Here, we present two protocols for embedding cell-free protein synthesis reactions in macro-scale hydrogel matrices without the need for an external liquid phase.
Synthetic gene networks provide a platform for scientists and engineers to design and build novel systems with functionality encoded at a genetic level. While the dominant paradigm for the deployment of gene networks is within a cellular chassis, synthetic gene networks may also be deployed in cell-free environments. Promising applications of cell-free gene networks include biosensors, as these devices have been demonstrated against biotic (Ebola, Zika, and SARS-CoV-2 viruses) and abiotic (heavy metals, sulfides, pesticides, and other organic contaminants) targets. Cell-free systems are typically deployed in liquid form within a reaction vessel. Being able to embed such reactions in a physical matrix, however, may facilitate their broader application in a wider set of environments. To this end, methods for embedding cell-free protein synthesis (CFPS) reactions in a variety of hydrogel matrices have been developed. One of the key properties of hydrogels conducive to this work is the high-water reconstitution capacity of hydrogel materials. Additionally, hydrogels possess physical and chemical characteristics that are functionally beneficial. Hydrogels can be freeze-dried for storage and rehydrated for use later. Two step-by-step protocols for the inclusion and assay of CFPS reactions in hydrogels are presented. First, a CFPS system can be incorporated into a hydrogel via rehydration with a cell lysate. The system within the hydrogel can then be induced or expressed constitutively for complete protein expression through the hydrogel. Second, cell lysate can be introduced to a hydrogel at the point of polymerization, and the entire system can be freeze-dried and rehydrated at a later point with an aqueous solution containing the inducer for the expression system encoded within the hydrogel. These methods have the potential to allow for cell-free gene networks that confer sensory capabilities to hydrogel materials, with the potential for deployment beyond the laboratory.
Synthetic biology integrates diverse engineering disciplines to design and engineer biologically based parts, devices, and systems that can perform functions that are not found in nature. Most synthetic biology approaches are still bound to living cells. By contrast, cell-free synthetic biology systems facilitate unprecedented levels of control and freedom in design, enabling increased flexibility and a shortened time for engineering biological systems while eliminating many of the constraints of traditional cell-based gene expression methods1,2,3. CFPS is being used in an increasing number of applications across numerous disciplines, including constructing artificial cells, prototyping genetic circuits, developing biosensors, and producing metabolites4,5,6. CFPS has also been particularly useful for producing recombinant proteins that cannot be readily expressed in living cells, such as aggregation-prone proteins, transmembrane proteins, and toxic proteins6,7,8.
CFPS is typically performed in liquid reactions. This, however, may restrict their deployment in some situations, as any liquid cell-free device must be contained within a reaction vessel. The rationale for the development of the methods presented here was to provide robust protocols for embedding cell-free synthetic biology devices into hydrogels, not as a protein production platform per se but, instead, to allow the use of hydrogels as a physical chassis for the deployment of cell-free devices beyond the laboratory. The use of hydrogels as CFPS chassis has several advantages. Hydrogels are polymeric materials that, despite a high water content (sometimes in excess of 98%), possess solid properties9,10,11. They have uses as pastes, lubricants, and adhesives and are present in products as diverse as contact lenses, wound dressings, marine adhesive tapes, soil improvers, and baby diapers9,11,12,13,14. Hydrogels are also under active investigation as drug delivery vehicles9,15,16,17. Hydrogels may also be biocompatible, biodegradable, and possess some stimuli responses of their own9,18,19,20. Therefore, the goal here is to create a synergy between molecular biology-derived functionality and materials science. To this end, efforts have been made to integrate cell-free synthetic biology with a range of materials, including collagen, laponite, polyacrylamide, fibrin, PEG-peptide, and agarose11,21,22, as well as to coat surfaces of glass, paper, and cloth11,23,24 with CFPS devices. The protocols presented here demonstrate two methods for embedding CFPS reactions in macro-scale (i.e., >1 mm) hydrogel matrices, using agarose as the exemplar material. Agarose was chosen due to its high water absorption capacity, controlled self-gelling properties, and tuneable mechanical properties11,24,25,26. Agarose also supports functional CFPS, is cheaper than many other hydrogel alternatives, and is biodegradable, making it an attractive choice as an experimental model system. These methods have, however, been previously demonstrated as appropriate for embedding CFPS in a range of alternative hydrogels11. Considering the wide range of applications of hydrogels and the functionality of CFPS, the methods demonstrated here can provide a basis from which researchers are able to develop biologically enhanced hydrogel materials suited to their own ends.
