Christopher J Silva1, Melissa Erickson-Beltran1. 1. Produce Safety & Microbiology Research Unit, Western Regional Research Center, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Albany, California 94710, United States.
Abstract
A prion's pathogenic character is enciphered in its conformation, which also defines the chemical environments of its amino acids. Differences in chemical environments influence the reactivity of amino acid side chains, in a conformation-dependent manner. Chemical oxidation of susceptible methionines would identify those methionines on the surface of a prion, which would reveal conformation-dependent information. We identified a set of methionine-containing peptides derived from the tryptic, chymotryptic, or tryptic/chymotryptic digestion of recombinant prion protein and the Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted scrapie. We developed a multiple reaction monitoring-based method of quantifying the extent of the methionine oxidation in those peptides. This approach can be used to define a prion's conformation and to distinguish among prion strains, which is an important component of food safety. Not subject to U.S. Copyright. Published 2022 by American Chemical Society.
A prion's pathogenic character is enciphered in its conformation, which also defines the chemical environments of its amino acids. Differences in chemical environments influence the reactivity of amino acid side chains, in a conformation-dependent manner. Chemical oxidation of susceptible methionines would identify those methionines on the surface of a prion, which would reveal conformation-dependent information. We identified a set of methionine-containing peptides derived from the tryptic, chymotryptic, or tryptic/chymotryptic digestion of recombinant prion protein and the Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted scrapie. We developed a multiple reaction monitoring-based method of quantifying the extent of the methionine oxidation in those peptides. This approach can be used to define a prion's conformation and to distinguish among prion strains, which is an important component of food safety. Not subject to U.S. Copyright. Published 2022 by American Chemical Society.
Prions (PrPSc) are pathological proteins that
amplify by inducing a natively expressed prion protein
(PrPC) to adopt the prion conformation.[1,2] Extensive
mass spectrometry-based analysis has shown no covalent differences
between PrPC and PrPSc.[3,4] The
only demonstrated difference between the two isoforms is their conformation.
PrPC is a monomer, whose secondary structure has been characterized
by nuclear magnetic resonance and X-ray-based analysis and shown to
be composed of α-helix, random coil, and a small amount of β-sheet.[5,6] In contrast, PrPSc is a poorly characterized multimer
composed mostly of β-sheet and random coil, based on hydrogen-deuterium
exchange mass spectrometry and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy.[7,8] The PrPC monomer shows no special resistance to digestion
by proteinase K (PK), while PrPSc shows significant resistance
to PK digestion.[2]A prion’s
pathologic character resides solely in its conformation,
which means that this property is lost once PrPSc is inactivated
by the denaturation required for mass spectrometry-based analysis.[2,9] The chemical environment of an amino acid is determined by the conformation
of the protein in which it is contained, which means that the same
amino acid can react differently with an identical reagent, in a conformation-dependent
manner. Fortunately, the conformational differences in proteins can
be captured by covalent modification.[4,10−14] The covalent differences are imparted by PK digestion, where PK
will completely digest PrPC but only partially digest PrPSc to yield an infectious and characteristic truncated protein,
PrP 27–30.[15] Differences in the
reactivity of lysines with acylating reagents have been used to detect
PrPSc in the presence of PrPC and to distinguish
among prion conformations.[10,11] Acylation leaves the
prion’s infectivity largely intact.[16] Diethyl pyrocarbonate reacts with the histidines in purified PrPSc to yield the corresponding ethoxyformyl adducts and a consequent
1000-fold reduction of infectivity.[17] The
loss of infectivity can be restored when the ethoxyformyl group is
removed from the ethoxyformylated histidines.[17] In this way, covalent modification of prions can yield useful structural
information.Prion protein (PrP) contains more methionines than
are typical
of a mammalian protein, and those methionines are susceptible to oxidation
by selected reagents.[18] Oxidized methionine
was proposed to be a covalent signature of prions but has since been
shown to be an artifact.[4,19] Oxidizing reagents
have been used to study the role of methionine in PrP.[20,21] Mammals possess two generic methionine sulfoxide reductases (Msr
A and Msr B) to maintain the methionines in a naturally reduced state.[22] It has been proposed that these methionine reductases
are part of a general cellular mechanism of scavenging reactive oxidized
species.[23] Other studies of specific methionine
oxidation have shown that the methionine oxidation in PrPSc is consistent with artifactual oxidation.[4,12,24] After extensive oxidation, prions remain
infectious, which indicates that oxidation of a prion’s methionines
does not substantially alter its structure.[25]Specific methionines play a crucial role in prion propagation.
Humans homozygous for methionine at position 129 were found to be
the most susceptible to and had the shortest disease course for the
acquired human prion disease Kuru.[26,27] Almost all
of the patients afflicted with variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease,
the human manifestation of cattle-derived bovine spongiform encephalopathy,
were homozygous for methionine at position 129.[28] The course of other human familial prion diseases is influenced
by methionine at position 129.[29] Chronic
wasting disease (CWD) progresses most rapidly in animals homozygous
for methionine at position 132, which is isosequential to position
129 in humans.[30] Unlike lysine or histidine,
methionine is nonpolar. Methionines may reside in nonpolar regions
of a protein that make oxidation by charged species difficult. In
addition, other amino acids may influence the extent of methionine
oxidation.[12] The structure of PrPSc makes it difficult to repair with MsrA and MsrB.[31]We developed methods to analyze methionine-containing
peptides
from PrP. The peptides were optimized for a multiple reaction monitoring
(MRM) method. Chromatographic conditions were developed to separate
the oxidized and unoxidized peptides. The relative amount of oxidized
methionine in each peptide was determined. We report those results
below.
Results
In Silico Digestion of Recombinant
PrP (rPrP)
to Identify Conditions to Isolate Methionine-Containing Peptides
The numbering systems used in this paper are for the mature sheep
(25–233) or hamster (23–231) normal cellular prion protein
(Figures S1 and S2). A partial list of
species possessing the peptide sequences in this manuscript has been
tabulated (Table S3). For example, methionine
at position 132 in sheep and other species is equivalent to methionine
129 in hamsters and humans. The methionine-containing peptides used
in this study are derived from the digestion of hamster rPrP or PrPSc with trypsin to yield PMMHFGNDWEDR (hamster; positions 137–148),
IMER (hamster; positions 205–208), and VVEQMCTTQYQK
(hamster; positions 209–220). We also used seven synthetic
polymorphic chymotryptic peptides (Table S3), MLGSMRP (sheep and other
species; positions 132–141) MLGSMRP (sheep and other species; positions 132–141),
MLGSMSP (sheep and other
species; positions 132–141), MLGSMRP (sheep; positions 132–141), MLGSMRP, (human and other species; positions 129–138),
YENMY (sheep and goat; positions
153–158), and YENMY (sheep
and other species; positions 153–158), In addition, a synthetic
peptide, MLGSAMSR (hamster and other species; positions 129–136
[hamster numbering]), that could be derived from the sequential tryptic/chymotryptic
digestion of sheep or hamster PrP, was also evaluated. These peptides
were optimized for MRM-based analysis (Figure S3). The MRM transitions for these ions were empirically determined.
