD
Homotypic
2948
N/A
N/A
059
IRAK2_DD
047
DTHD1_DD
Homotypic
2184
N/A
N/A
059
IRAK2_DD
062
LRRD1_DD
Homotypic
2138
N/A
N/A
059
IRAK2_DD
071
NLRC3_CARD
Heterotypic
3100
N/A
N/A
059
IRAK2_DD
115
UNC5D_DD
Homotypic
3102
N/A
N/A
062
LRRD1_DD
011
BCL10_CARD
Heterotypic
2252
N/A
N/A
065
PYRIN_PYD
009
ASC_PYD
Homotypic
2938
Physical association
11498534
N/A
065
PYRIN_PYD
010
ASC_PYD-CARD
2908
Physical association
11498534
N/A
065
PYRIN_PYD
020
CARD18_CARD
Heterotypic
5470
N/A
N/A
065
PYRIN_PYD
021
CARD19_CARD
Heterotypic
6436
N/A
N/A
067
MYD88_DD
042
CRADD_DD
Homotypic
3134
N/A
N/A
067
MYD88_DD
047
DTHD1_DD
Homotypic
2670
N/A
N/A
067
MYD88_DD
115
UNC5D_DD
Homotypic
3966
N/A
N/A
072
NLRC4_CARD
011
BCL10_CARD
Homotypic
3282
N/A
Affinity Capture-MS
21907836
081
NLRP2_PYD
106
TNFRSF10B_DD
Heterotypic
7216
N/A
N/A
083
NLRP4_DD
004
ANK3_DD
Homotypic
2058
N/A
N/A
083
NLRP4_DD
011
BCL10_CARD
Heterotypic
2844
N/A
N/A
083
NLRP4_DD
020
CARD18_CARD
Heterotypic
8070
N/A
N/A
083
NLRP4_DD
021
CARD19_CARD
Heterotypic
5258
N/A
N/A
083
NLRP4_DD
044
DEDD_PYD
Heterotypic
2948
N/A
N/A
086
NLRP7_PYD
037
CFLAR_DED1
Heterotypic
6814
N/A
N/A
087
NLRP8_PYD
071
NLRC3_CARD
Heterotypic
2348
N/A
N/A
087
NLRP8_PYD
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
2460
N/A
N/A
088
NLRP9_PYD
011
BCL10_CARD
Heterotypic
2936
N/A
N/A
088
NLRP9_PYD
020
CARD18_CARD
Heterotypic
5886
N/A
N/A
088
NLRP9_PYD
021
CARD19_CARD
Heterotypic
4226
N/A
N/A
088
NLRP9_PYD
084
NLRP5_PYD
Homotypic
2852
N/A
N/A
089
NOD1_CARD
071
NLRC3_CARD
Homotypic
2086
N/A
N/A
090
NOD2_CARD1
015
CARD10_CARD
Homotypic
2438
N/A
N/A
090
NOD2_CARD1
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
2738
N/A
N/A
090
NOD2_CARD1
071
NLRC3_CARD
Homotypic
3656
N/A
N/A
090
NOD2_CARD1
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
2200
N/A
N/A
092
NOD2_CARD1-CARD2
015
CARD10_CARD
Homotypic
10,988
N/A
N/A
092
NOD2_CARD1-CARD2
037
CFLAR_DED1
Heterotypic
4002
N/A
N/A
092
NOD2_CARD1-CARD2
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
2170
N/A
N/A
092
NOD2_CARD1-CARD2
071
NLRC3_CARD
Homotypic
8834
N/A
N/A
092
NOD2_CARD1-CARD2
073
NLRC5_CARD
Homotypic
3466
N/A
N/A
095
PIDD1_DD
015
CARD10_CARD
Heterotypic
5146
N/A
N/A
095
PIDD1_DD
111
TRADD_DD
Homotypic
4018
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
011
BCL10_CARD
Heterotypic
5342
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
037
CFLAR_DED1
Heterotypic
9994
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
4782
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
047
DTHD1_DD
Heterotypic
4984
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
058
IRAK1_DD
Heterotypic
7260
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
062
LRRD1_DD
Heterotypic
2632
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
071
NLRC3_CARD
Heterotypic
8938
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
091
NOD2_CARD2
Heterotypic
3810
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
105
TNFRSF10A_DD
Heterotypic
3174
N/A
N/A
097
PYDC2_PYD
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
4210
N/A
N/A
100
RIG-I_CARD1
