$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Solid-phase DNA and RNA synthesis is the bread and butter of every nucleic acid chemistry lab, and although the addition of the photolithography component is admittedly a complex operation, microarray fabrication mediated by UV light is also a very reliable process. It is, in addition, the only available method for in situ RNA synthesis on microarrays. Still, as in any multi-stage experimental procedure, there is ample room for human error.
Perhaps the most critical step is the coupling of a phosphoramidite, as it needs to be a constantly high-yielding chemical reaction in order to afford oligonucleotides with few synthetic errors. In our microarray synthesis protocol, phosphoramidite coupling is even more pivotal to overall synthesis quality since the fabrication process bypasses capping and prevents oligonucleotide purification. Stepwise coupling efficiencies above 99% have been calculated for all photosensitive DNA and RNA phosphoramidites, even for very short coupling times (15 s)24 but lower coupling yields can occasionally occur, particularly in the case of dG amidites. The stability of the solubilized phosphoramidites at room temperature has been investigated before and was shown to depend on the nature of the nucleobase, with guanosine phosphoramidites prone to extensive degradation in only a matter of days29,30. But when stored at -25 °C, dG phosphoramidites dissolved in ACN as 30 mM solution were found to be stable for several weeks. The relative instability of dG phosphoramidite solutions at room temperature does however mean that they should not be kept attached to the DNA synthesizer for several days.
For RNA phosphoramidites, the coupling yield is very dependent on phosphoramidite quality (which can be assessed by 31P NMR spectroscopy) and coupling time. Coupling times of 5 minutes for rA, rG, rC and 2 min for rU appear necessary. Indeed, we found that shortening the condensation time to 2 min for all RNA phosphoramidites led to significantly lower hybridization signals.
The DNA synthesizer itself, as well as the reagents and solvents, certainly needs to be as clean as possible in order to achieve the highest yield of oligonucleotide synthesis. However, insoluble material, salts or particles, can accumulate over time in the lines and tubing of the delivery system, leading to a gradual decrease in consumption of reagents and reactants. Where a general cleaning of the synthesizer does not resolve a low output volume, an increase in the number of pulses can be an alternative solution. Particularly useful in the case of low phosphoramidite consumption, the line in the coupling protocol corresponding to the pumping of a mix of phosphoramidite and activator (third line of the coupling subsection in Table 1 and Table 2) can be modified, from 6 to 9 pulses without any appreciable negative effect on synthesis quality. Furthermore, the number of pulses of activator needed to bring the amidite/activator mix to the synthesis substrate (currently 6, fourth line in the coupling subsection, see Table 1 and Table 2) depends on the DNA synthesizer itself as well as on tubing length in the synthesis cell. This number can be adjusted after replacing the phosphoramidite with a colored solution and counting the number of pulses needed to push the colored mix to the glass substrate for coupling.
The method described herein allows for DNA and RNA synthesis to proceed simultaneously, on the same microarray. Hybrids of DNA and RNA may also be prepared without any change to the array fabrication protocols, and as long as the three-step deprotection protocol is followed. However, it should be noted that RNA-only microarrays only require a two-step deprotection: a decyanoethylation first with Et3N followed by hydroxyl and base deprotection with hydrazine. DNA nucleobases were found to be incompletely deprotected under those conditions, and need the additional step in EDA in order to effect the complete removal of phenoxyacetyl (Pac) groups. This extra treatment with EDA is shorter (5 min) than for the standard deprotection of DNA microarrays31, but it is sufficient to drive it to completion after the triethylamine and hydrazine treatments. In addition, a short reaction time with EDA limits the exposure of a fully-deprotected RNA oligonucleotide to basic conditions.
An advantage of in situ RNA array synthesis over alternative methods like spotting or DNA transcription32,33,34 is the ability to store the synthesized RNA microchip in protected form until use, thus avoiding the risk of potential RNA degradation. Post-synthetic procedures for RNA does, on the other hand, imply that consumables and reagents are kept sterile and that handling is performed under RNase-free conditions. Of note, we found that the addition of RNase inhibitor to the hybridization mix did not yield stronger hybridization signals for the RNA features.
