Maximizing binary interactome mapping with a minimal number of assays.

Biological Assay/methods; Databases, Protein; HEK293 Cells; HeLa Cells; High-Throughput Screening Assays/methods; Humans; Protein Interaction Mapping/methods; Protein Interaction Maps; Proteins/metabolism; Proteome/analysis; Proteomics/methods; Two-Hybrid System Techniques

Abstract :

[en] Complementary assays are required to comprehensively map complex biological entities such as genomes, proteomes and interactome networks. However, how various assays can be optimally combined to approach completeness while maintaining high precision often remains unclear. Here, we propose a framework for binary protein-protein interaction (PPI) mapping based on optimally combining assays and/or assay versions to maximize detection of true positive interactions, while avoiding detection of random protein pairs. We have engineered a novel NanoLuc two-hybrid (N2H) system that integrates 12 different versions, differing by protein expression systems and tagging configurations. The resulting union of N2H versions recovers as many PPIs as 10 distinct assays combined. Thus, to further improve PPI mapping, developing alternative versions of existing assays might be as productive as designing completely new assays. Our findings should be applicable to systematic mapping of other biological landscapes.

Disciplines :

Biochemistry, biophysics & molecular biology

Author, co-author :

Choi, Soon Gang

Olivet, Julien ; Université de Liège - ULiège > GIGA

Cassonnet, Patricia

Vidalain, Pierre-Olivier

Luck, Katja

Lambourne, Luke

Spirohn, Kerstin

Lemmens, Irma

Dos Santos, Mélanie

Demeret, Caroline

More authors (16 more)

Language :

English

Title :

Maximizing binary interactome mapping with a minimal number of assays.

Publication date :

2019

Journal title :

Nature Communications

eISSN :

2041-1723

Publisher :

Nature Publishing Group, United Kingdom

Volume :

Issue :

Pages :

3907

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Available on ORBi :

