$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
These three protocols work in tandem to (1) prepare cells for solid-state breakage by cryomilling, (2) achieve breakage in a planetary ball mill, and (3) produce extracts from cell powder to affinity capture a protein of interest in complex with its physiological interactors. Many different cell lysis techniques exist, including mechanical/physical approaches employing crushing impact, shearing, and/or pressure, as well as chemical/enzymatic approaches, each with different pros and cons49,50. Each investigator is encouraged to explore methods most suitable for their analyses, keeping in mind that any chosen approach for cell breakage and protein extraction is likely to introduce biases51,52 necessitating empirical optimization (discussed below). Mechanical methods may produce high heat and/or shearing forces which can disrupt protein complexes. Cryomilling avoids heating effects by virtue of employing LN2 cooling of samples for the duration of the process. Planetary ball mills are understood to rely upon impact and frictional forces, including shear stress, as components of particle size reduction53,54. At the settings reported we have not observed degeneration of protein complexes. Indeed we have extracted and retrieved apparently intact ~50 MDa nuclear pore complexes11 and enzymatically active retrotransposons exhibiting higher specific activity than preparations employing 'gentle' detergent-based lysis7. Chemical/enzymatic methods of cell lysis suffer from the limitation that the contents of the cell are released into an in vitro milieu that supports the disruption of cell membranes and structural macromolecules but may not be suitable for maintenance of the integrity of the protein complex(es) of interest. Frequently, neither the constituents of the complexes formed with the protein of interest nor the conditions needed to stabilize the target complexes are known in advance. A major benefit of solid-state milling is that breakage and extraction are uncoupled, permitting source material to be prepared free of added liquid, stored (at -80 °C or below), amassed, and conveniently retrieved for on-demand experimentation; e.g., to explore optimized in vitro conditions for affinity capture. Protein interactions are most stable at high concentration55,56, therefore minimizing the volume of extractant can be advantageous for preserving physiological interactions. On the other hand, there are practical considerations — the protein complexes do need to be partitioned out of the cells and into a non-viscous aqueous phase, free of insoluble aggregates, in order to mingle the target complexes with the affinity medium. Moreover, some standardization and control over the in vitro environment (pH, salt concentration, etc.) is needed for systematization and reproducibility. We find that extracts produced in the dilution range of 1:4-1:9 (w:v) satisfy practical and theoretical concerns, yielding quality results. Additionally, the optimal proportion of cell extract to affinity medium needs to be determined. This is done empirically by titration of extracts with varying amounts of affinity medium and can have detectable effects on the signal-to-noise ratio of the experiment, further discussed below. An excellent depletion of the target protein is typically ≥70% of the soluble fraction of the target protein, but >90% is desirable and may be achievable with careful parameterization of extraction conditions. Many such practical considerations are covered in reference1. Paramagnetic beads are manipulated using neodymium magnets in a specialized microcentrifuge tube holder, although homemade alternatives are viable. When placed within the holder, beads collect at the side of the tube under the influence of the magnetic field. Solutions may then be removed without disturbing the beads.
One limitation of the presented cryomilling protocol, developed with the planetary ball mill used here (See Table of Materials), is that a minimum amount of material is required to effectively mill and recover cell powder using this device (>1 g). Such quantities are easily obtained with many microbes, cell lines, and model organisms, and can also often be achieved with tissues excised from laboratory animals. However, certain cell lines may be very difficult to grow in abundance and animal tissues may be scarce. Smaller quantities of material can be comparably milled using other devices utilizing smaller containers, although potentially at the sacrifice of the powder fineness achieved. In addition, the cost of mechanical milling devices may be prohibitively expensive for some laboratories. Cryomilling can be achieved using a number of alternative setups14-19, including, most affordably by hand using a pestle and mortar, although breakage efficiency drops considerably. Affinity capture protocols typically aim for a high efficiency of cell lysis to facilitate maximal protein extraction into solution and hence, maximal potential for capture of the target protein complexes. On the other hand, it has been demonstrated for yeast in vitro splicing extracts that maximal lysis may not equate with maximal in vitro biochemical activity57,58. We have not observed such problems in the systems we have tested thus far, and therefore do not purposefully limit our cell breakage when cryomilling. Nevertheless, this possibility should be borne in mind when optimizing for in vitro enzymatic assays. Although cryomilling is a highly effective method for breaking cells, a limited amount of sonication often benefits the production homogenous whole cell extracts from mammalian tissues because inhomogeneous aggregates can sometimes be observed by visual inspection: typically in extraction conditions using low to moderate salt (100-300 mM) and non-ionic detergent (0.1-1% v/v) concentrations. Because we observed that the presence of these aggregates can reduce the yield and/or quality of the subsequent affinity capture, we routinely implement sonication to disperse them (even when they are not observed with the naked eye). The aggregates are consistent with agglomerated membrane fragments, comparable to those previously reported in extracts from milled yeast cells58. Sonication is also used in some protocols to shear DNA and liberate chromatin fragments into solution, however the degree of sonication applied in this protocol does not appreciably fragment DNA. The limited availability (or the high cost) of an excellent affinity ligand or antibody against the particular protein of interest may be another impediment. A wide array of commercially available affinity reagents may be leveraged when the model organism is amenable to genomic tagging or transfection with ectopic expression vectors, permitting the expression of proteins of interest as affinity-tagged fusions. However, the production of custom antibodies has become increasingly feasible and both polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies can perform excellently in affinity capture applications. These many considerations are also covered in greater detail in reference1.
