Solving the world’s problems with new biotechnology

The ability to isolate, create, synthesize, or artificially evolve living organisms towards desirable phenotypes may be increasingly important for solving many of the problems the world is facing. Such problems may include creating renewable energy using biowaste, finding biocontrol products that kill food-spoiling fungi “organically”, or assaying pathogens in the field using synthetic biological detection systems. With the arrival of synthetic biology, “it is possible to design and assemble chromosomes, genes and gene pathways, and even whole genomes”, according to the J. Craig Venter Institute. That is, if you know which genes or gene pathways you would need to put into the synthetic genome that would lead to the desired traits. So far, most published synthetic biology work involves bringing in transcription factors from a non-host source to set up an artificial network like circadian oscillators, showing that it can be done and it is interesting.

Through the process of evolution biological systems aptly self-engineer favorable traits in order to survive, but these changes require millions of years to manifest. However, there are quicker adaptations to environmental cues, such as developing antibiotic resistance, which can be achieved through a small number of mutations in hundreds or even dozens of generations. The question is how to harness this kind of adaptation for new strains that can be used as products with defined purposes? As a first requirement, you must have an assay for identifying the wanted mutants or method for augmenting their subpopulation, which is not necessarily easy and normally takes some clever designs to establish. Since evolutionary success in nature results from continuous “rounds” of gene mutagenesis, expression and selection, an evolution in the lab should ideally proceed with continuity. Previously, each round of mutation and selection takes a few days to complete. Recently, Esvelt et al. in David Liu’s lab at Harvard demonstrated one way of doing in vitro continuous evolution, by creating a lagoon of mixed E. coli and phages. By continuous dilution of the phage population through outflow, those phages that remain in the pool with properties that help them propagate in the host bacteria will have a better chance to regenerate and accumulate mutations towards the design of the assay [1].

Another aspect of natural evolution is that it occurs in a heterogeneous environment separated into niches of subpopulations with uneven stress levels. Although most evolutions with human intervention were conducted in a homologous population under the same stress and selection, a spatially complex environment may speed up evolution. This may not be easy to imagine, but if a mutant acquires some level of resistance to its environmental stress level and has a chance to move to join a population under higher stress, its relative fitness will likely increase. In addition, in a smaller population in the niche under higher stress, the mutant with marginally beneficial properties acquired under lower pressure can take over more quickly. This was demonstrated by Zhang et al. who showed that with a gradient of antibiotics applied to an array of microwells interconnected through tiny channels, new resistant strains can evolve in less than a day. Without the gradient, or separate the interconnected niches into discrete wells, no resistant populations could be obtained [2].

With more understandings like these and equipped with large scale gene synthesis, chromosome assembly, and deep sequencing technologies, we should see increasing numbers of human-made organisms serving special needs for food, health, energy, and the environment. Synthetic biology or artificial evolution won’t solve all the world’s problems, but if applied effectively and diligently, they can certainly help with many critical aspects as the technology “coevolves” with the environment.

[1] Kevin M. Esvelt, Jacob C. Carlson, & David R. Liu. “A system for the continuous directed evolution of biomolecules” Nature 499, 2011.
Qiucen Zhang, Guillaume Lambert, David Liao, Hyunsung Kim, Kristelle Robin, Chih-kuan Tung, Nader Pourmand, Robert H. Austin. “Acceleration of Emergence of Bacterial Antibiotic Resistance in Connected Microenvironments” Science 333, 2011.

New Products of the week: Modified UTP (Pseudouridine-5´-triphosphate), and Modified CTP (Methylcytidine-5´-triphosphate) for in vitro transcription of mRNA.

Promotion of the week: Friday special this week, buy 2 GFP-Trap get 1 free. Email the code “2+1GFPTrap” after placing your order of 2 GFP-Trap beads (0.25ml or 0.5ml scales only).

Tags: biocontrol, bioenergy, biofuel, biowaste, chromosome assembly, deep sequencing, food fungus, green energy, in vitro evolution, microenvironment, next generation sequencing, synthetic biology

Fusion of the Transcription Domain to iPS Factors Radically Enhances Reprogramming

Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) can be achieved through introduction of a small group of stem cell specific transcription factors. Ever since this was first demonstrated by Takahashi and Yamanaka, there have been relentless efforts for improving the efficiency of this generally inefficient process. There is also a general opinion that iPSCs are different from each other and from embryonic stem cells (ESCs) in various aspects, depending on the method of the induction. As a result, another focus of the reprogramming field has been to find ways for creating iPSCs that are as close to ESCs as possible. One of the parameters for defining stem cell status is their epigenetic characters; epigenetic changes have been demonstrated to occur during reprogramming of subsequent differentiation.

In fact, it seems that reprogramming can be largely described as a process composed of chromatin remodeling and specific transcription activation. Strong transcription activators are known to effectively recruit multiple chromatin remodeling complexes when exerting their functions. A good example is MyoD, a master transcription factor for skeletal myogenesis that can “single-handedly” switch (transdifferentiate) the fate of differentiated cells. Hirai et al. speculated that since MyoD is such a strong transcription factor, it may be able to increase chromatin accessibility to iPS factors if fused together. When transduced on retroviral vectors, Oct-TAD (Transcription Activation Domain) of MyoD, in combination with Sox2 and Klf4, increased the number of iPSC colonies by 40-fold. Additionally, these iPSCs appeared to quickly adopt stem cell gene expression profiles, days faster than when traditional Oct4, Sox2, c-Myc, and Klf4 were used; and sometimes the levels of pluripotency genes even exceeds those seen in ESCs. Amazingly, when using the fusion assisted method some colonies are formed without the help of feeder cells, a requirement of ESCs grown in similar medium. Does this mean that these iPSCs can even be more “stem-like” than embryonic stem cells?

Like MyoD, VP16, also widely known for its strong transcription activation domain, when fused to iPS factors, was shown to exhibit a similar stimulation effect on reprogramming. Although the details of the fusion arrangements and specificity appear to differ between MyoD and VP16, the fact that two research groups could achieve similar results using comparable strategies provides a good argument that other labs should at least consider this method when creating mouse or human iPSCs. Previously in our blog we have discussed using iPS factor mRNAs, a method originally developed by Warren et al., for substantially shortening the time required for reprogramming and making it more robust across cell types and media conditions. If the new TAD-fusion factors are used also in the mRNA format, then the protocol might be further shortened and simplified. If successful, this non-integrating approach could become a dominant method in the field, even making competitive non-integrating method such as Sendai and plasmid-based miRNA irrelevant.

New product of the week:SurfaceBind RNA purification system, higher capacity and simpler procedure than Qiagen or Ambion’s comparable products, particularly suitable for mRNA cleanup after in vitro transcription.

Promotion of the week: 30% off RNA SurfaceBind Purification kits. To redeem this offer email the code PURIFY to oligo@allelebiotech.com.

Tags: chromatin remodeling, epegenetic markers, footprint free, iPS cells, iPSCs, mRNA iPSCs, MyoD-Oct, reprogramming, TAD-Oct, VP16-Oct

Big Potential in Using Protozoans for Producing Mammalian Proteins

Recombinant protein expression is critical for functionally studying proteins, preparing antigens, providing tissue culture growth supplement, and producing certain therapeutic compounds. Like many molecular biology labs, we have used several heterologous protein expression systems over the last decade including E. coli, yeasts, insect cells and mammalian cells from various species. It is widely accepted that these systems present increasing functional relevance from bacteria to mammalian cells, with accompanying increase in difficulty and cost. The benefits of using cells from higher species are often reflected in post-translational modifications (PTMs), such as glycosylation, phosphorylation, etc.

There is yet another system that could be easy to handle while maintaining mammalian-like PTMs–parasitic protozoan Leishmania tarentolae. L. tarenolae is a unicellular organism, its host is lizard. Even though it’s a vertebrate parasite, this species poses no risk to humans. Amazingly, L. tarenolae individuals can be grown on agar plates for clonal selection or in simple liquid media like E. coli. Their optimal growth temperature is 27C, and they do not require shaking; thus they are suitable for growth in insect cell incubators or even at room temperature. The most important advantage of this system is that oligosaccharide structures of proteins produced in this organism resemble those of mammalian cells much more closely than even insect cells, i. e. the N-glycosylation profile can be basically identical to a biantennary fully galactosylated Man3GlcNAc2core-a-1,6-fucosylated structure found in mammalian cells.

IFrom our first-hand experience, the handling of this species is extremely convenient. While we heavily promote the baculovirus expression system (BVES) for most of our custom protein production projects (we carried out one NIH project for producing human glycosylated cancer antigen proteins using a modified BVES recently), we now believe that there is a good chance that many of the proteins we have been producing could be produced in the protozoan system with potentially better efficiency.

New Product of the Week: GFP-Multitrap 5 plates, ABP-CM-GMULT5, $1,200.

Promotion of the week: Get one GFP-Trap free when you send us two referrals. Call 858-587-6645 for details or claim prize.

Tags: BVES, glycosylation, insect cells, L. tarenolae, Leishmania tarentolae, Lexsy, protein epxression, protein yield, protozoan, PTM, recombinant proteins

About 50 Papers Cited the Use of GFP-Trap Camelid Antibody So Far in 2011

With their ability to quantitatively pulldown GFP-tagged proteins, GFP-Trap (or RFP-Trap for DsRed-derived fluorescent proteins) beads have gained ground in becoming the reagent of choice for immuno-coprecipitation. The complexes isolated from GFP-Trap agarose or magnetic beads can be easily analyzed without interference from light or heavy IgG chains typically present after monoclonal or polyclonal antibody precipitation. Since the market launch of GFP-Trap, in each of the past 3 years, the number of publications citing GFP-Trap more has than doubled and there is no sign of that rate slowing down any time soon.

In 2011 alone, 48 research groups have published their results with data generated through use of GFP-Trap (not including other related products such as GFP-Booster, GFP-MultiTrap). Research topics in these recent publications include identification of domains of the zinc finger protein 638 (ZNF638) that interacts with C/EBPb when promoting adipocyte differentiation [1]; identification of phosphorylation site on Cdc42-associated kinase (Ack) by LC-MS/MS after immunoprecipitation [2]; and analysis of the activities of myosin heavy-chain kinases (MHCKs) in wild-type vs Htt mutant Dictyostelium discoideum, a cellular model for studying the Huntingon disease [3].

The use of GFP-Trap beads is a simple bind-wash-elute procedure that involves just one antibody already immobilized on either agarose or magnetic beads. Camelid antibodies, especially their VHH single domain fragments such as those used in GFP-Trap or RFP-Trap, are very stable (they can be shipped and temporarily stored at room temperature). The consistency of performance is very high; as a matter of fact, this line of products requires the lowest amount of technical support among all of our products. If you are still using tags like FLAG, V5, HA, etc., you should consider trying GFP as both a fluorescence and co-IP tag in your future experiments for obtaining results you previously could not obtain.

New Product of the Week: Non-Integrating iPSC Generation Kits. First of its kind on the market. Click to read more about mRNA-based reprogramming.

Promotion of the Week: Save 15% to save the environment by using EcoCulture Dishes at 30% less plastic for better imaging. Code: 091911DISH when call or email us.

Blog References:
[1] Meruvu, S. et al. “Regulation of Adipocyte Differentiation by the Zinc Finger Protein ZNF638” JBC 2011
[2] Shen, H. et al. “Constitutive activated Cdc42-associated kinase (Ack) phosphorylation at arrested endocytic clathrin-coated pits of cells that lack dynamin” Molecular Biology of the Cell 2011
[3] Wang, Y. et al. “Dictyostelium huntingtin controls chemotaxis and cytokinesis through the regulation of myosin II phosphorylation” Molecular Biology of the Cell 2011

Tags: anti-GFP, camelid antibodies, Chromotek, Co-IP, GFP-Trap, GFPTrap, immunoprecipitation, nAb: Camelid Antibodies, Nanobodies, VHH, pulldown, RFPTrap, VHH

Methods of iPSC Generation Update

Induced pluripotent stem cells can be directly generated from adult cell cultures through the introduction of a group of factors, e.g. Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc (the Yamanaka factors) [Takahashi and Yamanaka, 2006]. Additional factors such as Nanog and Lin28 can either substitute some of the Yamanaka factors or supplement them for higher reprogramming efficiency [Yu et al. 2007].

