Team:Heidelberg/Project/Indigoidine-Tag

From 2013.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
 
(164 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 14: Line 14:
     text-align:justify;
     text-align:justify;
}
}
-
 
+
.col-sm-12 h2,
-
#tyrocidineText a{
+
.col-sm-6 h2 {
-
  color:#800000;
+
  font-size:220%;
}
}
 +
/*#tyrocidineText a{
 +
color:#800000;
 +
}*/
</style>
</style>
-
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/4/42/Heidelberg_new_button.png" style="float:right;margin-right:4%">
+
 
       <div class="container">
       <div class="container">
             <!--Project Description-->
             <!--Project Description-->
             <div>
             <div>
-
                       <h1><span style="font-size:170%;color:#0B2161;">Indigoidine-Tag.</span><span class="text-muted" style="font-family:Arial, sans-serif; font-size:100%"> Inventing the GFP for NRPs.</span></h1>
+
                       <h1><span style="font-size:170%;color:#000080;">Indigoidine-Tag.</span><span class="text-muted" style="font-family:Arial, sans-serif; font-size:100%"> Introducing the GFP for NRPs.</span></h1>
             </div>
             </div>
Line 30: Line 33:
                 <!--graphical abstract-->
                 <!--graphical abstract-->
                 <div class="col-sm-6">
                 <div class="col-sm-6">
-
                     <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" rel="group" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/d/de/Heidelberg_Indigoidine-Tag_graphical_abstract.png" >
+
                     <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" rel="group" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ee/Heidelberg_Indigoidine-Tag_graphical_abstract_2.png" >
-
                     <img style="width:100%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 4px; border-color: grey;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/d/de/Heidelberg_Indigoidine_graphical_abstract.png"></img>
+
                     <img style="width:100%; margin-bottom:30px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 4px; border-color: grey;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ee/Heidelberg_Indigoidine-Tag_graphical_abstract_2.png"></img>
                     </a>
                     </a>
-
                     <div class="jumbotron">
+
                     <div class="jumbotron" style="padding:63px">
                         <h2>Highlights</h2>
                         <h2>Highlights</h2>
-
                         <p style="font-size:16px">
+
                         <p style="font-size:18px">
-
                             <ul style="font-size:14px">
+
                             <ul style="font-size:16px">
-
<li> Creation of an easily detectable NRPS-Tag using the Indigoidine Synthetase
+
<b>
-
<li> Proof of principle for inter-species module shuffling
+
<li> Creation of an easily detectable, inert and universal NRPS-Tag using the indigoidine Synthetase
-
<li> Protocol for High-Throughput NRPS-assays: <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/81333">RFC 100</a> and <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/81332">RFC 99</a>
+
<li> Simple Verification of Non-Ribosomal Peptides via Thin Layer Chromatography
-
<li> Empirical determination of optimal domain boarders for T-domain exchange
+
<li> Proof of principle module shuffling and domain-import among species
-
<li> Alteration of enzyme activity by exchange of T-domain
+
<li> Establishment of a standardized protocol for High-Throughput NRPS-assays: <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs">RFC 100</a> and <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs#rfc99">RFC 99</a>
-
<li> Proof of functionality for synthetic T-domains
+
</b>
                             </ul>
                             </ul>
Line 53: Line 56:
                         <h2>Abstract</h2>
                         <h2>Abstract</h2>
                         <p style="font-size:14px; text-align:justify">
                         <p style="font-size:14px; text-align:justify">
-
                             An integral characteristic of synthetic biology yet often undermined is the ability to learn fundamental knowledge by systematically perturbing a biological system. Non-ribosomal peptide synthetases (NRPS) are predestinated for such a trial and error approach. Their hierarchical organization into modules and domains offer a unique opportunity to spin around their inherent logical assembly and observe if their functionality is preserved. Following this idea, interchangeability of modules within one pathway has already been proven by both, us (LINK) and several research groups (LINK). However, detection of the product, as well as high-throughput screening of functionality remained complicated.
+
                             Synthesizing peptides with various functions using Non-Ribosomal Peptide Syntheatses (NRPS) provides access to more than 500 building blocks, and hence opens up a diverse spectrum of possible products. However, detection of the Non-Ribosomal Peptide (NRP), as well as high-throughput screening of peptide functionality remained complicated or even impossible. Thus, an <b>easily detectable, inert and universal tag</b> that allows simplified screening and detection, similar to the <b>GFP</b>-tag for proteins would be required.
-
                             Indigoidine, a blue pigment which is synthesized by the NRPS IndC from <em>Photorhabdus luminescens laumondii</em> TT01 (DSM15139), was established as a novel and application-oriented tag functionally fused to synthesized peptides. Streamlining this process demonstrates a substantial reinforcement of the NRPS-Designer, our software tool, and offers the possibility to evaluate and optimize synthesis of Non-Ribosomal Peptides (NRPs) in a high-throughput manner (<a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/81332">RFC 99</a>). Furthermore, we established an Indigoidine-production assay based on OD measurement of the blue-colored pigment. We thereby could prove the dependence of the efficiency on the T-domain and the 4'-Phosphopanthetheinyl-transferases (PPTases), resulting in different levels of Indigoidine synthesis.
+
</p>
 +
<p style="font-size:14px; text-align:justify">
 +
                             <b>Indigoidine</b>, a blue pigment which is synthesized by the NRPS IndC from <em>Photorhabdus luminescens laumondii</em> TT01 (DSM15139), was <b>established as a novel and application-oriented tag functionally fused to synthesized peptides</b>. Streamlining this process demonstrates a substantial reinforcement of the <a href="http://igem2013.bioquant.uni-heidelberg.de/NRPSDesigner/">NRPS-Designer</a>, our software tool, and offers the possibility to evaluate and optimize synthesis of NRPs in a <b>high-throughput</b> manner (<a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs#rfc99">RFC 99</a> & <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs">RFC 100</a>).
                         </p>
                         </p>
                     </div>
                     </div>
Line 64: Line 69:
                             <li data-target="#myCarousel" data-slide-to="2"></li>
                             <li data-target="#myCarousel" data-slide-to="2"></li>
                             <li data-target="#myCarousel" data-slide-to="3"></li>
                             <li data-target="#myCarousel" data-slide-to="3"></li>
-
                            <li data-target="#myCarousel" data-slide-to="4"></li>
 
-
                            <li data-target="#myCarousel" data-slide-to="5"></li>
 
-
                            <li data-target="#myCarousel" data-slide-to="6"></li>
 
-
                            <li data-target="#myCarousel" data-slide-to="7"></li>
 
                         </ol>
                         </ol>
                         <div class="carousel-inner">
                         <div class="carousel-inner">
 +
 +
<div class="carousel-inner" style="margin-top:5%; max-height:260px">
                             <div class="item active">
                             <div class="item active">
-
                                 <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ea/Heidelberg_ind_slider_1.png">   
+
                                 <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/4/4b/Heidelberg_slider_Tagging_1.png" style=" max-height:260px">   
                                 <div class="container">
                                 <div class="container">
                                     <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
                                     <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
Line 81: Line 84:
                             </div>
                             </div>
                             <div class="item">
                             <div class="item">
-
                              <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/3/3a/Heidelberg_ind_slider_2.png">
+
                                <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/b/b4/Heidelberg_slider_Tagging_2.png" style=" max-height:260px">
-
                              <div class="container">
+
                                <div class="container">
-
                                <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
+
                                    <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
-
                                  <p style="font-size:18px; color:#fff"></p>
+
                                      <p style="font-size:18px; color:#fff"></p>
 +
                                    </div>
                                 </div>
                                 </div>
-
                              </div>
 
-
                            </div>
 
-
                            <div class="item">
 
-
                              <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/1/18/Heidelberg_ind_slider_3.png">
 
-
                              <div class="container">
 
-
                                <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
 
-
                                  <p style="font-size:18px; color:#fff"></p>
 
-
                                </div>
 
-
                              </div>
 
-
                            </div>
 
-
                            <div class="item">
 
-
                              <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/f/fa/Heidelberg_ind_slider_4.png">
 
-
                              <div class="container">
 
-
                                <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
 
-
                                  <p style="font-size:18px; color:#fff"></p>
 
-
                                </div>
 
-
                              </div>
 
-
                            </div>
 
-
                            <div class="item">
 
-
                              <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/b/b4/Heidelberg_ind_slider_5.png">
 
-
                              <div class="container">
 
-
                                <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
 
-
                                  <p style="font-size:18px; color:#fff"></p>
 
-
                                </div>
 
-
                              </div>
 
-
                            </div>
 
-
                            <div class="item">
 
-
                              <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ef/Heidelberg_ind_slider_6.png">
 
-
                              <div class="container">
 
-
                                <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
 
-
                                  <p style="font-size:18px; color:#fff"></p>
 
-
                                </div>
 
-
                              </div>
 
                             </div>
                             </div>
                             <div class="item">
                             <div class="item">
-
                               <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/1/16/Heidelberg_ind_slider_7.png">
+
                               <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/f/f5/Heidelberg_project2.png" style="max-height:260px">
                               <div class="container">
                               <div class="container">
                                 <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
                                 <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
Line 129: Line 100:
                             </div>
                             </div>
                             <div class="item">
                             <div class="item">
-
                               <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/61/Heidelberg_ind_slider_8.png">
+
                               <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/5/5e/Heidelberg_slider_Tagging_3.png" style="max-height:260px">
                               <div class="container">
                               <div class="container">
                                 <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
                                 <div class="carousel-caption" data-offset="0">
Line 144: Line 115:
       </div>
       </div>
       <div class="container">
       <div class="container">
-
             <div class="row" style="float:left">
+
             <div class="row">
                 <div id="tyrocidineText" class="col-sm-12">
                 <div id="tyrocidineText" class="col-sm-12">
                   <h2 id="introduction">Introduction</h2>
                   <h2 id="introduction">Introduction</h2>
-
                  <p>
 
-
                  Most modules of non-ribosomal peptide synthetase (NRPS) pathways consist of three domain types: condensation, adenylation and thiolation domain (see <a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="NRPS module and domain structure and activation of T-domains." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/a/a9/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig1.png" rel="gallery1">Figure 1a</a>), also called peptidyl-carrier-protein domain (PCP)-domain (reviewed in <bib id="pmid16895337"/>)). Remarkably, precisely this order of domains is highly conserved among different NRPS pathways except for the very first and last module of each NRPS. In the initial module, the A-domain is always followed by a T-domain. The last module of an NRPS usually ends with a TE-domain.  During the process of non-ribisomal peptide (NRP) synthesis, a new amino acid is first adenylated by the A-domain and then bound to the T-domain via a thioester bond. The C-domain catalyzes the condensation of the substrate - which is bound to the T-domain of the previous module - and the amino acid of the next module. The T-domain itself shows no substrate specificity but acts as a carrier domain, which keeps the peptide attached to the NRPS module complex. The core element of every T-domain is a conserved 4’-phosphopanthetheinylated (4’-PPT) serine. The 4’-PPT residue is added by a 4’-Phosphopanthetheinyl-transferase (PPTase), which converts the NRPS apo-enzyme to its active holo-form (see <a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="NRPS module and domain structure and activation of T-domains." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/a/a9/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig1.png" rel="gallery1">Figure 1b</a>).
 