In previous studies, microgel systems with a size range of 1 µm to 400 µm have been used to perform CFPS in hydrogels submerged in reaction buffer23,27,28,29,30,31. The requirement to submerge hydrogels within CFPS reaction buffers, however, limits opportunities for their deployment as materials in their own right. The protocols presented here allow CFPS reactions to occur within hydrogels without the need to submerge the gels in reaction buffers. Second, the use of macroscale gels (between 2 mm and 10 mm in size) allows the study of the physical interaction between hydrogels and cell-free gene expression. For example, with this technique, it is possible to study how the hydrogel matrix affects CFPS reactions11 and how CFPS reactions can impact the hydrogel matrix31. Larger sizes of hydrogels also allow for the development of novel, bio-programmable materials32. Finally, by embedding CFPS reactions into hydrogels, there is also a potential reduction in the requirement for plastic reaction vessels. For the deployment of cell-free sensors, this has clear advantages over devices dependent on plasticware. Taken together, embedding CFPS reactions in hydrogels provides several advantages for the deployment of cell-free devices beyond the laboratory.
The overall goal of the methods presented here is to allow the operation of CFPS reactions within hydrogel matrices. Two different methods are demonstrated for embedding cell-free protein production reactions in macro-scale hydrogel materials (Figure 1). In Method A, CFPS components are introduced to lyophilized agarose hydrogels to form an active system. In Method B, molten agarose is mixed with CFPS reaction components to form a complete CFPS hydrogel system, which is then lyophilized and stored until needed. These systems can be rehydrated with a volume of water or buffer and analyte to commence the reaction.
This study uses Escherichia coli cell lysate-based systems. These are some of the most popular experimental CFPS systems, as E. coli cell lysate preparation is simple, inexpensive, and achieves high protein yields. The cell lysate is complemented with the macromolecular components needed to perform transcription and translation, including ribosomes, tRNAs, aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases, and initiation, elongation, and termination factors. Specifically, this paper demonstrates the production of eGFP and mCherry in agarose hydrogels using E. coli cell lysates and monitors the appearance of fluorescence using a plate reader and confocal microscopy. Representative results for the microtiter plate reader can be seen in Whitfield et al.31, and the underlying data are publicly available33. Further, the expression of fluorescent proteins throughout the gels is confirmed using confocal microscopy. The two protocols demonstrated in this paper allow for the assembly and storage of CFPS-based genetic devices in materia with the ultimate goal of creating a suitable physical environment for the distribution of cell-free gene circuitry in a manner supportive of field deployment.
1. Cell lysate buffer and media preparation
2. Cell lysate preparation (4 day protocol)
3. Preparation of lyophilized hydrogels (Method A)
4. Preparation of the 14x energy solution stock
5. Preparation of the 4x amino acid stock
6. Cell-free buffer calibration
NOTE: The CFPS buffer used for the hydrogel reactions was calibrated for optimal DTT, Mg-glutamate, and K-glutamate concentrations following the protocol in Banks et al.34 modified from Sun et al.35. The calibration reaction compositions were selected using the design of experiments (DOE) method, with seven factor levels being selected for K-glutamate (200 mM, 400 mM, 600 mM, 1,000 mM, 1,200 mM, 1,400 mM), Mg-glutamate (0 mM, 10 mM, 20 mM, 30 mM, 40 mM, 50 mM, 60 mM), and DTT (0 mM, 5, 10 mM, 15 mM, 20 mM, 25 mM, 30 mM) stocks. JMP Pro 15 was used to generate a custom DOE design (Table 2) and conduct the analysis to determine the optimal factor concentrations.
7. CFPS in rehydrated lyophilized hydrogels (Method A)
NOTE: The plasmids used in the CFPS reactions were created using components from the EcoFlex modular toolkit for E. coli36 and described in Whitfield et al.11 The mCherry and eGFP were under the control of the constitutive JM23100 promoter. These components are available from Addgene.
