Transient dissipative dimerization and transient gated dimerization of DNA tetrahedra nanostructures are introduced as functional modules to emulate transient and gated protein-protein interactions and emergent protein-protein guided transient catalytic functions, operating in nature. Four tetrahedra are engineered to yield functional modules that, in the presence of pre-engineered auxiliary nucleic acids and the nicking enzyme Nt.BbvCI, lead to the fueled transient dimerization of two pairs of tetrahedra. The dynamic transient formation and depletion of DNA tetrahedra are followed by transient FRET signals generated by fluorophore-labeled tetrahedra. The integration of two inhibitors within the mixture of the four tetrahedra and two auxiliary modules, fueling the transient dimerization, results in selective inhibitor-guided gated transient dimerization of two different DNA tetrahedra dimers. Kinetic models for the dynamic transient dimerization and gated transient dimerization of the DNA tetrahedra are formulated and computationally simulated. The derived rate-constants allow the prediction and subsequent experimental validation of the performance of the systems under different auxiliary conditions. In addition, by appropriate modification of the four tetrahedra structures, the triggered gated emergence of selective transient catalytic functions driven by the two pairs of DNA tetrahedra dimers is demonstrated.
Transient dissipative dimerization and transient gated dimerization of DNA tetrahedra nanostructures are introduced as functional modules to emulate transient and gated protein-protein interactions and emergent protein-protein guided transient catalytic functions, operating in nature. Four tetrahedra are engineered to yield functional modules that, in the presence of pre-engineered auxiliary nucleic acids and the nicking enzyme Nt.BbvCI, lead to the fueled transient dimerization of two pairs of tetrahedra. The dynamic transient formation and depletion of DNA tetrahedra are followed by transient FRET signals generated by fluorophore-labeled tetrahedra. The integration of two inhibitors within the mixture of the four tetrahedra and two auxiliary modules, fueling the transient dimerization, results in selective inhibitor-guided gated transient dimerization of two different DNA tetrahedra dimers. Kinetic models for the dynamic transient dimerization and gated transient dimerization of the DNA tetrahedra are formulated and computationally simulated. The derived rate-constants allow the prediction and subsequent experimental validation of the performance of the systems under different auxiliary conditions. In addition, by appropriate modification of the four tetrahedra structures, the triggered gated emergence of selective transient catalytic functions driven by the two pairs of DNA tetrahedra dimers is demonstrated.
Transient
formation and dissociation
of protein–protein complexes represent key processes in nature
orchestrating signaling transductions, electron transport chains,
and activations of dynamic networks and operating biocatalytic cascades
and branched biocatalytic cycles.[1−5] Bioprocesses such as transcriptional regulation of cellular activities,[6] proliferation and differentiation of cells,[7,8] or cell–cell recognition and adhesion[9,10] are
regulated by transient protein–protein interactions. Emulating
transient natural protein–protein functionalities by synthetic
constituents is a major challenge in the rapidly developing area of
Systems Chemistry.[11−13] DNA tetrahedra nanostructures attract recent research
interest as a functional material for various applications.[14−17] The stability of DNA tetrahedra, their size-tunability by the lengths
of the comprising nucleic acid strands, and the ease of functionalization
of the corners or edges of the tetrahedra structure, turn these nanostructures
as ideal components for various uses.[18,19] Indeed, different
applications of DNA tetrahedra were suggested, including their use
for sensing and multiplex sensing,[20−22] intracellular imaging,[23−25] nanocarriers of loads,[26,27] and nanoscale scaffolds
for engineering chiroplasmonic nanostructures.[28] The sizes of DNA tetrahedra, 3–12 nm, and their
superior cell permeation properties[26,29,30] introduce objects of dimensions and cell permeability
features comparable to proteins, and thus, by appropriate functionalization
of their structures, DNA tetrahedra could act as functional modules
mimicking protein–protein interactions. Furthermore, similar
to embed catalytic sites in proteins, one could introduce a catalytic
site into the tetrahedra scaffolds with distinct variable catalytic
functions of “inner” or “outer” catalysts
positioned in the tetrahedra structures[31] (for further discussion on these structural and functional properties, vide infra). Indeed, a recent report demonstrated the triggered,
thermodynamically controlled, dynamic reconfiguration of constitutional
dynamic networks consisting of DNA tetrahedra, as a model for protein–protein
interactions.[19] Transient, out-of-equilibrium,
dynamic operations of DNA tetrahedra, as a means to emulate transient
protein–protein interactions are desirable. Particularly, the
design of gated transient transitions of DNA tetrahedra, and the development
of transient DNA-tetrahedra-guided gated catalytic transformations
are important to model transient protein–protein interactions.
It should be noted that the DNA tetrahedra scaffolds are very distant
in their structural and functional complexities compared to proteins.
The size resemblance of DNA tetrahedra to small-sized proteins and
the modularity to tether structural or catalytic strands to the DNA
tetrahedra and their cell permeability and carrier properties, however,
provide biomimetic Systems Chemistry tools to model proteins.The design of artificial out-of-equilibrium systems attracts substantial
recent research efforts. Examples include the biocatalytic amination
and hydrolysis of peptides leading to spatiotemporal assembly and
disassembly of fibers,[32] the transient
assembly of vesicles through noncovalent interactions between surfactants
and adenosine triphosphate (ATP), acting as fuel, and their separation
upon hydrolysis of ATP.[33] Also, the guanosine
triphosphate transient assembly of the FtsZ protein within coacervate
droplets into fibrils elongates the coacervate droplets, leading to
their separation and the division of the protein fibrils, as a model
for cell division,[34] and the demonstration
of dissipative chlorophyll-to-carotenoid energy transfer in the light-harvesting
complex II in membrane nanodiscs[35] represents
synthetic transient model systems mimicking biological transformations.