since 27 December 2021

Statistics

Number of views

71 (4 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

22 (5 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

Bibliography

A reference standard for genome biology. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 1121 (2018).
Harper, J. W. & Bennett, E. J. Proteome complexity and the forces that drive proteome imbalance. Nature 537, 328–338 (2016).
Riley, N. M. et al. The negative mode proteome with activated ion negative electron transfer dissociation (AI-NETD). Mol. Cell. Proteom. 14, 2644–2660 (2015).
Chayen, N. E. & Saridakis, E. Protein crystallization: from purified protein to diffraction-quality crystal. Nat. Methods 5, 147–153 (2008).
Liu, H. L. & Hsu, J. P. Recent developments in structural proteomics for protein structure determination. Proteomics 5, 2056–2068 (2005).
Yee, A. A. et al. NMR and X-ray crystallography, complementary tools in structural proteomics of small proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 127, 16512–16517 (2005).
Wang, H. W. & Wang, J. W. How cryo-electron microscopy and X-ray crystallography complement each other. Protein Sci. 26, 32–39 (2017).
Vidal, M., Cusick, M. E. & Barabási, A. L. Interactome networks and human disease. Cell 144, 986–998 (2011).
Luck, K., Sheynkman, G. M., Zhang, I. & Vidal, M. Proteome-scale human interactomics. Trends Biochem. Sci. 42, 342–354 (2017).
Stelzl, U. et al. A human protein–protein interaction network: a resource for annotating the proteome. Cell 122, 957–968 (2005).
Rual, J. F. et al. Towards a proteome-scale map of the human protein–protein interaction network. Nature 437, 1173–1178 (2005).
Rolland, T. et al. A proteome-scale map of the human interactome network. Cell 159, 1212–1226 (2014).
Huttlin, E. L. et al. The BioPlex network: a systematic exploration of the human interactome. Cell 162, 425–440 (2015).
Hein, M. Y. et al. A human interactome in three quantitative dimensions organized by stoichiometries and abundances. Cell 163, 712–723 (2015).
Wan, C. et al. Panorama of ancient metazoan macromolecular complexes. Nature 525, 339–344 (2015).
Walhout, A. J. et al. Protein interaction mapping in C. elegans using proteins involved in vulval development. Science 287, 116–122 (2000).
Tewari, M. et al. Systematic interactome mapping and genetic perturbation analysis of a C. elegans TGF-beta signaling network. Mol. Cell 13, 469–482 (2004).
Flores, A. et al. A protein–protein interaction map of yeast RNA polymerase III. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 7815–7820 (1999).
De Las Rivas, J. & Fontanillo, C. Protein–protein interaction networks: unraveling the wiring of molecular machines within the cell. Brief. Funct. Genom. 11, 489–496 (2012).
Cowley, M. J. et al. PINA v2.0: mining interactome modules. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, D862–D865 (2012).
Fields, S. & Song, O. A novel genetic system to detect protein–protein interactions. Nature 340, 245–246 (1989).
Venkatesan, K. et al. An empirical framework for binary interactome mapping. Nat. Methods 6, 83–90 (2009).
Braun, P. et al. An experimentally derived confidence score for binary protein–protein interactions. Nat. Methods 6, 91–97 (2009).
Cassonnet, P. et al. Benchmarking a luciferase complementation assay for detecting protein complexes. Nat. Methods 8, 990–992 (2011).
Lievens, S. et al. Kinase substrate sensor (KISS), a mammalian in situ protein interaction sensor. Mol. Cell. Proteom. 13, 3332–3342 (2014).
Trepte, P. et al. DULIP: a dual luminescence-based co-immunoprecipitation assay for interactome mapping in mammalian cells. J. Mol. Biol. 427, 3375–3388 (2015).
Trepte, P. et al. LuTHy: a double-readout bioluminescence-based two-hybrid technology for quantitative mapping of protein–protein interactions in mammalian cells. Mol. Syst. Biol. 14, e8071 (2018).
Chen, Y. C., Rajagopala, S. V., Stellberger, T. & Uetz, P. Exhaustive benchmarking of the yeast two-hybrid system. Nat. Methods 7, 667–668 (2010).
Caufield, J. H., Sakhawalkar, N. & Uetz, P. A comparison and optimization of yeast two-hybrid systems. Methods 58, 317–324 (2012).
Vidal, M. & Fields, S. The yeast two-hybrid assay: still finding connections after 25 years. Nat. Methods 11, 1203–1206 (2014).
Hall, M. P. et al. Engineered luciferase reporter from a deep sea shrimp utilizing a novel imidazopyrazinone substrate. ACS Chem. Biol. 7, 1848–1857 (2012).
Walhout, A. J. et al. GATEWAY recombinational cloning: application to the cloning of large numbers of open reading frames or ORFeomes. Methods Enzymol. 328, 575–592 (2000).
Sahni, N. et al. Widespread macromolecular interaction perturbations in human genetic disorders. Cell 161, 647–660 (2015).
Stellberger, T. et al. Improving the yeast two-hybrid system with permutated fusions proteins: the Varicella Zoster Virus interactome. Proteome Sci. 8, 8 (2010).
Lievens, S. et al. Array MAPPIT: high-throughput interactome analysis in mammalian cells. J. Proteome Res. 8, 877–886 (2009).
Riegel, E., Heimbucher, T., Hofer, T. & Czerny, T. A sensitive, semi-quantitative mammalian two-hybrid assay. Biotechniques 62, 206–214 (2017).
Tang, Y., Qiu, J., Machner, M. & LaBaer, J. Discovering protein–protein interactions using nucleic acid programmable protein arrays. Curr. Protoc. Cell Biol. 74, 15.21.1.–15.21.14 (2017).
Yazaki, J., Galli, M., Kim, A. Y. & Ecker, J. R. Profiling interactome networks with the HaloTag-NAPPA in situ protein array. Curr. Protoc. Plant Biol. 3, e20071 (2018).
Dixon, A. S. et al. NanoLuc complementation reporter optimized for accurate measurement of protein interactions in cells. ACS Chem. Biol. 11, 400–408 (2016).
Verhoef, L. G., Mattioli, M., Ricci, F., Li, Y. C. & Wade, M. Multiplex detection of protein–protein interactions using a next generation luciferase reporter. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1863, 284–292 (2016).
Mo, X. et al. AKT1, LKB1, and YAP1 revealed as MYC interactors with NanoLuc-based protein-fragment complementation assay. Mol. Pharmacol. 91, 339–347 (2017).
Stacer, A. C. et al. NanoLuc reporter for dual luciferase imaging in living animals. Mol. Imaging 12, 1–13 (2013).
Germain-Genevois, C., Garandeau, O. & Couillaud, F. Detection of brain tumors and systemic metastases using NanoLuc and FLuc for dual reporter imaging. Mol. Imaging Biol. 18, 62–69 (2016).
ORFeome Collaboration. The ORFeome Collaboration: a genome-scale human ORF-clone resource. Nat. Methods 13, 191–192 (2016).
Cusick, M. E. et al. Literature-curated protein interaction datasets. Nat. Methods 6, 39–46 (2009).
Lamesch, P. et al. C. elegans ORFeome version 3.1: increasing the coverage of ORFeome resources with improved gene predictions. Genome Res. 14, 2064–2069 (2004).
Harrow, J. et al. GENCODE: the reference human genome annotation for The ENCODE Project. Genome Res. 22, 1760–1774 (2012).
Redden, H. & Alper, H. S. The development and characterization of synthetic minimal yeast promoters. Nat. Commun. 6, 7810 (2015).
Jones, K. A., Yamamoto, K. R. & Tjian, R. Two distinct transcription factors bind to the HSV thymidine kinase promoter in vitro. Cell 42, 559–572 (1985).
Thompson, S. R., Gulyas, K. D. & Sarnow, P. Internal initiation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae mediated by an initiator tRNA/eIF2-independent internal ribosome entry site element. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98, 12972–12977 (2001).
Fernández, I. S., Bai, X. C., Murshudov, G., Scheres, S. H. & Ramakrishnan, V. Initiation of translation by cricket paralysis virus IRES requires its translocation in the ribosome. Cell 157, 823–831 (2014).
Orr-Weaver, T. L., Szostak, J. W. & Rothstein, R. J. Genetic applications of yeast transformation with linear and gapped plasmids. Methods Enzymol. 101, 228–245 (1983).
Walhout, A. J. & Vidal, M. High-throughput yeast two-hybrid assays for large-scale protein interaction mapping. Methods 24, 297–306 (2001).
Yu, H. et al. High-quality binary protein interaction map of the yeast interactome network. Science 322, 104–110 (2008).