Cognate J-domain proteins cooperate with the Hsp70 chaperone to assist in a myriad of biological processes ranging from protein folding to degradation. Here, we describe an in situ proximity ligation assay, which allows the monitoring of these transiently formed chaperone machineries in bacterial, yeast and human cells.
J-domain proteins (JDPs) form the largest and the most diverse co-chaperone family in eukaryotic cells. Recent findings show that specific members of the JDP family could form transient heterocomplexes in eukaryotes to fine-tune substrate selection for the 70 kDa heat shock protein (Hsp70) chaperone-based protein disaggregases. The JDP complexes target acute/chronic stress induced aggregated proteins and presumably help assemble the disaggregases by recruiting multiple Hsp70s to the surface of protein aggregates. The extent of the protein quality control (PQC) network formed by these physically interacting JDPs remains largely uncharacterized in vivo. Here, we describe a microscopy-based in situ protein interaction assay named the proximity ligation assay (PLA), which is able to robustly capture these transiently formed chaperone complexes in distinct cellular compartments of eukaryotic cells. Our work expands the employment of PLA from human cells to yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and bacteria (Escherichia coli), thus rendering an important tool to monitor the dynamics of transiently formed protein assemblies in both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells.
A vast amount of genomic information remains uninterpretable due to our incomplete understanding of cellular interactomes. Conventional protein-protein interaction detection methodologies such as protein co-immunoprecipitation with/without chemical cross-linking and protein co-localization, though widely used, pose a range of disadvantages. Some of the main disadvantages include poor quantification of the interactions and the potential introduction of non-native binding events. In comparison, emerging proximity-based techniques provide an alternative and a powerful approach for capturing protein interactions in cells. The proximity ligation assay (PLA)1, now available as a proprietary kit, employs antibodies to specifically target protein complexes based on the proximity of the interacting subunits.
PLA is initiated by the formation of a scaffold consisting of primary and secondary antibodies with small DNA tags (PLA probes) on the surface of the targeted protein complex (Figure 1, steps 1-3). Next, determined by the proximity of the DNA tags, a circular DNA molecule is generated via hybridization with connector oligonucleotides (Figure 1, step 4). The formation of the circular DNA is completed by a DNA ligation step. The newly formed circular piece of DNA serves as a template for the subsequent rolling circle amplification (RCA)-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR) primed by one of the conjugated oligonucleotide tags. This generates a single-stranded concatemeric DNA-molecule attached to the protein complex via the antibody scaffold (Figure 1, step 6). The concatemeric DNA molecule is visualized using fluorescently labeled oligonucleotides that hybridize to multiple unique sequences scattered across the amplified DNA (Figure 1, step 7)2. The generated PLA signal, which appears as a fluorescent dot (Figure 1, step 7), corresponds to the location of the targeted protein complex in the cell. As a result, the assay could detect protein complexes with high spatial accuracy. The technique is not limited to simply capturing protein interactions, but could also be utilized to detect single molecules or protein modifications on proteins with high sensitivity1,2.
Hsp70 forms a highly versatile chaperone system fundamentally important for maintaining cellular protein homeostasis by participating in an array of housekeeping and stress-associated functions. Housekeeping activities of the Hsp70 chaperone system include de novo protein folding, protein translocation across cellular membranes, assembly and disassembly of protein complexes, regulation of protein activity and linking different protein folding/quality control machineries3. The same chaperone system also refolds misfolded/unfolded proteins, prevents protein aggregation, promotes protein disaggregation and cooperates with cellular proteases to degrade terminally misfolded/damaged proteins to facilitate cellular repair after proteotoxic stresses4,5. To achieve this functional diversity, the Hsp70 chaperone relies on partnering co-chaperones of the JDP family and nucleotide exchange factors (NEFs) that fine-tune the Hsp70’s ATP-dependent allosteric control of substrate binding and release3,6. Further, the JDP co-chaperones play a vital role in selecting substrates for this versatile chaperone system. Members of this family are subdivided into three classes (A, B and C) based on their structural homology to the prototype JDP, the E. coli DnaJ. Class A JDPs contain an N-terminal J-domain, which interacts with Hsp70, a glycine-phenylalanine rich region, a substrate binding region consisting of a Zinc finger-like region (ZFLR) and two β-barrel domains, and a C-terminal dimerization domain. JDPs with an N-terminal J-domain and a glycine-phenylalanine rich region, but lacking the ZFLR, fall into class B. In general, members of these two classes are involved in chaperoning functions. Members falling under the catchall class C, which contains JDPs that only share the J-domain4, recruit Hsp70s to perform a variety of non-chaperoning functions. The important role of JDPs as interchangeable substrate recognition “adaptors” of the Hsp70 system is reflected by an expansion of the family members during evolution. For example, humans have over 42 distinct JDP members4. These JDPs function as monomers, homodimers and/or homo/hetero oligomers4,5. Recently, a functional cooperation via transient complex formation between class A (e.g., H. sapiens DNAJA2; S. cerevisiae Ydj1) and class B (e.g., H. sapiens DNAJB1; S. cerevisiae Sis1) eukaryotic JDPs was reported to promote efficient recognition of amorphous protein aggregates in vitro7,8. These mixed class JDP complexes presumably assemble on the surface of aggregated proteins to facilitate the formation of Hsp70- and Hsp70+Hsp100-based protein disaggregases7,8,9,10. The critical evidence to support the existence of these transiently formed mixed class JDP complexes in eukaryotic cells was provided with PLA8.