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
2438
N/A
N/A
100
RIG-I_CARD1
071
NLRC3_CARD
Homotypic
2304
N/A
N/A
100
RIG-I_CARD1
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
2032
N/A
N/A
101
RIG-I_CARD2
042
CRADD_DD
Heterotypic
2016
N/A
N/A
101
RIG-I_CARD2
058
IRAK1_DD
Heterotypic
3274
N/A
N/A
101
RIG-I_CARD2
071
NLRC3_CARD
Homotypic
3648
N/A
N/A
101
RIG-I_CARD2
091
NOD2_CARD2
Homotypic
2020
N/A
N/A
101
RIG-I_CARD2
115
UNC5D_DD
Heterotypic
3188
N/A
N/A
102
RIG-I_CARD1-CARD2
037
CFLAR_DED1
Heterotypic
2738
N/A
N/A
107
TNFRSF11B_CARD
103
RIPK1_DD
Heterotypic
2722
N/A
N/A
108
TNFRSF1A_DD
011
BCL10_CARD
Heterotypic
4508
N/A
Affinity Capture-MS
21903422
110
TNFRSF25_DD
052
FADD_DED-DD
3382
N/A
N/A
Combinations were extracted where AlphaScreen signals of more than 2 × 103 RLU were observed in either FLAG × biotin or biotin × FLAG pair.
Combinations hinting at possible interactions.Combinations were extracted where AlphaScreen signals of more than 2 × 103 RLU were observed in either FLAG × biotin or biotin × FLAG pair.
The strength of ALPHA signals does not correlate with the expression levels of domains, but with specific pair combinations
To investigate whether the non-normalized expression levels of DDSP domains affect the ALPHA results in an unbiased fashion, we compared the expression levels of the domains and the distribution of positive ALPHA signals. In the bubble chart in Fig. 6, blue bubbles show ALPHA signals. The bigger the bubble area, the stronger the signal. The longitudinal axis shows relative concentrations of FLAG-tagged domains and the horizontal axis shows relative concentrations of biotin-tagged domains. Significantly large bubbles were widely and randomly scattered across the chart, instead of gathering in specific regions, such as the top right where the expressed domains were most abundant. In addition, the sizes of the bubbles showed no linear correlation with the expression levels of domains. These results demonstrate that the strength of ALPHA signals was not correlated with the expression levels of the domains, but with specific pair combinations.
Fig. 6
The strength of ALPHA signals is not correlated with the expression levels of the domains, but with specific pair combinations.
A bubble chart compares the domain expression levels determined by ELISAs and the strength of ALPHA signals. Blue bubbles show ALPHA signals. The bigger the bubble area, the stronger the signal. The longitudinal axis shows relative concentrations of FLAG-tagged domains and the horizontal axis shows relative concentrations of biotin-tagged domains.
The strength of ALPHA signals is not correlated with the expression levels of the domains, but with specific pair combinations.
A bubble chart compares the domain expression levels determined by ELISAs and the strength of ALPHA signals. Blue bubbles show ALPHA signals. The bigger the bubble area, the stronger the signal. The longitudinal axis shows relative concentrations of FLAG-tagged domains and the horizontal axis shows relative concentrations of biotin-tagged domains.