-
                  </p>
 
-
                 
 
-
                 
 
-
                 
 
-
                  <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/a/a9/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig1.png">
 
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/a/a9/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig1.png"></img>
 
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 1</b>: NRPS module and domain structure and activation of T-domains.
 
-
   
 
-
a) Basic structure of NRPS pathways
 
-
Typically, a NRPS is composed of 1 to about 10 single modules, of which each consists of a
 
-
C-domain (condensation domain), an A-domain (adenylation domain) and a T-domain (thiolation
 
-
domain). Moreover, the initial module lacks the C-domain and the last module of a pathway has
 
-
an additional TE-domain (thioesterase domain), which cleaves the synthesized nonribosomal
 
-
peptide from the last T-domain.
 
-
b) Activation of NRPS modules by 4'-Phosphopanthetheinylation of the T-domain.
 
-
Every NRPS module has to be activated by a 4'-Phosphopanthetheinyl-transferase (PPTase).
 
-
which transfers the 4'-Phosphopanthetheinyl moiety of Coenzyme A to a conserved serine
 
-
residue in the T-domain.
 
-
    </figcaption>
 
-
        </a>
 
<p>
<p>
-
Besides these fundamental domains (C-domain, A-domain and T-domain), some NRPS modules incorporate additional domains enlarging the amount of potential catalytic reactions, such as cyclization, epimerization or oxidation of the amino acid [Reference]. <br/>
+
Non-Ribosomal Peptide Synthetases (NRPS) are assembly lines which consist of several modules, each module incorporating one specific amino acid into the growing peptide chain (for a more detailled introduction into NRPS, please refer to our <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/NRPS">Background Page</a>). As previously shown by both other research groups [1] and our work (Project <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/Project/Tyrocidine">Peptide-Synthesis</a>), NRPS modules can be rearranged to form a novel assembly line which produces a custom, non-ribosomal peptide. However, the detection of those synhetic peptides using mass spectrometry is still challenging. In order to simplify the detection of peptides created by custom NRPSs, we developed a blue pigment tag for non-ribosomal peptides - the Indigoidine-Tag.
-
For example, a single module of <em>P. luminescens laumondii</em> TT01 (DSM15139) contains an internal oxidation domain (Ox-domain) in its A-domain and a special TE-domain (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Exchange of the indC T-domain on a pSB1C3 derived expression plasmid" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/c/ca/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig2.png" rel="gallery1">Figure 2a</a>). This enzyme first adenylates L-glutamine (A-domain), which is then attached to the T-domain. The TE-domain cleaves and catalyzes the cyclization of the substrate, which is further oxidized by the Ox-domain. The oxidation of two cyclic glutamines results in the formation of an insoluble small molecule (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Exchange of the indC T-domain on a pSB1C3 derived expression plasmid" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/c/ca/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig2.png" rel="gallery1">Figure 2b</a>)[Reference].
+
</p>
</p>
-
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/c/ca/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig2.png">
+
<p>
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/c/ca/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig2.png"></img>
+
The indigoidine synthetase indC from <i>Photorhabdus luminescens laumondii</i> TT01 consists of an <b>A</b>denylation domain with an internal <b>Ox</b>idation domain, a <b>T</b>hiolation domain and a <b>T</b>hio<b>E</b>sterase domain. The A-domain adenylates L-glutamine which is then attached to the T-domain via a thioester bond. The TE-domain catalyzes the cyclization of the glutamine and cleaves it from the T-domain. Two cyclic glutamines are oxidized by the Ox-domain, resulting in the blue pigment dimer indigoidine (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 1: The indigoidine synthetase IndC catalyzes the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine. a) The indigoidine synthetase indC from <i>P. luminescens</i> is a single module NRPS catalyzing the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine by cyclization and oxidation of two L-glutamines. b) Expression of a functional indigoidine synthetase in <i>E. coli</i> BAP1 cells leads to a blue phenotype." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/a/a2/Heidelberg_indtag_fig1.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 1a</a>)[2]. This leads to a blue phenotype of <i>E. coli</i> cells expressing the indC gene when grown on plates or in liquid cultures (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 1: The indigoidine synthetase IndC catalyzes the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine. a) The indigoidine synthetase indC from <i>P. luminescens</i> is a single module NRPS catalyzing the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine by cyclization and oxidation of two L-glutamines. b) Expression of a functional indigoidine synthetase in <i>E. coli</i> BAP1 cells leads to a blue phenotype." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/a/a2/Heidelberg_indtag_fig1.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 1b</a>). The blue pigment can be purified and dissolved in DMSO using a simple protocol.
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 2</b>: Exchange of the indC T-domain on a pSB1C3 derived expression plasmid
+
</p>
-
    The indigoidine synthetase indC from <em>P. luminescens</em> consists of an adenylation domain with an internal oxidation domain, a thiolation domain and a thioesterase domain. We replaced the indC T-domain with T-domains of other NRPS modules (one of which is the indigoidine synthetase bpsA from <em>S. lavendulae</em>) and seven synthetic T-domains, which were customized to be introduced to indC, respectively.
+
<br>
-
    </figcaption>
+
<center>
-
        </a>
+
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/a/a2/Heidelberg_indtag_fig1.png" title="Figure 1: The indigoidine synthetase IndC catalyzes the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine. a) The indigoidine synthetase indC from <i>P. luminescens</i> is a single module NRPS catalyzing the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine by cyclization and oxidation of two L-glutamines. b) Expression of a functional indigoidine synthetase in <i>E. coli</i> BAP1 cells leads to a blue phenotype.">
-
The small molecule produced by the pathway described above is a blue-colored pigment called <em>indigoidine</em>. Accordingly, the catalytic NRPS is referred to as <em>indigoidine synthetase</em> or <em>blue pigment synthetase</em> encoded by various bacterial strains such as <em>S. lavendulae subsp. lavendulae</em> (ATCC11924) or <em>P. luminescens</em> (<bib id="Takahashi2007"/><bib id="Brachmann2012"/>). Previous publications showed that replacing the T-domain of the blue pigment synthetase bpsA from <em>S. lavendulae</em> with T-domains of other NRPS modules results in a loss of function, i.e. the engineered indigoidine synthetase does not produce the blue pigment (<bib id="Owen2012"/>). So far the only T-domain exchange that resulted in a functional bpsA was achieved using the T-domain of entF - a gene involved in the enterobactin biosynthesis of <em>E. coli</em>. For this approach, random mutagenesis was performed to yield various mutated entF T-domains, some of which were capable to preserve the enzyme function when being introduced into bpsA (<bib id="Owen2012"/>). Other studies revealed that it is possible to exchange the A-domains of NRPS modules in <em>B. subtilis</em> resulting in modified non-ribosomal peptide products (<bib id="Doekel2000"/> ). Additionally, the selectivity of an NRPS module for specific amino acids could be modified by altering the conserved motif in the active site of the A-domain (<bib id="Thirlway2012"/>). Furthermore, since the endogenous 4'-Phoshopanthetheinyl-transferase (PPTase) entD from <em>E. coli</em> has been reported to exhibit low efficiency in activating heterologous NRPS pathways, most research in the field of NRPS involves co-expression of another PPTase (<bib id="Pfeifer2001"/>), <bib id="Takahashi2007"/>).
+
-
<h2 id="results">Results </h2>
+
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; margin-top:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/a/a2/Heidelberg_indtag_fig1.png"/>
-
</html>
+
    <figcaption style="width:60%;"><b>Figure 1: The indigoidine synthetase IndC catalyzes the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine.</b> a) The indigoidine synthetase indC from <i>P. luminescens</i> is a single module NRPS catalyzing the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine by cyclization and oxidation of two L-glutamines. b) Expression of a functional indigoidine synthetase in <i>E. coli</i> BAP1 cells leads to a blue phenotype.</figcaption>
-
==Expression of Functional Indigoidine Synthetase indC derived from ''P. lumninescens'' in five substrains of ''E. coli''==
+
</a>
-
===Endogenous PPTAse of ''E. coli'' Is Sufficient for Activation of the ''P. lumninescens'' Derived Indigoidine Synthetase IndC===
+
<br/>
-
The open reading frame of the native indigoidine synthetase indC was amplified from genomic DNA of ''P. lumninescens'' and cloned into a plasmid under the control of an lac-inducible promoter. This indC expression cassette was transformed into different substrains of ''E. coli'', namely DH5alpha, MG1655, BAP1, TOP10 and NEB Turbo. All of these host strains express the endogenous PPTAse entD which is responsible for the transfer of the 4'-phosphopantetheine residue from coenzyme A to the apo-domain of EntF, a T-domain in the enterobactin pathway(<bib id="pmid:9214294"/>). As depicted in Figure 6a, entD does not exhibit strict substrate speceficity in being restricted to activating domains of the enterobactin pathway, but is able to activate the T-domain of indC as determined by the blue phenotype of the transformed cells. Except for NEB Turbo cells, all transformed host strains displayed a decelerated growth and significantly smaller colonies on plate when compared to the negative control. The blue phenotype developed late after transformation ranging from first blue colonies after 24 h and taking up to three days for visible poduction of the blue pigment. NEB Turbo showed regular colony growth and developed a strong blue phenotype upon induction with IPTG. As all host strains were able to express the functional indigoidine sythetase derived from a different species, further experiments were only conducted with one ''E. coli'' strain. Due to its simplicity in handling and sufficient expression of the constructs, the substrain TOP10 was chosen.
+
</center>
 +
<p>
 +
We fused the indC gene to NRPS modules of the tyrocidine synthesis cluster from <i>Brevibacillus parabrevis</i> to create novel NRPS assembly lines which attach the blue pigment indigoidine to the last amino acid of the synthesized peptide (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 2: The IndC module is fused to other NRPS modules to establish the indigoidine-Tag. When combining the coding sequences of NRPS modules from diverse Non-Ribosomal Peptide Synthetases, such as antibiotic biosynthesis clusters, with the indC indigoidine synthetase module, the resulting assembly line will eventually produce a indigoidine-tagged peptide." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/e5/Heidelberg_indtag_fig2.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 2</a>). After purification, the tagged peptide can be validated using comparative Thin Layer Chromatography (TLC) or Mass-Spectrometry (MassSpec) after purification by High Pressure Liquid Chromatography (HPLC).  
 +
</p>
 +
<br>
 +
<center>
 +
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/e5/Heidelberg_indtag_fig2.png" title="Figure 2: The IndC module is fused to other NRPS modules to establish the Indigoidine-Tag.
 +
When combining the coding sequences of NRPS modules from diverse Non-Ribosomal Peptide Synthetases, such as antibiotic biosynthesis clusters, with the indC indigoidine synthetase module, the resulting assembly line will eventually produce an indigoidine-tagged peptide.">
-
===Improved Production of Indigoidine by Co-transformation of Host Strain with Supplementary PPTases===
+
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; margin-top:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/e5/Heidelberg_indtag_fig2.png" />
-
The expression of indC under activation by endC was sufficient for easy detection of indigoidine production on plates harboring indC-carrying cells. In order to determine, whether the amount of indigoidine production in the ''E. coli''TOP10 cells is dependent on the quality of the interacting of indC with the PPTase, four PPTase dervied from varying origins were selected and amplified from the genome of the hosts of origin. ''E. coli''TOP10 cells were co-transformed with plasmids coding for the different PPTases and the plasmid containing the expression cassette for indC. As reference for the endogenous PPTase activity served cells only transformed with the indC plasmid. Irrespective of the PPTase, growth of colonies was retarded. Remarkably however, colonies co-transformed with the PPTase plasmid remained of smaller size than the ones only carrying the indC construct. On the other side, indigoidine production was more diffuse in the latter cells with secretion of the blue pigment into the agar (Figure 6b, indC) and only slight blue-greenish coloring of the colonies. The four PPTases additionally introduced into the TOP10 cells were all shown to be functional (blue phenotype of the transformants, Figure 6b), but lead to the retention of most of the indigoidine within the cells. Colonies of cells transformed with thess constructs, were of convex shape and of distinct, dark blue color. Overall, cells carrying an additional PPTase showed increased indigoidine production compared to the cells relying on the endogenous entD.  
+
    <figcaption style="width:60%;"><b>Figure 2: The IndC module is fused to other NRPS modules to establish the Indigoidine-Tag.</b> When combining the coding sequences of NRPS modules from diverse Non-Ribosomal Peptide Synthetases, such as antibiotic biosynthesis clusters, with the indC indigoidine synthetase module, the resulting assembly line will eventually produce a indigoidine-tagged peptide.  
-
+
</figcaption>
-
==Synthetic T-Domains Generated by Consensus and Guided Random Design Method are Functional==
+
</a><br>
-
The main structurel characteristic of NRPSs is their modular composition on different levels. The indogoidine synthetase indC is a one-module NRPS comprised of the three domains, namely AoxA, T and TE. Since the functionality of this NRPS is detectable by the bare eye, it offers a perfect and simple experimental set-up for proof of principle experiments regarding the interchangeability of domains from different NRPS. Out of the three domains in indC, the T-domain is suppossed to exhibit the least substrate specificity and was thus chosen for first domain shuffeling approaches. For the initial definition of T-domain boundaries of indC, we used PFAM, a web-tool which allows -amongst other functions- for the prediction of NRPS's module and domain boundaries. Following the boundary prediction, we choose a two-pronged domain shuffling approach: First, we transferred native T-domains derived from either different host species and/or NRPSs of entirely different function into the indC indigoidine synthetase. Second, we deviced three methods for the generation of synthetic T-domains based on different NRPS libraries generated by BLAST search against either specific subranges of host organisms or restricting the query sequence to be BLASTed.(link)
+
</center>
-
As depicted in Figure 6, both approaches lead principally to fully functional indCs. The synthetic T-domains 1, 3 and 4 showed the same diecreased growth and indigoidin production on plates as did the native T-domain derived from ''P. lumninescens''. The colonies obtained after co-transformation with supplementary PPTase plasmid were small in size and of dark blue color. Compared to synthetic T-domain 5, indigoidin production started earlier (approximately after 24-30 hours). In contrast to the synthetic domains 1,3 and 4 which were designed by the consensus method and showed medium to high similarity to the sequence of origin, synthetic domain 5 was generated by the guided random method. Remarkably, even though 39 out of the 62 amino acids of the original T-domain were exchange, the indigoidine synthetase with this T-domain was still functional. Closer analysis of the sequence compared to the original indC T-domain sequence  showed, that the characteristics of the amino acid sequence, i. e. for instance polar or charged amino acids, were retained in 72% of the sequence. Also, the GGXS core sequence of the T-domain at which the activation by the PPTas occurs was conserved.
+
<p>
 +
The possibility of tagging non-ribosomal peptides makes high-throughput protocols possible. Therefore, we created a standardized procedure for the production of NRPs in our <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs">RFC100</a>: i) design of novel NRPSs with our NRPS-Designer software, ii) high-throughput construction of NRPS-libraries, iii) the detection and validation of the synthetic peptides and iv) functional assays with possible upscaling of the peptide production to industrial level.
 +
</p>
-
==Domain Shuffling Works across Modules Derived from Different Pathways and Host Organisms==
 