The optimized transitions were used to detect and distinguish among
these various oxidized methionine-containing peptides.MRM optimization
was based on the fragmentation of the peptides into characteristic
ions, which can be used to identify oxidized peptides and the oxidized
methionine. The most intense ion of the MLGSMRP ( = A or V; = S or N; = L, F, or I) peptides is the
y8 ion, GSMRP (Figure S4). By measuring the y8 ion (GSMRP) and the parent ion
(MLGSMRP), the
specific oxidized methionine can be identified. If the initial methionine
(position 132) is oxidized, then the molecular weight of the parent
ion will be increased by 16, but the molecular weight of the y8 ion
will remain the same. If the other methionine (position 137) is oxidized,
then both the parent ion and the y8 ions will be increased by 16.
If methionine 132 and 137 are both oxidized, then the parent ion will
be increased by 32 and the y8 ion will be increased by 16. The oxidized
peptides are readily separated by chromatography (Figure S5). The y6 (GSAMSR) ion is the most intense ion from
the fragmentation of the tryptic/chymotryptic peptide, MLGSAMSR (hamster;
positions 129–136). An analogous method of analysis can be
used to quantify the oxidation of the methionines of the MLGSAMSR
peptide. These oxidized species are also readily separated by chromatography
(Figure S6). In this way, the amount and
locations of methionine oxidation can be identified in these peptides.The other two methionine-containing peptides can be analyzed in
a similar fashion. The tryptic hamster peptide, PMMHFGNDWEDR (hamster;
positions 137–148), could be analyzed using the y3 ion. This
transition permits us to distinguish among the oxidized methionines
by filtering the +16 or +32 parent ions and then detecting the y3
ions. Chromatography was used to separate the unoxidized, each of
the singly oxidized, and the doubly oxidized peptides (Figure S6). The chromatographic retention time
of the parent ion to the a2 ion (PM) transition was used to distinguish
among the two mono-oxidized peptides. In this way, the extent of methionine
oxidation in two-methionine-containing peptides can be analyzed.Peptides containing a single methionine can be analyzed using the
fragmentation of the parent into daughter ions. The oxidation of the
hamster-derived tryptic peptides VVEQMCTTQYQK (hamster; positions
209–220) and IMER (hamster; positions 205–208) can be
analyzed using the transition of the parent ion to the a2 or y3 ions,
respectively. The chymotryptic peptides, YENMY (sheep and goat; positions 153–158) and YENMY (sheep and other species; positions
153–158), can be analyzed using the parent ion to the respective
b5 transitions. The IMER, YENMY,
and YENMY peptides contain a
single methionine or oxidized methionine which are readily separated
(Figure S7). The chromatographic separation
of the oxidized and unoxidized VVEQMCTTQYQK peptides has been previously
reported.[4] These physicochemical properties
permit the analysis of these methionine-containing peptides.
Air Oxidation
of Methionine-Containing Peptides
The
chemistry of MLGSMRP ( = A or V; = S or N; = L, F, or I) peptide air oxidation was analyzed using
the described MRM (vide supra) method. The peptides
were dissolved in buffer and agitated at 37 °C to allow for air
oxidation of the peptide’s methionines. Samples were periodically
removed for analysis. The signals from these time courses were integrated
and are summarized in Figure . The MLGSMRP ( = A or V; = S or N; = L, F, or I) peptides differ in the relative oxidation
of the methionines at positions (sheep numbering) 132 (Met132) and
137 (Met137). An analogous experiment was performed with the MLGSAMSR
peptide, and the results are summarized in Figure S8. This difference in oxidation among these peptides is dependent
upon the amino acids in the respective peptides.
Figure 1
Percentage of methionines
oxidized in four peptides [MLGSMSRP (sheep and other species;
positions 132–141), MLGSMSRP (sheep and other species;
positions 132–141), MLGSMSRP (sheep; positions 132–141),
and MLGSMSRP (human and
other species; positions 129–138)] over time. The peptides
were dissolved in buffer and shaken at 37 °C. Aliquots were removed
at the indicated times and analyzed by MRM. Each data point was done
in triplicate and reported as a mean ± standard deviation.
Percentage of methionines
oxidized in four peptides [MLGSMSRP (sheep and other species;
positions 132–141), MLGSMSRP (sheep and other species;
positions 132–141), MLGSMSRP (sheep; positions 132–141),
and MLGSMSRP (human and
other species; positions 129–138)] over time. The peptides
were dissolved in buffer and shaken at 37 °C. Aliquots were removed
at the indicated times and analyzed by MRM. Each data point was done
in triplicate and reported as a mean ± standard deviation.Two single methionine-containing chymotryptic peptides,
YENMY and YENMY, were air-oxidized over time. The differences between
the extent
of oxidation of the methionine in the YENMY and YENMY peptides are
dependent upon the amino acids in the peptide, with YENMY showing more oxidation than YENMY over time (p <
0.01) (Figure S9). Similar results were
previously reported for analogues of the VVEQMCTTQYQK peptide.[12] These results indicate that the oxidation of
a methionine in a single methionine-containing peptide is influenced
by the amino acid composition of that peptide.
Electrospray Ionization
(ESI) Oxidation of Methionine-Containing
Peptides
The oxidative species generated by the process of
ESI of the peptides results in their artifactual oxidation.[32,33] The MLGSMRP ( = A or V; = S or N; = L, F, or I) peptides were analyzed by MRM (Figure ). The signals corresponding to artifactual
ESI methionine oxidation have identical retention times to the unoxidized
compound yet they appear as peaks in the oxidized transitions. We
determined the percentages of artifactual ESI oxidation of Met132
and Met137 (sheep numbering) in the unoxidized peptides. Additionally,
we determined the percentage of artifactual ESI Met132 oxidation occurring
in peptides containing an oxidized Met137. Conversely, we determined
the extent of artifactual ESI Met137 oxidation in peptides containing
an oxidized Met132. In the tested unoxidized peptides, Met132 was
more susceptible to ESI oxidation than Met137 (p <
0.01). In the partially oxidized peptides (Met137 or Met132 oxidized),
Met132 ESI oxidation was similarly favored over Met137 oxidation (p < 0.01). This indicates that oxidation of one methionine
is not dependent upon the oxidative state of the other methionine
in the parent ion.
Figure 2
Artifactual ESI oxidation of the methionines in four peptides
[MLGSMRPL, MLGSMRP, MLGSMRP, and MLGSMRP (sheep
and other species; positions 132–141)].
The percentage of ESI oxidation of Met132 or Met137 in the unoxidized
peptide and that of Met132 or Met137 in a peptide with methionine
containing an oxidized Met137 or Met132, respectively, is shown. There
was a statistically significant difference (p <
0.05) in the greater percentage of oxidized Met132 vs that of Met137,
regardless of the oxidation state of the parent peptide. Each data
point was done in triplicate and reported as a mean ± standard
deviation. Statistical differences were determined by Student’s
t-test.
Artifactual ESI oxidation of the methionines in four peptides
[MLGSMRPL, MLGSMRP, MLGSMRP, and MLGSMRP (sheep
and other species; positions 132–141)].
The percentage of ESI oxidation of Met132 or Met137 in the unoxidized
peptide and that of Met132 or Met137 in a peptide with methionine
containing an oxidized Met137 or Met132, respectively, is shown. There
was a statistically significant difference (p <
0.05) in the greater percentage of oxidized Met132 vs that of Met137,
regardless of the oxidation state of the parent peptide. Each data
point was done in triplicate and reported as a mean ± standard
deviation. Statistical differences were determined by Student’s
t-test.
