$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
A major barrier for the determination of high-resolution structures of biological molecules by macromolecular crystallography (MX) remains the production of well diffracting crystals at an amenable size. There are many strategies for achieving this goal from recombinant protein gene construct design through to large sparse matrix searches for chemical cocktails that may generate initial crystals2. For the latter, it is often the case that the crystallographer will need to optimize any initial hits to obtain crystals with sufficient diffraction quality and size for structure determination studies3. Despite these options, some target molecules may never generate large (>10 µm), well diffracting crystals and as a result the crystallographer must persevere with their microcrystals and the challenges that such samples present. These include appropriately mounting and cryo-protecting the crystals, managing inherently weaker diffraction and increased radiation sensitivity. Microcrystals are formed from fewer unit cells and molecules than larger crystals and as such, the diffraction is not amplified to the same extent compared to larger crystals, resulting in inherently weaker diffraction intensities. It is important that the background signal does not mask these reflections, particularly at higher resolution where weak reflection intensities can be lost4. In addition, microcrystals are more sensitive to radiation damage and despite recording diffraction at liquid nitrogen temperatures5, it may not be possible to collect complete data from a single crystal, making it necessary to collect data from a very large number of crystals to produce a single complete dataset6.
The increasing availability of X-ray free electron lasers (XFELs) and the evolution of serial crystallography methods (SFX)7 have provided routes to collecting data from smaller microcrystals. However, these are bespoke sample delivery methods, which require a significant amount of hardware and software expertise, where experiments are limited to room-temperature and typically sample consumption is high (hundreds of microliters) and still may require further optimisation8. As such, projects where only a limited quantity of microcrystals can be made are not appropriate for SFX.
Meanwhile, synchrotron beamline technology over recent decades has progressed to produce smaller, more stable beams9 with a brilliance that has permitted data collection from ever smaller crystals10,11. Microfocus beamlines such as FMX at NSLS-II and I24 at Diamond Light Source have been able to determine novel structures from crystals with maximum dimensions of ~3 µm12 and demonstrate the ability to collect usable data from even smaller crystals measuring ~1 µm13. The beamline must be precisely configured, with excellent, high resolution on-axis-viewing optics, a minimal sphere of confusion for sample rotation and a precisely aligned rotation axis that is coincident with the X-ray beam. It is important to closely match the X-ray beam profile to the crystal volume and ensure the crystal is precisely aligned in the X-ray beam - a challenge for crystals <5 µm14. Meeting these experimental conditions at the beamline is essential to recording the best quality data from microcrystals.
The remaining and possibly most important aspect of data collection from microcrystals is the presentation of the crystal to the X-ray beam. Microcrystals have often been mounted on micromesh sample mounts, manufactured from polyimide, a low X-ray scattering material with apertures as small as 10 µm15,16. The polyimide mesh is mounted on a standard pin that is set into a magnetic SPINE base, making it compatible with most MX beamlines17. The mesh mount is used to fish crystals from the crystallization drop often following the same procedure as mounting a 100 µm crystal using a standard loop style mount. While the crystals may be distributed across the mesh, a key disadvantage is that a relatively large volume of liquid can be carried by the mesh and the pin while harvesting (Figure 1C,D). This volume of liquid, that can be many times larger than the crystals themselves, will contribute to background noise when illuminated with X-rays. This background scatter can be even stronger if the liquid forms crystalline ice during flash cooling, diminishing the signal-to-noise ratio of already weak intensities within the resolutions of ice diffraction. Therefore, it is key that excess liquid is removed from the sample, to ensure that all possible signals can be recorded. This challenge is even greater in the case of membrane protein crystals formed within the lipid cubic phase (LCP), where the LCP generates strong background scatter and is also difficult to remove from around the crystals 18.
The new Versatile Macromolecular Crystallography microfocus (VMXm) beamline at Diamond Light Source provides the conditions with which to collect data from crystals potentially measuring less than a micron in size. The beamline has been designed to deliver a beam profile measuring 0.3 µm x 0.5 µm (VxH)1, a goniometer with a sphere of confusion no greater than 60 nm and an in vacuo sample environment. These design features of the VMXm endstation minimize the generation of background X-ray noise by the beamline apparatus during data collection with the largest remaining source of background generated by the sample14.
Specific sample preparation methods designed for the VMXm beamline provide an opportunity to reduce this background and further improve the signal-to-noise of diffraction data, maximizing the quality of the data that can be recorded from microcrystals measuring <10 µm. Many of the requirements outlined here for low-background diffraction from microcrystals are also common to cryogenic transmission electron microscopy (cryoTEM)19 and microcrystal electron diffraction (microED)20. As a result, many of the tools that have already been developed for the preparation of cryoTEM samples are suitable, with some adaptations, for the preparation of microcrystals. In the preparation of samples for single particle cryoTEM, the particles under investigation are embedded in very thin layers (typically <100 nm) of vitreous ice such that electrons are able to transmit through the sample. The thin uniform layer is achieved by blotting away excess liquid and vitrification of the sample is achieved by rapid cooling of the sample (~104 K s-1)21 through plunging into liquid ethane held at ~93 K22. In contrast, liquid nitrogen, as used routinely for MX sample preparation, is a less efficient cryogen than ethane and has a greater propensity for crystalline ice formation within the sample21. The formation of crystalline ice, which can degrade diffraction and generate background noise, is normally mitigated through the use of cryo-protectant compounds23. Low molecular weight polymers such as poly-ethylene glycol (PEG) 400 and methyl-2,4-pentanediol (MPD), sugars, oils or saturated salts can be added to an aliquot of crystallization solution in low concentrations24- there is not a 'one size fits all' solution to selecting the most appropriate cryoprotectant and this often requires optimization25. The crystal also undergoes multiple manipulations during the harvesting and cryo-protecting process which may result in damage to the crystal, the opportunity to utilize liquid ethane allows the omission of this step and helps protect the integrity of the crystal.
While liquid ethane is an effective cryogen for microcrystals (<10 µm) due to the thinness of the sample, there are alternative methods for preventing crystalline ice formation, particularly in larger crystals, including reducing the water content of the crystal by use of a tightly controlled humid environment26, or through the wicking of excess liquid away from both the loop and surface of the crystal27, however, these again require greater manipulation of the sample. The use of automated blotting and plunge freezing with liquid ethane, as in cryoTEM, together remove excess crystallization solution and provide a means to flash cool microcrystals in a controlled manner while attempting to minimize manipulation.
Here, we present a protocol that can be utilized not only by both users of the VMXm beamline and at other microfocus beamlines to collect high signal-to-noise diffraction data but may also be useful to those preparing soluble protein crystal and detergent based membrane protein crystal samples for microED experiments. While all of the facilities to prepare and assess samples are available at VMXm, many structural biology laboratories are increasingly equipped for cryoTEM sample preparation. As a result, we envisage that some users may wish to use their own facilities to prepare their samples for beamtime at VMXm.