-
Multiple web-tools exist which offer the prediction of NRPS module and domain boundaries. One of the most common used prediction tools is PFAM which we used as a starting point to determine the best method for defining domain boundaries. PFAM predicted large linker structures between the end of the A and the beginning of the T-domain (compare Figure 8, T-boundaries from B to two). Using these domain boundaries for the native T-domains did only yield one functional native T-domain(results not depicted). We tried to improve this yield by defining new T-domain boundaries based on the predictions of PFAM and multiple sequence alingments with the respective homology libraris at the predicted linker regions. Boundaries were set closer to the preceeding A-domain, at regions were less sequence conservation was observed. Figure 8 shows the indigoidine production after insertion of native T-domains with revised boundaries. T-domain boundary combinations A1, A2 and C1 yielded functional T-domains. As the indigoidine production and cell growth was best for the T-domains created with boundary combination A2, this boundary design was used for all subsequent cloning strategies. Figure 9 depicts the success of this boundary desgin as two additional native T-domains derived from delH4 and bpsA (indigoidine synthetase) led to functional indCs and the production of indigoidine. In addition, the native T-domain from plu2642 which was already shown to be functional(compare Figure 7) showed faster and increased indigoidine production (deep blue agar plate, lower right panel on Figure 9). The results obtained from this experiments proofed two concepts. First, domain shuffling is possible across different species as the T-domains of delH4 and bpsA were derived from ''D. acidovorans'' and ''S. lavendulae lavendulae'', respectively and were functional in ''E. coli''. Also, shuffling of domains from modules of different substrate specificity has been proofen herein. Second,  manually adjusting the boundaries predicted by PFAM based on MSA is a functional method to predict functional T-domain boundaries.
 
-
==PPTase and T-domain Interaction Strongly Influence the Yield of Indigoidine Production==
+
<br/>
-
As the previous experiments of shuffled T-domains and different combinations of PPTAses showed, there are substantial differences in cell growth and indigoidine production when observed on plates. However, this observations were always of qualitative nature and did not give any insight into quantitative differences. We approached the quantification of indigoidine production in a time-resolved and highly-combinatorial manner: plasmids coding for indC containing all synthetic (4) and native T-domains (3) proven functional by the previous assays were co-transformed with the four functional PPTases. The indigoidine production over time (30 hours) was measured at its absorption maximum of 590 nm and corrected for the contribution of the cellular components in the medium as described in the methods. As Figure 10 shows, synthetic T-domains in combination with different PPTases lead to distinct differneces in indogoidin production. As a comparisons between the left and right panel of Figure 10 shows, PPTases working best with one T-domain might not lead to any indigoidine production when used with a indigoidine synthetase containing a different T-domain (Figure 10, pink line, delC). In addition, as distinctly visible in Figure 11, indigoidine production over time is not a strictly monoton function (blue line). After an indigoidin production peak at 16 hours, indigoidine production caused by indC containing the synthetic domain 4 decreases again. The indigoidin production in cells transformed with indC/synthetic T-domain 3 is still increasing. 
+
<h2 id="results">Results </h2>
-
<html>
+
-
 
+
-
 
+
-
                  <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/c/cf/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig6.png">
+
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/c/cf/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig6.png"></img>
+
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 6</b>: Comparison between different <em>E. coli</em> strains and PPTases:
+
-
    a) Comparison of different <em>E. coli</em> strains examining growth and indigoidine production
+
-
The figure shows five different strains of <em>E. coli</em> that have been co-transformed with an indC expression plasmid and a sfp expression plasmid. The negative control is <em>E. coli</em> TOP10 without a plasmid. All transformants have been grown on LB agar for 48 hours at room temperature, cells were not induced. One can see that even without induction all strains express the indigoidine synthetase and produce the blue pigment indigoidine. However, the strains BAP1 and NEB Turbo grow faster in the first day, exhibiting a white phenotype (data not shown). Colonies on the plate of <em>E. coli</em> TOP10  are very small and dark blue/ black. Assuming that indigoidine production inhibits cell growth due to its toxicity, we concluded that TOP10 produced the most indigoidine among the strains we tested. We used <em>E. coli</em> TOP10 for the following experiments.
+
-
 
+
-
b) Comparison between different PPTases concerning overall indigoidine production
+
-
The Figure shows ''E. coli'' TOP10 cells co-transformed with indC and four different PPTases (sfp, svp, entD and delC), respectively. The image bottom left shows ''E. coli'' TOP10 cells without additional PPTase and the negative control is TOP10 without a plasmid.
+
-
 
+
-
    </figcaption>
+
-
        </a>
+
-
       
+
-
                  <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/f/f1/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig7.png">
+
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/f/f1/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig7.png"></img>
+
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 7: Modified variants of indC with replaced T-domains</b>
+
-
    We replaced the indC T-domain with both the T-domains of other native NRPS modules (entF, delH, tycC, tycA, bpsA, plu2642 and plu2670) and synthetic T-domains. The figure shows the five modified versions of indC that remain the enzyme function, thus resulting in a blue phenotype of transformed ''E. coli'' TOP10. The cells have been co-transformed with a plasmid containing the respective engineered variant of indC and a second plasmid coding for the PPTase sfp, svp, entD and delC. The figure shows representative results; the total 85 transformation results can be found in the indigoidine notebook, week 17.
+
-
    </figcaption>
+
-
        </a>
+
-
       
