Quantification of Protein Interaction Network Dynamics using Multiplexed Co-Immunoprecipitation.


Journal

Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE
ISSN: 1940-087X
Titre abrégé: J Vis Exp
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101313252

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
21 08 2019
Historique:
entrez: 10 9 2019
pubmed: 10 9 2019
medline: 18 6 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Dynamic protein-protein interactions control cellular behavior, from motility to DNA replication to signal transduction. However, monitoring dynamic interactions among multiple proteins in a protein interaction network is technically difficult. Here, we present a protocol for Quantitative Multiplex Immunoprecipitation (QMI), which allows quantitative assessment of fold changes in protein interactions based on relative fluorescence measurements of Proteins in Shared Complexes detected by Exposed Surface epitopes (PiSCES). In QMI, protein complexes from cell lysates are immunoprecipitated onto microspheres, and then probed with a labeled antibody for a different protein in order to quantify the abundance of PiSCES. Immunoprecipitation antibodies are conjugated to different MagBead spectral regions, which allows a flow cytometer to differentiate multiple parallel immunoprecipitations and simultaneously quantify the amount of probe antibody associated with each. QMI does not require genetic tagging and can be performed using minimal biomaterial compared to other immunoprecipitation methods. QMI can be adapted for any defined group of interacting proteins, and has thus far been used to characterize signaling networks in T cells and neuronal glutamate synapses. Results have led to new hypothesis generation with potential diagnostic and therapeutic applications. This protocol includes instructions to perform QMI, from the initial antibody panel selection through to running assays and analyzing data. The initial assembly of a QMI assay involves screening antibodies to generate a panel, and empirically determining an appropriate lysis buffer. The subsequent reagent preparation includes covalently coupling immunoprecipitation antibodies to MagBeads, and biotinylating probe antibodies so they can be labeled by a streptavidin-conjugated fluorophore. To run the assay, lysate is mixed with MagBeads overnight, and then beads are divided and incubated with different probe antibodies, and then a fluorophore label, and read by flow cytometry. Two statistical tests are performed to identify PiSCES that differ significantly between experimental conditions, and results are visualized using heatmaps or node-edge diagrams.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31498315
doi: 10.3791/60029
pmc: PMC8195492
mid: NIHMS1705703
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antibodies 0
Proteins 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural Video-Audio Media

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Subventions

Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R00 MH102244
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R01 MH113545
Pays : United States

Références

Science. 2018 Aug 31;361(6405):
pubmed: 30166458
J Vis Exp. 2010 Dec 02;(46):
pubmed: 21178959
Mol Pharmacol. 2015 Sep;88(3):572-8
pubmed: 26184590
Mol Autism. 2018 Sep 15;9:48
pubmed: 30237867
Clin Exp Pharmacol. 2012 Dec 21;2(3):S3.001
pubmed: 24535485
Sci STKE. 2007 Jun 05;2007(389):pl2
pubmed: 17551170
J Immunol. 2011 Jul 15;187(2):870-8
pubmed: 21666056
Mol Syst Biol. 2005;1:2005.0023
pubmed: 16729058
Exp Dermatol. 2014 Apr;23(4):272-3
pubmed: 24588717
Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2007 Jul;8(7):519-29
pubmed: 17565364
Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2007 Apr;19(2):112-6
pubmed: 17317137
J Biol Chem. 1998 Jan 9;273(2):669-72
pubmed: 9422713
J Neurochem. 2018 Sep;146(5):540-559
pubmed: 29804286
PLoS Comput Biol. 2010 Jun 24;6(6):e1000807
pubmed: 20589078
Sci Immunol. 2019 Feb 15;4(32):
pubmed: 30770409
Trends Biochem Sci. 2016 Mar;41(3):274-286
pubmed: 26725301
Trends Cell Biol. 2016 Feb;26(2):148-159
pubmed: 26546292
Sci Signal. 2016 Aug 02;9(439):rs7
pubmed: 27485017
Genes Dev. 2000 May 1;14(9):1027-47
pubmed: 10809663
Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2005 Feb;6(2):99-111
pubmed: 15654321

Auteurs

Emily A Brown (EA)

Center for Integrative Brain Research, Seattle Children's Research Institute; Graduate Program in Neuroscience, University of Washington.

Steven C Neier (SC)

Department of Cancer Immunology and Virology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School; Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT.

Claudia Neuhauser (C)

Department of Mathematics, University of Houston.

Adam G Schrum (AG)

Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, School of Medicine, University of Missouri; Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Missouri; Department Bioengineering, College of Engineering, University of Missouri.

Stephen E P Smith (SEP)

Center for Integrative Brain Research, Seattle Children's Research Institute; Graduate Program in Neuroscience, University of Washington; Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington; seps@uw.edu.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH