Artificial metalloenzymes (ArMs) are created by embedding a synthetic metal catalyst into a protein scaffold. ArMs have the potential to merge the catalytic advantages of natural enzymes with the reaction scope of synthetic catalysts. The choice of the protein scaffold is of utmost importance to tune the activity of the ArM. Herein, we show the repurposing of HaloTag, a self-labeling protein widely used in chemical biology, to create an ArM scaffold for metathesis. This monomeric protein scaffold allows for covalent attachment of metathesis cofactors, and the resulting ArMs are capable of catalyzing ring-closing metathesis. Both chemical and genetic engineering were explored to determine the evolvability of the resulting ArM. Additionally, exploration of the substrate scope revealed a reaction with promising turnover numbers (>48) and conversion rates (>96%).
Artificial metalloenzymes (ArMs) are created by embedding a synthetic metal catalyst into a protein scaffold. ArMs have the potential to merge the catalytic advantages of natural enzymes with the reaction scope of synthetic catalysts. The choice of the protein scaffold is of utmost importance to tune the activity of the ArM. Herein, we show the repurposing of HaloTag, a self-labeling protein widely used in chemical biology, to create an ArM scaffold for metathesis. This monomeric protein scaffold allows for covalent attachment of metathesis cofactors, and the resulting ArMs are capable of catalyzing ring-closing metathesis. Both chemical and genetic engineering were explored to determine the evolvability of the resulting ArM. Additionally, exploration of the substrate scope revealed a reaction with promising turnover numbers (>48) and conversion rates (>96%).
New methods for catalysis are
of increasing importance in synthetic chemistry. Enzymatic catalysis
is becoming more central to organic synthesis in both academia and
industry.[1,2] The advantages of enzymes are multifold
and include selectivity, activity at ambient temperature and pressure,
aqueous catalysis, and access to catalytic cascades that can be challenging
to realize with synthetic catalysts.Artificial metalloenzymes
(ArMs) are hybrid catalysts that are
created by embedding a metal catalyst into a protein scaffold.[3] The resulting hybrid catalysts have the potential
to impart the advantages of enzymes and retain the reaction versatility
of synthetic catalysts. Because of these advantages, ArMs represent
potential tools for novel biocatalysis. Thus, identifying a suitable
scaffold protein is essential for improving ArMs.[4] Multiple scaffolds have been explored for ArMs, including
heme proteins,[5,6] (strept)avidin,[7] human carbonic anhydrase,[8] glycosylated
albumin,[9] lactococcal multidrug resistance
regulator (LmrR),[10] an oligopeptidase,[11] FhuA,[12] and so on.[13] Increasing the number of viable scaffolds will
eventually enable chemists to use ArMs as a plug-and-play strategy,
in which several scaffolds can be screened to identify the best catalytic
starting point. Accordingly, the exploration of more scaffold proteins
is critical to advancing the versatility of the field.For ArMs,
an important factor for the design is the anchoring method
of the synthetic catalyst to the scaffold protein. This anchoring
can be achieved by three methods: (i) supramolecular interaction,
(ii) dative coordination, and (iii) covalent binding. Each of these
methods has distinct advantages. Although covalently linked ArMs have
the potential to create the most stable bioconjugates, only a few
examples of covalently linked ArMs have been reported.[11,13−15] Thus, we sought to explore a new scaffold for covalent
anchoring of catalysts. To this end, we examined a small monomeric
protein, HaloTag (version 7, Promega, HT hereafter), as a novel scaffold
for ArM engineering.HT is a 34-kDa protein that contains a
reactive aspartic acid residue
deep within the protein (Figure ).[16] This aspartic acid
residue can react with haloalkanes via nucleophilic substitution between
the electrophilic haloalkane and the nucleophilic aspartate side chain.