+
-
                  <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/eb/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig8.png">
+
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/eb/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig8.png"></img>
+
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 8: Determination of required domain borders for T-domain exchange</b>
+
-
    a) Definition of different domain border combinations for T-domain exchanges
+
-
The figure shows a sequence alignment of the indC and bpsA amino acid sequences.
+
-
The alignment was created using clustalO (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/msa/clustalo/) with
+
-
standard parameters. The lines marked A, B and C reflect the borders we used between the A-
+
-
and the T-domain, whereas those marked, 1, 2, 3 and 4 reflect the borders between the T- and
+
-
the TE-domain. In total we tried all twelve combinations of a domain border {A, B, C} and a
+
-
domain border {1, 2, 3, 4}, replacing the sequence inbetween with the respective part of bpsA.
+
-
 
+
-
b) E. coli TOP10 co-transformed with modified versions of indC and the PPTase sfp
+
-
The co-tranformation of the modified indC-(bpsA-T) plasmids described above with a second
+
-
plasmid coding for the PPTase Sfp shows that only three domain border combinations can be
+
-
used for exchanging the indC T-domain with the T-domain of bpsA. These are the
+
-
combinations A1, A2 and C1. We applied combination A2 for further T-domain exchanges.
+
-
    </figcaption>
+
-
        </a>
+
-
       
+
-
                  <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/6e/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig9.png">
+
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/6e/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig9.png"></img>
+
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 9: Applying optimized domain border combinations by T-domain exchange of native NRPS T-domains</b>
+
-
    As described above, we determined an optimized domain border combination for the exchange of the native indC T-domain with the T-domain of the indigoidine synthetase bpsA. We applied this border combination (previously referred to as ''A2'') to the T-domains of the NRPS modules entF, delH4, delH5, tycA1, tycC6, plu2642 and plu2670, replacing the indC T-domain with the respective fragments of those modules. This figure shows three transformants with a blue phenotype in which the indC T-domain was exchanged by the T-domain of the respective NRPS module. The pictures were taken after 60 hours of incubation at room temperature. Once more one can see the differences in growth kinetics due to the production of indigoidine: Cells expressing the indC variant with the T-domain of bpsA  grow very slow and form small and dark blue colonies, whereas cells expressing other variants grow faster. Comparing the images on the very right, we suggest that cells expressing indC with the T-domain of plu2642 produce the most indigoidine in the given timeframe, compared to both the delH4- and the bpsA-variant. The combination of the plu2642 T-domain and the indC indigoidine synthetase seems to be ideal, concerning both indigoidine production and overall growth.
+
-
    </figcaption>
+
-
        </a>
+
-
       
+
-
        <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/4/4d/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig10.png">
+
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/4/4d/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig10.png"></img>
+
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 10</b>:  Synthetic T-domains in combination with different PPTases lead to distinct differneces in indogoidin production.
+
-
    </figcaption>
+
-
        </a>
+
-
       
+
-
        <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/3/38/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig11.png">
+
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/3/38/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig11.png"></img>
+
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 11</b>: Indigoidine production over time is not a strictly monoton function
+
-
    </figcaption>
+
-
        </a>
+
-
 
+
-
 
+
-
<h2 id="discussion">Discussion</h2>
+
-
In this subproject, we wanted to set the basis for engineering entirely synthetic NRPS modules composed of user-defined domains.
+
-
 
+
-
As model system, we used the unimodular indigoidine synthetase NRPS from <em>P. luminescens subsp. Laumondii</em> TT01. We predicted the modular composition and domain borders of IndC using our own NRPS-Designer software.
+
-
 
+
-
We then started by replacing the native IndC T-domain with T-domains derived from different NRPS pathways from different bacterial strains, among those the T-domain from the BpsA indigoidine synthetase from <em>S. lavendulae</em> ATCC11924. Constructs were transformed into E. coli alongside with an PPTase expression cassette in order to screen for functional IndC variants. As hoped, a subset of the natural T-domains were functioning in context of the IndC scaffold module, leading to indigoidine production and thereby blue coloring of colonies and corresponding liquid cultures. We then engineered a variety of synthetic T-domains derived from consensus sequences of different natural T-domains. Again, a subset of these T-domains successfully maintained indigoidine production (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 9" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/6e/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig9.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 9</a>).
+
-
 
+
-
Notably, one of our engineered IndC construcats showed an indigoidine production even higher compared to the wild-type IndC (T-domain Plu2642; <a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 3" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/6c/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig3.png" rel="gallery1">Figure 3</a>).
+
-
 
+
-
This is particularly remarkably as our results contradict to previous studies of NRPS domains that reported the native T-domain of the indigoidine synthetase BpsA to be absolutely essential for protein function (and therefore not replaceable by other T-domains).  ([Owen2012]).
+
-
 
+
-
However, to our surprise, the BpsA T-domain-containing IndC construct did not yield any detectable indigoidine production, although BpsA shares strong sequence homology with IndC. We hypothesized, that the selection of the exact border could be critical for maintaining domain functionality when introduced into a novel NRPS module scaffold. Therefore, we amplified different BpsA T-domain variants differing in their domain border and introduced them into the IndC scaffold. Remarkably, a subset of the resulting IndC variants showed successful indigoidine production.
+
-
 
+
-
We thus revaluated all native and synthetic T-domains in light of this finding and performed a second screening round in which we were able to rescue even more functional IndC variants, proofing our abovementioned hypothesis.
+
-
 
+
-
We also co-transformed all engineered IndC construct bearing different natural and synthetic T-domains with four different PPTase expression constructs. To our surprise, the T-domains used not only determined general efficiency of indigoidine production, but also the efficiency of NRPS activation by the different activating PPTases.
+
-
 
+
-
In conclusion we were able to demonstrate, that it is indeed possible to replace single Domains from NRPS modules, while preserving or even enhancing its functionality. In addition, we established an approach for the design of synthetic T-domains and proved their functionality by introducing them into the indigoidine synthetase indC scaffold. Moreover, we established a high throughput protocol for circular polymerase extension cloning and transformation (Hi-CT) (<a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/81332">BBF RFC 99</a>), which we applied for our domain shuffling approach. In summary, we created a library of 58 engineered indC variants. In addition we perforemd measurement of blue pigement production over time, which gave us novel insights in how NRPS domains should be designed, where the domain borders between different domains in a single NRPS module have to be set and which domains from respective NRPS pathways and bacterial strains can be used, when creating novel engineered NRPS pathways. We implemented our findings into the "NRPS-Designer" Software, so that the underlying algorithm for NRPS design takes into consideration the abovementioned findings (e.g. domain border setting) which are certainly crucial for successful in silico prediction of functional NRPSs.
+
-
 
+
-
Thereby, our project pioneers the research on high-throughput methods for creation of synthetic NRPS modules composed of user-defined domains. We believe that our findings will highly contribute to future development of custom NRPSs.
+
-
 
+
-
 
+
-
<h2>Methods</h2>
+
</html>
</html>
-
<strong>Table 1: Bacterial strains and genes of interest derived thereof.</strong> The indigoidine synthetase bpsA was kindly supplied by the Fussenegger lab at ETH Zurich.
 
-
{|class="wikitable"
+
===Showing Inter-Species Module Compatibility by Fusion of Tyrocidine Modules to the Indigoidine Synthetase===
-
|-
+
<p><html>
-
! Strain !! Gene !! Function
+
Our module-shuffling approach within the tyrocidine cluster was confirmed by MassSpec. Access to such special technical devices and the referring expertise is demanded for detection of small peptides but often limited. That is why we were thinking of a potential alternative to test for the synthesis of NRPs. We wanted to establish an assay accessible to the majority of the community for validation of the presence of custom peptides. Since the synthetase for indigoidine consists of only a single module, it could serve as a paradigm for the fusion to modules of other NRPSs. The pigment indigoidine could potentially ease detection of peptides when they are fused to the dye that is visible by eye.
-
|-
+
</p>
-
<em>Photorhabdus luminescens laumondii</em> TT01 DSM15139 || indC || Indigoidine synthetase
+
<p>
-
|-
+
Thus we wanted to investigate whether it is possible to fuse indigoidine as a tag to NRPs of other pathways even originating from other species. In the following, we will showcase the extent of NRPSs’ modular compatibility by creating inter-species module-fusions between the indigoidine synthetase from <em>P. luminescens</em> and modules of the tyrocidine synthetase from <em>B. parabrevis</em>. In those fusion NRPs, indigoidine serves as a tag that eases identification of <em>E. coli</em> clones synthesizing the customized peptide.
-
|  <em>Streptomyces lavendulae lavendulae</em> || bpsA || Indigoidine synthetase
+
</p></html>
-
|-
+
===Fusing Single Amino Acids to Indigoidine===
-
| <em>Photorhabdus luminescens laumondii</em> TT01 DSM15139  ||ngrA || PPTase
+
-
|-
+
-
<em>Escherischia coli</em> BAP1 ||sfp || PPTase
+
-
|-
+
-
<em>Streptomyces verticillus</em> ATCC15003 ||svp || PPTase
+
-
|-
+
-
<em>Escherischia coli</em> MG1655 ||entD || PPTase
+
-
|-
+
-
<em> Delftia acidovorans</em> SPH-1 ||delC || PPTase
+
-
|}
+
<html>
<html>
 +
<p>
 +
First, we combined single modules of the tyrocidine synthetase with the indC synthetase resulting in three distinct NRPSs producing asparagine, valine or phenylalanine respectively, all tagged with indigoidine (see <a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 3: Composition of three fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC). Labeling of modules in the first row describes the modules of the tyrocidine synthetase. Coloured modules in the three rows below were fused together to create plasmids encoding for novel NRPSs (depicted in gray rectangle)." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/f/fc/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure4.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 3</a>).
 +
</p>
 +
<br>
 +
<center>
 +
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/f/fc/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure4.png" title="Figure 3: Composition of three fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC). Labeling of modules in the first row describes the modules of the tyrocidine synthetase. Coloured modules in the three rows below were fused together to create plasmids encoding for novel NRPSs (depicted in gray rectangle).">
-
<h3>Cloning Strategy</h3>
+
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/f/fc/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure4.png"></img>
-
We assembled the different indC variants on a chloramphenicol resistance backbone (pSB1C3) with an IPTG-inducable lac-promoter, the ribosome binding site BBa_B0034 and the coding sequence of the respective indC variant. The indC plasmids should be co-transformed with a PPTase construct to get a significant and fast indigoidine production. Therefore, we used a second plasmid backbone carrying a kanamycin resistance (pSB3K3). We assembled five pSB3K3 derived plasmids, each carrying an expression cassette with an IPTG induceable lac-promotor, the BBa_B0029 ribosome binding site and the coding sequence of the respective PPTase (sfp, svp, entD, delC and ngrA; see Table 1).
+
      <figcaption style="width:60%;"><b>Figure 3: Composition of three fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC)</b>. Figure 3: Composition of three fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC). Labeling of modules in the first row describes the modules of the tyrocidine synthetase. Coloured modules in the three rows below were fused together to create plasmids encoding for novel NRPSs (depicted in gray rectangle).</figcaption>
-
We used <em>E. coli</em> TOP10 for co-transformations of the possible combination of the indC variants (2) and all PPTase plasmids (5).
+
</a>
-
 