It should be noted that some terminological discrepancies defining
nonequilibrium systems exist.[36] In fact,
substantial discussions addressed the relation between energy/fuel
input into chemical systems and the formation of nonequilibrium, transient
products.[37−39] Accordingly, we consider a dissipative system as
a self-assembled module that requires the supply of energy or a chemical
fuel to yield waste products and nonequilibrated reaction intermediates
undergoing transient transitions to the original self-assembled state.The information encoded in the base sequence of nucleic acids provides
a rich “toolbox” to construct dynamic networks. Thermodynamically
controlled equilibrated reconfiguration of constitutional dynamic
networks were reported,[40−43] and their application as functional modules to generate
triggered formation of hydrogel materials of controlled stiffness,[44] to guide transcription and translation processes,[45] and to intercommunicate biocatalytic cascades[46] were reported. Also, out-of-equilibrium transcriptional
circuits acting as transcriptional oscillators[47,48] or transcriptional switches and bistable regulatory networks[49] were demonstrated. Furthermore, enzyme-based
DNA machinery relying on polymerization/nickase or sequence-specific
nicking enzymes were applied to assemble out-of-equilibrium oscillatory
behaviors[50−52] and transient operation of constitutional dynamic
networks.[53] Also, light-driven ATP-fueled
out-of-equilibrium DNA ligation cycles[54,55] were reported.
In the present study, we report on the transient dimerization of DNA
tetrahedra and discuss the analogy between the dynamic function of
these nanostructures and native protein–protein interactions.
Particularly, we introduce means to gate the transient selection of
two different dimer pairs from a mixture of tetrahedra nanostructures,
as a means to model selective gating of protein–protein interactions
within an ensemble of proteins. In addition, we conjugate the gated
DNA tetrahedra structures to functional nucleic acid tethers, leading
to emerging catalytic functions of the respective dimers, in analogy
to guided catalytic functions dictated by protein–protein interactions.
The dynamics of the transient and gated transient modules are accompanied
by kinetic modeling of the systems using computational simulations.
The derived rate constants are applied to predict the transient behaviors
of the systems subjected to different auxiliary triggers, and the
predicted results are validated by experiments. It should be noted
that in a recent study, we reported on the execution of a related,
transient system comprising of duplex nucleic acid constituents. The
advances of the present systems rest, however, on the dynamic formation
of transient and gated transient dimeric protein-mimetic tetrahedra
nanostructures and demonstrate emerging protein/protein-like catalytic
functions. This would allow the integration of such systems into protocell
assemblies.
Results and Discussion
Figure depicts
the scheme to operate transient dimerization of two tetrahedra T1 and T2. The reaction module consists of two tetrahedra
T1 and T2 modified with single stranded tethers
functionalized with fluorophores Cy3 and Cy5, respectively, the duplex
L1/I1, and the nicking enzyme Nt.BbvCI. In the
presence of the fuel strand L1′, the duplex L1/I1 in the module is displaced to yield the energetically
stabilized duplex L1/L1′ and the free
strand I1. The constituents of the reaction module are
pre-engineered such that the released strand I1 bridges
the free tethers associated with tetrahedra to yield the dimer T1/T2, while the resulting duplex L1/L1′ is designed to include in the L1′
strand the specific sequence domain to be nicked by the nicking enzyme
to yield two fragments, being separated as “waste” products,
thus regenerating the single strand L1. The released L1 displaces the strand I1 bridging the dimer units,
resulting in the separation of the dimer, and the recovery of the
original rest module. That is, subjecting the reaction module to the
fuel strand L1′ leads to the dynamic transient formation
of the bridged dimer T1/T2 that undergoes a
transient recovery to the initial rest state of separated tetrahedra.
For a further discussion explaining the energetics of the transient
process and the design principles of the system; see Figure S1. The transient assembly and disassembly of the dimer
are probed by the Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET)
process proceeding between the fluorophores Cy3 and Cy5 in the intimate
T1/T2 dimer structure. Figure S2 depicts the time-dependent fluorescence changes of Cy3 and
Cy5 that follow the dynamic transient formation and disappearance
of the dimer structure T1/T2. Using the appropriate
calibration curve relating the fluorescence intensities of fluorophores
Cy5/Cy3 to variable concentrations of the dimer T1/T2, e.g., I1/T1T2, Figure S3, the transient fluorescence
changes observed upon triggered the reaction module with L1′, Figure S2, were translated into
transient curves corresponding to the time-dependent dynamic concentration
changes upon the formation and disappearance of the dimer T1/T2, and this is displayed in Figure , panel I curve b and panel II curve b. The
transient assembly of the dimer T1/T2 was computationally
modeled. The kinetic model accounting for the transient formation
and depletion of the T1/T2 dimer was formulated,
and the set of rate constants that follow the kinetic steps involved
with the formation and the dissipative depletion of the constituent
T1/T2 are summarized in the Supporting Information Figure S4. The computationally simulated
curve b′ was fitted to the experimental results, and the derived
rate constants, corresponding to the reaction steps involved in the
kinetic model, are summarized in Table S1. To support the derived set of the simulated rate constants, it
is important to try to evaluate, independently, experimentally, (and
computationally) one (or more) of the rate constants involved in the
overall kinetic model. Accordingly, we evaluated independently the
values k3 and k–3, and the results are presented in Figure S5. The derived values k3 and k–3 fit well with the respective rate constants
in the overall simulated model, supporting the simulation process.