8. Cell-free protein synthesis in deployable hydrogels (Method B)
This protocol details two methods for embedding CFPS reactions into hydrogel matrices, with Figure 1 presenting a schematic overview of the two approaches. Both methods are amenable to freeze-drying and long-term storage. Method A is the most utilized methodology for two reasons. First, it has been shown to be the most applicable method for working with a range of hydrogel materials11. Second, Method A allows for the parallel testing of genetic constructs. Method B is more appropriate for the fabrication of an optimized system and field deployment. Both protocols allow many samples to be prepared in one go to aid in experimental reproducibility. This feature is also useful for the long-term development of the technology, as freeze-dried devices may be shipped in a dry state and reconstituted on site when needed.
The approach outlined in the protocol and Figure 1 can be used for the expression of single gene constructs or for the co-expression of multiple genes. The data presented in Figure 2 show the expression of both eGFP and mCherry in a 0.75% agarose gel. Confocal microscopy was used to confirm that protein expression was homogenous throughout the hydrogel, including within the internal planes. Specifically, protein synthesis was not confined to the outer edges of the hydrogel, and internal fluorescence was not the result of protein diffusion. To confirm this, by placing an eGFP-expressing hydrogel in physical contact with an mCherry-expressing hydrogel, it was possible to see protein diffusion from one hydrogel to another. The rate of diffusion between the two was insufficient to explain the extensive localization of either red or green fluorescence inside the material. This experiment also illustrates a key advantage of deploying cell-free devices in hydrogels-the device functionality can be spatially organized in a manner that is not possible in liquid cell-free reactions. In addition, for the creation of gene networks, the simultaneous synthesis of more than a single gene product is needed. The results shown in Figure 2 (bottom row) confirmed the co-expression of both mCherry and eGFP in agarose. In this work, both proteins were expressed, and there was no spatial competition between the proteins. Again, an overlay of the red and green wavelength range demonstrates the even spatial distribution of both proteins within the hydrogel.
Table 1: The 14x energy solution stocks. Please click here to download this Table.
Table 2: Design of an experimental array for the optimization of DTT, Mg-glutamate, and K-glutamate within the cell-free protein synthesis reactions. Please click here to download this Table.
Table 3: The 2x CFPS buffer components. Please click here to download this Table.
Figure 1: Schematic of the two protocols. In the first method (Method A, demonstrated in this paper) hydrogel materials are prepared first and then freeze-dried (step 1) without cell-free components. These dried hydrogels can be stored and reconstituted when required (step 2) with the correct volume of cell-free reaction prior to incubation for protein production (step 3) The variant method, Method B, incorporates all, or some, of the cell-free reaction components in the initial hydrogel fabrication. Following freeze-drying (step 1), the hydrogels may then be reconstituted in water alone or in buffer containing an analyte of interest (step 2). Protein production (step 3) continues as before. A third method, in which freeze-dried cell-free components are reconstituted with hydrogel polymers, is described in Whitfield et al.11 but has found use with only a limited number of hydrogels to date. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2: Cell-free protein synthesis of eGFP and mCherry in a hydrogel using E. coli cell lysates. Agarose gels (0.75%) were prepared without DNA template (top) with 4 µg of either eGFP or mCherry template (middle) or with 4 µg of both eGFP and mCherry template (bottom). The hydrogels were incubated for 4 h before confocal microscopy in the red and green channels. An overlay of the two channels is also shown, and the overlay includes the differential interference contrast (DIC) image. Hydrogels containing either eGFP or mCherry template were prepared separately but incubated in physical contact with each other. The gel diameter is 6 mm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Outlined here are two protocols for the incorporation of E. coli cell lysate-based CFPS reactions into agarose hydrogels. These methods allow for simultaneous gene expression throughout the material. The protocol can be adapted for other CFPS systems and has been successfully conducted with commercially available CFPS kits in addition to the laboratory-prepared cell lysates detailed here. Importantly, the protocol allows for gene expression in the absence of an external liquid phase. This means that the system is self-contained and does not require a cell-free reaction bath. Distinct from previous methods in which CFPS reactions occurred within hydrogels, the requirement for external buffers and reaction vessels is removed with this method. It is anticipated that these methods will allow researchers to explore the use of hydrogel materials as chassis for cell-free synthetic biology devices, ultimately providing a route for moving such devices out of the laboratory.
