$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
A fundamental goal of structural biology studies is to unravel the relationship between the structure and function of biomolecular machines. The first visual impression of biomolecules (e.g., proteins and nucleic acids) occurred in the 1950s through the development X-ray crystallography1,2. X-ray crystallography provides high-resolution, static structural information constrained by the crystal packing. Therefore, the inherent immobility of X-ray structural models shuns the dynamic nature of biomolecules, a factor that impacts most biological functions3,4,5. Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)6,7,8 provided an alternative solution to the problem by resolving structural models in aqueous solutions. A great advantage of NMR is its ability to recover the intrinsic dynamic nature of biomolecules and conformational ensembles, which helps to clarify the intrinsic relationships between structure, dynamics, and function3,4,5. Nevertheless, NMR, limited by sample size and large amounts of sample, requires complex labeling strategies for larger systems. Therefore, there is a pressing need to develop alternative methods in structural biology.
Historically, Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET)9 has not taken an important role in structural biology because of the misconception that FRET provides low-accuracy distance measurements. It is the purpose of this protocol to revisit the ability of FRET to determine distances on the nanometer scale, such that these distances can be used for building structural models of biomolecules. The first experimental verification of the R-6 dependence on the FRET efficiency was done by Stryer in 196710 by measuring polyprolines of various lengths as a "spectroscopic ruler." A similar experiment was accomplished at the single-molecule level in 200511. Polyproline molecules turned out to be non-ideal, and thus, double-stranded DNA molecules were later used12. This opened the window for precise distance measurements and the idea of using FRET to identify structural properties of biomolecules.
FRET is optimal when the interdye distance range is from ~0.6-1.3 R0, where R0 is the Förster distance. For typical fluorophores used in single-molecule FRET experiments, R0 is ~50 Å. Typically, FRET offers many advantages over other methods in its ability to resolve and differentiate the structures and dynamics in heterogeneous systems: (i) Due to the ultimate sensitivity of fluorescence, single-molecule FRET experiments13,14,15,16 can resolve heterogeneous ensembles by directly counting and simultaneously characterizing the structures of its individual members. (ii) Complex reaction pathways can be directly deciphered in single-molecule FRET studies because no synchronization of an ensemble is needed. (iii) FRET can access a wide range of temporal domains that span over 10 decades in time, covering a wide variety of biologically relevant dynamics. (iv) FRET experiments can be performed in any solution conditions, in vitro as well as in vivo. The combination of FRET with fluorescence microscopy allows for the study of molecular structures and interactions directly in living cells15,16,17,18,19, even with high precision20. (v) FRET can be applied to systems of nearly any size (e.g., polyproline oligomers21,22,23,24, Hsp9025, HIV reverse transcriptase26, and ribosomes27). (vi) Finally, a network of distances that contains all the dimensionality of biomolecules could be used to derive structural models of static or dynamic molecules18,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37.
Therefore, single-molecule FRET spectroscopy can be used to derive distances that are precise enough to be used for distance-restrained structural modeling26. This is possible by taking advantage of multiparameter fluorescence detection (MFD)28,38,39,40,41,42, which utilizes eight dimensions of fluorescence information (i.e., excitation spectrum, fluorescence spectrum, anisotropy, fluorescence lifetime, fluorescence quantum yield, macroscopic time, the fluorescence intensities, and the distance between fluorophores) to accurately and precisely provide distance restraints. Additionally, pulsed interleaved excitation (PIE) is combined with MFD (PIE-MFD)42 to monitor direct excitation acceptor fluorescence and to select single-molecule events arising from samples containing a 1:1 donor-to-acceptor stoichiometry. A typical PIE-MFD setup uses two-pulsed interleaved excitation lasers connected to a confocal microscope body, where photon detection is split into four different channels in different spectral windows and polarization characteristics. More details can be found in Figure 1.
It is important to note that FRET must be combined with computational methods to achieve atomistic-like structural models that are consistent with FRET results26,30. It is not the goal of the present protocol to go over the associated methodology to build structural models with FRET-derived distances. However, these approaches have been applied in combination with other techniques (e.g., small-angle X-ray scattering or electron paramagnetic resonance), giving birth to the field of integrative structural biology43,44,45,46. The current goal is to pave the way for FRET as a quantitative tool in structural biology. As an example, this methodology was used to identify three conformational states in the ligand-binding domain (LBD) of the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor. The ultimate aim is to overcome the aforementioned limitations and to bring FRET amongst the integrative methods used for the structural determination of biomolecules by providing measured distances with high precision.