Also, the kinetic model and the resulting derived rate constants have
scientific meaning only if some of the rate constants can be experimentally
validated and if the set of the rate constants can predict the behavior
of the system under variable auxiliary conditions and subsequently
validated experimentally. The transient assembly and depletion of
the dimer T1/T2 is anticipated to be affected
by the concentrations of the fuel strand L1′ and
by the concentrations of the nicking enzyme Nt.BbvCI. Accordingly,
the computed rate-constants were applied to predict the transient
behavior of the system at three different concentrations of L1′, 2, 6, and 8 μM (curves a′, c′,
and d′, dashed lines), Figure , panel I, and at three different concentrations of
the nicking enzyme (0.0306, 0.0612, and 0.0765 μM, curves a′,
c′, and d′, dashed lines), Figure , panel II. The computationally simulated
results were then experimentally validated to yield the curves a,
c, and d, panel I and the curves a, c, and d, panel II. The experimental
results fit well with the predicted transients, indicating the significance
of the computational model to understand the kinetic behavior of the
system under different conditions. The results demonstrate that as
the concentrations of the fuel strand increase, the content of intermediate
dimer complex increases, and as the concentration of the nicking enzyme
increases, the depletion of the dimer T1/T2 is
enhanced. A further independent method to follow the dynamic transient
dimerization of T1/T2 applied time-dependent
quantitative electrophoretic separation of the monomer/dimer constituents.
For a detailed discussion, see page s9 and Figure S6 in the Supporting Information.
Figure 1
Scheme for the transient
formation and depletion of the T1/T2 dimer tetrahedra
nanostructure. The dissipative process
is followed by the transient FRET signal generated upon formation
and depletion of the tetrahedra dimer structures.
Figure 2
(A) Transient
concentration changes of the tetrahedra T1/T2 upon the L1′ fueled, triggered formation
and depletion of the T1/T2 dimer in the presence
of variable concentrations of the fuel strand L1′
= (a) 2, (b) 4, (c) 6, (d) 8 μM. For all systems: L1/I1 = 1 μM; T1 = 1 μM; T2 = 1 μM; and Nt.BbvCI = 0.046 μM (Solid lines correspond
to experimental results. Dashed curves a′, b′, c′,
and d′ correspond to the computationally simulated transients,
using the kinetic model presented in the Supporting Information, Figure S4). Curves b/b′ correspond to the
experimental transient (solid line) followed by the computational
simulation (dash line), using the kinetic model, leading to the derived
rate constants tabulated in Table S1. Curves
a/a′, c/c′, and d/d′ were first computationally
simulated and subsequently experimentally validated. (B) Transient
concentration changes of the tetrahedra T1/T2 upon the L1′ fueled, triggered formation and depletion
of the T1/T2 dimer in the presence of variable
concentrations of Nt.BbvCI = (a) 0.0306, (b) 0.046, (c) 0.0612, (d)
0.0765 μM. For all systems: L1/I1 = 1
μM; T1= 1 μM; T2 = 1 μM; and
fuel strand L1′ = 4 μM (Solid lines correspond
to experimental results. Dashed curves a′, b′, c′,
and d′ correspond to the computational simulated transients,
using the kinetic model presented in the Supporting Information, Figure S4). Curves b/b′ correspond to the
experimental transient (solid line) followed by the computational
simulation (dash line), using the kinetic model, leading to the derived
rate constants tabulated in Table S1. Curves
a/a′, c/c′, and d/d′ were first computationally
simulated and subsequently experimentally validated.
Scheme for the transient
formation and depletion of the T1/T2 dimer tetrahedra
nanostructure. The dissipative process
is followed by the transient FRET signal generated upon formation
and depletion of the tetrahedra dimer structures.(A) Transient
concentration changes of the tetrahedra T1/T2 upon the L1′ fueled, triggered formation
and depletion of the T1/T2 dimer in the presence
of variable concentrations of the fuel strand L1′
= (a) 2, (b) 4, (c) 6, (d) 8 μM. For all systems: L1/I1 = 1 μM; T1 = 1 μM; T2 = 1 μM; and Nt.BbvCI = 0.046 μM (Solid lines correspond
to experimental results. Dashed curves a′, b′, c′,
and d′ correspond to the computationally simulated transients,
using the kinetic model presented in the Supporting Information, Figure S4). Curves b/b′ correspond to the
experimental transient (solid line) followed by the computational
simulation (dash line), using the kinetic model, leading to the derived
rate constants tabulated in Table S1. Curves
a/a′, c/c′, and d/d′ were first computationally
simulated and subsequently experimentally validated. (B) Transient
concentration changes of the tetrahedra T1/T2 upon the L1′ fueled, triggered formation and depletion
of the T1/T2 dimer in the presence of variable
concentrations of Nt.BbvCI = (a) 0.0306, (b) 0.046, (c) 0.0612, (d)
0.0765 μM. For all systems: L1/I1 = 1
μM; T1= 1 μM; T2 = 1 μM; and
fuel strand L1′ = 4 μM (Solid lines correspond
to experimental results. Dashed curves a′, b′, c′,
and d′ correspond to the computational simulated transients,
using the kinetic model presented in the Supporting Information, Figure S4). Curves b/b′ correspond to the
experimental transient (solid line) followed by the computational
simulation (dash line), using the kinetic model, leading to the derived
rate constants tabulated in Table S1. Curves
a/a′, c/c′, and d/d′ were first computationally
simulated and subsequently experimentally validated.Using a similar concept, a second DNA tetrahedra pair of
T3 and T4 was engineered, Figure . In this system, the reaction module consists
of the FAM-modified T3 and the TAMRA-functionalized T4, the duplex L2/I2, and the nicking
enzyme Nt.BbvCI. In the presence of the fuel strand L2′,
the transient formation of the dimer T3/T4 is
activated, followed by the nicking enzyme-stimulated depletion of
the dimer structure and the recovery of the initial rest system. The
transient formation and the depletion of the intermediate dimer T3/T4 is followed by the FRET process between the
FAM and TAMRA fluorophores. Using an appropriate calibration curve
monitoring the FRET signal as a function of different concentrations
of the intact T3/T4 dimer (Figure S7), the time-dependent transient concentration changes
of T3/T4 were evaluated, and the respective
transient curve was displayed in Figure S8, curve c, panel I. As before, the transient curve was computationally
simulated, curve c′ (see the kinetic model, Figure S9, and derived rate constants, Table S2). The derived rate constants were, then, applied
to predict the time-dependent transient curves of the T3/T4 dimer, in the presence of different concentrations
of L2′ and the nicking enzyme, Nt.BbvCI, curves
a′, b′, and d′, panel I, and curves a′,
b′, c′, and d′, panel II, Figure S8, and the results were experimentally validated,
curves a, b, and d, panel I, and curves a, b, c, and d, panel II, Figure S8. The experimental results fit well
with the time-dependent transient corresponding to T3/T4, in the presence of the different triggers.