Co-immunoprecipitation confirms previously reported interactions and provides hints about new interactions
The ALPHA is an excellent technology to analyze protein–protein interactions because it is homogeneous, highly sensitive, and convenient. However, doubts remain about whether and to what extent the ALPHA results reflect and are consistent with the real situations in natural cells. To validate the accuracy and veracity of the ALPHA results, we performed a co-immunoprecipitation assay.We selected eight representative pairs of domains from the 116 domains according to the ALPHA (Fig. 7A). Among them, four pairs between AIM2_PYD × NLRP9_PYD and AIM2_PYD × ASC_CARD had low signals, indicating these domains do not interact [13]. The two pairs between (NLRC4_CARD × ASC_CARD) both demonstrated significantly high signals, indicating that these domains interact, which actually was reported as components of NLRC4 inflammasome (Table 1) [21]. A one-sided pair (CARD10_CARD-FLAG × NOD2_CARD1-CARD2-biotin) exhibited an extremely high signal, whereas the other pair with reversed tags did not. An interaction between CARD10_CARD and NOD2_CARD1-CARD2 has not been previously reported and therefore needed to be confirmed in cells.
Fig. 7
An immunoprecipitation assay confirms the ALPHA results.
A ALPHA results of the four domain–domain interaction pairs examined in panels B and C. B, C An AGIA-tagged domain and a FLAG-tagged domain were co-expressed in HEK293T cells. Soluble supernatants generated from whole cell lysates (input) were applied to immunoprecipitation assay using an anti-AGIA or an anti-FLAG antibody, and co-immunoprecipitants were detected by immunoblotting with an anti-FLAG or anti-AGIA antibody, respectively.
An immunoprecipitation assay confirms the ALPHA results.
A ALPHA results of the four domain–domain interaction pairs examined in panels B and C. B, C An AGIA-tagged domain and a FLAG-tagged domain were co-expressed in HEK293T cells. Soluble supernatants generated from whole cell lysates (input) were applied to immunoprecipitation assay using an anti-AGIA or an anti-FLAG antibody, and co-immunoprecipitants were detected by immunoblotting with an anti-FLAG or anti-AGIA antibody, respectively.The results of the co-immunoprecipitation assay are shown in Fig. 7B, C. As expected, a homotypic domain pair (AIM2_PYD × NLRP9_PYD) that had low ALPHA signals and a known noninteracting heterotopic domain pair (AIM2_PYD × ASC_CARD) did not co-immunoprecipitate [22], whereas a known interacting homotypic domain pair (NLRC4_CARD × ASC_CARD) did [23]. These immunoprecipitation results were consistent with those of the ALPHA assay and previous reports. The homotypic domain pair of CARD10_CARD × NOD2_CARD1-CARD2, which had a high signal in the ALPHA assay, were reciprocally co-immunoprecipitated (Fig. 7B, C).
Discussion
Human DDSPs are involved in assembly of multimeric complexes associated with signaling cascades that lead to cell death and inflammation [3]. Disruption of this assembly or dysregulation of DDSP interactions due to inherited gene mutations causes immunodeficiency and/or autoinflammatory diseases [4]. However, the relationships between the genotypes and phenotypes of inherited immunodeficiency and/or autoinflammatory diseases are not fully understood. In some cases, even though the responsible genes have been reported, mutations of these genes have not been found [12]. Thus, we hypothesize that DDSP interactions are involved in some unknown signaling cascades. In this study, we comprehensively analyzed the interactions of DDSP domains to explore novel interaction pathways.The greatest difficulties faced when comprehensively investigating the interactions of DDSP domains are the preparation of more than 100 different kinds of proteins and the conduction of a one-against-all domain–domain interaction assay, where conventional methods are commonly used such as yeast two-hybrid assay, pull-down assay, and immunoprecipitation assay. Here, we used the wheat germ cell-free protein synthesis system and ALPHA, which greatly facilitated our study. We successfully synthesized 116 FLAG-tagged and 116 biotin-tagged domains of DDSPs using the wheat germ cell-free protein synthesis system (Supplementary Table S1) and comprehensively analyzed domain–domain interactions using ALPHA (Fig. 3). The ALPHA results of domain–domain interactions were reliable and trustworthy. An