Characterizing Protein–Protein Interactions Using Mass Spectrometry: Challenges and Opportunities

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 34, Issue 10, 2016, Pages 825-834

  Smits, Arne H ^a   Vermeulen, Michiel ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

crosslinking mass spectrometry; mass spectrometry based proteomics; protein complex stoichiometry; protein protein interactions; ultra sensitive interaction proteomics

Indexed keywords

MASS SPECTROMETRY; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY; PURIFICATION; SPECTROMETRY; STOICHIOMETRY;

BIOCHEMICAL PURIFICATION; HIGH CONFIDENCE; INTERACTORS; NOVEL METHODOLOGY; PROTEIN COMPLEXES; PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN-PROTEIN INTERACTIONS; PROTEOMICS;

PROTEINS;

GLOBAL INTERACTOME PROFILING TECHNIQUE; HUMAN; MASS SPECTROMETRY; METHODOLOGY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN PURIFICATION; REVIEW; STOICHIOMETRY; STRUCTURAL PROTEOMICS; WORKFLOW; ANIMAL; CHEMISTRY; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; METABOLISM; MOUSE; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEOMICS;

PROTEIN;

ANIMALS; HUMANS; MASS SPECTROMETRY; MICE; PROTEIN INTERACTION MAPPING; PROTEINS; PROTEOMICS;

EID: 84961226693     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2016.02.014     Document Type: Review

References (86)