The synthesis of DNA libraries on a base-sensitive monomer is more complex than the synthesis of a few control sequences on a surface, and as such is certainly more prone to design errors. Yet, assuming that the sequence design (i.e., the nature and the number of sequences) is correct, transforming this list into a collection of exposure masks and an ordered series of coupling cycles remains a straightforward process. However, important variations from standard microarray synthesis exist and are critical to a successful fabrication of a high-density library array.
First, a base-sensitive dT monomer is coupled as the first phosphoramidite after synthesis of the linker. The coupling yield of this monomer (Figure 1) was found to be relatively low, around 85%28, which is why efforts are made to improve its incorporation rate, either by increasing its concentration in ACN from 30 mM to 50 mM, or by repeating the coupling step: two consecutive coupling reactions using fresh monomers, or two separate but consecutive coupling cycles.
The second change is the addition of a β-carotene solution in the back chamber of the synthesis cell, which conveniently absorbs 365 nm light. This is an important modification of the photolithography setup as it prevents UV light from reflecting back onto the array substrate. Indeed, after traversing the interstitial medium between the substrates, incoming UV light exits through the drilled slide and reaches the quartz block of the cell. The Fresnel equations predict that ~4% of perpendicularly incident UV light will reflect from each of the three downstream air-glass interfaces (exit side of the 2nd substrate and both sides of the quartz block) and back onto the synthesis substrate, leading to unintended exposure of photoprotected oligonucleotides. Diffraction and scattering also contribute to "off-target" photodeprotection and, therefore, to nucleotide insertion, which directly affects the error rate of synthesis, but these contributions are much smaller than reflections and can mainly be addressed by reducing synthesis density (leaving gaps between features). We have found that the level of β-carotene solution in the lower chamber of the cell tends to slightly decrease only during the first minutes of array synthesis, and therefore needs to be monitored and readjusted.
Finally, the third change is the deprotection solution, replacing EtOH for toluene, which keeps the cleaved DNA library bound to the surface, presumably through electrostatic interactions. Applying a small amount of water to the synthesis area after ACN washing allows for the library to be conveniently collected. The process is however only successful if the water content in EDA and toluene is minimal, rendering the nucleic acid entirely insoluble in the deprotection cocktail. Alternatively, DNA libraries may be cleaved off the chip using ammonia9,10,14,35, then further deprotected by heating the DNA-containing aqueous ammonia solution to 55 °C overnight. The recovery of DNA libraries using ammonia is however not compatible with RNA. RNA oligonucleotides on a base-cleavable substrate can be eluted from the surface using the same EDA/toluene procedure described above, but only at the penultimate stage after the Et3N and hydrazine two-step deprotection strategy28.
Alternative strategies to recover oligonucleotide pools from microarrays without the need for a specific basic treatment exist, are in principle compatible with photolithography and rely on the use of enzymes. For instance, a single deoxyuracil nucleotide can be the target of the uracil-DNA glycosylase (UDG) and excised from the rest of the DNA sequence, or a single RNA unit can be recognized by RNase H type 2 enzymes and the phosphodiester bond 5' to the RNA cleaved, releasing the 5' DNA part23.
We now have a powerful, reliable and high-density method for the synthesis of DNA, RNA, and hybrid DNA/RNA microarrays. These can not only serve as platforms for hybridization or binding assays36, but they also represent a fast and inexpensive way to produce complex nucleic acid libraries. For DNA-based digital data storage, microarray photolithography may become a potential solution to the "writing" bottleneck (i.e., to the encoding of information by synthesis). The success in digital encoding on DNA and in de novo gene assembly depends on sequence fidelity which, at the synthesis level, translates into the error rate. Synthetic and optical errors in our current array fabrication protocols will be discussed and reported on elsewhere. In parallel, efforts are now underway to further increase fabrication scale and throughput.