Figure 3
Schematic composition
of a FAM-modified T3 and TAMRA-functionalized
T4 tetrahedra mixture in a module that includes the L2/I2 duplex and the enzyme Nt.BbvCI for the L2′-fueled transient dimerization and separation of the
T3/T4 tetrahedra dimer. The transient dimerization
is followed by the FRET process between FAM/TAMRA.
Schematic composition
of a FAM-modified T3 and TAMRA-functionalized
T4 tetrahedra mixture in a module that includes the L2/I2 duplex and the enzyme Nt.BbvCI for the L2′-fueled transient dimerization and separation of the
T3/T4 tetrahedra dimer. The transient dimerization
is followed by the FRET process between FAM/TAMRA.The availability of two different tetrahedra dimer structures
revealing
transient formation and depletion of T1/T2 and
T3/T4 driven by the fuel strands L1′ and L2′ and the nicking enzyme suggests
that mixing the four tetrahedra T1, T2, T3, and T4 could lead to the concomitant transient
formation and dissociation of the two dimers T1/T2, T3/T4, and to the guided gated formation
of T1/T2 or T3/T4, in
the presence of appropriate inhibitors, as outlined in Figure . The mixture of tetrahedra
T1, T2, T3, and T4 in
the presence of the two triggering fuels, L1′ and
L2′, and the nicking enzyme, is anticipated to activate
the parallel activation of the transient formation and dissociation
of the dimers T1/T2 and T3/T4, state A. In the presence of inhibitor B1 that blocks the free tether associated with T1 (forming T1B1), the triggered formation of
T1/T2 is inhibited, whereas the L2′-triggered formation/depletion of T3/T4 is feasible, state B. As the concentration of the inhibitor
B1 increases, the blockage of the transient formation of
T1/T2 should be enhanced. Similarly, the introduction
of the inhibitor B2 to the reaction mixture blocks the
free tether associated with T3 to form T3B2, resulting in the blockage of the transient formation of
T3/T4, whereas the formation of T1/T2 proceeds with no interference, state C. That is, the mixture of the four tetrahedra could emulate the formation/dissociation
of protein–protein interactions, and particularly emulate the
inhibition of protein–protein binding interactions guided by
auxiliary inhibiting triggers. The gated operation of the transients
corresponding to T1/T2 and T3/T4, in the presence of the respective inhibitors, is demonstrated
in Figure . In the
absence of the inhibitors, the two transient processes generating
T1/T2 and T3/T4 proceed, Figure A, panels I and II.
In the presence of inhibitor B1, the transient formation
of T1/T2 is inhibited, Figure B, panel I, whereas the transient formation
of T3/T4 is unaffected, Figure B, panel II. As the concentration of B1 is elevated, the degree of inhibition of the transient formation
of T1/T2 increases. At a concentration of B1 corresponding to 1.33 μM, the formation of T1/T2 is fully blocked. The effect of the inhibitor B1 on the transient formation and depletion of T1/T2 were kinetically modeled (see Supporting Information Figures S11–S13). The derived
rate constants are tabulated in Tables S3–S5. The computationally simulated transient curves are presented in
curves a′, b′, c′, and d′, Figure B, panel I (In fact, the experimental
curve b was simulated to yield b′ and the derived rate-constants
were used to predict the transients at different concentrations of
B1, and the computational results were subsequently validated
by experiments). Very good fit between the experiments and computationally
simulated results is observed. Similarly, the gated operation of the
transient formation of T3/T4, in the presence
of the inhibitor B2 is displayed in Figure C, panels I and II. In the presence of B2 the formation and depletion of T3/T4 is inhibited, Figure C, panel II. The degree of inhibition is controlled by the concentrations
of B2, and as the concentration of B2 increases,
the blockage of T3/T4 is higher, and at a concentration
of B2, corresponding to 1.33 μM, the process generating
T3/T4 is fully blocked. At the same time the
transient formation of T1/T2 is unaffected upon
the addition of B2. As before, the effect of added B2 on the transients generating T3/T4 was
kinetically modeled, and the fit of the computationally simulated
transients, curves a′, b′, c′, and d′
are validated by experiments (curves a, b, c, and d in Figure C, panel II).
Figure 4
Scheme corresponding
to the inhibitor-guided gated transient dimerization
of the tetrahedra T1/T2 and/or T3/T4. In the absence of the inhibitors, the concomitant
dimerization of T1/T2 and T3/T4 proceeds. In the presence of inhibitor B1, the
gated transient dimerization of T3/T4 occurs;
in the presence of B2 as inhibitor, the guided gated transient
dimerization of T1/T2 proceeds.