Chymotrypsin Digestion
of Methionine-Containing Peptides
Oxidation of methionine
converts a nonpolar amino acid into a polar
one. For comparison, the dipole moment of dimethyl sulfide is 1.5,
while that of its oxidized analogue, dimethyl sulfoxide, is 3.6. Chymotrypsin’s
preference is to cleave on the carboxyl terminus of a nonpolar amino
acid. Two chymotryptic peptides, MLGSMRP and MLGSMRP, were digested with chymotrypsin for 0, 30, 60, 120, or 240 min.
The samples were analyzed by MRM-based analysis. The percentage of
the remaining peptide with Met132, Met137, or Met132 plus Met137 oxidation
was determined. The MRM signals were integrated and plotted. The results
are summarized in Figures S10 and S11.
Extended chymotrypsin digestion does not significantly alter the percentage
of Met132 oxidation in the peptide. The percentage of the peptide
with Met132 and Met137 oxidation is not significantly altered over
the course of the digestion with chymotrypsin.The percentage
of Met137 oxidation increases over the course of the digestion. This
suggests that chymotrypsin preferentially cleaves unoxidized Met137
compared to oxidized Met137. Furthermore, there is a significant difference
(p < 0.05) in the percentage of the Met137 oxidized
peptide after 30 min of chymotryptic digestion. Such a preference
is not an important consideration when quantifying the total amount
of peptide. However, it is significant when the specific purpose is
to quantify the extent of methionine oxidation.The MLGSAMSR
peptide is derived from an extended tryptic digestion
followed by a short chymotryptic digestion. This peptide was digested
with chymotrypsin for 0, 30, 60, 120, or 240 min. The resulting MLGSAMSR
peptides (oxidized and unoxidized) were subjected to an MRM-based
analysis. The signals from the oxidized and unoxidized peptides were
integrated and graphed. These graphs are summarized in Figure S12. After an extended chymotryptic digestion,
the percentage of singly oxidized Met129 (=Met132 in sheep and other
species) or doubly oxidized Met129 plus Met134 (=Met137 in sheep and
other species) peptides remained similar (p >
0.21).
However, the percentage of oxidized Met134 increased starting after
30 min (p < 0.05). There was no difference in
the percentage of oxidized Met134 present in the starting (undigested
with chymotrypsin) peptide and the same peptide digested with chymotrypsin
for 30 min (p > 0.26).
Peroxide Oxidation of rPrP
Hydrogen peroxide has been
widely used to oxidize PrPs. Our MRM method was used to determine
that a methionine was oxidized and not another amino acid. Log P is a measure of the partitioning of a compound between
water and 1-octanol. A smaller number (more negative value) indicates
a more hydrophilic molecule. Hydrogen peroxide has a log P value of −1.36, which indicates that it will less efficiently
oxidize methionines that are in a hydrophobic or surface-inaccessible
region of rPrP or PrPSc.Five different final concentrations
of hydrogen peroxide (0, 1, 10, 20, or 40 mM) were reacted with hamster
rPrP for 30 min. After the reaction was quenched, the protein was
isolated and digested with trypsin. Three tryptic peptides (vide supra) were subjected to an MRM-based analysis. The
MRM signals were integrated and used to prepare the graphs shown in Figure . Again, the observed
results show that the extent of oxidation is dependent upon the chemical
environment of the methionine. Though these peptides contain a methionine
or methionines that will react with an oxidant (O2 or ESI-induced
oxidation, vide supra), they react differently with hydrogen peroxide.
In addition, the extent of the reaction with hydrogen peroxide is
considerably lower than that observed for chloramine T. Again, such
differences in reactivity are due to the chemical environment of the
methionines of rPrP when they are in the PrPC conformation.
Figure 3
Percentage
of oxidized methionines present in three hamster tryptic
peptides [PMMHFGNDWEDR (positions 137–148), IMER (positions
205–208), and VVEQMCTTQYQK (positions 209–220)] derived
from the oxidation of hamster rPrP. rPrP was reacted with one of five
different concentrations (0, 1, 10, 20, or 40 mM) of hydrogen peroxide
or chloramine T. The reacted rPrP samples were prepared for digestion
with trypsin. After the tryptic digestion, the three peptides were
analyzed in triplicate by MRM-based mass spectrometry. There was no
statistically significant (p > 0.1) difference
between
the percentage of methionine oxidized by hydrogen peroxide at positions
138 and 139 in the PMMHFGNDWEDR peptide at hydrogen peroxide concentrations
below 40 mM. At 40 mM, there was a statistically significant difference
(p < 0.05). Each data point was done in triplicate
and reported as a mean ± standard deviation. Statistical differences
were determined by Student’s t-test.
Percentage
of oxidized methionines present in three hamster tryptic
peptides [PMMHFGNDWEDR (positions 137–148), IMER (positions
205–208), and VVEQMCTTQYQK (positions 209–220)] derived
from the oxidation of hamster rPrP. rPrP was reacted with one of five
different concentrations (0, 1, 10, 20, or 40 mM) of hydrogen peroxide
or chloramine T. The reacted rPrP samples were prepared for digestion
with trypsin. After the tryptic digestion, the three peptides were
analyzed in triplicate by MRM-based mass spectrometry. There was no
statistically significant (p > 0.1) difference
between
the percentage of methionine oxidized by hydrogen peroxide at positions
138 and 139 in the PMMHFGNDWEDR peptide at hydrogen peroxide concentrations
below 40 mM. At 40 mM, there was a statistically significant difference
(p < 0.05). Each data point was done in triplicate
and reported as a mean ± standard deviation. Statistical differences
were determined by Student’s t-test.
Chloramine T Oxidation of Hamster rPrP
Chloramine T
is a water-soluble oxidant. It specifically reacts with methionines
over other amino acids. Chloramine T has a log P value
of −1.3. By comparison, oxygen has a log P value of 0.65. If a methionine resides in a hydrophobic or surface-inaccessible
region of rPrP or PrPSc, then chloramine T may not have
access to it.Hamster rPrP was reacted with five final concentrations
(0, 1, 10, 20, or 40 mM) of chloramine T for 30 min. The reactions
were quenched, and then the protein was digested with trypsin. Three
tryptic peptides, PMMHFGNDWEDR, IMER, and VVEQMCTTQYQK, were selected
for analysis. Each was analyzed by our MRM-based method. The integrated
results are summarized in Figure . These results indicate that even though these peptides
contain methionines that react with either molecular oxygen or ESI-generated
oxidants, they react differently with chloramine T when they are part
of the protein rather than as isolated peptides. These differences
in reactivity are due to the chemical environment of the methionines
when they are in the rPrP conformation.
Hydrogen Peroxide Oxidation
of the Sc237 Strain of Hamster-Adapted
Scrapie
The Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted scrapie was isolated
from the brains of infected hamsters in the terminal stage of the
disease. Sc237 prions were isolated by a modified version of the method
of Bolton et al.[34,35] The isolated prions were reacted
for 30 min with four different final concentrations (10, 20, 35, or
50 mM) of hydrogen peroxide. The reaction was quenched, and the prions
were denatured,[36] isolated, and digested
with trypsin and then analyzed using our MRM-based analysis. The integrated
MRM signals are summarized in the graphs shown in Figure . The extent of oxidation of
the methionine (Met206) in the IMER peptide is very low, which suggests
that it is not surface-exposed. The methionine (Met213) in the VVEQMCTTQYQK
peptide is also less exposed but is comparatively more surface-exposed
than Met206. The first methionine (Met138) of PMMHFGNDWEDR is significantly
more oxidized (p < 0.01) than the adjacent methionine
(Met139). This difference in reactivity is to be expected if this
peptide is part of a β-sheet motif where adjacent amino acids
project in opposite perpendicular directions from the plane of the
β-sheet.