PLA is increasingly employed for assessing protein interactions in metazoa, primarily in mammalian cells. Here, we report the successful expansion of this technique to monitor transiently formed chaperone complexes in eukaryotic and prokaryotic unicellular organisms such as the budding yeast S. cerevisiae and the bacterium E. coli. Importantly, this expansion highlights the potential use of PLA in detecting and analyzing microbes that infect human and animal cells.
1. HeLa Cell Preparation
2. S. cerevisiae Cell Preparation
3. E. coli Cell Preparation
4. Proximity Ligation Assay
5. Detection
Our previous in vitro studies using purified proteins revealed that a subset of human class A and class B JDPs form transient mixed class JDP complexes to efficiently target a broad range of aggregated proteins and possibly facilitate the assembly of Hsp70-based protein disaggregases7. We employed PLA to determine whether mixed class (A+B) JDP complexes occur in human cervical cancer cells (HeLa). Human JDPs DNAJA2 (class A) and DNAJB1 (class B) were targeted with highly specific primary antibodies and secondary PLA probes (Figure 2A-C). The appearance of red fluorescent punctae indicated the presence of mixed class DNAJA2 and DNAJB1 complexes in HeLa cells (Figure 2C) confirming our previous biochemical findings7. Each punctum represents an individual protein interaction event in the HeLa cell cytosol/nucleus.
Previous biochemical results obtained from Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET), which detects protein interactions as a readout of the amount of energy transferred from an excited donor fluorophore attached to one protein to a suitable acceptor fluorophore attached to the second protein, indicated that similar mixed class complexes could also occur between yeast JDPs, in vitro8. Confirming our biochemical findings, we observed the formation of mixed class complexes between Ydj1 (class A) and Sis1 (class B) in unicellular eukaryote S. cerevisiae (baker’s yeast) cells with PLA (Figure 2F). In yeast, due to their small cell size and the coalescence of multiple punctae, the individual fluorescent dots generated by PLA could often be less distinguishable. A considerable decrease in fluorescent punctae formation was observed after knockout or knockdown of interacting JDPs in both human and yeast cells8, which demonstrates the high specificity of PLA in capturing these co-chaperone complexes in different cell types. In contrast to their eukaryotic counterparts, the prokaryotic (E. coli) JDPs lacked the ability to form mixed class JDP complexes and functionally cooperate to boost protein disaggregation, in vitro8. In agreement with the biochemical analysis, we did not observe mixed class JDP complex formation between bacterial DnaJ-YFP (class A) and CbpA-mCherry (class B), the only JDPs in E. coli (Figure 2I). However, our PLA setup was able to capture other chaperone assemblies involving the two JDPs. For example, we detected chaperone complexes between DnaJ-YFP and DnaK (bacterial Hsp70) (Figure 2L) and CbpA-mCherry and DnaK8 (data not shown). These two bacterial chaperone complexes are extensively characterized both in vitro and in vivo8,11,12 thus confirming our PLA results. Together, these observations demonstrate the ability of PLA to robustly capture transiently formed chaperone machineries in unicellular/multicellular eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells. The technical controls lacking a primary antibody against one of the interacting JDPs/chaperones, but containing both the mouse and rabbit derived secondary PLA probes, showed little to no background fluorescence signal (Figure 2A,B,D,E,G,H,J,K) indicating a lack of false positive signal amplification in our experimental setup.