The result of this substitution reaction is a stable ester bond. Various
haloalkanes can be used in this reaction, including bromoalkanes,
chloroalkanes, and haloalkanes of varying chain lengths.[16−18] Additionally, the haloalkane chain can be terminally functionalized
to add cargo, most commonly a fluorophore[16,19,20] but also other cargo such as a metal complex,
used for magnetic resonance imaging.[21] On
the basis of this work, we posited that by functionalizing a haloalkane
chain with a metal catalyst, we could create a stable ArM. An HT-based
ArM could have several advantages: (i) the distance between the catalyst
and protein surface could be easily optimized by changing the alkane
linker length; (ii) the bioconjugation reaction is biocompatible,
which would allow for whole-cell catalysis; and (iii) the monomeric
nature offers engineering advantages. To assess the potential of HT
as an ArM scaffold, we were interested in exploring a reaction that
has no known equivalent in biology. As an archetypal bio-orthogonal
reaction, metathesis has been often used as a test reaction for ArMs.[9,12,22−29]
Figure 1
Use
of HT as a scaffold for ArMs. A substitution reaction at an
aspartic acid residue buried within HT generates a covalent linkage
upon reaction with a haloalkane chain. The reactive haloalkane chain
can be equipped with a synthetic metal cofactor to create an ArM.
Use
of HT as a scaffold for ArMs. A substitution reaction at an
aspartic acid residue buried within HT generates a covalent linkage
upon reaction with a haloalkane chain. The reactive haloalkane chain
can be equipped with a synthetic metal cofactor to create an ArM.Thus, we sought to create metathesis-catalyzing
ArMs with HT as
scaffold, two cofactors were synthesized for Ru-catalyzed metathesis
(Figure A).[30] Both cofactors were based on a Hoveyda–Grubbs
II type catalyst (HG-II). The catalysts differed in the placement
of the HT linker, which was appended at either the para-position of one mesityl group (Mes8) or the NHC core
(N8). The difference in linker placement was designed
to allow for different orientations upon binding to HT. The resulting
cofactors both bind HT (Figures B and S2). Catalyst N8 resulted in higher yield of the ArM within the incubation
time, suggesting that the position of catalyst N8 may
fit better into the cleft of HT. Additionally, cofactors with shorter
linker length were also tested but did not bind adequately to HT (Figure S2).
Figure 2
Cofactors and bioconjugation assay. Two
metathesis cofactors—N8 and Mes8—based
on HG-II derived catalysts
were synthesized (A). Binding analysis at varying ratios of HT to
cofactor: (white with black outline) 50 μM HT: 50 μM cofactor;
(blue) 50 μM HT: 110 μM cofactor; and (yellow with dots)
40 μM HT: 160 μM cofactor. All of the reactions were conducted
in 20 mM MOPS, pH 7.0 at room temperature for 2 h (B).
Cofactors and bioconjugation assay. Two
metathesis cofactors—N8 and Mes8—based
on HG-II derived catalysts
were synthesized (A). Binding analysis at varying ratios of HT to
cofactor: (white with black outline) 50 μM HT: 50 μM cofactor;
(blue) 50 μM HT: 110 μM cofactor; and (yellow with dots)
40 μM HT: 160 μM cofactor. All of the reactions were conducted
in 20 mM MOPS, pH 7.0 at room temperature for 2 h (B).With the two ArMs at hand, the catalytic activities of the
protein–cofactor
conjugates (N8-HT and Mes8-HT) were examined.
A pro-fluorescent substrate (Np7HC) system was used to
characterize rapidly the metathesis activity of the ArM.[31] Upon reaction with the synthetic catalysts or
ArM, Np7HC can be converted into a fluorescent product,
7-hydroxycoumarin, and naphthalene (Figure A). Because the elimination step is essentially
spontaneous, the production of 7-hydroxycoumarin can be monitored
by fluorescence spectroscopy, as a readout for ring-closing metathesis
(RCM) activity. The production of naphthalene can be further confirmed
by GC-MS. The product concentrations and turnover numbers (TON) were
determined by comparing the fluorescence intensity with a calibration
curve (Figure S3).
