Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Sample preparation and characterization around SAXS
Rob Meijers
EMBL Hamburg
Experimental verification and… validation?
Garbage in
?
The right stuff
• Molecular weight
• Oligomerization state
• Monodispersity
• Aggregation
• Protein concentration
• Protein folding state
Quality controlSDS Page
Mass spec
Gel filtrationDLS/SLS
Circular Dichroism
1 2 1 2ConcentratedDilute Non‐reduced
1
A gel of a heterodimeric receptor
1 2
A size exclusion profile
1 2 1 2ConcentratedDilute Non‐reduced
1
A second look
Different gels
• SDS
• SDS non‐reduced
• Native
• Iso‐electric focussing
• Purity
• Disulphide bonds
• Post‐translational modifications:– Phosphorylation
– glycosylation
Protein concentration
• UV‐Vis
• Bradford
• Refractive index
Sample injected
Sampleprovided
Quality controlSDS Page
Gel filtration
Mass spec
Mass spectrometry
• MALDI‐TOF or ESI
• Integral sample
• Proteolytic digest:– Trypsin
– Carboxypeptidase
– Aminopeptidase
Mass spectrometry
• MS/MS + Ion mobility :– Detailed folding state
– Protein‐protein interactions
– Whole protein size…
Ion mobility derived particle size
2012‐10‐18 13
Ruotolo et al Nature Protocols (2008) 3, 1139
in combination with SAXS…
Sizing profile, SLS twist
Intramolecular interference produces a disymmetry in the scattered light.
Size of molecule/particle must be significant compared to wavelength of light
Angular Dependence
small moleculesradius < 15 nm Pθ = 1 for all θ
large moleculesradius > 15 nm Pθ= 1 for θ = 0°
Normalised LS signals show no angular dependence for proteins
– Molecular weight requires only RALS
– Can not measure size by light scattering alone
0.0
119.5
12.0
24.0
36.0
48.0
60.0
72.0
84.0
96.0
108.0
Rig
ht A
ngle
Lig
ht S
catte
ring
Res
pons
e (m
V)
0.0
56.7
6.0
12.0
18.0
24.0
30.0
36.0
42.0
48.0
Low
Ang
le L
ight
Sca
tterin
g R
espo
nse
(mV)
10.50 16.60Retention Volume (mL)
11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5
RALSLALS
Combined particle analysis
• UV
• Refractive index
• Viscosity
• Right angle light scattering
Viscotek/Malvern
What are the detectors responding to?
Refractometer = KRI × dn/dc × Conc
UV‐Detector = KUV × dA/dc × Conc
Viscometer = KVisc × Intrinsic Viscosity × Conc
Light Scattering = KLS ×Mw × (dn/dc)2 × Conc
MonomerDimer
Trimer
0,0
1472,0
82,0
164,0
246,0
328,0
410,0
492,0
574,0
656,0
738,0
820,0
902,0
984,0
1066,0
1148,0
1230,0
1312,0
1394,0
Ref
ract
ive
Inde
x R
espo
nse
(mV
)
4,000
7,000
4,200
4,400
4,600
4,800
5,000
5,200
5,400
5,600
5,800
6,000
6,200
6,400
6,600
6,800
Log
Mol
ecul
ar W
eigh
t
0,0
239,0
14,0
28,0
42,0
56,0
70,0
84,0
98,0
112,0
126,0
140,0
154,0
168,0
182,0
196,0
210,0
224,0
Rig
ht A
ngle
Lig
ht S
catte
ring
Res
pons
e (m
V)
0,0
36,0
2,0
4,0
6,0
8,0
10,0
12,0
14,0
16,0
18,0
20,0
22,0
24,0
26,0
28,0
30,0
32,0
34,0V
isco
met
er D
P R
espo
nse
(mV
)
5,30 10,00Retention Volume (mL)
5,6 5,8 6,0 6,2 6,4 6,6 6,8 7,0 7,2 7,4 7,6 7,8 8,0 8,2 8,4 8,6 8,8 9,0 9,2 9,4 9,6
Monomer
DimerTrimer
High MW Aggregates(Mw > 1 Mio D)
Mw (D) IVw (dl/g) Rh (nm) Weight Fraction (%)
Monomer 66.430 0,056 3,88 87
Dimer 133.000 0,071 5,32 11
Trimer 201.000 0,095 6,69 1,5
Light Scattering Viscometer Refractive Index
BSA
LALS (7º) detector
RALS (90º)
RI detector
UV detector
GPC columns
Laser Light Scattering Detector, Refractive Index Detector and UV‐Cell
SEC + SAXS
• SWING beamline at Soleil
• HPLC in FPLC mode
Online purification & QC
• Combine SEC and SAXS
• Add:– Refractive index
– RALS
• Integrate in BioSAXSbeamline
Courtesy Melissa Graewert
UVRiLS
UV ~ c ɛLS ~ c (dn/dc)² MWRi ~ c dn/dc
ml
Au
Courtesy Melissa Graewert
Frame 1 Frame 501
Frame 1001 Frame 1501 Frame 2001
I(O)
2500 frames collected (1 sec each) while proteins eluted from superdex 200 10/300 column @ 0.3 ml/min
Courtesy Melissa Graewert
Automation – how to handle > 2000 frames
Conventional pipe line (Autognom, Dammif, etc)
Detector images
Defining buffer region
Buffer substration
AutoRadius of Gyration
Peakdetection
Scaling and averaging
Radial averaging
Courtesy Melissa Graewert
Courtesy Melissa Graewert
0.0
197.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
180.0
Ref
ract
ive
Inde
x R
espo
nse
(mV
)
4.000
6.000
4.200
4.400
4.600
4.800
5.000
5.200
5.400
5.600
5.800
Log
Mol
ecul
ar W
eigh
t
10.50 16.60Retention Volume (mL)
11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5
Data File: 2005-08-04_12;51;19_BSA_01.vdt Method: Proteins SEC-0002.vcm
Dimer134 kDa
Trimer205 kDa
Monomer66 kDa
SAXS Rg/I(0) profile
SEC elution profile
Monomer versus Dimer
Definedbuffer region
Courtesy Melissa Graewert
Integration of experimental data
• SAXS scattering curve
• Accurate protein concentration (UV‐VIS +RI)
• Molecular weight (RALS)
• Radius of gyration? (MALS)
Estimation of Particle Radius
H2O
H2OH2O
H2O
H2O
H2O
RgRh
Rg II
Rg
The micro‐world
Stokes‐Einstein relation
• D = Diffusion coefficient
• k = Boltzmann’s coefficient
• T = Temperature
• η = Viscosity
• R = hydrodynamic radius
Dynamic light scattering
Dynamic Light Scattering scheme
Sample
Detector
Correlator
Transmitted light
DiffusedLight
Information from the correlation curve
Integration of experimental data
• SAXS scattering curve
• Accurate protein concentration (UV‐VIS +RI)
• Molecular weight (RALS)
• Radius of gyration? (MALS)
Thermophoresis
• Heat sample by 2K
• Molecules dissipate
• When fluorescently labelled
• Equilibrate depending on size of hydration shell, charge distribution
Duhr and Braun (2006) PNAS 103, pp19678
Current technology
Jerabek‐Willemsen et al. 2011
Sample optimization
• Reduced Gel problematic: change purification protocol
• NR Gel problematic: check cysteines
• Protein aggregation, folding stability:– Size exclusion, light scattering, CD, NMR, thermofluor
Thermal stability
• Thermofluor
• Modified real‐time PCR machine– Add hydrophobic fluorescent probe
– When protein unfolds…
– Fluorescence increases
Thermal stability
• Check protein stability
• Additive/ligand screen
Ericsson et al Analytical Biochemistry 357 (2006) 289
Sample optimization
• Reduced Gel problematic: change purification protocol
• NR Gel problematic: check cysteines
• Protein aggregation, folding stability:– Size exclusion, light scattering, CD, NMR, thermofluor
• Modify buffers, additives
• If nothing works: change construct
Additives?
• DTT (will affect OD 280nm)
• Glycerol (no more than 5 %)
• Detergents at less than 2xCMC0.1% 1‐s‐Nonyl‐β‐D‐thioglucoside0.2% n‐Decanoylsucrose0.3% n‐Nonyl‐β‐D‐maltoside0.4% DDAO0.5% C8E50.8% FOS‐Choline®‐101.1% FOS‐Choline®‐9
Conclusions
• QC at home is crucial
• But we can do it for you at EMBL@PETRA3
• Some quality control methods can provide useful complementary data
• (In)direct validation of the SAXS models
Acknowledgements
• Malvern Instruments (Bernd Tartsch)
• Melissa Graewert (EMBL Hamburg)
• Stefan Duhr (Nanotemper)
• Stephane Boivin (EMBL Hamburg)