Critical to the success of both approaches is the use of high-quality cell lysates. A high-quality cell lysate should have a high protein concentration (>40 mg/mL), should be kept cold for the duration of preparation, and should not have undergone repeated freeze-thaw cycles. In addition, it is critical that the DNA templates are of high purity. To achieve this, plasmids should be extracted from cells using a high-purity, high-yield plasmid preparation kit for transcriptional reactions to proceed within the CFPS environment. These critical stages are common to all CFPS applications and are not unique to this method. Nonetheless, it is the preparation of CFPS components that has the biggest impact on the effectiveness of the protocols. In terms of the materials, effective, rapid freeze-drying of the hydrogels needs to be achieved. If the freeze-drier does not reach a sufficiently cold temperature (below −45 °C), the gel will be dried rather than freeze-dried, which can compromise the internal structure of the hydrogel matrix and may cause the degradation of the embedded CFPS systems. Method B also has a unique concern; specifically, when adding the CFPS mix to the molten agarose to form the gel, the molten agarose must be left to cool sufficiently before the CFPS mixture is added to prevent thermal degradation to the CFPS reactions. However, allowing the agarose to cool too much will result in the polymerization of the gel and prevent the addition of the CFPS system. Finally, hydrogels possess a degree of autofluorescence, which can conflict with the fluorescence signals generated during the CFPS reactions. It is important, therefore, to include appropriate negative controls and genetic reporters that do not have the same fluorescence characteristics as the material.
The protocols demonstrated here center on the use of agarose as a model hydrogel. Agarose is an excellent model system for this work as it is widely available, inexpensive, and demonstrates excellent protein production capabilities. Previous investigations have also demonstrated that agarose can be a substitute for the crowding agent PEG in CFPS reactions, indicating that the interactions between the polymer chassis and the CFPS reactions may enhance the protein production11. These methods, however, are also amenable to modifications using a wide range of alternative hydrogel matrices with varying physical and chemical properties. The method has been applied to xanthan gum, alginate, acyl gellan gum, polyacrylamide, hyaluronic acid hydrogels, and the poloxamer gels F-108 and F-1279. In some scenarios, reduced protein production is observed compared to liquid controls or other hydrogels. Nonetheless, in these scenarios, a trade-off may be met, where the functionality of the material itself (e.g., its adhesive properties or biocompatibility) is of significant benefit such that a reduction in the protein production may be accepted. Modifications to the concentrations of the hydrogels can also be made. For agarose, the methods are amenable to polymer concentrations in the range of 0.5%-1.5% w/v, for example. A higher gel concentration typically results, in a material sense, in a more robust device that is more resilient to handling and better preserves the CFPS reaction within. The trade-off with increased gel concentration, however, is that the reaction may have a reduced production rate or protein yield11,37. The relationship between the polymer concentration and protein production, however, is not linear and varies depending on the hydrogel used11. As such, for any new hydrogel polymer, a degree of experimentation is required to balance material functionality against cell-free functionality.
Embedding CFPS reactions in hydrogel materials without the need for external buffers represents an interesting route for the deployment of cell-free devices. Cell-free devices carry the benefit of removing the need for the release of genetically engineered organisms outside a controlled laboratory environment. In addition, embedding reactions in hydrogels removes the need for reaction vessels (typically plasticware) following reconstitution. Given that many hydrogels are biodegradable, this offers a potential route for reducing plastic waste. Likewise, the protocol detailed here also demonstrates that both hydrogel and CFPS are amenable to freeze-drying. While repeated cycles of lyophilization are not recommended and will likely damage the CFPS and hydrogel function, for single-use devices. The ability to freeze-dry and reconstitute the components reduces the device weight and removes the requirement for a cold chain during transportation. These properties ultimately simplify the logistics and reduce the transportation costs for the devices. Further, hydrogels have many useful functional properties of their own; for example, they can act as pastes, lubricants, and adhesives. Hydrogels may also be biocompatible, biodegradable, and possess stimuli-responses in their own right. Taken together, a synergy can be achieved between biological functionality and materials science to create a new class of bioprogrammable materials.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
The authors greatly acknowledge the support of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council awards BB/V017551/1 (S.K., T.P.H.) and BB/W01095X/1 (A.L., T.P.H.), and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council – Defence Science and Technology Laboratories award EP/N026683/1 (C.J.W., A.M.B., T.P.H.). Data supporting this publication are openly available at: 10.25405/data.ncl.22232452. For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising.
Material | |||
3-PGA | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | sc-214793B | |
Acetic Acid | Sigma-Aldrich | A6283 | |
Agar | Thermo Fisher Scientific | A10752.22 | |
Agarose | Severn Biotech | 30-15-50 | |
Amino Acid Sampler Kit | VWR | BTRABR1401801 | |
ATP | Sigma-Aldrich | A8937-1G | |
cAMP | Sigma-Aldrich | A9501-1G | |
Coenzyme A (CoA) | Sigma-Aldrich | C4282-100MG | |
CTP | Alfa Aesar | J14121.MC | |
DTT | Thermo Fisher Scientific | R0862 | |
Folinic Acid | Sigma-Aldrich | F7878-100MG | |
GTP | Carbosynth | NG01208 | |
HEPES | Sigma-Aldrich | H4034-25G | |
K-glutamate | Sigma-Aldrich | G1149-100G | |
Lysozyme | Sigma-Aldrich | L6876-1G | |
Mg-glutamate | Sigma-Aldrich | 49605-250G | |
NAD | Sigma-Aldrich | N6522-250MG | |
PEG-8000 | Promega | V3011 | |
Potassium Hydroxide (KOH) | Sigma-Aldrich | 757551-5G | |
Potassium Phosphate Dibasic (K2HPO4) | Sigma-Aldrich | P3786-500G | |
Potassium Phosphate Monobasic (KH2PO4) | Sigma-Aldrich | RDD037-500G | |
Protease Inhibitor cocktail | Sigma-Aldrich | P2714-1BTL | |
Qubit Protein concentration kit | Thermo Fisher Scientific | A50668 | |
Rossetta 2 DE 3 E.coli | Sigma-Aldrich | 71397-3 | |
Sodium Chloride (NaCl) | Sigma-Aldrich | S9888-500G | |
Spermidine | Sigma-Aldrich | 85558-1G | |
Tryptone | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 211705 | |
Tris | Sigma-Aldrich | GE17-1321-01 | |
tRNA | Sigma-Aldrich | 10109541001 | |
UTP | Alfa Aesar | J23160.MC | |
Yeast Extract | Sigma-Aldrich | Y1625-1KG | |
Equipment | |||
1.5 mL microcentrifuge tubes | Sigma-Aldrich | HS4323-500EA | |
10K MWCO dialysis cassettes | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 66381 | |
15 mL centrifuge tube | Sarstedt | 62.554.502 | |
50 mL centrifuge bottles | Sarstedt | 62.547.254 | |
500 mL centrifuge bottles | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 3120-9500 | |
Alpha 1-2 LD Plus freeze-dryer | Christ | part no. 101521, 101522, 101527 | |
Benchtop Centrifuge | Thermo Fisher Scientific | H-X3R | |
Black 384 well microtitre plates | Fischer Scientific | 66 | |
Cuvettes | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 222S | |
Elga Purelab Chorus | Elga | ##### | |
Eppendorf Microcentrifuge 5425R | Eppendorf | EP00532 | |
High Speed Centrifuge | Beckman Coulter | B34183 | |
JMP license | SAS Institute | 15 | |
Magnetic Stirrer | Fischer Scientific | 15353518 | |
Parafilm | Amcor | PM-966 | |
Photospectrometer (Biophotometer) | Eppendorf | 16713 | |
Pipettes and tips | Gilson | ##### | |
Precision Balance | Sartorius | 16384738 | |
Qubit 2.0 Fluorometer | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Q32866 | |
Shaking Incubator | Thermo Fisher Scientific | SHKE8000 | |
Sonic Dismembrator (Sonicator) | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 12893543 | |
Static Incubator | Sanyo | MIR-162 | |
Syringe and needles | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 66490 | |
Thermo max Q8000 (Shaking Incubator) | Thermo Fisher Scientific | SHKE8000 | |
Varioskan Lux platereader | Thermo Fisher Scientific | VLBL00GD1 | |
Vortex Genie 2 | Cole-parmer | OU-04724-05 | |
VWR PHenomenal pH 1100 L, ph/mv/°c meter | VWR | 662-1657 |