Figure 3
Activity of the cofactors
and corresponding ArMs. A reaction that
produces the fluorescent 7-hydroxycoumarin was selected for facile
characterization (A). The TON for the cofactors N8 and Mes8 were determined by GC-MS, UPLC-MS, and fluorescence analysis
(B). The bioconjugation reactions were conducted at 65 μM cofactor
and 55 μM HT (Supporting Information, section 11). The metathesis reactions were conducted in 20 mM MOPS,
100 mM MgCl2, pH 7.0 at 25 °C. Each reaction contained
2 μM cofactor, 2 μM HT, and 100 μM substrate. Formation
of 7-hydroxycomarin was determined by fluorescence (λex = 330 nm and λem = 450 nm) and UPLC-MS; formation
of naphthalene was determined by GC-MS (Figure S3).
Activity of the cofactors
and corresponding ArMs. A reaction that
produces the fluorescent 7-hydroxycoumarin was selected for facile
characterization (A). The TON for the cofactors N8 and Mes8 were determined by GC-MS, UPLC-MS, and fluorescence analysis
(B). The bioconjugation reactions were conducted at 65 μM cofactor
and 55 μM HT (Supporting Information, section 11). The metathesis reactions were conducted in 20 mM MOPS,
100 mM MgCl2, pH 7.0 at 25 °C. Each reaction contained
2 μM cofactor, 2 μM HT, and 100 μM substrate. Formation
of 7-hydroxycomarin was determined by fluorescence (λex = 330 nm and λem = 450 nm) and UPLC-MS; formation
of naphthalene was determined by GC-MS (Figure S3).Using Np7HC in buffer,
we found that the ArM produced
a higher TON than the catalyst alone (Figures B and S4). The
results were confirmed for both reaction products: 7-hydroxycoumarin
and naphthalene. The benefit of the ArM is pH-dependent, with the
ArM improving the TON more at pH 7.0 than pH 5.0 (Figure S5). This pH dependence could result from protonation
changes in HT, low protein stability at pH 5.0, or improved free-cofactor
activity at low pH, a frequently reported phenomenon.[24,27] Comparison between the cofactors suggests that each cofactor alone
has similar activity. Under the bioconjugation conditions used in Figure , the N8-HT yields slightly higher TONs than the Mes8-HT. However,
when the purified ArMs were examined, both Mes8-HT and N8-HT exhibited similar activity (Figure S4), indicating that more complete bioconjugation increases
the TON. Although the TONs were lower than conventional HG-II cofactors
in organic solvent, they were comparable to those previously reported
for other metathesis-catalyzing ArMs.[9,12,15,22−27]Upon confirming that the ArM was competent for catalysis in
buffer,
we subsequently examined if mutagenesis and directed evolution could
produce a more active catalyst, either by increasing the ArM activity
or improving the bioconjugation. Both crystallographic data of HT
(Figure A) and homology
modeling (Figure S1) were used to identify
suitable residues for mutagenesis.[32−34] Residues lining the
opening of the alkane binding cavity were the primary targets for
mutagenesis. Of these residues, however, some were conserved in the
family of dehalogenases from which HT is derived (Figure S1). These conserved residues were not selected for
mutagenesis to reduce the chances that mutagenesis would alter the
substitution reaction required to form the ArM.
Figure 4
Genetic engineering of
the ArM. (A) Analysis of amino acids for
mutagenesis based on crystallography (PDB: 5vnp).[34] Seven
sites were targeted for saturation mutagenesis and activity profiling:
E133, E143, F144, M175, P243, V245, and L271. Mutations at five of
these sites increased the catalytic performance marginally. The best
hits are displayed in panel B. The wt HT samples were completed as
biological replicates, and the variants are replicates from the same
protein purification batch. The bioconjugation and metathesis reactions
were conducted as described for Figure .
Genetic engineering of
the ArM. (A) Analysis of amino acids for
mutagenesis based on crystallography (PDB: 5vnp).[34] Seven
sites were targeted for saturation mutagenesis and activity profiling:
E133, E143, F144, M175, P243, V245, and L271. Mutations at five of
these sites increased the catalytic performance marginally. The best
hits are displayed in panel B. The wt HT samples were completed as
biological replicates, and the variants are replicates from the same
protein purification batch. The bioconjugation and metathesis reactions
were conducted as described for Figure .On the basis of these
considerations, seven positions were identified
for mutagenesis, and a library of 84 single mutants was designed and
screened for TON (Figure B). Some of the single mutants displayed up to 120% of wild-type
(wt) ArM activity. However, neither recombination of the best mutants
nor random mutagenesis further improved activity (Figure S6).The modest improvements suggest that these
ArMs may not be ideally
suited for directed evolution. We identified two possible reasons
for this observation: (i) the linker length projects the cofactor
too far from the protein surface or (ii) the protein provides minimal
interaction with the transition state, limiting the effect of the
second coordination sphere provided by HT on the catalytic event.
Cofactors with shorter linkers were evaluated, but these did not bind
efficiently to HT (Figure S2), lending
more support to the lack of transition state stabilization.To examine further the catalytic activity of the wt ArM, the N8-HT was evaluated with several RCM substrates (Figure ). Characterization
of the TON for these substrates was completed by UPLC-MS or 1H NMR (Figures S7–S10). A comparison
of these reactions suggests that the N8-HT is capable
of catalyzing RCM with multiple substrates. Catalysis with the N8-HT yield both five-membered (pyrrole or cyclopentene) and
six-membered rings (naphthalene from Np7HC). However,
when provided with a substrate that can undergo RCM to form either
a five- or six-membered ring, the ArM yields exclusively the five-membered
ring (TenDA) at 34% conversion. The five- and six-membered
rings are the kinetically and thermodynamically favored products,
respectively.[35] The N8-HT
was most effective with the substrates BzDA and EnDA. Notably, conversion with the alkyne-based EnDA substrate was near complete (Figure S10). This trend in reactivity is similar to the previously reported
ArM using albumin as the scaffold.[9]
Figure 5
Substrate scope
for metathesis reactions. The reaction TON and
percent conversion were determined for wt HT with the N8 cofactor.
Substrate scope
for metathesis reactions. The reaction TON and
percent conversion were determined for wt HT with the N8 cofactor.In summary, we have identified
a new scaffold system for creation
of artificial metalloproteins. We have shown that these artificial
metalloproteins can act as ArMs for metathesis in aqueous systems
at pH 7.0. Additionally, we have shown that chemical optimization
and enzyme engineering lead to improvements in the ArM activity. Finally,
we have shown that the ArM is capable of catalyzing RCM with diverse
substrates. On the basis of these findings, we are currently exploring
the HT scaffold as a scaffold for additional reaction types and loop
designs to provide stabilization of the transition state.
Authors: Georgyi V Los; Lance P Encell; Mark G McDougall; Danette D Hartzell; Natasha Karassina; Chad Zimprich; Monika G Wood; Randy Learish; Rachel Friedman Ohana; Marjeta Urh; Dan Simpson; Jacqui Mendez; Kris Zimmerman; Paul Otto; Gediminas Vidugiris; Ji Zhu; Aldis Darzins; Dieter H Klaubert; Robert F Bulleit; Keith V Wood Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Yu Liu; Matthew Fares; Noah P Dunham; Zi Gao; Kun Miao; Xueyuan Jiang; Samuel S Bollinger; Amie K Boal; Xin Zhang Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2017-06-19 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Markus Jeschek; Raphael Reuter; Tillmann Heinisch; Christian Trindler; Juliane Klehr; Sven Panke; Thomas R Ward Journal: Nature Date: 2016-08-29 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Philipp Lohner; Mariia Zmyslia; Johann Thurn; Jasmin K Pape; Rūta Gerasimaitė; Jan Keller-Findeisen; Saskia Groeer; Benedikt Deuringer; Regine Süss; Andreas Walther; Stefan W Hell; Gražvydas Lukinavičius; Thorsten Hugel; Claudia Jessen-Trefzer Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 15.336