Figure 5
(A) Concomitant transient dimerization of T1/T2, panel I, curve a, and of T3/T4, panel II,
curve a, upon the L1′ and L2′
triggered activation of the module in state A. The curves
a′ in panel I and a′ in panel II correspond to the computationally
simulated results (see Supporting Information Figure S11 and Table S3). (B, panel I) Transient dimerization of
T1/T2 in the presence of variable concentrations
of B1 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM (a′,
b′, c′, and d′ computationally simulated transients).
(panel II) Transients of dimer T3/T4 upon subjecting
the module in state A to variable concentrations of B1 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM. (C, panel
I) Transient dimerization of T1/T2 in the presence
of variable concentrations of B2 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66,
(c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM. (panel II) Transients of dimer T3/T4 upon subjecting the module in state A to variable concentrations of B2 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66,
(c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM (a′, b′, c′, and d′
computationally simulated transients).
Scheme corresponding
to the inhibitor-guided gated transient dimerization
of the tetrahedra T1/T2 and/or T3/T4. In the absence of the inhibitors, the concomitant
dimerization of T1/T2 and T3/T4 proceeds. In the presence of inhibitor B1, the
gated transient dimerization of T3/T4 occurs;
in the presence of B2 as inhibitor, the guided gated transient
dimerization of T1/T2 proceeds.(A) Concomitant transient dimerization of T1/T2, panel I, curve a, and of T3/T4, panel II,
curve a, upon the L1′ and L2′
triggered activation of the module in state A. The curves
a′ in panel I and a′ in panel II correspond to the computationally
simulated results (see Supporting Information Figure S11 and Table S3). (B, panel I) Transient dimerization of
T1/T2 in the presence of variable concentrations
of B1 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM (a′,
b′, c′, and d′ computationally simulated transients).
(panel II) Transients of dimer T3/T4 upon subjecting
the module in state A to variable concentrations of B1 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM. (C, panel
I) Transient dimerization of T1/T2 in the presence
of variable concentrations of B2 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66,
(c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM. (panel II) Transients of dimer T3/T4 upon subjecting the module in state A to variable concentrations of B2 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66,
(c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM (a′, b′, c′, and d′
computationally simulated transients).Finally, the gated operation of the transient formation and dissociation
of the tetrahedra dimers T1/T2 and T3/T4 were applied to demonstrate emerging catalytic processes
guided by the respective dimer structures. That is, in analogy to
natural processes where protein–protein interactions lead to
emerging catalytic functions, the dimer tetrahedra nanostructures
emulate the processes in nature. Figure depicts the gated transient catalytic functions
guided by the tetrahedra dimer structures. Four different tetrahedron
structures T5, T6, T7, and T8 were designed. The tetrahedra T5 and T6 include tethers P1 and P2 composed of sequence
domains x1 and x2 that are extended by DNAzyme
subunits t1 and t2 that can assemble under appropriate
conditions to the Mg2+-ion-dependent DNAzyme(1) that cleaves the fluorophore/quencher-functionalized substrate
S1 (fluorophore = Cy5, quencher = BHQ2). The sequence domain
x1 and x2 are complementary to I1 being part of the L1/I1 module. Similarly,
the tetrahedra T7 and T8 are functionalized
with the tethers P3 and P4 that are composed
of the sequence domains y1 and y2 extended by
the DNAzyme subunits t3 and t4, respectively.
The domains y1 and y2 are complementary to the
strand I2 associated with the module L2/I2, and the subunits t3 and t4 assemble
under appropriate conditions to the Mg2+-ion-dependent
DNAzyme(2) that cleaves the fluorophore/quencher-functionalized
substrate S2 (fluorophore = FAM, quencher = IBRQ). The
reaction unit in state 1 includes two modules that are
triggered in the presence of the fuel strands L1′
and L2′, to generate two parallel transient catalytic
processes driven by DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2). That is, the fuel strands L1′ and L2′ separate the modules L1/I1 and L2/I2 to yield L1/L1′
and L2/L2′, while releasing the strands
I1 and I2. The released strands I1 and I2 bridge the tetrahedra pairs T5, T6 and T7, T8 to yield the dimer tetrahedra
T5/T6 and T7/T8 that stabilize
the respective DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2)
subunits and form the Mg2+-ion-dependent DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2) that cleave the respective
substrates S1 and S2. Cleavage of the substrates
releases the respective fluorophore-modified fragmented products that
transduce the catalytic functions of DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2). The L1/L1′ and L2/L2′ duplexes are nicked, however, by the nicking
enzyme Nt.BbvCI resulting in the release of L1 and L2, respectively. The released L1 and L2 strands displace the bridging units I1 and I2 to form the energetically stabilized original duplexes L1/I1 and L2/I2, while separating
the dimer tetrahedra T5/T6 and T7/T8. The separation of the tetrahedra leads to the separation
of DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2), resulting
in the transient depletion of the catalytic functions of the system.
The dynamic formation of the catalytic units and their depletion are,
then, followed by the time-dependent fluorescence changes of the fluorophores
Cy5 and FAM, respectively. Figure S14,
panels I and II, shows the transient fluorescence intensities of the
fluorophores Cy5 and FAM, upon operation of the catalytic mixture
of state 1 in Figure . Using the appropriate calibration curves of Cy5-labeled
and FAM-modified fragmented products generated by DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2), Figures S15–S16, the transient concentrations of the fragmented products were evaluated, Figure A, panels I and II,
and the transient catalytic rates of DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2) were derived (first-order derivatives of the time-dependent
concentrations depicted in panels I and II, Figure A), and these are displayed in Figure B, panels I and II.
Figure 6
Scheme corresponding
to the inhibitor-guided gated dynamic formation
of transient DNAzymes catalytic formations. State 1:
In the absence of the inhibitors, the two DNAzymes, DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2), are formed as transient catalytic
outputs. State 2: In the presence of inhibitor B1, only the transient DNAzyme(2) is formed. State 3: In the presence of inhibitor B2, only the transient
DNAzyme(1) is operative.