+
</center><br>
-
<h3>Circular Polymerase Extension Cloning</h3>
+
<p>
-
Circular Polymerase Extension Cloning (CPEC) is a sequence-independent cloning method based on homologous recombination of double-strand DNA overlaps of vector and insert(s) (<bib id="pmid:21293463"/>). It is suitable for the generation of combinatorial, synthetic construct libraries as it allows for multi-fragment assembly in an accurate, efficient and economical manner.  
+
To assure compatibility, the indigoidine module was always preceded by the C2 module, as the <a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 1: Overview of the tyrocidine Cluster. Ten Modules are formed from three gene clusters resulting in ten amino acid long peptides. In an assembly line manner each amino acid is added consecutively to the nascent, before the finale product is cleaved and released. (Adapted from [10])" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/4/44/Heidelberg_TycCluster_Scheme.png" rel="gallery1">tyc-C2</a> is specific for glutamine which is required for indigoidine production. SDS-PAGE showed the expected bands for the expression of the NRP synthetases in the transformed BAP1. The <em>E. coli</em> strain BAP1 was used for expression of the NRPS fusions because it carries the required PPTase sfp under the control of a T7 promoter. All three of the fusion variants turned the colonies blue even before expression induction with IPTG. The blue pigment thus served a first indicator that peptide synthesis was successful. To further verify the existence of the fusion peptide, we ran comparative TLC. The native, purified indigoidine ran further than our purified dipeptides suggesting that the amino acids were indeed fused to the pigment (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 4: Comparative TLC of our tagged NRP Val-Ind with native indigoidine. Three different biological replicates of the produced NRP, a valin-indigoidine fusion peptide (Val-Ind), are compared to an indigoidine control (Ind-ctrl). Clearly visibly, the tagged NRP shows an altered migration behavior on TLC with Dichloromethane as running solvent." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/9/9e/Heidelberg_TLC_5.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 4</a>). The peptides were detected under visible and UV light due to indigoidine’s properties as a dye.
-
CPEC relies on a simple polymerase extension of the DNA fragments to be assembled. Crucial to this concept is the design of vector and insert fragments which MUST share overlapping regions at the ends (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="CPEC method" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/6c/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig3.png" rel="gallery1">Figure 1.1</a>). In a single reaction set-up, insert DNA fragments and linear vector are heat denaturized and allowed to anneal at elevated temperature, resulting in specific hybridized insert-vector constructs (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="CPEC method" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/6c/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig3.png" rel="gallery1">Figure 1.2</a>). Subsequently, the single-strand hybrid constructs are extended under PCR-elongation conditions (72 °C for 20 s/kbp of longest fragment) which yield completely assembled, double-stranded circular constructs (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="CPEC method" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/6c/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig3.png" rel="gallery1">Figure 1.3</a>) ready for transformation into competent cells. The single strands nicks introduced on each strand due to the unidirectional nature of the polymerase chain reaction will be removed by endogenous ligases upon transformation into <em>Escherichia coli</em>.
+
</p>
-
 
+
<br>
-
        <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/6c/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig3.png">
+
<center>
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/6c/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig3.png"></img>
+
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="http://igem2013.bioquant.uni-heidelberg.de/wiki/images/7/73/TLC_5.png" title="Figure 4: Comparative TLC of our tagged NRP Val-Ind with native indigoidine. Three different biological replicates of the produced NRP, a valin-indigoidine fusion peptide (Val-Ind), are compared to an indigoidine control (Ind-ctrl). Clearly visibly, the tagged NRP shows an altered migration behavior on TLC with Dichloromethane as running solvent.">
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 3: Circular polymerase extension cloning: a sequence-independent, homologous recombination based cloning approach</b>Insert and backbone fragments sharing overlapping regions at their ends are transferred into a single reaction set-up in molecular ratios determined by equation 1 (compare to 5.1.4). 2)  The insert/backbone reaction mixture is heat-denaturized and subsequently cooled down to 53°C to allow for annealing of the complementary overlaps.  3) By polymerase chain reaction, the single strand hybrid-regions are filled up to double strands yielding circular, double-stranded molecules with nicks at overlapping regions. 4) Plasmids resulting from CPEC can be used directly for transformation. Figure adapted from [Quan & Tian, 2009 (<bib id="pmid:21293463"/>)]
+
-
    </figcaption>
+
-
        </a>
+
-
 
+
-
We provide instructions (<a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/81332">RFC 99</a>) for a rapid and cost efficient cloning and transformation method based on CPEC which allows for the manufacturing of multi-fragment plasmid constructs in a parallelized manner: High Throughput Circular Extension Cloning and Transformation (HiCT)
+
-
 
+
-
CPEC was performed according to the following protocol:
+
-
The total mass of DNA used per CPEC reaction varied between 50 to 200 ng. The insert to backbone molar ratio was 3:1 for insert-backbone and 1:1 for insert-insert molar ratio. Conversion from mass concentration of fragments to molar concentration was done using the formula: cM = c*10^6/(n*660), where c is the measured oligonucleotide concentration [ng/µl], n is the number of dinucleotides of the fragment and cM is the resulting concentration [nM].
+
-
 
+
-
The final reaction volume was adjusted to 6 µl with polymerase master mix (Phusion® High-Fidelity PCR Master Mix with HF Buffer, NEB #M0531S/L). The CPEC reaction was carried out under the following conditions:
+
 +
    <img style="width:30%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="http://igem2013.bioquant.uni-heidelberg.de/wiki/images/7/73/TLC_5.png"></img>
 +
        <figcaption style="width:60%;"><b>Figure 4: Comparative TLC of our tagged NRP Val-Ind with native indigoidine.</b> Three different biological replicates of the produced NRP, a valin-indigoidine fusion peptide (Val-Ind), are compared to an indigoidine control (Ind-ctrl). Clearly visibly, the tagged NRP shows an altered migration behavior on TLC with Dichloromethane as running solvent.</figcaption>
 +
    </a>
 +
</center><br>
</html>
</html>
-
* initial denaturation at 98°C for 30 s
+
===Using Indigoidine as a Tag for Non-Ribosomal Peptides===
-
* 5 cycles with:
+
<html><p>
-
* denaturation step at 98°C for 5 s.
+
To gather additional evidence for our functional indigoidine tag, we assembled seven variants with up to three modules in front of the indigoidine synthetase (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 5: Composition of seven fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC). The contructs depicted above serve as a proof of principle for the tagging of Non-Ribosomal Peptides with indigoidine. Several constructs were created using a valin-spacer in order to assess the influence of sterically hindrance by larger or polar amino acids. To be able to show the applicability of the tag most clearly, the di- and tripeptide constructs described on the Peptide Synthesis page, were tagged with indigoidine as well." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/d/db/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure6.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 5</a>) following the same approach as described above.
-
** annealing step at 53°C for 15 s
+
</p>
-
** elongation/filling up step at 72°C for 20 s/kbp of longest fragment.
+
<br>
-
* final extension at 72°C for three  times the calculated elongation time.
+
<center>
-
* (Optional: Hold at 12°C )
+
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/d/db/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure6.png" title="Figure 5: Composition of seven fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC). The contructs depicted above serve as a proof of principle for the tagging of Non-Ribosomal Peptides with indigoidine. Several constructs were created using a valin-spacer in order to assess the influence of sterically hindrance by larger or polar amino acids. To be able to show the applicability of the tag most clearly, the di- and tripeptide constructs described on the Peptide Synthesis page, were tagged with indigoidine as well.">
-
<html>
+
-
After CPEC, 5 µl of of the reaction mixture were used for transformation. The remaining volume was used for quality check on a gel with small pockets (10 to 20 µl in volume).
+
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/d/db/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure6.png"></img>
 +
    <figcaption style="width:60%;"><b>Figure 5: Composition of seven fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC).</b> The contructs depicted above serve as a proof of principle for the tagging of Non-Ribosomal Peptides with indigoidine. Several constructs were created using a valin-spacer in order to assess the influence of sterically hindrance of bigger or polar amino acids. To be able to show the applicability of the tag most clearly, the di- and tripeptide constructs described on the Peptide Synthesis page, were tagged with indigoidine as well.</figcaption>
 +
    </a>
 +
</center>
 +
<br>
 +
<p>
 +
Again the constructs pPW06, pPW09, pPW10, pPW11 and pPW12 (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 5: Composition of seven fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC). The contructs depicted above serve as a proof of principle for the tagging of Non-Ribosomal Peptides with indigoidine. Several constructs were created using a valin-spacer in order to assess the influence of sterically hindrance by larger or polar amino acids. To be able to show the applicability of the tag most clearly, the di- and tripeptide constructs described on the Peptide Synthesis page, were tagged with indigoidine as well." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/d/db/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure6.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 5</a>) turned <em>E. coli</em> BAP1 colonies blue upon transformation. Even with increasing peptide length, synthesis did not seem to be affected and the dye-properties of the indigoidine were still preserved (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 6: Comparison of liquid cultures of <em>E. coli</em> BAP1 transformed with different indigoidine-Tag constructs. The image shows a comparison of different constructs, varying in length. Shown are two tagged amino acids (Val-Ind and Asn-Ind), one tagged dipeptide (Orn-Val-Ind) and one tagged tripeptide (Phe-Orn-Leu-Ind). The constructs are hence two dimers, one trimer and one tetramer." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/60/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure7.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 6</a>).
 +
</p>
 +
<br>
 +
<center>
 +
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/60/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure7.png" title="Figure 6: Comparison of liquid cultures of <em>E. coli</em> BAP1 transformed with different Indigoidine-Tag constructs. The image shows a comparison of different constructs, varying in length. Shown are two tagged amino acids (Val-Ind and Asn-Ind), one tagged dipeptide (Orn-Val-Ind) and one tagged tripeptide (Phe-Orn-Leu-Ind). The constructs are hence two dimers, one trimer and one tetramer.">
-
The following primers were used for all CPEC experiments into standard BioBrick backbones: BBa_J04450_stem_loop_fw, Bba_J04450_B0034-RBS_ATG_rv, Bba_J04450_B0029-RBS_ATG_rv. The reverse primers (rv) differ in the ribosomal binding sites they introduce: Bba_J04450_B0034-RBS_ATG_rv contains the ribosomal binding site used in J04450, Bba_J04450_B0029-RBS_ATG_rv introduces the ribosomal binding site B0029 which is of weaker than B0034.
+
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/60/Heidelberg_Ind-Tag_Figure7.png"></img>
-
 