Examples of how the cell lysis method and choice of affinity medium can affect results are illustrated in Figure 1. Examples of effects exerted by different extractants can be seen in references1,11,24. Because these and other experimental parameters affect the quality of the affinity capture, making it difficult to discriminate FPs, repositories of "bead proteomes" and computational approaches to eliminate non-specific contaminants have been developed to assist in identifying FPs40-43. Nevertheless, such approaches only substitute for optimal sample preparation to a limited degree59. Observing best practices and empirically optimizing the affinity capture experiment will provide the highest quality samples for downstream analyses, further discussed below. An easily implemented practice that can improve sample purity is native elution. Native elution is most frequently used to obtain the affinity isolated protein complex, intact, for further experimentation; but as it frequently enhances sample purity, it may also be used for this reason alone. However, as demonstrated in Figure 1, panel II, the ability of native elution to improve sample purity may depend on an accurate titration of the quantity of affinity medium to the abundance of the target protein in the cell extract — when the medium is in excess, unoccupied paratopes may permit the off-target accumulation of FP proteins observable in the natively eluted fractions. Using the reagents and procedures described here, it has been our experience that the single greatest contributor of FPs to our experiments is the tagged protein itself once removed from the context of the living cell. (Fig. 1.II and Fig. S1). In such cases, parental cell line controls that yield irrelevant proteomes in the absence of the antigen are of no practical value; likewise for tag-only or spike-in controls that are devoid of anything but the target antigen. Therefore, whenever practical we implement I-DIRT7,38, which directly measures the accumulation of post-lysis protein interactions using quantitative MS. As mentioned in Step 3.2.7 of the protocol, procedures for native elution will vary with the details of the affinity system used. Native elution is most commonly achieved by competitive displacement of the tagged protein complex or proteolytic cleavage of the tag, releasing the complex from the affinity medium. Several affinity systems comprised of small epitope tags exist, for which the epitope itself is available as peptide useful for competitive elution of tagged protein complexes60. Likewise, several proteases are available to specifically cleave cognate sites strategically placed in affinity tagged fusion proteins61. Depending on the specifics of the chosen affinity systems, the appropriate elution scheme may be adopted.
Generally, the quality of the results obtained will be significantly impacted by the quality of the sample preparation. It is important to work carefully and precisely through each step of these protocols, and as rapidly as possible while maintaining care and precision. It is advisable to track the partitioning of the protein of interest through each step to understand the efficiency of each manipulation. For example: how abundant is the protein of interest in the cell or tissue in question? Perhaps the protein under study (and its complexes) will be challenging to characterize by mass spectrometry due to low abundance. If the purified complexes are detectable by general protein staining (approximately nanograms range), mass spectrometry is likely to succeed. If the captured protein of interest can only be detected by sensitive enhanced chemiluminescent western blotting (approximately picogram range), mass spectrometry is less likely to be effective. Even if the protein of interest is abundant in the cell, how abundant is it in the cell extract produced? Does the protein partition to the solution or is it in the pellet? If the latter, a new extraction solution can be devised that may improve recovery. Once the cell extract is combined with the affinity medium, how effectively is the protein captured? Does the protein remain bound through subsequent washes? What about other copurifying proteins? By saving an aliquot of each sample at appropriate steps of the protocol these questions can easily be answered, typically by western blotting against the protein of interest or general protein staining, but other assays may also be suitable. Optimizing each step will enhance the yield and purity of captured complexes, although there may be a trade-off to be made in maximizing one attribute or the other.
A typical application of affinity capture for many researchers is to identify candidate in vivo interactors for a small number of proteins of interest; these candidates are commonly subjected to validation by orthogonal approaches in vivo to demonstrate the biological significance of the physical interactors. Affinity capture is also employed by high-throughput studies to generate lists of copurifying proteins observed on a (nearly) proteome-wide basis, facilitating computational inferences concerning putative in vivo complexes. Numerous examples of such studies can be found in the literature. This approach foregoes optimization of the conditions of capture for any given target in favor of exploring many targets; as such, the inferred complexes themselves are rarely retrieved fully intact and highly pure in any given sample. Rather, the partial overlaps in compositions observed between numerous distinct affinity-captured samples are used as a basis of the inferences42. Both approaches contribute valuable data to our understanding of the interactome. Nevertheless, one major benefit of affinity capture is that it does frequently offer the opportunity to obtain the complexes intact and highly purified, provided that efforts are made to optimize the procedure. We believe that the future of the approach lies in increasing the ease and efficiency of optimizing the capture of endogenous protein complexes11, for more accurate assessment of the gamut of physiological interactors and more frequent use in further downstream biochemical, enzymological, and structural studies, e.g., references7,9,23.