protein targeting with small molecules || colour plates
TRANSCRIPT
Deletion library construction
Gene overexpression Haploinsufficiency Deletion
Complete deletionSingle deletionMulticopy plasmid
Antibiotic resistance gene
Unique ID sequences
Control
SM DNA
PCR Cy5
DNA
CombineEnriched
Depleted
DNA barcode arraySurvivors
Constant
With SM, strain was...
PCR Cy3
Wildtype
Figure 2.5 Typical SM-induced growth alteration screening procedure.
m/z
Time
Detection
Figure 2.7 FAC-MS: SM affinity is proportional to retention time.
Proteinapplication
e−
Fe(CNFe(Fe(CNCN)63−
Fe(CN)63−
Figure 2.9 Typical EIS device. Auxiliary, working, and reference electrodes are shownin gold, blue, and green, respectively. In a solution (gray transparent cube), a redox com-pound such as Fe(CN)6
3− will “complete the circuit” between the auxiliary and workingelectrodes, but upon application of a protein that would bind to a SM immobilized onthe working electrode, the access of the redox solute may be severely limited, resultingin impedance changes.
(a)
Styrene GMA DVB
Emulgen1150S -60
SeedPolymerizationPolymerization
GMA
MP
Compound X
OO
50
H
MP-DL
(b)
DMF THF Ethyl Acetate
Dioxane Toluene Dichloromethane
Water
(c)
268.9 ± 44.4228.9 ± 45.6225.5 ± 39.5From O to W
153.5 ± 15.4182.0 ± 40.9219.8 ± 31.3From W to O
DichloromethaneTolueneDioxane
222.5 ± 36.3210.4 ± 38.4223.8 ± 21.0From O to W
250.6 ± 31.3220.3 ± 30.5222.4 ± 35.8From W to O
Ethyl acetateTHFDMF(d)
Figure 3.5 (a) Synthetic scheme of FG beads; (b) FE-TEM image of the isolated FGbeads; (c) photo image of FGNE beads dispersed in DMF, THF, ethyl acetate, 1,4-dioxane,toluene, and dichloromethane (these dispersions contain 0.4 mg of FGNE beads); (d)dynamic light-scattering (DLS) analyses of FGNE beads in DMF, THF, ethyl acetate, 1,4-dioxane, toluene, and dichloromethane and water-resuspended beads from each organicsolvent.
Streptavidin-coated well
Biotinylated small moleculeimmobilization on the
streptavidin-coated well
Phage affinity selection usingcloned phage cDNA libraryagainst biotinylated small
molecule
Amplified phage clone sequencing& target identification
Affinity-based bound phageamplification
Repeated Phage Panning
Figure 5.1 Overall phage display biopanning scheme. Identification of a target proteinof a small molecule.
a: DMSO (5%) control
b: HBC 3.125 µM
c: HBC 6.25 µM
d: HBC 12.5 µM
e: HBC 25 µM
f: HBC 50 µM
g: HBC 100 µM
ka (1/Ms): 367kd (1/s): 2.98 x 10−3
KA (1/M): 1.23 x 105
KD (M): 8.11 x 10−6
Res
onan
ce u
nits
1800
1200
600
−600
0
0 50
g
f
e
c
ab
d
100 150
Time (s)
200
(b)
(a)
Figure 5.3 Validation of CaM as a target protein of HBC. (a) Surface plasmon resonanceanalysis of interaction between HBC and Ca2+/CaM. Purified Ca2+/CaM was immobilizedon a CM5 sensor chip and various concentrations of HBC were loaded into the sensorcell. Binding sensor grams were obtained from the BIAcore evaluation software. Kineticparameters of ka, kd ,KA, and KD are shown. (b) Docking model of HBC in a complexwith the C-terminal Ca2+/CaM domain. The docking mode of HBC (gray carbon) andW7 (orange carbon) obtained from FlexX. The Connolly molecular surface of the activesite is shown in purple with amino acid residues occupying the active site. Hydrogenatoms are not shown for clarity. The yellow dotted line indicates the hydrogen-bondinginteraction (d = 1.244 A). (From ref. 15.)
I: Competitive
(a) (b) (c)
−(KM)−1 (Vmax)−1
(v0)
−1
[S0]−1
I: UnCompetitive
Noncompetitive
Uninhibited
(v0)
−1
[S0]−1
I : KI = KI ’
I : KI > KI ’
I : KI < KI ’
(v0)
−1[S0]−1
Apparent KM Apparent Vmax Apparent KM Apparent Vmax
VmaxaKM Vmax /aKM
Apparent KM Apparent Vmax
Vmax /b
Vmax /b
KM /b
aKM /b
Vmax /baKM /bE E
S S
KI
I
I
I
S
SKI’
KI I KI’
E
−−
−
Figure 7.3 Inhibitor types, corresponding apparent kinetic constants, and reaction mech-anisms. Here α is defined as (1 + [I]/KI), while β is short for (1 + [I]/K ′
I). Note that therate equation for a given inhibitor type can be obtained simply by substituting the kineticconstants in equation (2) with the apparent constants.
Figure 7.6 Fragment-based design: When two optimized and independent ligands(square and triangle) are joined, the binding of the resulting compound to its target protein(red) is superior to that of separate fragments.
Figure 7.7 U Dock 1.1, in a search for an ideal ligand conformation. Note that this posewill probably be rejected since it clashes with the surface of the active site and protrudesinto the protein.
Sensitive or Synthetic-lethal
Resistant
Gene mutation array
Querycompound
Mut
ant1
Mut
ant2
Mut
ant3
Mut
ant4
Mut
ant5
Mut
ant6
Mut
ant7
Mut
ant8
Mut
ant9
Mut
ant1
0
Gen
e ar
ray
Gene A
Gene B
Gene C
Gene Z
Target proteinidentification
Mut
ant1
Mut
ant2
Mut
ant3
Mut
ant4
Mut
ant5
Mut
ant6
Mut
ant7
Mut
ant8
Mut
ant9
Mut
ant1
0
Gene mutation array
Com
poun
d ar
ray
Target pathwayidentification
Compound A
Compound B
Compound C
Compound Z
Mut
ant1
Mut
ant2
Mut
ant3
Mut
ant4
Mut
ant5
Mut
ant6
Mut
ant7
Mut
ant8
Mut
ant9
Mut
ant1
0
Gene mutation array
Compare(i) (ii)
Figure 11.2 From phenotype observation to target pathway and target protein identi-fication. Profiling of chemical genetic interactions is of help for identification of targetpathway and target protein. Once phenotypes of gene mutants for a query compound aredefined, modes of action of the compound can be expected from statistical analysis usingphenotype compendia or functional analysis using public databases. For example, themutants 6, 8, and 10 are sensitive (shown in red) to the query compound and the mutants3 and 7 are resistant (shown in green) to the query compound. (i) Comparison with thecompendia of chemical genetic interaction profiles reveals that the query compound has asimilar target pathway or modes of action with those of the compound A. (ii) Comparisonwith the synthetic lethal profiles shows that the gene A product is predicted to be a targetprotein of the query compound. This strategy is particularly useful for reverse genomicsapproaches using yeast.