Article Figures & Tables
Figures
- Fig. 1. Specificity, oligomeric state and affinity of anti-GFP and anti-mCherry DARPins.
(A) ELISA experiments show a high specificity of selected DARPins towards their cognate target and closely related proteins. Off7 is a control DARPin binding to maltose binding protein (MBP), E 3_5 is an unselected DARPin. All bars represent mean values of duplicates, error bars represent standard deviations. (B) Analysis of the oligomeric state by SEC shows that most DARPins are predominantly monomeric. Due to low extinction coefficients at 280 nm for the chromatograms of 2m22 and 2m74 the absorption at 230 nm is shown. Arrows indicate the elution volumes of the molecular weight standard with the respective MWs. (C) Example of FA assays of different DARPins binding to sfGFP. The solid line indicates a fit to a 1:1 binding model. Extracted KDs for all DARPins can be found in Table 1. (D) Example of a kinetic titration SPR experiment of 3G124 binding to GFP. The concentrations of the five DARPin injections are indicated in the graph. Fit to a global 1:1 kinetic titration binding model is indicated in red. Extracted association and dissociation rates and KDs for several DARPins are summarized in Table 1; additional sensograms are shown in supplementary material Fig. S4.
- Fig. 2. Binding of anti-GFP-DARPin-Ruby2 fusions to GFP in HeLa cells.
Shown are HeLa cells transiently overexpressing a DARPin-mRuby2 fusion protein (A–G) (H is an mRuby2-nanobody fusion) together with a GFP version tethered to the plasma membrane (GFP-CVIM, A′–H′). Overlap of fluorescent signal indicates binding of the respective anti-GFP-DARPin-mRuby2 fusion to GFP-CVIM, indicated by the yellow fluorescent signal at the plasma membrane. (A–A″) As expected, the anti-mCherry DARPin 2m22-mRuby2 fusion protein, which does not recognize GFP, is not recruited to the plasma membrane. (B–B″) 3G86.32-mRuby2, (C–C″) 3G168-mRuby2, (D–D″) 3G124-mRuby2 as well as (E–E″) 3G86.1-mRuby2 fusion proteins localize to the plasma membrane where they interact with GFP-CVIM. On the other hand, low affinity (F–F″) 3G61-mRuby2 and (G–G″) 3G146-mRuby2 fusion proteins localize to the cytoplasm and nucleus, indicating that they cannot interact sufficiently with GFP-CVIM anchored in the plasma membrane. (H–H″) Positive control mRuby2-VHH-GFP4 fusion protein localizes to the plasma membrane. Unprimed letters, mRuby2 channel; primed letters, GFP channel; double primed letters, overlay. Scale bars are 20 µm.
- Fig. 3. Binding of anti-mCherry-Darpin-GFP fusions to mCherry in HeLa cells.
Shown are HeLa cells transiently overexpressing GFP (A) or anti-mCherry-GFP fusion proteins (B–E) together with a mCherry version tethered to the plasma membrane (mCherry-CVIM, A′–E′). Overlap of fluorescent signal indicates binding of the respective anti-mCherry-DARPin-GFP fusion to mCherry-CVIM, indicated by the yellow fluorescent signal at the plasma membrane. (A–A″) As expected, the untethered GFP control does not change its subcellular localization upon co-expression with mCherry-CVIM and remains cytoplasmic and nuclear. (B–B″) 2m22-GFP re-localizes to the plasma membrane where it binds to mCherry-CVIM. (C–C″) The 3m160-GFP fusion protein results in some fluorescent signal at the plasma membrane indicating the weaker affinity to mCherry-CVIM. (D–D″) 2m151-GFP and (E–E″) 2m74-GFP fusion proteins are not significantly recruited to the plasma because of their only micromolar affinity. Unprimed letters, GFP channel; primed letters, mCherry channel; double primed letters, overlay. Scale bars are 20 µm.
- Fig. 4. Expression of a Slmb-anti-GFP-DARPin fusion in Drosophila embryos degrades eYFP.