Figure 4
Percentage of oxidized methionines present in three hamster
tryptic
peptides [PMMHFGNDWEDR (positions 137–148), IMER (positions
205–208), and VVEQMCTTQYQK (positions 209–220)] derived
from the oxidization of the Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted scrapie.
The prions were reacted with one of four different concentrations
(10, 20, 35, or 50 mM) of hydrogen peroxide or five different concentrations
(0, 0.5, 1, 5, or 10 mM) of chloramine T. The reacted Sc237 samples
were prepared for digestion with trypsin. After the tryptic digestion,
the three peptides were analyzed in triplicate by MRM-based mass spectrometry.
There was a statistically significant (p < 0.01)
difference between the percentage of methionine oxidized by hydrogen
peroxide at positions 138 and 139 in the PMMHFGNDWEDR peptide at all
hydrogen peroxide concentrations. There were no statistically significant
differences between the percentage of methionine oxidation in the
IMER peptide at any concentration of hydrogen peroxide or chloramine
T. At higher concentrations of hydrogen peroxide (35 and 40 mM) and
chloramine T (5 and 10 mM), there were statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences in the percentage of methionine
oxidized in the VVEQMCTTQYQK peptide compared to lower concentrations
of hydrogen peroxide (10 mM) and chloramine T (0 mM). Each data point
was done in triplicate and reported as a mean ± standard deviation.
Statistical differences were determined by Student’s t-test.
Percentage of oxidized methionines present in three hamster
tryptic
peptides [PMMHFGNDWEDR (positions 137–148), IMER (positions
205–208), and VVEQMCTTQYQK (positions 209–220)] derived
from the oxidization of the Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted scrapie.
The prions were reacted with one of four different concentrations
(10, 20, 35, or 50 mM) of hydrogen peroxide or five different concentrations
(0, 0.5, 1, 5, or 10 mM) of chloramine T. The reacted Sc237 samples
were prepared for digestion with trypsin. After the tryptic digestion,
the three peptides were analyzed in triplicate by MRM-based mass spectrometry.
There was a statistically significant (p < 0.01)
difference between the percentage of methionine oxidized by hydrogen
peroxide at positions 138 and 139 in the PMMHFGNDWEDR peptide at all
hydrogen peroxide concentrations. There were no statistically significant
differences between the percentage of methionine oxidation in the
IMER peptide at any concentration of hydrogen peroxide or chloramine
T. At higher concentrations of hydrogen peroxide (35 and 40 mM) and
chloramine T (5 and 10 mM), there were statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences in the percentage of methionine
oxidized in the VVEQMCTTQYQK peptide compared to lower concentrations
of hydrogen peroxide (10 mM) and chloramine T (0 mM). Each data point
was done in triplicate and reported as a mean ± standard deviation.
Statistical differences were determined by Student’s t-test.
Chloramine T Oxidation of Hamster-Adapted
Scrapie Sc237
Samples of the Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted
scrapie were reacted
for 15 min with five different final concentrations (0, 0.5, 1, 5,
or 10 mM) of chloramine T. Each sample was processed for an MRM-based
analysis. The graphical summaries of the integrated MRM signals are
summarized in Figure . The extent of oxidation of the methionine (Met206) in the IMER
peptide is comparatively low. There were no statistical differences
(p > 0.07) between the amount of oxidized Met206
in the unreacted Sc237 sample and any of those reacted with chloramine
T, suggesting that Met206 is not surface-exposed. At higher concentrations
(5 and 10 mM) of chloramine T, there were statistically significant
differences between the Met213 oxidized samples and the starting material.
This suggests that the Met213 of the VVEQMCTTQYQK sequence is more
exposed than Met206 of the IMER sequence. The first methionine (Met138)
of the PMMHFGNDWEDR peptide was significantly more oxidized (p < 0.03) than the adjacent methionine (Met139) at higher
concentrations of chloramine T (5 and 10 mM). This suggests that Met138
has a greater surface exposure than Met139.
Discussion
We developed an MRM-based method of quantitating the oxidation
of methionines present in peptides derived from PrP (rPrP or PrPSc). We used peptides found in sheep, hamsters, and other species
(Table S3) to determine how susceptible
each methionine in those peptides was to oxidation by air and by reactive
oxygen species. We observed that the amino acid composition of the
peptide influences the reactivity of each methionine. This occurred
in chymotryptic peptides with two methionines (MLGSMSRP MLGSMSRP MLGSMSRP and MLGSMSRP). It was observed in the hamster peptide,
MLGSAMSR. It was also observed in peptides containing a single methionine
(YENMY and YENMY). Previous work has shown that this is also
true for the sheep analogues of the hamster peptide, VVEQMCTTQYQK.[12] In those peptides with two methionines, each
methionine reacted differently. The difference in reactivity between
the two methionines was statistically significant, but not substantial,
except after extended exposure to air oxidation.ESI is known
to artifactually oxidize methionines in peptides.
The oxidants created by ESI are peroxides and hydroxyl radicals. We
quantitated the extent of ESI oxidation for four chymotryptic peptides
(MLGSMSRP MLGSMSRP MLGSMSRP and MLGSMSRP). These peptides
showed small, but significant, differences in the extent of artifactual
oxidation. In these samples, Met132 was more readily oxidized than
Met137. For two of these peptides (MLGSMSRP and MLGSMSRP), this
trend was different from that observed for air oxidation. This suggests
that the choice of oxidant may influence the extent of the reaction.Oxidized methionines can influence the chymotryptic digestion of
MRM-suitable chymotryptic peptides. We observed that chymotryptic
digestion of synthetic methionine-containing sheep (and other species Table S3) chymotryptic peptides (MLGSMSRPL and MLGSMSRPL) resulted in an increase in the percentage of oxidized
Met137, but not Met132, over time. This suggests that oxidized methionine
is not as efficiently cleaved as unoxidized methionine by chymotrypsin.
Such a bias can complicate the analysis of samples containing oxidized
methionine. When the hamster tryptic/chymotryptic peptide, MLGSAMSR,
was digested with chymotrypsin, there was no difference in the percentage
of oxidized Met129 in the sample during the entire digestion. After
0.5 h of digestion, there was no difference in the percentage of oxidized
Met134 present in the sample compared to the starting material. Thus,
an extended tryptic digestion followed by a short chymotryptic digestion
can solve this bias problem. Furthermore, this approach is not restricted
to hamster as digestion of sheep and other species PrP with trypsin/chymotrypsin
will likewise yield the MLGSAMSR peptide.The chemical environment
of a protein also influences the reactivity
of the methionines. The methionines in the three hamster tryptic peptides
are susceptible to oxidation. When hamster rPrP (PrPC conformation)
was oxidized with either hydrogen peroxide or chloramine T, the extent
of methionine oxidation in three tryptic peptides was noticeably different.
This indicates that Met206 of the IMER peptide resides in a surface-inaccessible
or nonpolar region of the protein, which is inaccessible to the polar
oxidants (Figure S13). In contrast, the
methionines 138, 139, and 213 are less protected in the PMMHFGNDWEDR
and VVEQMCTTQYQK peptides, respectively (Figures S14 and S15). This indicates that the chemical environment
of a peptide in a protein influences its reactivity.When the
Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted scrapie was oxidized,
we noticed a striking difference in reactivity. Other researchers
have shown that exposing prions to oxidants that oxidize methionine
does not destroy their infectivity.[25] This
means that methionine oxidation does not substantially perturb the
prion structure. Methionine 206 of the IMER peptide was not oxidized,
so it must not be exposed on the surface of the Sc237 prion. Met213
of the VVEQMCTTQYQK peptide was not as oxidized as it was in the rPrP
(=PrPC) conformation, which suggests that it has less surface
exposure in the Sc237 conformation than in the rPrP conformation.