+
      <figcaption style="width:60%;"><b>Figure 6: Comparison of liquid cultures of <em>E. coli</em> BAP1 transformed with different Indigoidine-Tag constructs.</b> The image shows a comparison of different constructs, varying in length. Shown are two tagged amino acids (Val-Ind and Asn-Ind), one tagged dipeptide (Orn-Val-Ind) and one tagged tripeptide (Phe-Orn-Leu-Ind). The constructs are hence two dimers, one trimer and one tetramer.</figcaption>
-
 
+
    </a>
-
<h3>Generation of the ccdB-Ind construct</h3>
+
</center>
-
To minimize the background colonies when exchanging the T-domain of the indigoidine synthetase we generated the ccdB-Ind plasmid  where we replaced the indC T-domain with the ccdB gene (Modul structure: AoxA-ccdb-TE) which kills <em>E. coli</em> TOP10 cells but not <em>E. coli</em> OneShot ccdB survival cells. Test-transformation in both <em>E. coli</em> TOP10 and the <em>E. coli</em> OneShot ccdB survival cells showed that background colonies could be eliminated by this strategy (Plattenbild top10 vs survival cells).
+
<br>
-
We used the ccdB-Ind for all further CPEC experiments aiming to swap T-domains. Primers for the backbone CPEC fragments were designed to facilitate the amplification of the entire ccdB-Ind plasmid while omitting the ccdB sequence (compare to Figure??). Assembly of the finale indigoidine synthase products with exchanged T-domain was achieved by CPEC as described or above or HiCT (<a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/81332">RFC 99</a>).
+
<p>
-
 
+
From this, we deduced that indigoidine possesses characteristics required for a proper peptide tag that we would like to propose for the use within the community (<a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs">RFC 100</a>). For this purpose we have created a <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/Favorite_Parts">ccdB-dependent vector</a> to ease the tagging of NRPs, accessible through the parts registry. Design of such constructs is enabled with our software, the <a href="http://igem2013.bioquant.uni-heidelberg.de/NRPSDesigner/" title="wikilink">NRPS Designer</a>. The ccdB-helper-construct (<a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/Favorite_Parts">BBa_K1152007</a>) is designed to lower the background of negative transformants: If the insert is cloned in the vecor correctly, there is no active ccdB present and the cell will survive. If the backbone religates or template-backbone is still present in the Gibson-Mix, cells will die due to ccdB expression. The impact of ccdB expression is depicted in <a class="fancybox fancyFigure" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/4/40/Heidelberg_ccdB_comparison_2.png" title="Figure 7: Effect of ccdB on non-resistant cells. Regular <em>E. coli</em> TOP10 cells die in presence of active ccdB (left side), while ccdB-resistant cells survive (right side). Hence this comparison shows the effectiveness of ccdB and the minimization of background to about 0%. Using the ccdB-helper plasmid for a Gibson-driven tagging-approach enhances effectiveness significantly." rel="gallery1">Fig. 7</a>
-
<h3>Examination of T-domain borders</h3>
+
</p>
-
We exchanged the T-domain of indC with the T-domain of bpsA and varied the size of the exchanged DNA sequence, thus examining several domain borders (compare to Figure ??). We used the CPEC assembly method and the indC-ccdB plasmid for this approach.
+
<br>
-
<h3>Test of various T-domains from different NRPS modules</h3>
+
<center>
-
For the investigation of additional T-domains from less related NRPS modules, we selected the border combination b31??? which was positive in the test with bpsA. We used the T-domains of the following genes:
+
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/9/9a/Heidelberg_ccdB_comparison.png" title="Figure 7: Effect of ccdB on non-resistant cells. Regular <em>E. coli</em> TOP10 cells die in presence of active ccdB (left side), while ccdB-resistant cells survive (right side). Hence this comparison shows the effectiveness of ccdB and the minimization of background to about 0%. Using the ccdB-helper plasmid for a Gibson-driven tagging-approach enhances effectiveness significantly.">
 +
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/9/9a/Heidelberg_ccdB_comparison.png"></img>
 +
      <figcaption style="width:60%;"><b>Figure 7: Effect of ccdB on non-resistant cells.</b> Regular <em>E. coli</em> TOP10 cells die in presence of active ccdB (left side), while ccdB-resistant cells survive (right side). Hence this comparison shows the effectiveness of ccdB and the minimization of background to about 0%. Using the ccdB-helper plasmid for a Gibson-driven tagging-approach enhances effectiveness significantly.</figcaption>
 +
    </a>
 +
</center>
 +
<br>
</html>
</html>
-
<strong>Table 2: Genes of which T-domains have been extracted and introduced to indC</strong>
+
===Experimental Validation of Software Predictions===
-
{|class="wikitable"
+
<html><p>
-
|-
+
We propose the Indigoidine-Tag as a part of our standards <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs#rfc99">RFC 99</a> and <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs">RFC 100</a>. The crucial tool in this standardized process is the <a href="http://igem2013.bioquant.uni-heidelberg.de/NRPSDesigner/" title="wikilink">NRPS Designer</a>. The <a href="http://igem2013.bioquant.uni-heidelberg.de/NRPSDesigner/" title="wikilink">NRPS Designer</a> predicts module boundaries and linker regions based on <a class="fancybox fancyFigure" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/2/2e/Heidelberg2013_TycCAclustalComparison.png" title=" Clustal Omega MSA of different C-A domain borders of Tyrocidine cluster with annotation (prediction) of the start of the A domain according to different tools and experimental results." rel="gallery1">Hidden Markov Models</a>. We used these predictions for our module shuffling experiments, which all worked successfully in our constructs. However, other tools predict <a class="fancybox fancyFigure" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/2/2e/Heidelberg2013_TycCAclustalComparison.png" title=" Clustal Omega MSA of different C-A domain borders of Tyrocidine cluster with annotation (prediction) of the start of the A domain according to different tools and experimental results." rel="gallery1">different boarders</a>, hence, we wanted to evaluate the predictions to contribute more data to the NRPS Designer and to provide experimental feedback to our software. Therefore, we systematically varied the module boundaries of the A domain and C domain of C2 within the Val-Ind-construct in relation to the <a href="http://pfam.sanger.ac.uk/">Pfam</a> prediction. Based on this altered domain positioning, eight constructs were designed combining narrow, broad and original <a href="http://pfam.sanger.ac.uk/">Pfam</a> module regions (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 8: Overview of our constructs for investigation of the different domain borders in relation to Pfam. Dark colors are variations in the start-region of the A domain borders and light colors are variations in the end-region of the C domain. Setting of proper domain boarders is crucial for module shuffling, both, within and in between pathways and organisms. We hence assessed adequate definitions of where and how to build the linker regions by vaying them and checking for functionality. We therefore created the eight constructs shown above. Those are all valin-indigoidine synthetases with different settings of domain boarders." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ed/Heidelberg_Results_LV_overview2.png" rel="gallery1">Fig. 8</a>). Their functionality was always compared to the original construct based on the boundaries obtained from <a href="http://pfam.sanger.ac.uk/">Pfam</a>. We could induce the production of Val-Ind in two of our constructs: pLV03 (narrow and Pfam border) and pLV08 (broad and narrow border)
-
!Gene !!Organism !! Original function
+
</p>
-
|-
+
<br>
-
| entF || <em>Escherichia coli</em> K-12|| NRPS module of enterobactin synthesis pathway
+
<center>
-
|-
+
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ed/Heidelberg_Results_LV_overview2.png" title="Figure 8: Overview of our constructs for investigation of the different domain borders in relation to Pfam. Setting of proper domain boarders is crucial for module shuffling, both, within and in between pathways and organisms. We hence assessed adequate definitions of where and how to build the linker regions by vaying them and checking for functionality. We therefore created the eight constructs shown above. Those are all valin-indigoidine synthetases with different settings of domain boarders.">
-
|tycA1|| <em>Brevibacillus parabrevis</em>|| 1st module in tyrocidine synthesis cluster
+
-
|-
+
-
|tycC6|| <em>Brevibacillus parabrevis</em>|| Last module in tyrocidine synthesis cluster
+
-
|-
+
-
|delH4|| <em>Delftia acidovorans</em> SPH-1|| 2nd but last module in delftibactin synthesis cluster
+
-
|-
+
-
|delH5|| <em>Delftia acidovorans</em> SPH-1|| Last module in delftibaction synthesis cluster
+
-
|-
+
-
|plu2642|| <em>P. luminescens</em> DSM15139|| NRPS of unknown function (one module: A-T-TE)
+
-
|-
+
-
|plu2670|| <em>P. luminescens</em> DSM15139|| module of NRPS pathway of unknown function
+
-
|}
+
-
<html>
+
-
All T-domains from the respective genomes were amplified using CPEC primers with a uniform 5’-end and a 3’-end specific for the respective gene. For the assembly of the hybrid-indigoidine synthetases by CPEC, the indC-ccdB construct was used.
+
    <img style="width:40%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ed/Heidelberg_Results_LV_overview2.png"></img>
 +
    <figcaption style="width:60%"><b>Figure 8: Overview of our constructs for investigation of the different domain borders in relation to Pfam.</b> Dark colors are variations in the start-region of the A domain borders and light colors are variations in the end-region of the C domain. Setting of proper domain boarders is crucial for module shuffling, both, within and in between pathways and organisms. We hence assessed adequate definitions of where and how to build the linker regions by vaying them and checking for functionality. We therefore created the eight constructs shown above. Those are all valin-indigoidine synthetases with different settings of domain boarders.</figcaption>
 +
    </a>
 +
</center>
 +
<br>
 +
<p>
 +
To summarize, we successfully validated the concept of modularity both for intra- and interspecies shuffeling. We have integrated our experimental data and fuelled it into our software to improve its prediction accuracy. To make NRPSs and their custom design more accessible to the community, we have submitted standardized versions of the modules we used for our shuffling experiments, to the parts registry (see the <a href="http://parts.igem.org" title="wikilink">parts registry</a> entries).
 +
</p>
 +
<br>
 +
<h2 id="discussion">Discussion</h2>
 +
<p>
 +
The bottleneck to test libraries of combinatorial NRPSs with an array of different modules is in fact the screening for functional enzymes <span class="citation">[3]</span> <span class="citation">[4]</span>. How to identify novel NRPSs consisting of compatible modules? Our experimental results (<a class="fancybox fancyFigure" title="Figure 4: Comparative TLC of our tagged NRP Val-Ind with native indigoidine. Three different biological replicates of the produced NRP, a valin-indigoidine fusion peptide (Val-Ind), are compared to an indigoidine control (Ind-ctrl). Clearly visibly, the produced NRP shows a significantly altered migration behavior on Thin Layer Chromatography with Dichloromethane as running solvent." href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/9/9e/Heidelberg_TLC_5.png" rel="gallery2">Fig. 4</a>) strongly support the hypothesis that the synthesis of short peptides can be easily monitored when fused to indigoidine. This novel technique that represents an equivalence of the GFP-tag for proteins in NRPs outrules classical detection by Mass-Spec due to the increased efficiency and high-throughput character. Our findings that NRPSs seem to offer a framework going beyond species borders confirm the results shown by Marahiel <span class="citation">[1]</span>. Using indigoidine as pigment-module for the fusion results in a fusion NRP which is even detectable by eye.
 +
</p>
 +
<p>
 +
With this, we offer a novel and very efficient way of tagging NRPs with indigoidine. The dye can be easily measured, quantified and even <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/Project/Tag-Optimization">optimized</a>. This aspect furthermore appends a valuable feature of the NRPS Designer. Users now have the opportunity to easily add an Indigoidine-Tag when they design their constructs, which is also described in our proposed RFC (<a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs">RFC 100</a>). Noteworthy, our experiments we could show that the indigoidine tag works fine when put behind modules for different amino acids, but the tagging clearly works best, when an apolar, small spacer amino-acid such as Glycine, Alanine or, as in our experiments, valin is used, due to less steric hindrance.
 +
</p>
 +
<br>
 +
<center>
 +
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ef/Heidelberg_Val-Ind_NRPS_Protein.png" title="Title 9: Predicted tertiary structure of the valin-indigoidine-synthetase. Crucial domains are clearly visible and distinguishable in prediction. Prediction was carried out using PHYRE2 secondary structure prediction with multiple subsets of the protein sequence.">
-
<h3>Creation of synthetic T-domains</h3>
+
    <img style="width:20%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ef/Heidelberg_Val-Ind_NRPS_Protein.png"></img>
-
All R scripts used in the following sections are based on R version R-3.0.1.
+
    <figcaption style="width:60%"><b>Figure 9: Predicted tertiary structure of the valin-indigoidine-Synthetase.</b> Crucial domains are clearly visible and distinguishable in prediction. Prediction was carried out using PHYRE2 secondary structure prediction with multiple subsets of the protein sequence.</figcaption>
-
 
