Co-immunoprecipitation and co-localization based approaches have been used as long-standing methods to characterize protein assembles. The detection of transiently formed specific chaperone complexes is a major challenge with such conventional methods, and as a result, previous findings are largely restricted to qualitative interpretations. The cell lysis-based co-immunoprecipitation techniques often require cross-linking to stabilize protein-protein interactions. Cell lysis increases the risk of disrupting transiently formed chaperone complexes, while cross-linking could introduce non-native interactions, particularly driven by the inherent “stickiness” of most chaperones. When analyzing the Hsp70 chaperone system using co-immunoprecipitation, potential artifacts could arise from (a) high expression levels of the chaperone and (b) solubility issues pertaining to membrane or protein aggregate bound chaperone machineries. Besides, co-immunoprecipitation-based techniques provide no information on cellular localization of the captured protein assemblies, which could be important for delineating the associated functions. The drawbacks of using co-immunoprecipitation techniques are somewhat reduced in co-localization-based approaches that preserve protein localization information. However, the co-localization of two or more proteins could indicate either direct protein-protein association or partitioning of proteins into the same microdomain in cells. Therefore, co-localization analysis is, at best, speculative in predicting protein interactions and lacks any proximity value. Due to the bulk and indiscriminate detection of the targeted proteins, the technique is highly limited in studying specific protein assemblies in cells. This is particularly problematic when the targeted protein(s) could, in parallel, form a wide range of distinct protein assemblies as in the case with the Hsp70 chaperone system. Compared to these conventional methodologies, PLA is a more refined in situ technique developed to robustly detect and quantify native protein associations in cells with preserved protein localization information. A protein interaction is revealed by this assay based on the proximity (approximately 10-30 nm) between the targeted proteins. PLA is "tunable" in that the range of the proximity distance could be reduced to obtain a more stringent readout by (a) decreasing the length of the oligonucleotide tags attached to the PLA probes and/or (b) conjugating the tags directly to primary antibodies. Care should be taken when interpreting a positive PLA signal. Ideally, a protein interaction should be confirmed with two or more independent methodologies. The intensity of the fluorescent signal in PLA is not as deterministically related to protein cluster size or separation distance between the interacting proteins as is the case with FRET. However, PLA has a high degree of specificity and sensitivity, and could even be used for analyzing very low abundant proteins such as growth factors or cytokines and their interactions in rare cell types or clinical specimens13.
The Hsp70 chaperone partners with multiple co-chaperones (e.g., JDPs and NEFs) during its cellular lifetime14 to drive distinct biological functions. The sheer number of probable Hsp70-JDP-NEF machine configurations and their dynamic behavior in cells have largely hampered a detailed understanding of the specific roles of these chaperone machines. Biological tools that allow selective tracing of distinct Hsp70 assemblies are, therefore, required to dissect the overall wiring of this chaperone network in cells. The transiently formed JDP-JDP and JDP-Hsp70 chaperone complexes7 were effectively captured in cells with PLA, indicating that this technique is suitable for studying molecular interactions with high dissociation constants (e.g., >3 μM Kd). Though, in the current work, the assay is primarily used as a “yes” or “no” type binary indicator for chaperone interaction, the users can employ this technique to obtain semi-quantitative readouts of the degree of interaction by digitally counting the fluorescence signal intensities15. However, due to the non-linear amplification of the PLA signal, caution should be exercised when interpreting PLA data in a quantitative manner16. Despite the aforementioned advantages, this method has certain limitations. One of the main disadvantages of PLA is that the assay requires cell fixation thus largely limiting its ability to resolve temporal dynamics of protein complexation in live cells. In comparison, in vivo FRET17 or Bioluminescence Resonance Energy Transfer (BRET)18 allows the monitoring of similar protein interactions in a spatio-temporal manner in living cells with relatively smaller proximity values (<10 nm). In contrast to PLA, a FRET signal exhibits a strict linear correlation with protein expression levels16 making FRET the gold standard in quantitative analysis of protein interactions. However, unlike FRET’s dependence on the enigmatic orientation factor κ2, PLA is not influenced by the orientation of the PLA probes, which increases the probability of capturing a protein complex19. In terms of user-friendliness, FRET and BRET require unique expertise thus generally limiting the accessibility of these methodologies to the broader research community. Further, both of these techniques require modification of the interacting proteins by attaching bulky luminescent/fluorescent protein tags that could potentially interfere with protein function and complex formation.
The following steps (1-4) require careful consideration for the successful implementation of PLA in cells. (1) Antibody selection: The commercially available PLA kit is compatible with primary antibodies raised against mouse, rabbit and goat only. PLA requires highly specific primary antibodies that do not bind to off targets. Additionally, it is important to select primary antibodies that are compatible with applications such as immunohistochemistry (IHC), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and/or immunoprecipitation (IP) to ensure that the antibodies could recognize antigenic amino acid sequences exposed on the surface of folded proteins. Prior to use, testing of all primary antibodies for their specificity is highly recommended. This can be performed via western blot analysis of whole cell lysates. In cases where the targeted proteins have homologs with small variations in size and sequence similarity (e.g., Hsp70 and JDP paralogs), the specificity of the antibodies could be tested with gene knockdown/knockout approaches or by probing against purified homologs to rule out any potential cross recognition. If suitable antibodies are not available, the targeted proteins could be tagged with epitopes that have antibodies of acceptable quality (Figure 2F). (2) Fixation and permeabilization of cells: A treatment of 4% paraformaldehyde and 0.1-0.5% Triton-X100 could be used to fix and permeabilize cells, respectively. The use of 4% paraformaldehyde is a better treatment for preserving protein-protein interactions and cellular ultrastructure compared to fixative conditions employing 99% methanol20,21,22. Fixing cells with 99% methanol, however, yields less cytoplasmic background staining, and perhaps is more suitable for specific cases such as detection of cytoskeleton associated protein assemblies21,22. Efficient permeabilization of both the plasma membrane as well as organelle membranes to increase antibody accessibility could be achieved with non-ionic surfactant Triton-X100. Triton-X100 can, however, non-specifically remove proteins from the plasma membrane23,24. Therefore, for the analysis of protein assemblies associated with cellular membranes, alternative detergents such as saponin or digitonin that targets sterols to permeabilize membranes could be applied21,22,25. (3) Disruption of the cell wall: Prior to membrane permeabilization, an additional step involving specific lytic enzymes is needed to increase the penetrability of antibodies in cell types with cell walls (e.g. fungi, plant and bacterial cells). For example, we employed lyticase, which degrades β-glucan to disrupt the cell wall of S. cerevisiae26. Similarly, the E. coli cell wall was disrupted using lysozyme, an enzyme that targets peptidoglycans27,28. The cell wall composition and lytic enzyme sensitivity varies with different growth conditions26 and culture confluence29,30. Therefore, the concentration of the lytic enzymes and digestion times may vary and care has to be taken to prevent over- or underdigestion of cells. After the cell wall digestion, the cells are relatively fragile and require crowding agents such as sorbitol for them to remain intact during the washing steps. (4) DNA amplification: The DNA ligation and the rolling circle PCR reaction steps are sensitive to temperature and humidity fluctuations. To ensure robust DNA amplification and reproducibility of the assay, these reactions are required to be performed at 37 °C in a humidity chamber. Importantly, the proccessed cells should be prevented from drying out while performing the assay to avoid any non-specific antibody binding and DNA amplification events that could lead to an increased in background signal.
All things considered, the implementation of this assay does not require unique expertise and sophisticated instrumentation. The successful monitoring of JDP-JDP and JDP-Hsp70 chaperone complexes illustrate the potential application of this technique to trace transiently formed protein assemblies in all cell types. Our implementation of the technique in yeast and bacteria significantly increases the applicability of PLA to study various biological processes mediated by distinct protein assemblies in a broad range of organisms. Further, our work highlights PLA as a promising new protein interaction tool to study evolutionary changes occurring at a molecular level across species8.