(A) Shown is an embryo with the following genotype: H2A-eYFP; en-GAL4, UAS-mCherryNLS; UAS-Slmb-3G86.32. Nuclei that express the Slmb-anti-GFP-DARPin in the engrailed pattern are also expressing unfused mCherry. It can be seen that red cells lost the eYFP signal. (B–B″) Close-up of another embryo showing the channel-specific signal of eYFP (B), mCherry (B′) and the overlay (B″). Note again that cells expressing mCherry have strongly reduced H2A-eYFP signal, indicating efficient eYFP degradation due to the expression of a Slmb-anti-GFP-Darpin. Scale bars are 20 µm.
- Fig. 5. Tissue specific expression of a Slmb-anti-GFP-DARPin fusion in Drosophila phenocopies a non-muscle myosin II mutant phenotype.
(A) Shown is an embryo with the following genotype: sqhAX3; sqhSqh::GFP. The arrow points to the normal dorsal closure. (B) Shown is an embryo with the following genotype: sqhAX3/Y; sqhSqh::GFP/Gal4; NSlmb-3G86.32/+. The dotted line outlines the “dorsal open” phenotype exposing the amnioserosa. Scale bars are 20 µm.
- Fig. 6. anti-GFP-DARPin fusion proteins can relocalize fluorescent fusion proteins in D. rerio embryos.
(A,B) 3G86.2-mRuby2 binds GFP in living zebrafish embryos. (A) Control embryo showing the localization of 3G86.32-mRuby2 in two adjacent skin cells. (B–B″) In a zebrafish embryo co-expressing membrane-bound GFP-CVIM (B), 3G86.32-mRuby2 now localizes to the plasma membrane (B′) and shows a virtually complete co-localization with GFP-CVIM (B″). (C,D) membrane-anchored 3G86.32-mRuby2-CVIM recruits GFP-rab5c in living zebrafish embryos. (C) Control embryo showing the localization of GFP-rab5c in two adjacent skin cells. (D–D″) In a zebrafish embryo co-expressing membrane-bound 3G86.32-mRuby2-CVIM (D′), GFP-Rab5C also localizes to the plasma membrane (D) and shows a virtually complete co-localization with 3G86.32-mRuby2-CVIM (D″). Scale bars are 20 µm.
Tables
- Table 1. Affinities and oligomeric states of GFP and mCherry-binding DARPins
Keywords
Article Navigation
Related articles
Cited by...
More in this TOC section
Similar articles
Other journals from The Company of Biologists
First person interview – Mary Salcedo
Have you seen our interviews with early-career first authors of our papers? In the latest issue, first author Mary Salcedo discusses her latest Methods and Techniques paper in which a newly created method geometrically analyses 789 insect wings.
Find out how Pamela Imperadore’s Travelling Fellowship grant from The Company of Biologists took her to Germany, where she used new imaging techniques to investigate the cellular machinery underlying octopus arm regeneration. Don’t miss the next application deadline for 2020 travel, coming up on 29 November. Where will your research take you?
On the cover, David Coppola, Brent Craven and their colleagues refute a widely-debated theory of olfactory coding first suggested by the Nobel Laureate Lord Adrian over half a century ago.
Biology Open has strong credentials and publishing with us is easy and fast. BiO aims to provide rapid publication for scientifically sound observations and valid conclusions in developmental, cell, experimental and translational biology. Submit your paper here – you’ll be in good company!
Recent cell science highlights in BiO – Masamitsu Sato and colleagues show that the conserved microtubule-associated protein CLASP facilitates bundling of spindle microtubules in early mitosis.
Transfer to Biology Open
If your submission to one of our sister journals, Development, Journal of Cell Science, Journal of Experimental Biology or Disease Models & Mechanisms, is unsuccessful, you can transfer your paper and any reviews directly to Biology Open. The majority of papers transferred with reviews are accepted for publication - find out more.
BiO joins the Review Commons initiative
Biology Open is pleased to be a part of the new and exciting Review Commons initiative, launched by EMBO and ASAPbio. Streamlining the publishing process, Review Commons enables high-quality peer review to take place before journal submission. Papers submitted to Review Commons will be assessed independently of any journal, focusing solely on the paper’s scientific rigor and merit.
preLights - Mammalian Y RNAs are modified at discrete guanosine residues with N-glycans
Connor Rosen discusses his selected preprint by Carolyn Bertozzi, Ryan Flynn and their co-workers on the glycosylation of small non-coding RNAs in mammalian cells.