The most striking difference in oxidation occurs in the adjacent methionines
138 and 139 of PMMHFGNDWEDR. Such a difference is predicted by the
β-sheet geometry, where adjacent methionines project in opposite
perpendicular directions from the plane of the β-sheet. None
of these differences in oxidation are due to intrinsic differences
in the reactivity of these four methionines, as the synthetic peptides
containing them all react with oxidants. The differences in reactivity
are due to differences in the conformations of hamster PrPC and PrPSc.We compared our empirical results with
a computational 4-rung-β-solenoid
model of a murine prion.[37] The model is
based on the mouse PrP sequence and does not incorporate the glycosylphosphatidylinositol
(GPI) anchor nor the asparagine-linked glycosylation. Despite these
limitations, the model accounts for the lack of oxidation of methionine
206 of the IMER peptide (Figure S16) and
the partial oxidation of Met213 of the VVEQMCTTQYQK peptide (Figure S17). It does not account for the difference
in the relative percentage of oxidized methionines 138 and 139 in
the PMMHFGNDWEDR peptide, however. The model would predict an opposite
result (methionine 139 more oxidized than methionine 138; Figure S18). This difference may be due to the
simplicity of the model (without glycosylation or GPI anchor) or the
difference in the PrP sequence (mouse vs hamster; Figure S19). Measuring the surface exposure of methionines
by measuring their susceptibility to oxidation can be used to inform
modelers, so they can refine their existing models of a prion structure.Recently, cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) was used to determine
the structure of the 263 K strain of hamster-adapted scrapie.[38] Unlike the 4-rung-β-solenoid,[37] this structure is composed of parallel in-register
intermolecular β-sheets (PIRIBS). Furthermore, it is not a computational
model; instead, it is based on cryo-EM analysis. A structure based
on the PDB coordinates (7LNA) is shown in Figure S20. Based on this image, there is a pore that appears to make the methionine
206 surface-accessible to hydrogen peroxide (Figure S21). In our experiments, this methionine is not oxidized,
which suggests that it is not surface-accessible. In the PIRIBS structure,
methionine 213 appears to be surface-inaccessible, which is consistent
with the low levels of methionine 213 oxidation. Methionines 138 and
139 appear to have some surface access in the PIRIBS structure. In
our experiments, methionine 138, but not 139, is surface-accessible.
The reasons for these inconsistencies are unclear. The PIRIBS structure
is based on the 263 K strain of hamster-adapted scrapie,[39] while our experiments employed a similar Sc237
strain of hamster-adapted scrapie.[40,41] In addition,
the PIRIBS structure is based on PK-treated prions that were isolated
using dithiothreitol (DTT),[42] while the
prions used in our work were not isolated using DTT, nor were they
treated with PK. It is also possible that the static PIRIBS structure
shown in Figure S20 is more dynamic and
the actual surface exposure of methionines is different from that
suggested by the static structure. The reasons for these inconsistencies
are unclear, and more experiments need to be performed to resolve
them.Our approach is an important means of ensuring the safety
of an
important food source that is acquired by means that are largely outside
of traditional regulatory controls. Wild game meat accounts for approximately
2.5% of the protein consumed in the United States.[43] Most of this meat comes from cervids (deer, elk, and moose)
and is not subjected to regulatory inspection.[44] This is important because CWD,[45] a prion disease of wild and farmed cervids, is becoming more prevalent
in North America (https://www.usgs.gov/centers/nwhc/science/expanding-distribution-chronic-wasting-disease?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects). Fortunately, none of the strains of North American CWD have been
shown to be zoonotic (https://www.cdc.gov/prions/cwd/index.html). The recent independent emergence of at least five novel strains
of CWD in Norway[46] suggests that cervid
PrPC can propagate a greater number of prion conformations
than previously believed. CWD is difficult to control as it spreads
among wild cervids by their natural behaviors and from CWD-contaminated
environments. In principle, this method can be used to model the compatibility
of human PrPC with a novel CWD strain (conformation), and,
thereby, identify a potential zoonotic prion. Such information will
allow regulators to proactively respond. Our approach has the potential
to help ensure food safety by identifying potential threats to an
important food source that is not subject to regulatory inspection.
Conclusions
Our MRM-based method of quantitating oxidized methionine in PrP-derived
peptides can be used to distinguish among prion conformations or strains.
In the 4-rung-β-solenoid model, each rung contains at least
one methionine per rung (Figure S22). In
principle, the surface exposure of a methionine can be used to determine
the register (projection inward or outward) for each rung. Previous
work has shown that lysine acylating reagents can be used to distinguish
among hamster prion strains, as acylation does not eliminate a prion’s
infectivity.[10,11,14,16] This approach maps the surface of a prion,
by quantitating the extent of methionine oxidation. This information
can be used to determine the register of each rung on the 4-rung-β-solenoid
and, in principle, distinguish among prion conformations or strains.
Such information can be used to model the ability of human PrPC to thread the proposed PrPSc structure. Thus,
covalent modification coupled with mass spectrometry-based analysis
can be used to “sequence” a prion’s conformation.
Materials
and Methods
Chemicals
LC/MS-grade acetonitrile, DTT, and water
were purchased from Fisher Scientific (Pittsburgh, PA). Chymotrypsin,
alpha (3X crystallized zymogen), was purchased from Worthington Biochemical
Corporation (Lakewood, NJ). All other reagents were from Sigma-Aldrich
(St. Louis, MO).The peptides used in this study were obtained
from Elim Biopharmaceuticals (Hayward, CA). For the sake of clarity,
the peptide polymorphisms are underlined and in bold. Mass spectrometry
was used to confirm the structures of the synthetic peptides. They
are of high (>95%) chemical purity based on LC/UV-based analysis.Digestion of the appropriate 15N-labeled rPrP protein
with chymotrypsin, trypsin, or a combination of trypsin and chymotrypsin
yielded the required 15N-labeled internal standards. The
genetic sequence of the relevant Prnp plasmid was
used to determine the PrP protein’s primary structure. The
PrP proteins were analyzed by mass spectrometry to ensure that the
predicted amino acid sequences were correct. The incorporation of
the 15N label into the uniformly labeled PrP internal standard
was estimated to be 99.7% by mass spectrometry.
Preparation
of Sheep and Hamster rPrP Polymorphisms
The prion protein
genes (sans the N-terminal signal sequence or C-terminal
GPI-anchor signal sequence) corresponding to amino acids 25–233
(sheep) or 23–231 (hamster) were cloned using standard protocols
into the pET11a vector (EMD Millipore, Billerica, MA). Other polymorphisms
were generated using the standard megaprimer method of site-directed
mutagenesis.[47,48] Products were checked for correct
length by gel, then purified, and digested with NdeI and BamHI and
ligated into a pET11a vector (also digested and treated with phosphatase).
The ligation mixture (3:1 molar ratio of insert/vector) was transformed
into chemically competent DH5α cells (New England Biolabs, Ipswich,
MA). The inserts were sequenced with an Applied Biosystems 3130 Genetic
Analyzer (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA) to verify each mutation.