1. 1 Gavin, A.C., et al. Proteome survey reveals modularity of the yeast cell machinery. Nature 440 (2006), 631–636.
2. 2 Krogan, N.J., et al. Global landscape of protein complexes in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature 440 (2006), 637–643.
3. 3 Bantscheff, M., et al. Quantitative mass spectrometry in proteomics: a critical review. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 389 (2007), 1017–1031.
4. 4 Vermeulen, M., et al. High confidence determination of specific protein–protein interactions using quantitative mass spectrometry. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 19 (2008), 331–337.
5. 5 Malovannaya, A., et al. Analysis of the human endogenous coregulator complexome. Cell 145 (2011), 787–799.
6. 6 Huttlin, E.L., et al. The BioPlex network: a systematic exploration of the human interactome. Cell 162 (2015), 425–440.
7. 7 Hein, M.Y., et al. A human interactome in three quantitative dimensions organized by stoichiometries and abundances. Cell 163 (2015), 712–723.
8. 8 Ho, Y., et al. Systematic identification of protein complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by mass spectrometry. Nature 415 (2002), 180–183.
9. 9 Gavin, A.C., et al. Functional organization of the yeast proteome by systematic analysis of protein complexes. Nature 415 (2002), 141–147.
10. 10 Selbach, M., Mann, M., Protein interaction screening by quantitative immunoprecipitation combined with knockdown (QUICK). Nat. Methods 3 (2006), 981–983.
11. 11 Sowa, M.E., et al. Defining the human deubiquitinating enzyme interaction landscape. Cell 138 (2009), 389–403.
12. 12 Cristea, I.M., et al. Fluorescent proteins as proteomic probes. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 4 (2005), 1933–1941.
13. 13 Hubner, N.C., et al. Quantitative proteomics combined with BAC TransgeneOmics reveals in vivo protein interactions. J. Cell Biol. 189 (2010), 739–754.
14. 14 Stadler, C., et al. Immunofluorescence and fluorescent-protein tagging show high correlation for protein localization in mammalian cells. Nat. Methods 10 (2013), 315–323.
15. 15 Hoffmann, C., et al. A FlAsH-based FRET approach to determine G protein-coupled receptor activation in living cells. Nat. Methods 2 (2005), 171–176.
16. 16 Muyldermans, S., Nanobodies: natural single-domain antibodies. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 82 (2013), 775–797.
17. 17 Rothbauer, U., et al. Targeting and tracing antigens in live cells with fluorescent nanobodies. Nat. Methods 3 (2006), 887–889.
18. 18 Rothbauer, U., et al. A versatile nanotrap for biochemical and functional studies with fluorescent fusion proteins. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 7 (2008), 282–289.
19. 19 Baymaz, H.I., et al. Identifying nuclear protein–protein interactions using GFP affinity purification and SILAC-based quantitative mass spectrometry. Methods Mol. Biol. 1188 (2014), 207–226.
20. 20 Fridy, P.C., et al. A robust pipeline for rapid production of versatile nanobody repertoires. Nat. Methods 11 (2014), 1253–1260.
21. 21 Shi, Y., et al. A strategy for dissecting the architectures of native macromolecular assemblies. Nat. Methods 12 (2015), 1135–1138.
22. 22 de Boer, E., et al. Efficient biotinylation and single-step purification of tagged transcription factors in mammalian cells and transgenic mice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100 (2003), 7480–7485.
23. 23 Wang, J., et al. A protein interaction network for pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. Nature 444 (2006), 364–368.
24. 24 Sharif, J., et al. The SRA protein Np95 mediates epigenetic inheritance by recruiting Dnmt1 to methylated DNA. Nature 450 (2007), 908–912.
25. 25 Kim, J., et al. An extended transcriptional network for pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. Cell 132 (2008), 1049–1061.
26. 26 Mito, Y., et al. Genome-scale profiling of histone H3.3 replacement patterns. Nat. Genet. 37 (2005), 1090–1097.
27. 27 Roux, K.J., et al. A promiscuous biotin ligase fusion protein identifies proximal and interacting proteins in mammalian cells. J. Cell Biol. 196 (2012), 801–810.
28. 28 Martell, J.D., et al. Engineered ascorbate peroxidase as a genetically encoded reporter for electron microscopy. Nat. Biotechnol., 30, 2012, 1143.
29. 29 Rhee, H.W., et al. Proteomic mapping of mitochondria in living cells via spatially restricted enzymatic tagging. Science 339 (2013), 1328–1331.
30. 30 Mellacheruvu, D., et al. The CRAPome: a contaminant repository for affinity purification-mass spectrometry data. Nat. Methods 10 (2013), 730–736.
31. 31 Duchaine, T.F., et al. Functional proteomics reveals the biochemical niche of C. elegans DCR-1 in multiple small-RNA-mediated pathways. Cell 124 (2006), 343–354.
32. 32 Veraksa, A., et al. Analyzing protein complexes in Drosophila with tandem affinity purification-mass spectrometry. Dev. Dyn. 232 (2005), 827–834.
33. 33 Rees, J.S., et al. In vivo analysis of proteomes and interactomes using parallel affinity capture (iPAC) coupled to mass spectrometry. Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 10, 2011 M110.002386.
34. 34 Angrand, P.O., et al. Transgenic mouse proteomics identifies new 14-3-3-associated proteins involved in cytoskeletal rearrangements and cell signaling. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 5 (2006), 2211–2227.
35. 35 Havugimana, P.C., et al. A census of human soluble protein complexes. Cell 150 (2012), 1068–1081.
36. 36 Kristensen, A.R., et al. A high-throughput approach for measuring temporal changes in the interactome. Nat. Methods 9 (2012), 907–909.
37. 37 Wan, C., et al. Panorama of ancient metazoan macromolecular complexes. Nature 525 (2015), 339–344.
38. 38 Ohta, S., et al. The protein composition of mitotic chromosomes determined using multiclassifier combinatorial proteomics. Cell 142 (2010), 810–821.
39. 39 Kustatscher, G., et al. Proteomics of a fuzzy organelle: interphase chromatin. EMBO J. 33 (2014), 648–664.
40. 40 Christoforou, A., et al. A draft map of the mouse pluripotent stem cell spatial proteome. Nat. Commun., 7, 2016, 9992.
41. 41 Savitski, M.M., et al. Tracking cancer drugs in living cells by thermal profiling of the proteome. Science, 346, 2014, 1255784.
42. 42 Reinhard, F.B., et al. Thermal proteome profiling monitors ligand interactions with cellular membrane proteins. Nat. Methods 12 (2015), 1129–1131.
43. 43 Huber, K.V.M., et al. Proteome-wide drug and metabolite interaction mapping by thermal-stability profiling. Nat. Methods 12 (2015), 1055–1057.
44. 44 Franken, H., et al. Thermal proteome profiling for unbiased identification of direct and indirect drug targets using multiplexed quantitative mass spectrometry. Nat. Protoc. 10 (2015), 1567–1593.
