Rapid, optimized interactomic screening

Nature Methods

Volumn 12, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 553-560

  Hakhverdyan, Zhanna ^a   Domanski, Michal ^a,b   Hough, Loren E ^a,g   Oroskar, Asha A ^c   Oroskar, Anil R ^c   Keegan, Sarah ^d   Dilworth, David J ^e,f   Molloy, Kelly R ^a   Sherman, Vadim ^a   Aitchison, John D ^e,f   Fenyö, David ^d   Chait, Brian T ^a   Jensen, Torben Heick ^b   Rout, Michael P ^a   Lacava, John ^a  

^a ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^c Orochem Technologies Inc   (United States)

^d NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS BIOLOGY   (United States)

^f SEATTLE BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BINDING AFFINITY; NONHUMAN; PHYSIOLOGICAL PROCESS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN STABILITY; ROBOTICS; SCREENING TEST; CELL LINE; CHEMISTRY; ESCHERICHIA COLI; HUMAN; MACROMOLECULE; METABOLISM; PROCEDURES; PROTEOMICS; YEAST;

MACROMOLECULE; PROTEIN;

CELL LINE; ESCHERICHIA COLI; HUMANS; MACROMOLECULAR SUBSTANCES; PROTEIN INTERACTION MAPPING; PROTEIN INTERACTION MAPS; PROTEINS; PROTEOMICS; YEASTS;

EID: 84930177614     PISSN: 15487091     EISSN: 15487105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.3395     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Brockhurst, M. A., Colegrave, N. & Rozen, D. E. Next-generation sequencing as a tool to study microbial evolution. Mol. Ecol. 20, 972-980 (2011).
2. Ross, J. S. & Cronin, M. Whole cancer genome sequencing by next-generation methods. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 136, 527-539 (2011).
3. Charbonnier, S., Gallego, O. & Gavin, A.-C. The social network of a cell: recent advances in interactome mapping. Biotechnol. Annu. Rev. 14, 1-28 (2008).
4. Collins, M. O. & Choudhary, J. S. Mapping multiprotein complexes by affinity purification and mass spectrometry. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 19, 324-330 (2008).
5. Kiemer, L. & Cesareni, G. Comparative interactomics: comparing apples and pears? Trends Biotechnol. 25, 448-454 (2007).
6. Williamson, M. P. & Sutcliffe, M. J. Protein-protein interactions. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 38, 875-878 (2010).
7. del Sol, A., Balling, R., Hood, L. & Galas, D. Diseases as network perturbations. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 21, 566-571 (2010).
8. Stumpf, M. P. H. et al. Estimating the size of the human interactome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105, 6959-6964 (2008).
9. Menche, J. et al. Disease networks. Uncovering disease-disease relationships through the incomplete interactome. Science 347, 1257601 (2015).
10. LaCava, J. et al. Affinity proteomics to study endogenous protein complexes: pointers, pitfalls, preferences and perspectives. Biotechniques 58, 103-119 (2015).
11. Bell, A. W., Nilsson, T., Kearney, R. E. & Bergeron, J. J. M. The protein microscope: incorporating mass spectrometry into cell biology. Nat. Methods 4, 783-784 (2007).
12. Devos, D. & Russell, R. B. A more complete, complexed and structured interactome. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 17, 370-377 (2007).
13. Breitkreutz, B.-J. et al. The BioGRID interaction database: 2008 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 36, D637-D640 (2008).
14. Armean, I. M., Lilley, K. S. & Trotter, M. W. B. Popular computational methods to assess multiprotein complexes derived from label-free affinity purification and mass spectrometry (AP-MS) experiments. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 12, 1-13 (2013).
15. Pardo, M. & Choudhary, J. S. Assignment of protein interactions from affinity purification/mass spectrometry data. J. Proteome Res. 11, 1462-1474 (2012).
16. Trinkle-Mulcahy, L. et al. Identifying specific protein interaction partners using quantitative mass spectrometry and bead proteomes. J. Cell Biol. 183, 223-239 (2008).
17. Mellacheruvu, D. et al. The CRAPome: a contaminant repository for affinity purification-mass spectrometry data. Nat. Methods 10, 730-736 (2013).
18. Babu, M. et al. Interaction landscape of membrane-protein complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature 489, 585-589 (2012).
19. Jancarik, J. & Kim, S.-H. Sparse matrix sampling: a screening method for crystallization of proteins. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 24, 409-411 (1991).
20. Chayen, N. E. High-throughput protein crystallization. Adv. Protein Chem. Struct. Biol. 77, 1-22 (2009).
21. Oeffinger, M. et al. Comprehensive analysis of diverse ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nat. Methods 4, 951-956 (2007).
22. Domanski, M. et al. Improved methodology for the affinity isolation of human protein complexes expressed at near endogenous levels. Biotechniques 0, 1-6 (2012).
23. Alber, F. et al. The molecular architecture of the nuclear pore complex. Nature 450, 695-701 (2007).
24. Machesky, L. M. & Gould, K. L. The Arp2/3 complex: a multifunctional actin organizer. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 11, 117-121 (1999).
25. Moseley, J. B. & Goode, B. L. The yeast actin cytoskeleton: from cellular function to biochemical mechanism. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 70, 605-645 (2006).
26. Liu, S.-L., Needham, K. M., May, J. R. & Nolen, B. J. Mechanism of a concentration-dependent switch between activation and inhibition of Arp2/3 complex by coronin. J. Biol. Chem. 286, 17039-17046 (2011).
27. Duncan, M. C., Cope, M. J., Goode, B. L., Wendland, B. & Drubin, D. G. Yeast Eps15-like endocytic protein, Pan1p, activates the Arp2/3 complex. Nat. Cell Biol. 3, 687-690 (2001).
28. Moreau, V., Galan, J. M., Devilliers, G., Haguenauer-Tsapis, R. & Winsor, B. The yeast actin-related protein Arp2p is required for the internalization step of endocytosis. Mol. Biol. Cell 8, 1361-1375 (1997).
29. Tang, H. Y., Munn, A. & Cai, M. EH domain proteins Pan1p and End3p are components of a complex that plays a dual role in organization of the cortical actin cytoskeleton and endocytosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17, 4294-4304 (1997).
30. Mitchell, P. et al. Rrp47p is an exosome-associated protein required for the 3? processing of stable RNAs. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23, 6982-6992 (2003).
31. Wasmuth, E. V. & Lima, C. D. Structure and activities of the eukaryotic RNA exosome. Enzymes 31, 53-75 (2012).
32. Allmang, C. et al. The yeast exosome and human PM-Scl are related complexes of 35 exonucleases. Genes Dev. 13, 2148-2158 (1999).
33. Dziembowski, A., Lorentzen, E., Conti, E. & Séraphin, B. A single subunit, Dis3, is essentially responsible for yeast exosome core activity. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 14, 15-22 (2007).
34. Synowsky, S. A., van den Heuvel, R. H. H., Mohammed, S., Pijnappel, P. W. W. M. & Heck, A. J. R. Probing genuine strong interactions and post-translational modifications in the heterogeneous yeast exosome protein complex. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 5, 1581-1592 (2006).
35. Gottschalk, A. et al. A comprehensive biochemical and genetic analysis of the yeast U1 snRNP reveals five novel proteins. RNA 4, 374-393 (1998).
36. Rigaut, G. et al. A generic protein purification method for protein complex characterization and proteome exploration. Nat. Biotechnol. 17, 1030-1032 (1999).
37. Blanc, A., Goyer, C. & Sonenberg, N. The coat protein of the yeast double-stranded-RNA virus L-A attaches covalently to the cap structure of eukaryotic messenger-RNA. Mol. Cell. Biol. 12, 3390-3398 (1992).
38. Görnemann, J. et al. Cotranscriptional spliceosome assembly and splicing are independent of the Prp40p WW domain. RNA 17, 2119-2129 (2011).
39. De Craene, J.-O. et al. Rtn1p is involved in structuring the cortical endoplasmic reticulum. Mol. Biol. Cell 17, 3009-3020 (2006).
40. Dawson, T. R., Lazarus, M. D., Hetzer, M. W. & Wente, S. R. ER membrane-bending proteins are necessary for de novo nuclear pore formation. J. Cell Biol. 184, 659-675 (2009).
41. Helbig, A. O., Heck, A. J. R. & Slijper, M. Exploring the membrane proteome-challenges and analytical strategies. J. Proteomics 73, 868-878 (2010).
42. Schuldiner, M. et al. Exploration of the function and organization of the yeast early secretory pathway through an epistatic miniarray profile. Cell 123, 507-519 (2005).
43. Creutz, C. E., Snyder, S. L. & Schulz, T. A. Characterization of the yeast tricalbins: membrane-bound multi-C2-domain proteins that form complexes involved in membrane trafficking. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 61, 1208-1220 (2004).
44. Tackett, A. J. et al. I-DIRT, a general method for distinguishing between specific and nonspecific protein interactions. J. Proteome Res. 4, 1752-1756 (2005).
45. Manford, A. G., Stefan, C. J., Yuan, H. L., Macgurn, J. A. & Emr, S. D. ER-to-plasma membrane tethering proteins regulate cell signaling and ER morphology. Dev. Cell 23, 1129-1140 (2012).
46. Voeltz, G. K., Prinz, W. A., Shibata, Y., Rist, J. M. & Rapoport, T. A. A class of membrane proteins shaping the tubular endoplasmic reticulum. Cell 124, 573-586 (2006).
47. Puig, O. et al. The tandem affinity purification (TAP) method: a general procedure of protein complex purification. Methods 24, 218-229 (2001).
48. Gavin, A.-C. et al. Proteome survey reveals modularity of the yeast cell machinery. Nature 440, 631-636 (2006).
49. Krogan, N. J. et al. Global landscape of protein complexes in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature 440, 637-643 (2006).
50. Sowa, M. E., Bennett, E. J., Gygi, S. P. & Harper, J. W. Defining the human deubiquitinating enzyme interaction landscape. Cell 138, 389-403 (2009).
51. Behrends, C., Sowa, M. E., Gygi, S. P. & Harper, J. W. Network organization of the human autophagy system. Nature 466, 68-76 (2010).
52. Ebright, R. H. RNA polymerase: structural similarities between bacterial RNA polymerase and eukaryotic RNA polymerase II. J. Mol. Biol. 304, 687-698 (2000).
53. Sukhodolets, M. V., Cabrera, J. E., Zhi, H. J. & Jin, D. J. RapA, a bacterial homolog of SWI2/SNF2, stimulates RNA polymerase recycling in transcription. Genes Dev. 15, 3330-3341 (2001).
54. Lubas, M. et al. Interaction profiling identifies the human nuclear exosome targeting complex. Mol. Cell 43, 624-637 (2011).
55. Andersen, P. R. et al. The human cap-binding complex is functionally connected to the nuclear RNA exosome. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 20, 1367-1376 (2013).
56. Anonymous. The call of the human proteome. Nat. Methods 7, 661 (2010).
57. Gauci, V. J., Wright, E. P. & Coorssen, J. R. Quantitative proteomics: assessing the spectrum of in-gel protein detection methods. J. Chem. Biol. 4, 3-29 (2011).
58. Candiano, G. et al. Blue silver: a very sensitive colloidal Coomassie G-250 staining for proteome analysis. Electrophoresis 25, 1327-1333 (2004).
59. Chambers, M. C. et al. A cross-platform toolkit for mass spectrometry and proteomics. Nat. Biotechnol. 30, 918-920 (2012).
60. Craig, R. & Beavis, R. C. TANDEM: matching proteins with tandem mass spectra. Bioinformatics 20, 1466-1467 (2004).
61. Ward, J. H. Jr. Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 58, 236-244 (1963).
62. Sokal, R. R. & Rohlf, F. J. The comparison of dendrograms by objective methods. Taxon 11, 33-40 (1962).
63. Pettersen, E. F. et al. UCSF chimera-a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J. Comput. Chem. 25, 1605-1612 (2004).
64. Wessel, D. & Flügge, U. I. A method for the quantitative recovery of protein in dilute solution in the presence of detergents and lipids. Anal. Biochem. 138, 141-143 (1984).
65. Cox, J. & Mann, M. MaxQuant enables high peptide identification rates, individualized p. p. b.-range mass accuracies and proteome-wide protein quantification. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 1367-1372 (2008).
66. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2012).
67. Ellison, A. M. Effect of seed dimorphism on the density-dependent dynamics of experimental populations of Atriplex triangularis (Chenopodiaceae). Am. J. Bot. 74, 1280-1288 (1987).
68. Statistical Analysis System Institute. SAS/STAT User's Guide (SAS, 1990).
69. Hartigan, J. A. & Hartigan, P. M. The dip test of unimodality. Ann. Stat. 13, 70-84 (1985).
70. Akaike, H. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr. 19, 716-723 (1974).
71. Benaglia, T., Chauveau, D., Hunter, D. R. & Young, D. S. mixtools: an R package for analyzing finite mixture models. J. Stat. Softw. 32, 1-29 (2009).