Figure 1: Schematic representation of the chronological steps of the Proximity Ligation Assay. (1) Complex between protein A and protein B. (2) Binding of primary (1°) antibodies (green and light brown) to proteins A and B. The two primary antibodies must be raised in different host species (e.g. mouse, rabbit or goat). (3) Primary antibodies are recognized by species-specific secondary (2°) antibodies covalently attached with DNA oligo tags (PLA probes). (4) When proteins A and B are in complex, the bound PLA probes are in close proximity to facilitate the DNA oligos to hybridize with connector DNA strands, which results in the formation of a circular DNA molecule. Subsequently, a DNA ligase facilitates the joining of DNA strands together by catalyzing the formation of a phosphodiester bond. (5) Initiation of the Rolling Circle Amplification (RCA) of the circular DNA molecule by a bacterial DNA polymerase at 37° C. RCA reaction is primed by one of the antibody-conjugated DNA oligo tags. (6) Generation of a single-stranded concatemeric DNA molecule attached to one of the secondary antibodies. (7) Hybridization of fluorescently-labeled complementary oligonucleotide probes to a unique repetitive sequence in the concatemeric DNA molecule. After the hybridization step, the concatemeric DNA molecule could be visualized as a bright fluorescent dot at the location of the targeted protein complex in fixed cells. Bottom denote the prokaryotic and eukaryotic cell types in which the PLA technique is applicable. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2. Molecular chaperone assemblies captured by PLA in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells. (A-C) Detection of mixed class JDP complexes formed between DNAJA2 (class A) and DNAJB1 (class B) in human cervical cancer cell line HeLa. PLA performed with (A) anti-DNAJA2 antibody alone (negative technical control); (B) anti-DNAJB1 antibody alone (negative technical control); (C) anti-DNAJB1 and anti-DNAJA2 antibodies together. The appearance of multiple fluorescent dots in panel C (positive signal) indicates the presence of protein complexes formed between DNAJA2 and DNAJB1. Each red fluorescent dot/punctum represents a single interaction. Nuclei (DNA) stained with DAPI (cyan). (D-F) Detection of mixed class JDP complexes formed between Ydj1 (class A) and Sis1 (class B) in S. cerevisiae cells. (D) PLA performed with anti-Ydj1 antibody alone (negative technical control); (E) PLA performed with anti-Sis1 antibody alone (negative technical control); (F) PLA performed with anti-Ydj1 and anti-Sis1 antibodies together. The positive fluorescent signal denotes the presence of Ydj1 and Sis1 complexes in S. cerevisiae. Yeast nuclei stained with DAPI (cyan). (G-L) Detection of chaperone complexes formed between prokaryotic Hsp70 (DnaK) and JDPs (DnaJ and CbpA) in E. coli cells. Due to the lack of specific primary antibodies against prokaryotic JDPs, the E. coli DnaJ (class A) and CbpA (class B) were tagged with YFP and mCherry, respectively. (G, J) PLA performed with anti-YFP alone (negative technical control); (H) PLA performed with anti-mCherry alone (negative technical control). (I) PLA performed with anti-YFP and anti-mCherry antibody. The lack of fluorescent dot formation indicates no complex formation between DnaJ and CbpA. (K) PLA performed with anti-DnaK antibody alone (negative technical control). (L) PLA performed with anti-YFP and anti-DnaK antibodies together. The positive fluorescent signal indicates complex formation between DnaK and DnaJ. Bacterial DNA stained with DAPI (cyan). In addition to containing a single primary antibody, all the negative technical controls were performed in the presence of the respective secondary PLA probes. Scale bars = 10 µm.
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.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
NBN is supported by a special Recruitment Grant from the Monash University Faculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences with funding from the State Government of Victoria and the Australian Government. We thank Bernd Bukau (ZMBH, Heidelberg University, Germany) and Harm H. Kampinga (Department of Biomedical Sciences of Cells & Systems, University of Groningen, The Netherlands) for their invaluable support and sharing of reagents, Holger Lorenz (ZMBH Imaging Facility, Heidelberg University, Germany) for his support with confocal microscopy and image processing, and Claire Hirst (ARMI, Monash University, Australia) for critical reading of the manuscript.
37% Formaldehyde | Merck | 103999 | |
Acetone | Sigma-Aldrich | 32201 | |
anti-DNAJA2 antibody | Abcam | ab157216 | |
anti-DNAJB1 Antibody | Enzo Life Sciences | ADI-SPA-450 | |
anti-DnaK antibody | In house | ||
anti-mCherry antibody | Abcam | ab125096 | |
anti-Sis1 Antibody | Cosmo Bio Corp | COP-080051 | |
anti-Ydj1 antibody | StressMarq Biosciences | SMC-150, | |
anti-YFP antibody | In house | ||
Coplin slide-staining jar | Sigma-Aldrich | S5516 | |
Diagnostic slides | Marienfeld | 1216530 | |
DMEM | Thermo-Fischer | 31966021 | |
DuoLink In Situ Detection Reagents Orange | Sigma-Aldrich | DUO92007 | |
DuoLink In Situ Mounting Medium + DAPI | Sigma-Aldrich | DUO82040 | |
DuoLink In Situ PLA Probe Anti-Mouse MINUS | Sigma-Aldrich | DUO92004 | |
DuoLink In Situ PLA Probe Anti-Rabbit PLUS | Sigma-Aldrich | DUO92002 | |
DuoLink In Situ Wash Buffers, Fluorescence | Sigma-Aldrich | DUO82049 | |
Fetal Calf Serum | Thermo-Fischer | 10082147 | |
Lysozyme | Sigma-Aldrich | 62971 | |
Methanol | Sigma-Aldrich | 32213 | |
Paraformaldehyde | Sigma-Aldrich | P6148 | |
Penicillin/Streptomycin | Thermo-Fischer | 15070063 | |
Poly-L-Lysine | Sigma-Aldrich | P47-07 | |
Sorbitol | Sigma-Aldrich | S7547 | |
Triton-X100 | Merck | 108643 | |
Trypsin | Thermo-Fischer | 25300096 | |
Tween-20 | Sigma-Aldrich | P1379 | |
Zymolase 100T / / Lyticase | United States Biological | Z1004 |