z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Controlling Protein Surface Orientation by Strategic Placement of Oligo-Histidine Tags
Author(s) -
Dorothee Wasserberg,
Jordi CabanasDanés,
Jord C. Prangsma,
Shane O’Mahony,
PierreAndré Cazade,
Eldrich E. Tromp,
Christian Blum,
Damien Thompson,
Jurriaan Huskens,
Vinod Subramaniam,
Pascal Jonkheijm
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
acs nano
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 5.554
H-Index - 382
eISSN - 1936-086X
pISSN - 1936-0851
DOI - 10.1021/acsnano.7b03717
Subject(s) - nitrilotriacetic acid , histidine , chemistry , crystallography , fluorescence , biophysics , amino acid , biochemistry , biology , chelation , organic chemistry , physics , quantum mechanics
We report oriented immobilization of proteins using the standard hexahistidine (His 6 )-Ni 2+ :NTA (nitrilotriacetic acid) methodology, which we systematically tuned to give control of surface coverage. Fluorescence microscopy and surface plasmon resonance measurements of self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) of red fluorescent proteins (TagRFP) showed that binding strength increased by 1 order of magnitude for each additional His 6 -tag on the TagRFP proteins. All TagRFP variants with His 6 -tags located on only one side of the barrel-shaped protein yielded a 1.5 times higher surface coverage compared to variants with His 6 -tags on opposite sides of the so-called β-barrel. Time-resolved fluorescence anisotropy measurements supported by polarized infrared spectroscopy verified that the orientation (and thus coverage and functionality) of proteins on surfaces can be controlled by strategic placement of a His 6 -tag on the protein. Molecular dynamics simulations show how the differently tagged proteins reside at the surface in "end-on" and "side-on" orientations with each His 6 -tag contributing to binding. Also, not every dihistidine subunit in a given His 6 -tag forms a full coordination bond with the Ni 2+ :NTA SAMs, which varied with the position of the His 6 -tag on the protein. At equal valency but different tag positions on the protein, differences in binding were caused by probing for Ni 2+ :NTA moieties and by additional electrostatic interactions between different fractions of the β-barrel structure and charged NTA moieties. Potential of mean force calculations indicate there is no specific single-protein interaction mode that provides a clear preferential surface orientation, suggesting that the experimentally measured preference for the end-on orientation is a supra-protein, not a single-protein, effect.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom