Finding the Best Capture Reagents

As capture reagents, monoclonal antibodies are the most widely used reagents for specifically detecting and quantifying proteins due to their very high specificity. However, development of monoclonal antibodies is time-consuming and expensive. In addition, many antigens prove to be non-immunogenic or extremely toxic, and therefore cannot be used to generate antibodies in animals. Furthermore, the large size of monoclonal antibodies (150 kDa) may limit their use in cases where more than one binding reagent competes for space to recognize closely juxtaposed epitopes. These limitations could arguably be the biggest hurdles to using monoclonal antibodies as capture reagents for a systematic study of the complete human proteome or for clinical applications of advanced proteomics.

Therefore, alternative capture reagents with high specificity, high affinity, and flexible size and structure that can be easily and cost-effectively produced are urgently needed in order to accelerate proteomic research. Single-chain variable-fragment (scFv) antibodies have been commonly used as alternatives in this regard. scFv is comprised of only the light chain and heavy chain variable regions connected by a peptide linker and with a molecular weight of 27 kDa. Since scFv retains the antigen-binding site of the variable regions, it inherits the specificity of an intact antibody and affinity. In addition, scFv can be easily expressed in yeast or in E. coli with yields in milligrams per liter. scFv can be linked to Fc of desired species specificity and maintain binding properties. If necessary, there is also the option of converting scFv into other antibody formats such as Fab or full IgG by simple cloning steps. The converted antibodies can also be efficiently expressed and purified in yeast or E. coli.

More recently, single domain antibodies that exist in nature were discovered that can be as small as half the size of scFv, and judging from the available data, superior in binding capabilities to scFv or even traditional IgG antibodies. This type of affinity molecules, termed VHH isolated from camelid animals or nurse shark, can be highly expressed in E. coli, linked to a fluorescent protein marker, or chemically conjugated to HRP or other signal generating moieties through a one step reaction.

Surface Bind gDNA for retrieving genomic DNA from Allele-in-One mouse tail lysate.

15% off One step Genotyping (mouse tail lysis and PCR kits), use code 011011MT at shop.allelebiotech.com

Tags: affinity reagents, capture molecules, human proteomics, IgG, nAb: Camelid Antibodies, nAbs, nano antibodies, nanobodies, proteome, scFv, VHH, VHH antibody chromotek

New Frontiers for Research Tool Development in the New Year

Allele Biotech's Green Crystal Ball

Optogenetics
Chosen as the Method of the Year 2010 by Nature Method and mentioned in a number of year-end recaps, this is a technology that allows the use of light to precisely (at least in a temporal sense) control engineered proteins within a targeted cell population. For example, by introducing light-activated channelrhodopsins into neurons, one can use a pulse of light to initiate a movement of ion across the cell membrane. The technology, first reported in 2005 then made headlines as a major impact on neurosciences since 2007, is now being combined with other components in controlling a broader array of biological events, such as DNA binding, enzyme activities, etc. Looking forward, a few areas will be more than likely the frontlines of moving optogenetics into more labs:

Additional combinations: The few known channelrhodopsins and their fast growing variations will be combined with more “effecter” domains to control different events. The challenge will be to find ways to use the structural changes or any responses channelrhodopsins have to stimulating lights in order to trigger a reaction in the associated effecter domain.

Tracking mechanisms: A platter of fluorescent proteins (FPs) will be used as an independent tracking method to follow cells being targeted. FPs that have optical spectra that do not interfere with the optogenetic molecules will be tested and established. In addition, FPs with less toxicity, narrower excitation and emission peaks, and more tolerance to different cellular environment will be preferred and eventually set up as standards.

Delivery tools: To bring the optogenetic reagents into cells like neurons researchers will most likely rely on lentiviral vectors in most cases. Other vehicles such as baculovirus, MMLV-based retrovirus, even herpes virus may find broader applications in this field. Pre-packaged lentiviruses and MMLV-retroviruses already contain optogenetic constructs will become popular products.

