Methods
for studying protein-DNA interactions
Biochemistry/MCB 568 -- Fall 2007
John W. Little--University of ArizonaBioc/MCB568 Home Page
There are several methods in common use for analyzing specific protein-DNA interactions. It is important to understand these methods, and to be aware of the capabilities and limitations of each method.
|
|
|
|||||||
![]() |
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
Step |
|
Consider first the left side of the figure, with no protein. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to Diagrams of Methods
An example of a footprinting gel is in Little et al (1999) [abstract, available anywhere; HTML file, available from U of A computers]. Look at Fig. 2. This shows the binding of two phage lambda proteins to each of four different templates. Consider first the wild-type (upper left panel). Incubations for the various lanes contained no protein (lane in center indicated by "-"), or differing amounts of one of two proteins, CI or Cro; increasing amounts are indicated by wedges. The template contains three binding sites (indicated by oR1, oR2 and oR3) for these proteins. In the various lanes, differing affinities for the three sites can be seen as differences in the amounts of protein needed to give protection. For instance, Cro binds tightly to oR3 and weakly to oR1 and oR2; CI binds tightly (and cooperatively) to oR1 and oR2, weakly to oR3.
Now consider the other three panels. In these cases, the templates were changed (by site-directed mutagenesis) so that the two outside sites (oR1 and oR3) are the same. At least for Cro, now the protein binds about equally well to the two flanking sites. Comparisons among panels shows that Cro's affinity for these sites differs on different templates.
Back to Diagrams of Methods
1. Other agents that break or damage DNA can be used in addition to DNase I.
Dimethyl sulfate (DMS) methylates G residues, creating an adduct that can be broken chemically. Typically, complexes are formed, then treated with DMS, then the reaction is stopped. The position of the breaks is then determined by primer extension. This approach has several advantages. First, it can be carried out under conditions (e.g., absence of magnesium) in which DNase I is inactive. Second, it can be done on covalently closed, supercoiled DNA, which often binds proteins differently than linear DNA.Potassium permanganate (KMnO4) is specific for thymine residues in single-stranded regions of DNA. Again, it is usually used in conjunction with primer extension. This can be used, for example, in transcription complexes to determine the location of RNA polymerase and the structure of the transcription bubble.
2. When used properly, this methodology can be used to measure dissociation constants. One carries out a series of binding reactions over a range of protein concentrations, and determines the fraction of the binding site that is occupied at each protein concentration. The dissociation constant is equal to the concentration of protein when 50% of the binding site is occupied, as we now discuss. To do this, the DNA concentration in the assay must be far lower than the dissociation constant for the interaction. This constraint arises directly from the definition of the dissociation constant:
where [R] and [O] are the concentrations of the free DNA-binding protein and binding site, respectively, and [R:O] is the concentration of the complex. At 50% occupancy, [O] = [RO], and Kd = [R]. However, we only know [R] if the total amount of DNA is so small that it does not significantly deplete the pool of free R; in other words, [R:O]<<[R].
An example of this approach is in Liu and Little (1998),[ abstract available anywhere, HTML file from U of A computers]. Look at Fig. 4, panel e for the curve given by a single site. The remaining data here are used to evaluate cooperative binding of the protein to three adjacent sites.
Back to Diagrams of Methods
This assay has several different names: Gel mobility assay, gel shift assay, EMSA (electrophoretic mobility shift assay), gel retardation assay. All these terms describe the same technique.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An example of gel mobility assay (includes a supershift assay (see below) in Fig. 5) is given in Dennisova et al. (2000). [abstract , HTML file], Figs. 4 and 5 .
Back to Diagrams of Methods
Several different refinements to the basic methodology provide additional types of information.
First, this assay can be carried out in the presence of complex mixtures of proteins, either in crude extracts or with partially purified components.
Second, a so-called supershift assay can be used. When one uses a complex mixture of proteins, it's not clear which one is binding to the DNA. When an antibody is available that interacts with a protein of interest (call it the antigen), one can ask whether a particular shifted band contains the antigen by having a second incubation that includes the antibody. If the complex shifts further up in the gel (the "supershift"), this is evidence that the antigen was present in the initial complex; the reason it shifts further up is that now the complex also contains the antibody. An example is cited above.
Third, one can do competition experiments, to ask whether the addition of unlabeled DNA can compete with the labeled DNA for the protein. The unlabeled DNA is often in the form of synthetic oligonucleotides. This assay is done when there is a limited amount of protein, so that it can be saturated. Competition experiments can be done for several reasons:
a. If you want to ask whether a particular protein is in the complex, you can add a known high-affinity site for that protein. If the protein is in the complex, it should be competed away; if not, then addition of the competitor has no effect.b. If you want to determine which of the bases in the DNA are important, you can add competitor DNA with changes in particular bases. If the base is important, then the mutant template will have less effect than the same amount of the wild-type template. Eventually the mutant template should compete; the relative amount that one has to add can give a good measure of relative affinities for mutant and wild-type template.
Back to Diagrams of Methods
This assay is no longer used widely, but it is rapid and simple, and can give a lot of information. It would be used for relatively detailed analysis of a particular protein-DNA interaction, for example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isolation of mutants in the DNA binding site help to identify which residues in the binding site are important. Examples of such sites are up-promoter and down-promoter mutants, which affect binding of RNA polymerase (or subsequent steps in initiation), and operator-constitutive mutants in repressor binding sites.
Mutants can be identified in a DNA-binding protein that affect its ability to bind to DNA; however, it is difficult to be certain how these mutants affect the interaction, except when high-resolution structural information is available.
X-ray crystallography of protein-DNA complexes provides the most detailed look at these interactions. This is the source of most of the PDB files used in our work with RasMol (here's a link to the class page on RasMol ). However, it is important to realize that structural data by themselves are not enough. Important contacts are also identified by the combination of genetic evidence that particular bases in the binding site are crucial and biochemical measurements of the changes in affinity. Such evidence allows us to look in detail at the important interactions in the structure.
Each of these methods has its advantages and disadvantages. These are listed here, though the comparison is not exhaustive.
One important use of many of these methods is to determine equilibrium constants (defined, for example, in the section on footprinting above). For the method to give an accurate value, the components must be at equilibrium under the conditions of the assay. For the gel mobility assay, this is rather problematic. The components may be at equilibrium when they are loaded onto the gel, but once they enter the gel one would expect them to re-equilibrate. What one sees depends on the conditions. Weak interactions often lead to dissociation during the gel run, giving a smeary shifted band or a smear extending above the free DNA. In other cases, the species move as well-behaved entities, without interconversion. In such cases, workers often assume that the values derived are equilibrium values, but usually don't validate this assumption. I usually take such numbers with a grain of salt. In any case, it's not well understood why complexes don't dissociate; one reason may be that the gels are run under low ionic-strength conditions, which favor strong DNA-protein interactions.
|
|
|
|
|
2. Other agents besides DNase I can be used 3. It localizes the binding site to within a few bp. |
2. DNase I can only be used under conditions that support its activity (presence of Mg++ and Ca++ ions). |
|
2. Gives some information about the mass of the protein bound 3. Can reveal multiple complexes 4. Can be used to measure DNA bending |
2. Does not localize binding site |
|
2. Can measure on- and off-rates |
|
|
2. With site-directed mutagenesis, can test models based on x-ray structures. |
|
|
2. Can give extremely explicit testable models for specificity of interaction. |
2. Not all DNA-binding proteins can be solved; many are "floppy". One solution is to use fragments or domains of protein. |
http://www.biochem.arizona.edu/classes/bioc568/bioc568.htm
Last modified October 2, 2006
© 2007. All rights reserved.