MA plot showed high reproducibility (98.74%) between two repeats (Fig. 4). A bubble chart demonstrated that the expression levels of DDSP domains did not affect the strength of ALPHA signals (Fig. 6). Furthermore, many domain interactions detected in this study were previously reported (Tables 1 and 2).Our data showed that 32.8% of self-interacting pairs and 5.7% of nonself-interacting pairs yielded positive results in the ALPHA, indicating that self-interacting pairs interact more readily than nonself-interacting pairs. Although two domains contained heterogeneous DFDs, all self-interacting pairs exhibited homotypic binding [24].DDSP domains are widely believed to exert their effects via monovalent, homotypic, subfamily-restricted interactions (DD × DD, CARD × CARD, DED × DED, and PYD × PYD), generating large multi-subunit structures comprising only one type of protein [25]. However, heterotypic binding has been reported for some exceptional DDSP domains [26]. We found ten domain pairs as novel candidates for heterotypic interactions (Fig. 5 and Table 1). Such interactions may help to elucidate the molecular basis of signaling complexes and pathways that regulate cell death and inflammation.This study shows many novel possible interactions (Tables 1 and 2). Twenty novel double-sided interactions (Fig. 5) were considered reliable because many of the other double-sided interactions identified in this study were previously reported. There were several combinations for which no direct interaction has been previously demonstrated, including CARD16_CARD × NLRC4_CARD, CRADD_DD × IRAK1_DD, IRAK1_DD × TNFRSF25_DD, and MYD88_DD × NOD2_CARD2 (Table 1), even though previous reports suggested their biological and pathological relevance. For example, acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a disorder in which blood supply to the heart is suddenly blocked, leading to heart attacks and unstable angina. A genome-wide association study of 18,624 patients with ACS identified the associated gene loci in IL-18, NLRC4, and CARD16; however, direct interactions between these proteins have not been demonstrated [27]. Our study identified a double-sided interaction between CARD16_CARD and NLRC4_CARD (Fig. 5 and Table 1). The direct interaction between NLRC4 and CARD16 highlights the role of NLRC4 inflammasome regulation in ACS. Moreover, many studies suggest that Toll-like receptors (TLRs) and nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain 1 (NOD1) and NOD2 synergize with each other to induce production of cytokines and antimicrobial peptides. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying this synergy have not been elucidated [28]. The synergic effect of TLRs and NODs leads to poor outcomes in individuals with septic shock syndrome caused by Gram-positive or -negative bacterial infections [29, 30]. The double-sided interaction between MYD88_DD and NOD2_CARD2 (the second CARD domain from the N-terminus) identified in this study may support the hypothesis that there are direct crosstalk between signaling pathways downstream of NODs and TLRs (Table 1). In addition, our study indicated the direct interaction between IRAK1 and CRADD (Fig. 5 and Table 1), supporting the previous report that IRAK1 functions to inhibit radiation therapy-induced apoptosis mediated by the PIDDosome (PIDD-RAIDD-caspase-2) [31].The one-sided interactions listed in Table 2, few of which were previously reported, are supposedly less reliable than the double-sided interactions listed in Table 1. The interactions need to be confirmed by co-immunoprecipitation assays in human cell lines. Many immunoprecipitation experiments assessing DDSP interactions have been performed using HEK293T cells. Therefore, we used HEK293T cells and compared the novel interaction between NOD2_CARD1-CARD2 and CARD10_CARD and the known interaction between NLRC4_CARD and ASC_CARD. NOD2_CARD1-CARD2-AGIA was co-immunoprecipitated by CARD10_CARD-FLAG and vice versa when the proteins were co-expressed, which was consistent with the ALPHA results (Fig. 7B, C and Supplementary Table S3), suggesting that CARD10 interacts with NOD2. Consequently, it is worth testing the other one-sided interactions listed in Table 2.CARD10 (also known as CARD and membrane-associated guanylate kinase (MAGUK) domain-containing protein 3 (CARMA3)) functions as a scaffold and is involved in NF-κB activation in response to various types of upstream innate immune signaling or modulates the interactions of deubiquitinating enzymes such as A20 and CYLD [32]. Several amino acid mutations of CARD10 are reportedly responsible for some inflammatory bowel diseases [33]. NOD2 is a Nod-like receptor that recognizes the bacterial peptidoglycan component muramyl dipeptide, leading to NF-κB activation [34, 35]. Gain-of-function mutations of NOD2 lead to autoinflammatory diseases such as early-onset sarcoidosis and Blau syndrome [36]. Loss-of-function mutations of NOD2 lead to susceptibility to an inflammatory bowel disease called Crohn’s disease [37, 38].Although the results of this study were highly reproducible, there are several limitations. First, all the recombinant DDSP domains synthesized and used in this study were fused with tags. The type and position of the tag may affect the ALPHA results. Depending on the structure of the domain, the fused tag may be concealed inside the mature domain and inaccessible to the detection antibody or streptavidin. Furthermore, when a domain interacts with partners via amino acid residues close to the terminus, the tag may interfere with the interaction, leading to false ALPHA results. This may explain one of the cause of known pairs of interactors that do not have a high enough ALPHA signal (Supplementary Table S4). Therefore, it is recommended that domains with tags fused at different positions are examined before conducting the ALPHA. The domain interactions were not noticeably affected according to whether the tag was located at the N- or C-terminus. Therefore, we tagged the C-termini of all domains with FLAG or biotin to ensure the domains and tags were fully translated. Second, the recombinant DDSP domains were synthesized using the wheat cell-free synthesis system and therefore their structures may differ from those of proteins expressed in cells. In particular, proteins synthesized using cell-free systems possibly have errors in post-translational modifications. For DDSP domains that require a certain post-translational modification for signal transduction, it is recommended that enzymes that catalyze such modifications, such as protein kinases, are added to the cell-free system. Finally, although we analyzed interactions for all possible DDSP domains combinations, some interactions may not occur in cells. Two DDSPs with different subcellular localizations and expression profiles are very unlikely to encounter each other in cells. Regarding the new interacting pairs identified by our comprehensive analysis, their localizations and interactions should be confirmed and overlap of their temporal and spatial expression patterns should be verified. Therefore, the ALPHA results could not be quantitatively analyzed to compare the strengths of the domain–domain interactions.In conclusion, we believe that our comprehensive investigation of DDSPs will be helpful for the field of DDSP-related diseases, especially immunodeficiency and autoinflammatory diseases. This work may facilitate future research aiming to identify pharmaceutical targets for drug discovery and to elucidate the pathogenesis of these diseases.Supplementary Figure S1Supplementary Table S1Supplementary Table S2Supplementary Table S3Supplementary Table S4
Authors: Naohiro Inohara; Yasunori Ogura; Ana Fontalba; Olga Gutierrez; Fernando Pons; Javier Crespo; Koichi Fukase; Seiichi Inamura; Shoichi Kusumoto; Masahito Hashimoto; Simon J Foster; Anthony P Moran; Jose L Fernandez-Luna; Gabriel Nuñez Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2003-01-04 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Linda R Klei; Dong Hu; Robert Panek; Danielle N Alfano; Rachel E Bridwell; Kelly M Bailey; Katherine I Oravecz-Wilson; Vincent J Concel; Emily M Hess; Matthew Van Beek; Phillip C Delekta; Shufang Gu; Simon C Watkins; Adrian T Ting; Peter J Gough; Kevin P Foley; John Bertin; Linda M McAllister-Lucas; Peter C Lucas Journal: Cell Rep Date: 2016-09-27 Impact factor: 9.423
Authors: F Rieux-Laucat; F Le Deist; C Hivroz; I A Roberts; K M Debatin; A Fischer; J P de Villartay Journal: Science Date: 1995-06-02 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Stephen E Girardin; Ivo G Boneca; Jérôme Viala; Mathias Chamaillard; Agnès Labigne; Gilles Thomas; Dana J Philpott; Philippe J Sansonetti Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2003-01-13 Impact factor: 5.157