VHH Antibodies
The small capture polypeptides based on single-domain Camelid antibodies (nanobodies, nano antbodies or nAbs) and similar VHH domains will become much dramatically more popular this year, judging from the significant increase in demands of the only camelid reagent products, GFP-Trap and RFP-Trap, in 2010. There are a number of NIH initiated programs that aim to find capture reagents that eventually target the complete human proteome. One of the key criteria for the current phase of the relevant NIH Director’s Initiative is ability to co-immunoprecipitate. The Human Proteome Organization (HUPO) recently expressed frustration due to the lack of high quality capture reagents necessary to isolate and identify most proteins. HUPO promotes global research on proteins in order to decode the human proteome. From what we have learned from dozens of publications showing the use of GFP-Trap, VHH molecules pulls down GFP-tagged proteins with unprecedented efficiency and purity. VHH antibodies show strong affinity and specificity, at a level superior or comparable to monoclonal antibodies. In addition, VHH antibodies are increasingly appreciated for their capabilities to recognize concave epitopes by their relatively convex-shaped paratopes. VHH nanobodies are small (~12-15 kD), with a limited number of functionally important disulfide bonds, can be expressed very well in E. coli, and are amazingly stable in extreme denaturing conditions such as heat and acid. They have been shown to be better suited for in vivo and trans-cellular membrane delivery than other antibodies. It should not be surprising that one day in the coming years VHH antibodies will be more dominant than monoclonal antibodies.

Super-Resolution Imaging
One of the goals of developing technologies such as photoactivated localization microscopy (PALM) and related super-resolution imaging (SRI) techniques was to achieve electron microscopy (EM) level resolution without using EM. Now new developments show that maybe combining EM and photoactivable FPs would provide more specific and more detailed morphology. It would be anticipated that more photoconvertible FPs will prove to work well for one type of SRI or another. The event that will bring this technology to nearly every cell biology lab is the improvement and availability of necessary instruments that some companies have already begun to commercialize.

New Product of the Week 010311-010911:

Human let-7b miRNA minigene on lentivirus with RFP reporter, ABP-RP-MILT7BLP

Promotion of the Week 010311-010911:

15% off mWasabi-based organelle markers carried on baculo2mammalian system if order this week (On-Demand products will require about 3-4 weeks for virus packaging after an order is placed). Use code 0103BACFP on fax or email order.

Tags: alpaca antibodies, camelid antibodies, channelrhodopsin, EM, halorhodopsin, optogenetic, PALM, photoactivable FP, photoconvertible FP, STED, STORM, VHH, VHH antibodies

BioTechniques Publishes Article on Single Domain Antibodies

Many blogs start by asking “Did you know…” to intrigue you to read along. So here it goes:

Did you know that there are more than 300,000 antibodies that are commercially available? And yes, many antibody companies are still generating more antibodies at ever faster pace and in a more systematic way. There are companies that plan to make peptide or short protein fragments for making antibodies against all human proteins or subproteome, others develop antibodies particularly suitable for demanding assays such as ChIP-CHIP. Government activities such as the National Cancer Institute (NCI)’s Clinical Proteomic Technologies Initiative (CPTI) and the Road Map program under the NIH Director’s Office also set goals of producing comprehensive sets of widely usable, renewable, affinity reagents for clinical cancer samples or the human proteome. Apparently people do not think the 300,000 available antibodies are sufficient for what they do.

Did you know that conventional antibodies commonly used as reagents are ~150kDa in molecular weight and can hardly be used inside live cells? Ulrich Rothbauer, professor in the department of biology at Ludwig Maximilians University, who is working with colleagues to develop tools to study cellular processes in living cells. “These antibodies have to assemble four different chains, two heavy and two light, and they’re assembled by disulfide bonds that cannot be correctly formed in the reducing environment of the cytoplasm. You cannot express such a huge complex molecule in living cells. You can [introduce] them by microinjection, for example, but it’s not applicable for high-throughput cell imaging.” [1] Antibody fragments such as scFv, Fab, and similar derivatives have been developed over the years to certain level of success, but not as widely accepted or practically amenable to replacing conventional antibodies.

Did you know that camel, llama, and shark naturally produce single heavy chain antibodies that can function as 13-16kDa fragments (yes if you have read previous Allele Blogs http://allelebiotech.com/blogs/2009/08/camelid-antibodies/)? They can easily be produced in bacteria, used directly inside live cells via transgene, fused to other proteins as a fusion tag, linked to DNA oligos as a detection module, or immobilized on beads for pull down or co-IP. Currently, these antibodies need to be selected by display after obtaining immunized antibody libraries. There is generally no commercial service for creating custom camelid antibodies at this time due to patent and other issues. Existing products are available for jelly fish GFP and DsRed derived RFP fusions. Publications using such a limited number of camelid antibodies have been amazing so far—dozens in top journals within the last few months and after only a short period of time since product launch.

New Product of the Week 05-09-10 to 05-16-10: RFP-Trap for mCherry, mRFP1, mOrange, mPlum, and mRuby etc.

Promotion of the Week 05-09-10 to 05-16-10: Purchase our ThermoExp500 PCR Thermocycer for $4,650.00, and qualify for $200 off or for a $300 credit toward any other Allele Biotech product or service! http://www.allelebiotech.com/allele3/EQ.php

Original BioTechniques Article http://www.biotechniques.com/news/biotechniquesNews/biotechniques-257771.html?utm_source=BioTechniques+Newsletters+%2526+e-Alerts&utm_campaign=b94f127de0-Methods+Newsletter&utm_medium=email

Tags: Alpaca, camelid antibodies, Chromotek, Fab, GFP-Trap, Hc antibodies, mCherry, mOrange, mPlum, mRFP1, mRuby, nAbs, RFP-Trap, scFv, single domain antibodies, VHH, VHH antibodies

Choosing siRNA, shRNA, and miRNA for Gene Silencing

RNAi refers to dsRNA-induced gene silencing, a cellular process that degrades RNA homologous to one strand of the dsRNA [1, 2]. The intermediates of long dsRNA-initiated RNAi are double-stranded small interfering RNAs (siRNA), typically 21-23 nucleotide (nt) long. The siRNAs, when introduced into cells, can be used to silence genes in mammalian systems where long dsRNAs prompt protein kinase R (PKR), RNase L, and interferon activities that result in non-specific RNA degradation and general shutdown of protein synthesis [3]. siRNAs can either be chemically synthesized then directly transfected into cells or can be generated inside the cell by introducing vectors that express short-hairpin RNA (shRNA) precursors of siRNAs. The process of shRNA into functional siRNA involves cellular RNAi machinery that naturally process genome encoded microRNAs (miRNA) that are responsible for cellular regulation of gene expression by modulating mRNA stability, translation, and chromatin structures [4].

Chemically synthesized siRNA is the simplest format for RNAi. One of the biggest hurdles for achieving effective RNAi with siRNA is that many cells are difficult to transfect. An RNAi experiment is typically considered successful when the target gene expression is reduced by >70%, a threshold not reachable by many types of cells due to their low transfection efficiency. Another drawback of using synthetic siRNA is the limited duration of post-transfection effects, typically with gene silencing activities peaking around 24 hours, and diminishing within 48 hours [5]. Chemical synthesis of siRNA, which is a service Allele Biotech and Orbigen (now merged under the Allele brand) pioneered and still provides, is expensive on a per transfection basis relative to DNA vector based reagents.

shRNA can be introduced by DNA plasmid, linear template, or packaged retroviral/lentiviral vectors. Using any form of DNA construct, except the PCR template format such as Allele’s LineSilence platform, requires creating DNA constructs and sequence verification; a taxing work load if multiple genes need to be studied. However, once the constructs are made, they can be reproduced easily and inexpensively. It is difficult to directly compare the effectiveness of siRNA versus shRNA on a per molecule basis because RNA polymerase III (Pol III) promoters such as U6 or H1 commonly used to express shRNAs can make thousands of copies of shRNA from a single DNA template. However when both siRNA and shRNA are produced the same way, e.g. synthesized chemically, shRNA is reported to be somewhat more effective [6, 7]. For the goals of this research, the most important advantage using shRNA can provide over siRNA is that it can be carried on a lentiviral vector and introduced into a wide variety of cells.

Similar to the comparison between siRNA versus shRNA, it is also difficult to rank the efficiency of shRNA versus miRNA from published data, partly due to different results from different experimental systems. There have been several reports that showed shRNA can cause significant cell toxicity, especially in vivo such as after injection into mouse brain. It was originally reasoned that highly efficient expression from Pol III promoters might overwhelm the cellular machinery that is needed to execute endogenous RNAi functions such as transporting miRNA from the nucleus to the cytoplasm. It was later found out that even using Pol III promoter to create miRNA could still mitigate the toxic effects of shRNA [8]. Since shRNA and miRNA are processed by endonuclease Dicer before being incorporated into RNA induced silencing complex (RISC), the exact identity of siRNAs produced from a given shRNA or miRNA targeting the same region on the mRNA are not known in most of the earlier studies. By designing shRNA and miRNA to give exactly the same processed siRNAs, Boudreau et al. showed that shRNA is actually more potent than miRNA in various systems [9].

New Product/Service of the Week (02-01-10 to 02-07-10): Lentrivirus retrovirus shRNA Packaging Services as low as under $900 per virus.

Currently Trendy Product Line: Camelid antibody group against fluorescent proteins as precipitation tag for co-IP (replacing formerly GFP-Trap line)–GFP-nAb, promotion ongoing now.