The correctly mutated, sequenced plasmids were isolated and transformed
into BL21 cells (EMD Millipore, Billerica, MA) for expression.
Preparation
of 15N-Labeled Sheep or Hamster rPrP
Each of the Prnp-containing BL21 clones was grown
in M9 minimal medium (84.5 mM Na2HPO4, 44.4
mM KH2PO4, 17.1 mM NaCl, 37.4 mM NH4Cl, 2 mM MgSO4, 0.1 mM CaCl2, 33.2μΜ
thiamine, 22.2 mM glucose, and trace metals) supplemented with either
naturally abundant 14NH4Cl or 15NH4Cl (99.7% 15N). Twenty-five mL of the appropriate
M9 medium (supplemented with 100 μg/mL of carbenicillin) in
250 mL flasks was inoculated with a single colony of the desired clone
(hamster PrP or sheep PrP with alanine at position 136, arginine at
positions 154 and 171 [A136R154R171]) and allowed to grow overnight in a shaker/incubator (250 rpm;
37 °C). To minimize isotopic dilution of 15N, four
microliters of the overnight culture grown in M9 medium (+15NH4Cl) was inoculated into a fresh 25 mL culture of M9
medium supplemented with 15NH4Cl and allowed
to grow overnight. Four mL of the appropriate overnight culture was
added to 150 mL of fresh M9 medium (supplemented with 100 μg/mL
of carbenicillin and 15NH4Cl) in a 1 L flask
and allowed to grow until the cells achieved midlog growth (A600 between 0.4 and 0.6). Once midlog growth was achieved,
the cells were induced to overexpress the cloned protein by the addition
of a sufficient amount of isopropyl β-D-1-thiogalactopyranoside
(IPTG) to make a 1 mM solution. The cells grew for four more hours.
After 4 h, they were pelleted (10,000 × g; 15 min), washed, and
then pelleted again. The inclusion bodies were isolated and rPrP purified
by previously described methods.[3]The inclusion bodies from the 15NH4Cl cultures
were isolated, denatured, and slowly renatured on an immobilized metal
affinity column and then chromatographed on that column. The fraction
containing the 15N-labeled PrP was dialyzed against ammonium
acetate (50 mM; pH 4.5) to remove the nonvolatile salts. The retentate
was lyophilized to yield a white powder.The powder was dissolved
in buffer (0.01% β-octylglucopyranoside
(BOG), 1 pmol/μL methionine, and 8% acetonitrile) and then reduced,
alkylated, and digested with chymotrypsin. The resulting 15N-labeled peptides were used as internal standards.
Preparation
of the Naturally Abundant (14N)-Labeled
rPrP
The same procedure for preparing 15N-labeled
rPrP was used to prepare naturally abundant (14N-labeled)
rPrP (vide supra), except that the M9 medium was
supplemented with naturally abundant 14NH4Cl,
and the second overnight 25 mL culture was omitted.
Identification
of Peptides via Qualitative Mass Spectrometry
Qualitative
mass spectrometry was performed using a Thermo Scientific,
Orbitrap Elite mass spectrometer (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA).
Synthetic peptides or peptides generated from recombinant proteins
digested with trypsin or chymotrypsin were solubilized with 5% acetonitrile,
0.1% formic acid in water (Optima LC/MS grade, Fisher Scientific,
Pittsburgh, PA), to approximately 1 pmol/μL. Each sample was
transferred to an autosampler vial and placed in the autosampler of
an Eksigent nanoLC 400 interfaced to an Orbitrap Elite mass spectrometer
with a PicoChip nanospray source (New Objective, Woburn, MA). For
each LC–MS run, a 2 μL portion of sample was loaded by
the autosampler onto a 75 μm ID column containing 10 cm of 3
μm, 120 Å, ReproSil-Pur C18-AQ reverse phase packing (New
Objective, Woburn, MA).Samples were eluted into the mass spectrometer
with a binary gradient flow at a rate of 300 nL/min. Solvent A was
2% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid in water, and Solvent B was acetonitrile
(Optima LC/MS grade containing 0.1% formic acid; Fisher Scientific,
Waltham, MA). The gradient was programmed from 5% Solvent B to 50%
Solvent B over 30 min, then to 90% solvent B for 20 min, and held
at 90% B for 10 min. Peptides were detected in the Orbitrap with the
FT survey scan from 300 to 2000 m/z at a resolution of 60,000. The 10 most intense peaks above a threshold
of 30,000 counts were subjected to dissociation (CID) with normalized
collision energy set to 35, default charge state set to 2, isolation
width set to 2.0 m/z, and activation
time set to 30 ms. Product spectra were recorded at 30,000 resolution
with the low mass set to 50 Da. Dynamic exclusion was enabled for
a duration of 6 s with a repeat count of 1. Charge state screening
allowed +1 and greater charge states to be selected for CID fragmentation.
Monoisotopic precursor selection was enabled. MS/MS data were searched
against both public and in-house generated databases using the Mascot
Server protein identification software (Matrix Science Inc., Boston,
MA) to identify peptides of interest.
Optimization of Peptides
Peptides were commercially
prepared by Elim Biopharmaceuticals (Hayward, CA) for optimization
studies. The instrument response was optimized for each peptide by
a previously described method.[49] The mass
spectrometer was operated in MRM mode, alternating between detection
of the oxidized and unoxidized peptides and the 15N-labeled
internal standards. The mass settings for the peptides are summarized
in Tables S1 and S2.
Chymotrypsin
Digestion of Peptides
To test the susceptibility
of methionine-containing peptides for further digestion by chymotrypsin,
the following peptides were each diluted to 83.3 fmol/μL in
chymotrypsin buffer (100 mM Tris pH 8, 10 mM CaCl2): MLGSAMSR (hamster
and other species; positions 129–136), MLGSMRP (sheep and other species; positions 132–141),
and MLGSMRP (sheep; positions
132–141). For the sake of clarity, the relevant polymorphisms
are denoted in bold and underlined. Chymotrypsin was added to a final
concentration of 500 ng/100 μL and 500 μL final volume.
At each time point (0, 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 h), an aliquot of 100 μL
was removed to a new tube, and 2.5 μL of 10% formic acid (Fisher
Scientific) was added to each and then filtered through a 10 K molecular
weight cut-off (MWCO) filter.
Air Oxidation of Peptides
The following peptides were
diluted to make a 1 mL solution containing 83.3 fmol/μL of each
peptide in 8% acetonitrile. Peptides were subjected to air oxidation
in sets. Set 1 contained the peptides MLGSMRP (sheep and other species; positions 132–141),
MLGSMRP (sheep and other
species; positions 132–141), MLGSMRP (human and other species; positions 129–138),
and YENMY (sheep and other species;
positions 153–158). Set 2 contained the peptides MLGSMRP (sheep and other species; positions 132–141),
YENMY (sheep and goats; positions
153–158), and MLGSMRP (sheep and other species; positions 132–141). Set 3 contained
the three hamster peptides IMER (positions 205–208), PMMHFGNDWEDR
(positions 137–148), and MLGSAMSR (positions 129–136).The solutions were shaken at 500 rpm at 37 °C to permit air
oxidation. A 100 μL aliquot (+2.5 μL of 10% FA) of each
solution was removed after 0, 4, 24, 48, 72, or 168 h. Each aliquot
was filtered through a 10,000 MWCO filter (12 min, 14,000 × g).
Samples were diluted with a 15N-labeled rPrP, chymotrypsin-digested
(for sets 1 and 2), or trypsin-digested (for set 3) internal standard
immediately before running on the mass spectrometer.
Animal Handling
and Hamster Scrapie Sample Preparation
Mesocricetus auratus
The recommendations contained
in the Guide for the Care and Use
of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health guided
our animal experiments. The protocols governing this work were approved
by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the United States
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Albany,
CA (Protocol Number: P-10-3). Isoflurane was used to anesthetize the
animals prior to all inoculations or euthanizations. A commercial
vendor (Charles River Laboratories; Wilmington, MA) supplied the LVG
Syrian golden hamsters ().The Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted scrapie[40,41] was purchased from InPro Biotechnology (South San Francisco, CA).
The Sc237 strain was passaged through LVG Syrian golden hamsters (Charles
River Laboratories, Wilmington, MA 01887). The initial inoculum was
prepared as a 10% homogenate in PBS from the brain of a hamster in
the terminal stage of an Sc237 prion infection. Female LVG hamsters
(4 weeks old) were anesthetized with isoflurane and then inoculated
intracranially (ic) with 50 μL of a 10% brain
homogenate (∼107ic ID50). The inoculated animals were monitored for clinical signs and were
humanely euthanized upon the appearance of terminal clinical signs.
The brains were surgically removed postmortem. Each brain was stored
at −80 °C until it was processed.PrPSc was isolated according to the methods of Bolton
et al. with some minor modifications.[34] Briefly, a tissue homogenate (10 or 20%) (w/v) from the brain was
made using a disposable homogenizer (OMNI International) in homogenization
buffer (water- or potassium-free PBS). The brain homogenates were
diluted 1:1 with buffer (20% w/v N-lauroylsarcosine, 19 mM sodium
phosphate, pH 8.5) and mixed for 15 min at room temperature. The homogenate
was then centrifuged for 18 min (16,000 × g;
20 °C), in a refrigerated centrifuge (Eppendorf 5810R), to remove
large particles. The supernatant was retained. Individual portions
of each tissue homogenate (500 μL) were separately diluted to
3 mL with buffer (10% w/v N-Lauroylsarcosine, 9.5 mM sodium phosphate,
pH 8.5) and individually transferred to a separate ultracentrifuge
tube (4.2 mL, 16 × 38 mm). The contents of the tube were underlaid
with 1 mL of 20% w/v sucrose and sealed. The sample in the sealed
tube was centrifuged for 75 min at 150,000 × g (46,000 rpm, 20 °C) with a floating Noryl spacer in a Beckman
70.1 Ti rotor to obtain an insoluble pellet.The resulting pellets
were immediately brought up in Z buffer (20
mM Tris pH 8.5 containing 0.1% of the zwittergent Z3–14), transferred
to screw top microcentrifuge tubes, and sonicated for 4 × 45
s bursts at maximum power using a microplate cup horn sonicator (Misonix
4000). Samples were then reacted with oxidants as described below
and finally, denatured by the addition of a 3× volume of 8 M
guanidine hydrochloride (GuCl), to achieve a final concentration of
6 M. Each resulting solution stood for 24 h at room temperature to
allow for full denaturation and then was transferred to a clean screw
top microcentrifuge tube. Samples were subjected to reduction, alkylation,
and enzymatic cleavage (vide infra).
Hydrogen
Peroxide Oxidation of rPrP and Hamster Scrapie
A fresh stock
solution of 30% (v/v) aqueous hydrogen peroxide solution
was prepared daily. The aqueous dilutions were prepared from the stock
solution. Lyophilized hamster rPrP (10 μg) was dissolved in
100 μL of Z buffer (0.1% Z3–14 in 20 mM Tris pH 8.5).
To each 100 μL sample was added 10 μL of a dilution of
hydrogen peroxide to give final concentrations of 0, 1, 10, 20, or
40 mM H2O2. Each sample was rotated in a 37
°C incubator for 15 min. Reactions were quenched by the addition
of 50 μL of a 355 mM L-methionine solution in water and rotated
an additional 15 min. Enough 8 M guanidine hydrochloride (GuCl) was
added to yield a 6 M solution. The reacted rPrPs, in 6 M GuCl, were
then reduced and alkylated as described below (Reduction and
Alkylation of PrP Samples).For hamster scrapie (Sc237),
Bolton pellets were prepared from infected brain homogenate, brought
up in 100 μL of Z buffer, and sonicated as described above (Animal Handling and Hamster Scrapie Sample Preparation).
To each sample was added 10 μL of a dilution of hydrogen peroxide
to give final concentrations of 0, 0.5, 1, 5, 10, 20, 35, or 50 mM
H2O2. Each sample was rotated in a 37 °C
incubator for 15 min. Reactions were stopped by the addition of 50
μL of a 355 mM L-methionine solution. Hamster scrapie samples
were denatured with three volumes of 8 M guanidine hydrochloride and
left to denature for 24 h. Denatured samples were transferred to clean
tubes and were reduced, alkylated, and methanol-precipitated before
digestion with trypsin, chymotrypsin, or a combination of the two
enzymes, as described below (vide infra).
Chloramine
T Oxidation of Hamster rPrP and Hamster-Adapted Scrapie
(Sc237)
Chloramine T solutions at 10× concentrations
were prepared fresh daily in Z buffer (0.1% Z3–14 in 20 mM
Tris pH 8.5), from a 300 mM concentrate in water. Hamster rPrP (10
μg) was dissolved in 90 μL of Z buffer. Fresh chloramine
T solution (10 μL) was added to yield a final concentration
of 0 (control), 0.1, 0.5, 1, 5, 10, 20, or 40 mM chloramine T per
rPrP sample. The solutions were rotated at room temperature for 15
min. After 15 min, the reaction was quenched by an excess of L-methionine
(10 μL of a 355 mM solution), and the tubes were rotated for
an additional 15 min at room temperature. Enough 8 M guanidine hydrochloride
(GuCl) was added to yield a 6 M solution. The reacted rPrPs in 6 M
GuCl were then reduced and alkylated as described below (Reduction
and Alkylation of PrP Samples).For hamster-adapted
scrapie (Sc237), Bolton pellets were prepared from infected brain
homogenate, brought up in 90 μL of buffer (0.1% Z3–14
in 20 mM Tris pH 8.5 buffer), and sonicated as described above (Animal Handling and Hamster Scrapie Sample Preparation).
To each sample was added 10 μL of a dilution of chloramine T
to give final concentrations of 0 (control), 0.1, 0.5, 1, 5, or 10
mM. The solutions were rotated at room temperature for 15 min. After
15 min, the reaction was quenched by an excess of L-methionine (10
μL of a 355 mM solution), and the tubes were rotated for an
additional 15 min at room temperature. Hamster scrapie samples were
denatured with three volumes of 8 M guanidine hydrochloride and left
to fully denature for 24 h. Denatured samples were transferred to
clean tubes and were reduced, alkylated, and digested with trypsin,
chymotrypsin, or a combination of the two enzymes, as described below
(vide infra).