The original pluripotent stem cells induction methods involved retrovirus or lentivirus that would leave foot-print in the host genome, a concern for clinical use of iPSCs. Several groups have tried to create iPSCs without integrating viruses, such as using small molecules, directly delivering proteins instead of cDNAs, viruses with RNA genomes, episomal systems, or removable elements such as PiggyBac or Sleeping Beauty transposons. From the literature and our first-hand experience in the iPS market, none of these methods has become a widely applicable tool, mostly due to impractically low reprogramming efficiency.

In addition to low efficiency, RNA viruses, such as the sendai virus, are still viruses and have virus-associated risks. Episomal plasmids or removable transposons still involve DNA, so the possibility of genomic integration by recombination remains. In case of some transposons such as PiggyBac, there is an additional question about the degree of removal – whether it is certain that all integrated transposons, often inserted within genes, are deleted; in case of transposons similar to Sleeping Beauty, the small footprints they leave behind may post a concern.

The method of choice for generating zero-footprint iPSCs should clearly be RNA-based without the involvement of virus. Luigi Warren and his former colleagues at Harvard demonstrated that by using in vitro transcribed iPS factor mRNAs with modified CTP and UTP, and 5’-cap can effectively reprogram a number of different human as well as mouse cells. The efficiency even exceeds those by using retrovirus or lentivirus by 10 to 100 fold. Furthermore, the RiPSCs created with mRNAs appear to be closer to hESCs as shown by expression profiling.

Very recently, a few miRNAs that have high expression levels in stem cells were shown to be able to reprogram mouse and human somatic cells when expressed together from a lentivirus [Anokye-Danso et al. 2011]. while that work used lentivirus, thus not directly applicable to the current project, Miyoshi et al. later showed that by using synthesized mature miRNA (overlapping but not the same set of miRNAs as used by Anokye-Danso et al.) reprogramming cold be achieved without viral infection. We believe that this is a promising method and would like to pursue it further and to find out whether these mi-iPSCs relate to hESCs as closely as R-iPSCs. Because transfecting synthetic miRNAs “does operate at considerably lower efficiency” in terms of iPSC creation [Miyoshi et al. 2011],alternative protocols may include transfecting the iPS factor mRNAs together with various miRNAs at different doses and frequencies.

New Product of the Week: EF1a-lacZ lentivirus particles, for expressing nuclear lacZ in virtually any human or mouse cells.

This week save 25% on photoconvertible fluorescent protein mClavGR2 cloning plasmids. Email oligo@allelebiotech.com with code FPBLOG0831.

Blog References: Warren, L. et al. “Highly efficient reprogramming to pluripotency and directed differentiation of human cells with synthetic modified mRNA” 2010 Cell Stem Cell 7(5): 618-30

Anokye-Danso, F. et al. “Highly efficient miRNA-mediated reprogramming of mouse and human somatic cells to pluripotency” 2011 Cell Stem Cell 8(4): 376-88

Miyoshi, N. et al. “Reprogramming of mouse and human cells to pluripotency using mature microRNAs” 2011 Cell Stem Cell 8(6): 633-8

Kim, H. et al. “miR-371-3 expression predicts neural differentiation propensity in human pluripotent stem cells” 2011 Cell Stem Cell 8(6): 695-706

Takahashi, K. and Yamanaka, S. “Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors” 2006 Cell 126(4): 663-76

Yu, J. et al. “Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from human somatic cells” 2007 Science 318(5858): 1917-20

Tags: 200c, 367s, Episomal plasmids, Luigi Warren, mi-iPSC, miRNA-302s, miRNA-369, mRNA transfection, PiggyBac iPSC, RiPSC, RiPSCs