Figure 7
Following
the time-dependent catalytic rates of DNAzyme(1) and
DNAzyme(2) in state 1, Figure . (A) Time-dependent concentration
changes of (panel I) the Cy5-labeled fragmented product of DNAzyme(1); (panel II) the FAM-labeled fragmented product of DNAzyme(2). (B) Transient catalytic rates corresponding to (panel
I) DNAzyme(1); (panel II) DNAzyme(2).
Scheme corresponding
to the inhibitor-guided gated dynamic formation
of transient DNAzymes catalytic formations. State 1:
In the absence of the inhibitors, the two DNAzymes, DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2), are formed as transient catalytic
outputs. State 2: In the presence of inhibitor B1, only the transient DNAzyme(2) is formed. State 3: In the presence of inhibitor B2, only the transient
DNAzyme(1) is operative.Following
the time-dependent catalytic rates of DNAzyme(1) and
DNAzyme(2) in state 1, Figure . (A) Time-dependent concentration
changes of (panel I) the Cy5-labeled fragmented product of DNAzyme(1); (panel II) the FAM-labeled fragmented product of DNAzyme(2). (B) Transient catalytic rates corresponding to (panel
I) DNAzyme(1); (panel II) DNAzyme(2).The inhibitor-guided gated catalytic activities
of the mixture
of DNAzymes are, also, introduced in Figure . Treatment of the constituents shown in
state 1 with the inhibitor B1 leads to blockage
of T6 (T6B1), resulting in the guided
selective dimerization of the T7/T8 tetrahedra,
and the selective activation of the Mg2+-ion-dependent
DNAzyme(2), state 2. Alternatively, subjecting
state 1 to inhibitor B2, leads to the blockage
of tetrahedron T7 (T7B2), resulting
in the gated activation of the transient DNAzyme(1),
state 3. The gated and selective catalytic functions
of DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2) are demonstrated
in Figure . In Figure A, the time-dependent
concentration changes of the Cy5-labeled fragmented product generated
by the DNAzyme(1), in the presence of variable concentrations
of B1 are displayed in panel I, and the time-dependent
concentration changes of the FAM-labeled fragmented product, generated
by DNAzyme(2), at different concentrations of B1, are presented in panel II. The catalytic rates of DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2), in the presence of variable
concentrations of B1, are displayed in Figure B, panels I and II. As the
concentration of B1 increases, the inhibition of formation
of the Cy5-labeled fragment is higher, and at a B1 concentration
of 1.33 μM, the formation of the Cy5-labeled fragmented product
is fully blocked. At the same time, the time-dependent formation of
the FAM-labeled fragmented product, generated by the DNAzyme(2), in the presence of variable concentrations of B1, is unaffected. Figure B depicts the gated, inhibitor-controlled, transient catalytic
rates of DNAzyme(1), upon the addition of B1, panel I, and the lack of any inhibition effect on the transient
catalytic rates of DNAzyme(2), panel II. Similarly, subjecting
the tetrahedra mixture, state 1, to the blocker strand
B2 yields state 3, where the tetrahedron T7 is blocked to form T7B2. Under these
conditions, the dimerization of T7/T8 is blocked
and the formation of DNAzyme(2) is inhibited. That is,
B2 gates and guides the mixture of tetrahedra to selectively
form the dimer T5/T6 and the accompanying DNAzyme(1) that cleaves substrate S1, leading to the transient
formation of the Cy5-labeled fragmented product. Figure C, panels I and II, depicts
the time-dependent concentration changes of the Cy5-modified fragmented
product, generated by DNAzyme(1) and FAM-labeled fragmented
product, generated by DNAzyme(2), in the presence of
variable concentrations of the inhibitor B2, respectively.
The formation of the Cy5-modified product generated by DNAzyme(1) is unaffected by the inhibitor B2, whereas the
time-dependent formation of the FAM-labeled product is inhibited as
the concentration of the inhibitor B2 is elevated, and,
at a B2 concentration corresponding to 1.33 μM, the
activity of DNAzyme(2) is fully blocked. In Figure D, panels I and II
depict the catalytic rates of DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2), derived from the time-dependent concentrations of Cy5-
and FAM-modified products shown in Figure C. While no effect of B2 on the
transient catalytic rates on the formation of Cy5-labeled product
is observed, the transient catalytic rates corresponding to the formation
of the FAM-labeled product are controlled by the concentration of
B2, and as the concentration of B2 increases,
the transient catalytic rates are decayed. The results are consistent
with the selective inhibition of DNAzyme(2) and the gated
activation of DNAzyme(1).
Figure 8
Concentration changes
of the fragmented substrates and transient
catalytic rates upon the inhibitor-guided gated operation of DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2), according to Figure . (A) Time-dependent concentration
changes of the fragmented fluorophore-generated substrates cleaved
by the DNAzymes in state 2: (panel I) DNAzyme(1), in the presence of variable concentrations of B1 =
(a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM; (panel II) DNAzyme(2), in the presence of variable concentrations of B1 (shown in panel I). The DNAzyme(2) is unaffected by
B1. (B) Transient catalytic rates corresponding to the
DNAzymes in states 2: (panel I) DNAzyme(1), in the presence of variable concentrations of B1 =
(a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM; (panel II) DNAzyme(2) in the presence of the different concentrations of B1 outlined in panel I. (C) Time-dependent concentration changes
of the fragmented fluorophore-generated substrates cleaved by the
DNAzymes in state 3: (panel I) DNAzyme(1), in the presence of variable concentrations of B2 outlined
in panel II. The DNAzyme(1) is unaffected by B2. (panel II) DNAzyme(2) in the presence of the different
concentrations of B2 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33
μM. (D) Transient catalytic rates corresponding to the DNAzymes
in states 3: (panel I) DNAzyme(1), in the
presence of variable concentrations of B2 (shown in panel
II); (panel II) DNAzyme(2) in the presence of the different
concentrations of B2 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33
μM.