1. Fire, A., S. Xu, M.K. Montgomery, S.A. Kostas, S.E. Driver, and C.C. Mello, Potent and specific genetic interference by double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature, 1998. 391(6669): p. 806-11.
2. Hannon, G.J., RNA interference. Nature, 2002. 418(6894): p. 244-51.
3. McManus, M.T. and P.A. Sharp, Gene silencing in mammals by small interfering RNAs. Nat Rev Genet, 2002. 3(10): p. 737-47.
4. Hutvagner, G. and P.D. Zamore, A microRNA in a multiple-turnover RNAi enzyme complex. Science, 2002. 297(5589): p. 2056-60.
5. Rao, D.D., J.S. Vorhies, N. Senzer, and J. Nemunaitis, siRNA vs. shRNA: similarities and differences. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 2009. 61(9): p. 746-59.
6. Vlassov, A.V., B. Korba, K. Farrar, S. Mukerjee, A.A. Seyhan, H. Ilves, R.L. Kaspar, D. Leake, S.A. Kazakov, and B.H. Johnston, shRNAs targeting hepatitis C: effects of sequence and structural features, and comparision with siRNA. Oligonucleotides, 2007. 17(2): p. 223-36.
7. Siolas, D., C. Lerner, J. Burchard, W. Ge, P.S. Linsley, P.J. Paddison, G.J. Hannon, and M.A. Cleary, Synthetic shRNAs as potent RNAi triggers. Nat Biotechnol, 2005. 23(2): p. 227-31.
8. McBride, J.L., R.L. Boudreau, S.Q. Harper, P.D. Staber, A.M. Monteys, I. Martins, B.L. Gilmore, H. Burstein, R.W. Peluso, B. Polisky, B.J. Carter, and B.L. Davidson, Artificial miRNAs mitigate shRNA-mediated toxicity in the brain: implications for the therapeutic development of RNAi. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2008. 105(15): p. 5868-73.
9. Boudreau, R.L., A.M. Monteys, and B.L. Davidson, Minimizing variables among hairpin-based RNAi vectors reveals the potency of shRNAs. Rna, 2008. 14(9): p. 1834-44.

Tags: alpaca antibodies, camelid antibody, gene knockdown, gene silencing, GFP-Trap, lentivirus packaging, miRNA, nanobodies, packaging systems, RFP-Trap, RNAi, shRNA, shRNA packaging, siRNA, VHH, virus packaging service

Immunoprecipitation Tags

Immunoprecipitation is a process of isolating a protein as an antigen by using antibodies against it. It is a powerful tool for studying proteins in biological samples and, in case of Co-IP (meaning immunoprecipitation of complexes containing a known antigen), for analyzing protein-protein interactions. Similar technologies such as chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP), RNA immunoprecipitation (RIP), or crosslinked and iImmunoprecipitation of RNA-protein complexes (CLIP) aid analysis of protein-DNA or protein-RNA interactions.

The major obstacle for achieving effective immunoprecipitation is the difficulty of finding usable antibodies against a target of interest. A common practice is to use tags that are fused to the C- or N-terminus of the target protein, thereby any validated, commercially available antibody can be used for co-IP in different experimental systems. However, caution must be exercised against potential interference of biological functions from the added tags. In general, one should choose tags that have been tested in many situations and proven non-interfering; still, each biological system is different. Independent validation or supporting data should be used when interpreting results from tag-based co-IP.

Tags are often selected based on high quality and commercially available antibodies. Most commonly used tags include: FLAG, Myc, HA, V5, T7, and His, which are quite small in size and in theory less likely to interfere. GST and GFP are in between 20-30kDa, but they are well documented to form self-contained and stable structures independent of their fusion partners and proved to not interfere in many cases. GST can bind to glutathione beads directly, therefore a top choice for pulldown experiments. GFP or other FPs as tags have the advantages of being also a visualization module to follow the protein both inside cells and during pulldown. However, previously available anti-GFP antibodies, either polyclonal or monoclonal, are not comparable to those against other tags, thereby limiting the use of GFP as fusion tag in pulldown experiments.

GFP-Trap, a recent addition to anti-tag antibodies, is an E. coli expressed, single domain fragment derived from camelid heavy chain antibodies (VHH antibodies) with much higher stability, specificity, and affinity, making GFP based pulldown quantitative. This recent advancement should make GFP in line to become the most suitable tags for many aforementioned precipitation experiments.

Tags: alpaca antibodies, and His, camelid, chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP), Chromotek, Co-IP, FLAG, GFP, GST, HA, immunoprecipitation, Myc, nangobody, nanobodies, or crosslinked and iImmunoprecipitation of RNA-protein complexes (CLIP), protein-DNA, protein-protein, protein-RNA, RNA immunoprecipitation (RIP), single domain, T7, V5, VHH, VHH antibody