+
    </a>
-
Different assumptions about the evolutionary conservation of T-domains were examined: i) conservation of a specific module across different species, ii) conservation of T-domains across different modules for the same species, iii) conservation of T-domains across different species,  iv) conservation of similar modules across different species. According to these three assumptions, different libraries of homologous protein sequences were generated using ncbi protein BLAST (blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) with standard parameters:
+
</center>
-
</html>
+
<br>
-
# query sequence: indC; Search set: non-redundant protein sequences without organism restriction
+
-
# query sequence: indC T-domain; Search set: non-redundant protein sequences within <em>P. luminescens</em>
+
-
# query sequence: indC T-domain; Search set: non-redundant protein sequences without organism restriction
+
-
# query sequences: indC, bpsA, entF, delH5 and tycC6; Search set: non-redundant protein sequences without organism restriction;
+
-
<html>
+
-
The 50 closest related protein sequences contained in each the library were subjected to a multiple sequence alignment (MSA) using clustalO (<a href="http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/msa/clustalo/">http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/msa/clustalo/</a>). with standard parameters for protein alignments. For library generation iv), each query sequence was BLASTed separately and the 50 best results of each query were combined i.e. a total of 250 sequences for the MSA.
+
-
 
+
-
After library generation, the following three methods were employed to design different synthetic T-domains.
+
-
 
+
-
<h4>Consensus method<h4>
+
-
Based on the  .clustal file obtained from the MSA of the homology libraries, a consensus sequence using the UGENE software (<a href="http://ugene.unipro.ru/">http://ugene.unipro.ru/</a>) with a threshold of 50% was created (i.e. if an amino acid appears in 50% or more of all sequences at a specific position it is considered as a consensus amino acid). For the creation of the synthetic T-domains, this consensus sequence was used to fill the gaps where there was no consensus amino acid with the original amino acid from the indC T-domain. By this approach, T-domains were generated which might deviate from the original sequence at positions with at least average conservation but coreespond to the original one if there is less conservation. 
+
-
 
+
-
 
+
-
<h4>Guided random method</h4>
+
-
In this approach, the multiple sequence alignments (MSA) generated by the consensus method was used. Implemented in R [Referenz], a position-specific profile was generated which has the same length as the MSA and contains the rate at which amino acids occur at any given position of the sequence alignment. The synthetic T-domain is created by position-wise generation of the sequence where the probability of choosing an amino acid at a given position is determined by the rate in the profile.
+
-
 
+
-
 
+
-
<h4>Randomized generation method</h4>
+
-
For generation of synthetic sequences by the randomized generation method, every amino acid was assigned a score of 1 or 0, i.e. occuring at least ones or not at all at a given position in the MSA. In the subsequent generation of the synthetic T-domain sequence of the synthetic domain, any amino acid assigned 1 had the same likelihood of being chosen at this position.
+
<p>
<p>
-
Seven synthetic T-domains were designed based on differnt combinations of the homology libraries and sequence generation methods.
+
Compared to other potential methods for <em>in-vivo</em> tagging of NRPs, as it has been described before <span class="citation">[5]</span> and <span class="citation">[6]</span>, the Indigoidine tag has the apparent advantage that it is relatively small compared to e.g. a His tag, for which four to nine Histidines are required. Synthesizing a short peptide with several modules for Histidine is imaginable, but would double or triple the size of the required NRPS, and hence of the vector, which is highly ineffective. Fluorescent proteins (FPs) have the advantage of easy detection but are simply too big to use them. Imagining e.g. GFP synthesized by an NRPS is practically not feasible. In summary, the Indigoidine-Tag, in contrast to all other imaginable tagging methods for NRPs fulfills the required characteristics of being small, inert, universal <em>and</em> easily detectable.
</p>
</p>
 +
<p>
 +
As far as <em>in-vitro</em> approaches are concerned, there are, in principle, two ways.
 +
<br><br>
 +
I) Either one could add a tagging agent to the cells or the medium before purification – which would be the case for e.g. Click-Chemistry.
 +
<br>
 +
II) Or one could add a certain tag such as a His tag to the NRPS and perform the entire synthesis of the NRP <em>in vitro</em>.
 +
<br><br>
 +
The latter approach has been widely used <span class="citation">[7]</span> <span class="citation">[8]</span>, is, however in vitro and hence less effective for a high-throughput advance as a functioning in-vivo-method. Besides, the upscaling of such an approach would hardly be feasible due to increasing expenses that would turn down financability. We ourselves thought of using methods such as Click-Chemistry for the purification of the short, synthetic peptides. Increased masses and easy cleavage enable high purities and can be determined via HPLC with UV and ESI-MS detection <span class="citation">[9]</span>. This approach, however, does not offer any opportunity to evaluate expression <em>in vivo</em> <span class="citation">[10]</span>.
 +
 +
</p>
 +
<p>
 +
Hence, using and Indigoidine-Tag, which can be added to the nascent NRP in the process of its formation by adding a 4 kbp indigoidine-module to the NRPS is a novel and effective approach for labeling NRPs for quantitative expression analysis. Its properties and effects for peptide synthesis via NRPS compare to the ones of <b>GFP</b> for proteins: it is relatively <b>inert, easily detectable and universal.</b>
 +
</p>
 +
<br>
 +
<h2 id="meth">Methods</h2>
</html>
</html>
-
<strong>Table 3: Overview of the homology libraries and sequence generation methods employed for the generation of seven synthetic T-domains</strong>
+
===Purification of Indigoidine and Tagged Constructs===
-
{|class="wikitable"
+
-
|-
+
-
!Domain ID !!Homology library !!Sequence generation method
+
-
|-
+
-
|synT1|| library i|| consensus
+
-
|-
+
-
|synT2|| library ii|| consensus
+
-
|-
+
-
|synT3|| library iii|| consensus
+
-
|-
+
-
|synT4|| library iv|| consensus
+
-
|-
+
-
|synT5|| library i|| guided random
+
-
|-
+
-
|synT6|| library iv|| guided random
+
-
|-
+
-
|synT7|| library i|| randomized generation
+
-
|}
+
<html>
<html>
-
<p>
+
1 ml of IPTG-induced, blue culture was spun down at full speed (14,000 rpm) for 20 minutes, washed in 1 ml of methanol and centrifuged once more for 5 minutes at 14,000 rpm. Methanol was discarded and samples were dissolved in 200-400 µl DMSO.
-
Figure ??shows the multiple sequence alignment of the seven synthetic T-domains and the native indC T-domain.
+
</p>
 +
<br>
 +
<center>
 +
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/5/55/Heidelberg_Methods_Purification.png" title="Figure 10: Workflow followed during purification of the tagged peptides. A: Blue overnight culture with the secreted tagged peptide to purify. B: Blue pellet after spinning down cells for 20 minutes at 14,000 rpm. C: The pellet is washed in methanol and spun down again. D: The tagged peptide dissolves in DMSO and can be applied to TLC or further purified if wished.">
-
After the generation of the T-domain amino acid sequences, the OPTIMIZER web-tool(<a href="http://genomes.urv.es/OPTIMIZER/">http://genomes.urv.es/OPTIMIZER/</a>) was used to obtain the corresponding DNA sequence. <em>E. coli</em> K-12 was set as strain for codon optimization and <em>most frequent</em> was chosen as codon option. The generated DNA sequence was cured from internal RFC10 cutting sites and CPEC cloning overhang required for the T-domain swapping into the ccdb construct were introduced. The synthetic T-domains were ordered at IDT (Integrated DNA Technologies, Coralville, Iowa). In order to obtain sufficient amounts of DNA, the synthetic T-domains were amplified via PCR.
+
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/5/55/Heidelberg_Methods_Purification.png" ></img>
-
 