Concentration changes
of the fragmented substrates and transient
catalytic rates upon the inhibitor-guided gated operation of DNAzyme(1) and DNAzyme(2), according to Figure . (A) Time-dependent concentration
changes of the fragmented fluorophore-generated substrates cleaved
by the DNAzymes in state 2: (panel I) DNAzyme(1), in the presence of variable concentrations of B1 =
(a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM; (panel II) DNAzyme(2), in the presence of variable concentrations of B1 (shown in panel I). The DNAzyme(2) is unaffected by
B1. (B) Transient catalytic rates corresponding to the
DNAzymes in states 2: (panel I) DNAzyme(1), in the presence of variable concentrations of B1 =
(a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33 μM; (panel II) DNAzyme(2) in the presence of the different concentrations of B1 outlined in panel I. (C) Time-dependent concentration changes
of the fragmented fluorophore-generated substrates cleaved by the
DNAzymes in state 3: (panel I) DNAzyme(1), in the presence of variable concentrations of B2 outlined
in panel II. The DNAzyme(1) is unaffected by B2. (panel II) DNAzyme(2) in the presence of the different
concentrations of B2 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33
μM. (D) Transient catalytic rates corresponding to the DNAzymes
in states 3: (panel I) DNAzyme(1), in the
presence of variable concentrations of B2 (shown in panel
II); (panel II) DNAzyme(2) in the presence of the different
concentrations of B2 = (a) 0.33, (b) 0.66, (c) 1, (d) 1.33
μM.It should be noted that throughout
the study, we applied DNA tetrahedra
components as functional units that emulate small-sized proteins in
operating transient dynamic dimerization and catalytic processes.
Nonetheless, in principle, the transient dynamic transformations could
be driven by duplex nucleic acid components that lack the tetrahedra
substitutes. Accordingly, we wished to demonstrate that besides size-similarities
between the tetrahedra and proteins, the tetrahedra subunits introduce
protein-like functionalities into the structures that are nonexistent
in analog “bare” duplexes. It was previously reported
that catalytic units can be tethered to “inner” or “outer”
positions of DNA tetrahedra, and the resulting catalyst tethers reveal
different catalytic activities (albeit quite small yet reproducible
differences).[31] Accordingly, we designed
DNA tetrahedra structures TA and TB that include
hemin/G-quadruplex units in “inner” or “outer”
positions and compared their activities to hemin/G-quadruplex tethered
to a duplex DNA, Figure S17(A). The different
hemin/G-quadruplex structures were examined toward two different catalytic
transformations: (i) the hemin/G-quadruplex catalyzed oxidation of
Amplex Red by H2O2 to form the fluorescent Resorufin,
(ii) the hemin/G-quadruplex catalyzed oxidation of dopamine by H2O2 to form aminochrome. The results are summarized
in Figure S17(B), panels I and II. The
catalytic rates of the respective systems are summarized in Figure S17(C), panels I and II. The results demonstrate
the improved catalytic functions of the catalytic units tethered to
the tetrahedra, as compared to the “bare” hemin/G-quadruplex
unit. Furthermore, the results show that the hemin/G-quadruplex units
embedded in the tetrahedra reveal slightly enhanced catalytic activities
as compared to the externally positioned catalyst. The inner functionalization
of the tetrahedra with the catalyst mimics the embedding of catalytic
sites in proteins. Thus, the results introduce the principles to enhance
the complexity of transient protein-like assemblies by the functionalization
of the tetrahedra subunits.
Conclusions
The present study suggested
DNA tetrahedra nanostructures as biomimetic
analogs of small-sized proteins. The functional modification of the
tetrahedra with complementary nucleic acids of catalytic nucleic acid
sequences allowed the assembly of tetrahedra mixtures revealing transient
formation and depletion. In the presence of pre-engineered auxiliary
nucleic acid duplexes, inhibitors, the Nt.BbvCI nicking enzyme, and
the DNA tetrahedra nanostructures, functional modules that guided
transient dimerization and dynamic gated selective transient dimerization
of DNA tetrahedra structures were demonstrated. In addition, by appropriate
modification of the tetrahedra structures, the triggered gated emergence
of selective dimer DNA tetrahedra nanostructures revealing transient
catalytic properties was realized. We suggested the dynamic processes
demonstrated the tetrahedra as model systems emulating the transient
formation and depletion of protein–protein complexes and gated
protein–protein structures in nature, and the transient emergence
of guided catalytic functions as a result of protein–protein
interactions in biological systems. We note, however, that, in principle,
all dynamic processes described in our study could be performed by
simple duplex nucleic acids that lack the tetrahedra conjugates. The
significance of the tetrahedra nanostructures conjugated to the different
systems rests, however, on the size resemblance between the tetrahedra
units and small-sized proteins and the ability to embed protein-like
functionalities and dictated catalytic functions in the tetrahedra
structures in configurations that cannot be achieved by in analog
duplex nucleic acids. In addition, the incorporation of the cell permeation
elements[26,29,30] into the dynamic
assemblies allows the introduction of such systems into cellular environments.