45. 45 Sardiu, M.E., et al. Probabilistic assembly of human protein interaction networks from label-free quantitative proteomics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105 (2008), 1454–1459.
46. 46 Sardiu, M.E., et al. Evaluation of clustering algorithms for protein complex and protein interaction network assembly. J. Proteome Res. 8 (2009), 2944–2952.
47. 47 Mazloom, A.R., et al. Recovering protein–protein and domain–domain interactions from aggregation of IP-MS proteomics of coregulator complexes. PLoS Comput. Biol., 7, 2011, e1002319.
48. 48 Choi, H., et al. SAINT: probabilistic scoring of affinity purification-mass spectrometry data. Nat. Methods 8 (2011), 70–73.
49. 49 Wepf, A., et al. Quantitative interaction proteomics using mass spectrometry. Nat. Methods 6 (2009), 203–205.
50. 50 Smits, A.H., et al. Stoichiometry of chromatin-associated protein complexes revealed by label-free quantitative mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Nucleic Acids Res., 41, 2013, e28.
51. 51 Schwanhausser, B., et al. Global quantification of mammalian gene expression control. Nature 473 (2011), 337–342.
52. 52 van Nuland, R., et al. Quantitative dissection and stoichiometry determination of the human SET1/MLL histone methyltransferase complexes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 33 (2013), 2067–2077.
53. 53 Ho, L., et al. An embryonic stem cell chromatin remodeling complex, esBAF, is essential for embryonic stem cell self-renewal and pluripotency. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106 (2009), 5181–5186.
54. 54 Ronan, J.L., et al. From neural development to cognition: unexpected roles for chromatin. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14 (2013), 347–359.
55. 55 Lambert, J.P., et al. Mapping differential interactomes by affinity purification coupled with data-independent mass spectrometry acquisition. Nat. Methods 10 (2013), 1239–1245.
56. 56 Hosp, F., et al. Quantitative interaction proteomics of neurodegenerative disease proteins. Cell Rep. 11 (2015), 1134–1146.
57. 57 Escamilla-Del-Arenal, M., et al. Cdyl, a new partner of the inactive X chromosome and potential reader of H3K27me3 and H3K9me2. Mol. Cell. Biol. 33 (2013), 5005–5020.
58. 58 Bennett, E.J., et al. Dynamics of cullin-RING ubiquitin ligase network revealed by systematic quantitative proteomics. Cell 143 (2010), 951–965.
59. 59 Schmidt, C., et al. Determination of protein stoichiometry within protein complexes using absolute quantification and multiple reaction monitoring. Anal. Chem. 82 (2010), 2784–2796.
60. 60 Young, M.M., et al. High throughput protein fold identification by using experimental constraints derived from intramolecular cross-links and mass spectrometry. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 97 (2000), 5802–5806.
61. 61 Leitner, A., et al. Probing native protein structures by chemical cross-linking, mass spectrometry, and bioinformatics. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 9 (2010), 1634–1649.
62. 62 Rappsilber, J., The beginning of a beautiful friendship: cross-linking/mass spectrometry and modelling of proteins and multi-protein complexes. J. Struct. Biol. 173 (2011), 530–540.
63. 63 Herzog, F., et al. Structural probing of a protein phosphatase 2A network by chemical cross-linking and mass spectrometry. Science 337 (2012), 1348–1352.
64. 64 Makowski, M.M., et al. xIP-MS: topological analysis of chromatin-associated protein complexes using single affinity purification. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 15 (2016), 854–865.
65. 65 Liu, F., et al. Proteome-wide profiling of protein assemblies by cross-linking mass spectrometry. Nat. Methods 12 (2015), 1179–1184.
66. 66 Agarwal, D., et al. Unveiling contacts within macro-molecular assemblies by solving minimum weight connectivity inference (MWC) problems. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 14 (2015), 2274–2284.
67. 67 Heck, A.J., Native mass spectrometry: a bridge between interactomics and structural biology. Nat. Methods 5 (2008), 927–933.
68. 68 Mehmood, S., et al. Mass spectrometry of protein complexes: from origins to applications. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 66 (2015), 453–474.
69. 69 Politis, A., et al. A mass spectrometry-based hybrid method for structural modeling of protein complexes. Nat. Methods 11 (2014), 403–406.
70. 70 Alber, F., et al. The molecular architecture of the nuclear pore complex. Nature 450 (2007), 695–701.
71. 71 Alber, F., et al. Determining the architectures of macromolecular assemblies. Nature 450 (2007), 683–694.
72. 72 Nogales, E., Scheres, S.H., Cryo-EM: a unique tool for the visualization of macromolecular complexity. Mol. Cell 58 (2015), 677–689.
73. 73 Cheng, Y., Single-particle cryo-EM at crystallographic resolution. Cell 161 (2015), 450–457.
74. 74 Nguyen, V.Q., et al. Molecular architecture of the ATP-dependent chromatin-remodeling complex SWR1. Cell 154 (2013), 1220–1231.
75. 75 Tosi, A., et al. Structure and subunit topology of the INO80 chromatin remodeler and its nucleosome complex. Cell 154 (2013), 1207–1219.
76. 76 Greber, B.J., et al. Architecture of the large subunit of the mammalian mitochondrial ribosome. Nature 505 (2014), 515–519.
77. 77 Huis in't Veld, P.J., et al. Characterization of a DNA exit gate in the human cohesin ring. Science 346 (2014), 968–972.
78. 78 Tomko, R.J. Jr, et al. A single alpha helix drives extensive remodeling of the proteasome lid and completion of regulatory particle assembly. Cell 163 (2015), 432–444.
79. 79 Eliuk, S., Makarov, A., Evolution of orbitrap mass spectrometry instrumentation. Annu. Rev. Anal. Chem. 8 (2015), 61–80.
80. 80 Kulak, N.A., et al. Minimal, encapsulated proteomic-sample processing applied to copy-number estimation in eukaryotic cells. Nat. Methods 11 (2014), 319–324.
81. 81 Hughes, C.S., et al. Ultrasensitive proteome analysis using paramagnetic bead technology. Mol. Syst. Biol., 10, 2014, 757.
82. 82 Hosp, F., et al. A double-barrel liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) system to quantify 96 interactomes per day. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 14 (2015), 2030–2041.
83. 83 Tan, S.J., et al. A microfluidic device for preparing next generation DNA sequencing libraries and for automating other laboratory protocols that require one or more column chromatography steps. PLoS ONE, 8, 2013, e64084.
84. 84 Gingras, A.C., Raught, B., Beyond hairballs: the use of quantitative mass spectrometry data to understand protein–protein interactions. FEBS Lett. 586 (2012), 2723–2731.
85. 85 Junker, J.P., van Oudenaarden, A., Every cell is special: genome-wide studies add a new dimension to single-cell biology. Cell 157 (2014), 8–11.
86. 86 Altelaar, A.F., Heck, A.J., Trends in ultrasensitive proteomics. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 16 (2012), 206–213.