Reduction and Alkylation
of PrP Samples
Each 10 μg
aliquot of rPrP not reacted with an oxidant was dissolved in 20 μL
of buffer (BOG, 1 pmol/μL methionine, and 8% acetonitrile) and
sonicated (Cole-Parmer model 8892; Vernon Hills, IL) for 5 min. A
10 μL aliquot of 15 mM DTT in buffer A (25 mM ammonium bicarbonate
(ABC), BOG, 1 pmol/μL methionine, and 8% acetonitrile; pH 8)
was added to the sonicated solution and reacted for 1 h (37 °C),
with 5 min of sonication every 20 min. The reaction mixture was cooled
to room temperature, and then 40 μL of iodoacetamide (IA) buffer
(22 mM iodoacetamide in buffer A) was added to the mixture and left
to react in the dark at room temperature for 1 h. Any excess IA was
quenched by the addition of 20 μL of DTT buffer (22 mM DTT in
buffer A). The reduced and alkylated rPrP was enzymatically digested
with either trypsin or chymotrypsin as described below.rPrP
samples reacted with oxidants, and hamster scrapie (strain Sc237)
samples reacted with oxidants, were reduced and alkylated in 6 M GuCl.
Briefly, samples in GuCl were reduced with 25 mM DTT in 25 mM ABC
buffer pH 8.0 for 15 min at 50 °C, with 5 min of sonication at
the beginning of the incubation. Samples were then cooled and alkylated
with 75 mM iodoacetamide in 25 mM ABC for 45 min at room temperature,
in the dark. Excess iodoacetamide was quenched by the addition of
25 mM DTT in 25 mM ABC and then methanol-precipitated as described
below.
Methanol Precipitation of Guanidine Hydrochloride (GuCl) Solutions
Enough cold methanol (−20 °C) was added to the GuCl-containing
solutions to make an 85% (v/v) solution. This solution was stored
at −20 °C for 1 h. After the hour had passed, the solution
was centrifuged (20,000 × g; 20 min; −11
°C). The supernatant was removed and disposed of as chemical
waste. The pellet was resuspended in cold (−20 °C) methanol
and centrifuged (20,000 × g; 20 min; −11
°C). The resulting supernatant was disposed of as chemical waste.
The pellet was air-dried for 10 min and then stored at −20
°C until ready for enzymatic digestion.
Enzymatic Digestions of
Reduced and Alkylated PrP Samples
Trypsin or chymotrypsin
was used to digest the reduced and alkylated
PrP proteins. Two enzymatic digestions were employed: (1) trypsin
digestion for 18 h at 37 °C and (2) chymotrypsin digestion for
0, 0.5, 1, 2, or 4 h at 30 °C. For each trypsin digestion, 1
μg of trypsin was used in 50 mM Tris pH 8.0 buffer, and for
chymotrypsin, 500 ng was used per sample, with added CaCl2 to 10 mM, also in 50 mM Tris pH 8.0 buffer. After the digestion
was complete, digestion was stopped by the addition of 2.5 μL
of 10% formic acid. Each sample was filtered through a 10,000 MWCO
filter (VWR International, San Francisco, CA) for 12 min at 14,000
× g. Samples were stored at −20 °C until analyzed
by mass spectrometry.
Quantitative Mass Spectrometry: Nanospray
Liquid Chromatography
and Tandem Mass Spectroscopy (LC–MS/MS)
An Applied
Biosystems (AB Sciex LLC, Framingham, MA) model 4000 Q-Trap instrument
equipped with a nanoelectrospray source was used to perform nanospray
LC–MS/MS. An aliquot (6 μL) of each digest was loaded
onto a C-18 trap cartridge [Acclaim PepMap100, 5 μm, 100 Å,
300 μm (inside diameter) × 5 mm (Dionex, Sunnyvale, CA)].
Salts were washed from the cartridge with an acetic acid/acetonitrile/heptafluorobutyric
acid/water solution (0.5/1/0.02/99). The now salt-free bound peptides
were eluted onto a reversed-phase column [Vydac (HiChrom, Lutterworth,
U.K.) 238EV5.07515, 75 μm × 150 mm]. The solvents were
delivered with an Applied Biosystems model Tempo nanoflow LC system
(ABI/MDS Sciex) with an autosampler, a column switching device, and
a nanoflow solvent delivery system. Samples were eluted from the column
with a binary gradient (A, 0.5% acetic acid in water, and B, 80% acetonitrile
with 0.5% acetic acid). The flow rate was 250 nL/min with a 16 min
linear gradient starting with 5% B and ending with 100% B. Elution
with 100% B was conducted for 7 min followed by a return to 5% B over
4 min. The eluted samples were sprayed with a noncoated spray tip
(FS360-20-10-N-20-C12, New Objective Inc., Woburn, MA) onto the Applied
Biosystems source, Model Nanospray II.The mass spectrometer
was operated in MRM mode, alternating between detection of the analyte
peptides and their appropriate 15N-labeled internal standards.
The mass settings for the peptides were empirically determined and
may be found in the Supporting Information. The mass settings for the quantification were done with the IntelliQuant
quantification algorithm using Analyst 1.5 software.
In
Silico Digestion of rPrP
The hamster
and sheep PrP sequences were digested in silico using
the PeptideCutter (https://web.expasy.org/peptide_cutter/) feature of the Internet
based Expasy software (https://www.expasy.org/). The sophisticated model was used to predict the chymotryptic cleavage
sites.
Safety Considerations
Acetonitrile and other hazardous
chemicals were handled in a dedicated chemical safety hood. The Sc237
strain of hamster-adapted scrapie is infectious and was handled in
a dedicated biosafety level 2 (BSL2) laboratory. The Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the USDA (www.aphis.usda.gov/permits/) inspected the BSL2 laboratory. The BSL2 procedures used to manipulate
the Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted scrapie are outlined in the 5th
edition of the CDC’s biosafety manual, Biosafety in Microbiological
and Biomedical Laboratories.[50] Before removal
from the dedicated BSL-2 laboratory, the Sc237 strain of hamster-adapted
scrapie was inactivated with 6 M guanidine hydrochloride.[36] Each Sc237-containing solution was thoroughly
mixed and then allowed to stand for at least 24 h at room temperature.[36] The inactivated Sc237 prions were transferred
to clean fresh tubes and removed from the BSL-2 laboratory. The inactivated
prions were digested with proteases and then filtered through a 10,000
MWCO filter, before being subjected to mass spectrometry-based analysis.
Authors: Franc Llorens; Katrin Thüne; Matthias Schmitz; Belén Ansoleaga; Margalida A Frau-Méndez; Maria Cramm; Waqas Tahir; Nadine Gotzmann; Sara Berjaoui; Margarita Carmona; Christopher J Silva; Ivan Fernandez-Vega; Juan José Zarranz; Inga Zerr; Isidro Ferrer Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2016-04-07 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Gerald S Baron; Andrew G Hughson; Gregory J Raymond; Danielle K Offerdahl; Kelly A Barton; Lynne D Raymond; David W Dorward; Byron Caughey Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2011-05-03 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Christopher J Silva; Bruce C Onisko; Irina C Dynin; Melissa Erickson-Beltran; Jesús R Requena Journal: J Agric Food Chem Date: 2021-02-15 Impact factor: 5.279
Authors: Katherine I O'Rourke; Terry R Spraker; Dongyue Zhuang; Justin J Greenlee; Thomas E Gidlewski; Amir N Hamir Journal: Neuroreport Date: 2007-12-03 Impact factor: 1.837
Authors: Laura Cracco; Emma H Doud; Grace I Hallinan; Holly J Garringer; Max H Jacobsen; Rose M Richardson; Emanuele Buratti; Ruben Vidal; Bernardino Ghetti; Kathy L Newell Journal: Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol Date: 2022-07-28 Impact factor: 6.250