For example, as pointed out, the functionalization of the tetrahedra
with the hemin/G-quadruplex DNAzyme units yields catalytic sites of
enhanced activity as compared to the DNAzyme tethered to a duplex
scaffold. Moreover, the tetrahedra scaffolds provide a means to embed
the catalytic unit in “inner” or “outer”
tetrahedra positions and tailor not only catalyst protein-like functionalities
but also scaffolds exhibiting spatially dictated activities. Furthermore,
the tetrahedra could be engineered to include tethers allowing the
transient oligomerization of the tetrahedra and guided gated dimerization
of the tetrahedra, similar to protein/protein transient binding and
separation phenomenon. In addition, the modification of the tetrahedra
with catalytic subunits allowed the transient emergence of catalytic
functions in analogy to emerging catalytic properties of proteins
guided by the transient oligomerization and separation of protein
subunits. These analogies are, indeed, “Systems Chemistry”
principles to mimic the structural complexity of biological systems
and functions. In fact, the structural tetrahedra scaffolds allow
the future engineering of biomimetic assemblies that cannot be realized
by simple duplex nucleic acid structures. For example, we find that
DNA tetrahedra units can be integrated with hydrogel microcapsules
while duplex nucleic acids leak out from such carriers. This suggests
that tetrahedra nanostructures could be encapsulated in cell-like
containments, such as microdroplets[56] or
microcapsules.[57,58] Thus, the minimal protein-like
features of the tetrahedra units could allow the assembly of biomimetic
protocells.
Experimental Section
Characterizations
The time-dependent fluorescence changes
were followed at 33 °C on a Cary Eclipse Fluorometer (Varian
Inc.). The excitations of Cy3, Cy5, FAM, and TAMRA were performed
at 540, 540, 496, and 496 nm, respectively. The emissions of Cy3 Cy5,
FAM, and TAMRA were recorded at 560, 660, 516, and 583 nm, respectively.
Preparation of the DNA Tetrahedra
The DNA tetrahedron
nanostructures (10 μM) were prepared by mixing equal amounts
of four corresponding sequences, in 1× CutSmart buffer (50 mM
Potassium Acetate, 20 mM Tris-acetate, 10 mM Magnesium Acetate, 100
μg mL–1 BSA, pH 7.9), and were heated to 90
°C for 5 min and then cooled down to 4 °C for 10 min.
Preparation and Measurement of Dissipative Systems
Taking
the first dissipative system (shown in Figure ) as an example, 150 μL solutions were
prepared with 15 μL of tetrahedron nanostructures (10 μM),
5 μL of duplex strands L1/I1 (30 μM),
and 0.046 μM nicking enzyme (Nt.BbvCI, New England BioLabs Inc.).
The prepared mixtures were subjected to different concentrations of
fuel strands and time-dependent fluorescence changes were monitored
spectroscopically at 33 °C. To study the effect of nicking enzyme,
150 μL solutions were prepared with 15 μL of tetrahedron
nanostructures (10 μM), 5 μL of duplex strands L1/I1 (30 μM), and various concentrations of nicking
enzyme (Nt.BbvCI, New England BioLabs Inc.). For the electrophoretic
measurement, native PAGE (6%) was performed to characterize the time-dependent
transient monomer/dimer at different time intervals and the band intensities
of the gel image was analyzed by the ImageJ software, Figure S6.
Measurements of the Gated
Dissipative Systems
Equal
amounts of four different tetrahedron structures were mixed (1 μM
each, 150 μL) with the two duplexes L1I1, L2I2 (1 μM each), and 0.136 μM
nicking enzyme (Nt.BbvCI, New England BioLabs Inc.) and with or without
different concentrations of the corresponding inhibitor strands, B1 and B2. The prepared mixtures were added with
the fuel strands L1′ and L2′ (4
μM each) and time-dependent fluorescence changes were monitored
spectroscopically at 33 °C. The time-dependent fluorescence changes
corresponding to the two tetrahedra dimers are followed by the evaluation
of the FRET signals of fluorophore pairs of Cy3/Cy5 and FAM/TAMRA
associated with the two tetrahedra dimers. Using the respective calibration
curves of the two pairs of chromophores, Figures S3 and S7, the transient FRET signals were translated to transient
concentration changes of the tetrahedra dimers T1/T2 and T3/T4. It should be noted, however,
that the FRET signals of Cy3/Cy5 and FAM/TAMRA exhibit overlap features.
To overcome this difficulty, each of the gating states shown in Figure was characterized
in two-separate analysis samples where one sample included the T1/T2 tetrahedra dimer labeled with Cy3/Cy5 and the
other tetrahedra constituent, T3/T4, was nonlabeled.
The second analysis sample included nonlabeled T1/T2 and the FAM/TAMRA-labeled T3/T4 constituent.
Measurements of the Gated Dissipative Transient Catalytic Processes
Four different DNA tetrahedra extending with the corresponding
DNAzyme subunits were prepared. Then equal amounts of these tetrahedron
structures were mixed (0.5 μM each, 150 μL) with the two
duplexes L1I1, L2I2 (0.5
μM each), 0.068 μM nicking enzyme (Nt.BbvCI, New England
BioLabs Inc.), the substrates (3 μM S1, 2 μM
S2) and with or without variable concentrations of the
corresponding inhibitor strands, B1 and B2.
The prepared mixtures were added with the fuel strands, L1′ and L2′ (2 μM each) and time-dependent
fluorescence changes were monitored spectroscopically at 25 °C.
Authors: Peter T Corbett; Julien Leclaire; Laurent Vial; Kevin R West; Jean-Luc Wietor; Jeremy K M Sanders; Sijbren Otto Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: Thomas R Wilks; Jonathan Bath; Jan Willem de Vries; Jeffery E Raymond; Andreas Herrmann; Andrew J Turberfield; Rachel K O'Reilly Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2013-10-01 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Alessandro Sorrenti; Jorge Leira-Iglesias; Albert J Markvoort; Tom F A de Greef; Thomas M Hermans Journal: Chem Soc Rev Date: 2017-09-18 Impact factor: 54.564