+
    <figcaption style="width:60%;"><b>Figure 10: Workflow followed during purification of the tagged peptides.</b> A: Blue overnight culture with the secreted tagged peptide to purify. B: Blue pellet after spinning down cells for 20 minutes at 14,000 rpm. C: The pellet is washed in methanol and spun down again. D: The tagged peptide dissolves in DMSO and can be applied to TLC or further purified if wished.</figcaption>
-
IndC-hybrid constructs of the native IndC with exchange of the native T-domain by the synthetic variants were assembled using CPEC and the indC-ccdB construct as backbone. The synthetic T-domains were amplified for CPEC using the same primers as for the native indC T-domain.
+
</a>
-
</p>
+
</center>
 +
<br>
</html>
</html>
-
<strong>Table 4: <em>Overview of primers that MAY be utilized for backbone linearization:</em> The reverse primers (rv) differ in
+
===Thin Layer Chromatography===
-
the ribosomal binding sites they introduce: BBa_J04450_B0034-RBS_ATG_rv contains the ribosomal binding site
+
-
B0034, BBa_J04450_B0029-RBS_ATG_rv introduces the ribosomal binding site B0029 which is weaker than B0034.
+
-
Note that the 5' overhangs (underlined) of the reverse primers (rv) already include the start codon (depicted in bold) of
+
-
the coding sequence to be introduced as insert into the corresponding backbone. The resulting expression cassette will
+
-
be driven by the Plac promoter (R0010).
+
-
</strong>
+
-
{|class="wikitable"
+
-
|-
+
-
!Primer !!Primer sequence(5’ --> 3’)!!Cutting site
+
-
|-
+
-
|BBa_J04450_stem_loop_fw||<u>TAATGA ''GCTAGC''</u> TAATAACGCTGATAGTGCTAGTG|| ''NheI''
+
-
|-
+
-
|BBa_J04450_B0034-RBS_ATG_rv||<u>CAT ''GGTACC''</u> TTTCTCCTCTTT CTCTAGTATGTGTG|| ''KpnI''
+
-
|-
+
-
|BBa_J04450_B0029-RBS_ATG_rv||<u>CAT ''GGATCC'' GGTTTCCTGTGTGAA</u> CTCTAGTATGTGTGAAATTGTTATCC|| ''NheI''
+
-
|}
+
<html>
<html>
 +
TLC was carried out on silica-gel as immobile phase and Dichloromethane as mobile phase. For the procedure, a 50 ml beaker was filled with ~15 ml Dichloromethane and let stand for about 10 minutes (in order to let the Dichloromethane-vapor fill the beaker). The TLC plate, coated with silica-gel was spotted with sample 0.5 to 1 cm above the lower edge and placed in the beaker. TLC was run until the solvent front was at two thirds of the TLC plate. As indigoidine is light-sensitive, the beaker was covered with aluminium foil in order to prevent direct light irradiation.
 +
</p></html>
 +
===Column Chromatography===
 +
<html>
 +
In order to show that further purification (beyond the regular purification procedure) is feasible and easy with the tagged peptides, we provide a protocol for analysis and purification of the sample via column-chromatography. For this purpose, the purified sample that is dissolved in DMSO is applied to a Pre-Packed column G25, as running buffer, DMSO was used. DMSO is constantly applied to the column to prevent it from drying. All uncolored fractions are discarded, while the blue fraction is kept and collected in a 2 ml Eppendorf tube. This purified extract (with the sample dissolved in DMSO) can then be used for TLC or Mass-Spectrometry if desired.
 +
</p>
 +
<br>
 +
<center>
 +
<a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/b/b2/Heidelberg_Methods_Column.png" title="Figure 11: Column Chromatography of tagged peptides. A: The blue fraction can be easily detected and collected. B: The purified product is dissolved and DMSO and can then be further analyzed.">
-
<h3>Quantitative indigoidine production assay</h3>
+
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/b/b2/Heidelberg_Methods_Column.png" ></img>
-
<h4>1. OD MEASUREMENT by TECAN plate reader</h4>
+
    <figcaption style="width:60%;"><b>Figure 11: Column Chromatography of tagged peptides.</b> A: The blue fraction can be easily detected and collected. B: The purified product is dissolved and DMSO and can then be further analyzed.</figcaption>
-
96-well plates are prepared with 100 μl LB-medium/well containing appropriate antibiotics (chloramphenicol and kanamycin for the indigoidine and PPTase contrcuts, respectively) and each well is inoculated with single colonies (in duplicates) from plates positive for the co-tansformation experiments i.e. from plates with blue colonies. Two sets of negative controls are also inoculated on the plate: First, pure medium serving as the baseline for background correction for the OD measurements. Second, transformation controls accounting for potential differences in cell growth due to expression of proteins contained on the plasmids, i.e. the antibitotic resistance gene and IndC. In this set of controls, the plasmid used in co-transformation with the PPTase plasmid contains IndC-constructs carrying a randomly generated sequence instead of the T-domain.  A second 96 well plate was prepared with 180 µl LB-medium/well for the measurement itself. The 96-well plate containing the pre-cultures of the co-transformed colonies was inoculated for 24 hours at 37°C. Subsequently, 20 µl of the pre-culture was transferred to the measurement plate. The absorbance of the bacterial cultures was measured at wavelengths ranging from 400 nm to 800 nm in intervals of 10 nm for each well every 30 min for 30 hours at 30°C in a Tecan infinite M200 plate reader. For the measurement plate, Greiner 96-well flat black plates with a clear lid were used.
+
</a>
-
 
+
</center>
-
<h4>2. Data analysis</h4>
+
<br>
-
<p>
+
<h3><a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs">RFC 100</a></h3>
-
Detecting the amount of the NRP expressed by the bacterial host strain is desirable. By tagging the NRP with indigoidine, the amount of the fusion peptide can be determined by quantifying the amount of blue pigment present in the cells. As the amount of blue pigment is proportional to the amount of the NRP of interest, a method for the quantification of the blue pigment will yield information about the expression of the NRP. Quantification of the pure indigoidine pigment can be easily achieved by optical density (OD) measurements at its maximum wavelength of about 590 nm.  
+
<b>For the entire practical procedure of the lab-work that is involved in our standardized protocol for high-throughput cloning and fast purification and validation of the product, feel welcome to visit the <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg/RFCs">RFC 100</a>-page.
-
In cellular culture, indigoidine quantification by OD measurements is impaired. Cellular density of liquid cultures is standardly measured as the optical density (OD) at a wave length of 600 nm, i. e.  the absorption peak of indigoidine interferes with the measurement of cell density at the preferred wave length (compare to Figure 3, grey dashed line).  Thus, for measurement of NRP expression without time consuming a priori purification of the tagged-protein, a method to separate the cellular and pigment-derived contributions to the OD is required (compare to Figure 3, brown and blue lines, respectively). The method of choice, as described by Myers et al.[2013], requires the OD measurement of  cell culture at two distinct wavelengths: the robust wave length ODR and the sensitive wave length ODS.  The concentration of indigoidine will have to be deducted from measurements at ODS = 590 nm:
+
-
</html><math>
+
-
OD_{S,+P}
+
-
</math><html>
+
-
[Indigoidine]= 〖〖OD〗_(S,+P)-OD〗_(S,-P)
+
-
with 〖OD〗_(S,+P) being the overall OD measurement and 〖OD〗_(S,-P) being the scattering contribution of the cellular components at the sensitive OD.  
+
-
The scattering contribution of the cellular compenents at ODS  (ODS,-P ) can be calculated from the scattering contribution measured at the robust wave length according to the following formula:  
+
-
[[File:
+
-
The correction factor δ is be determined by measuring the OD of pure cellular culture without indigoidine at both the wavelength  〖OD〗_(S,-P) and 〖OD〗_R and calculating their ratio.
+
-
Finally, the indigoidine production can be determined as
+
-
[[File:Heidelberg_5.png]]
+
-
 
+
-
For the calculation of the cellular component when measuring indigoidine producing liquid cell cultures, OD measurement at 800 nm as robust wavelength is recommended. By the approach described above, quantitative observation of the indigoidine production in a liquid culture over time as well as the indigoidine production in relation to the cell growth can be conducted.  
+
-
 
+
-
Background correction i. e. the contribution of the culture medium to the OD measurement is achieved by subtracting the mean of pure culture medium replicates from all OD values measured.
+
</p>
</p>
-
 
+
<br>
-
               
+
</div>
-
                  <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/4/4b/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig4.png">
+
                <div class="col-sm-12 jumbotron">
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/4/4b/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig4.png"></img>
+
                    <div class="references">
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 4</b>:  
+
<!--
-
    </figcaption>
+
<p>1. Marahiel MA, Stachelhaus T, Mootz HD (1997) Modular Peptide Synthetases Involved in Nonribosomal Peptide Synthesis. Chem Rev 97: 2651–2674.</p>
-
        </a>
+
<p>2. Finking R, Marahiel MA (2004) Biosynthesis of nonribosomal peptides. Annu Rev Microbiol 58: 453–488.</p>
-
       
+
<p>3. Marahiel MA (2009) Working outside the protein-synthesis rules: insights into non-ribosomal peptide synthesis. J Pept Sci 15: 799–807.</p>
-
                  <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/64/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig5.png">
+
<p>4. Weber T, Marahiel MA (2001) Exploring the domain structure of modular nonribosomal peptide synthetases. Structure 9: R3–R9.</p>
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/6/64/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig5.png"></img>
+
<p>5. Stachelhaus T, Mootz HD, Bergendahl V, Marahiel MA (1998) Peptide bond formation in nonribosomal peptide biosynthesis. Catalytic role of the condensation domain. J Biol Chem 273: 22773–22781.</p>
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 5</b>: Quantification of dye in cellular culture by OD measurements at robust and sensitive wavelengths. The contribution of the scattering by the cellular components at the sensitive wavelength, i.e. 590 nm for indigoidine has to be subtracted from the overall OD at this wavelength. For a detailed description of the calculation refer to text below.
+
<p>6. Owen JG, Copp JN, Ackerley DF (2011) Rapid and flexible biochemical assays for evaluating 4’-phosphopantetheinyl transferase activity. Biochem J 436: 709–717.</p>
-
Figure adopted from [Myers, 2013]
+
<p>7. Schwarzer D, Mootz HD, Marahiel MA (2001) Exploring the impact of different thioesterase domains for the design of hybrid peptide synthetases. Chem Biol 8: 997–1010.</p>
-
    </figcaption>
+
<p>8. Stein DB, Linne U, Hahn M, Marahiel MA (2006) Impact of epimerization domains on the intermodular transfer of enzyme-bound intermediates in nonribosomal peptide synthesis. Chembiochem 7: 1807–1814.</p>
-
        </a>
+
<p>9. Stein DB, Linne U, Marahiel MA (2005) Utility of epimerization domains for the redesign of nonribosomal peptide synthetases. FEBS J 272: 4506–4520.</p>
-
       
+
<p>10. Hur GH, Meier JL, Baskin J, Codelli JA, Bertozzi CR, et al. (2009) Crosslinking studies of protein-protein interactions in nonribosomal peptide biosynthesis. Chem Biol 16: 372–381.</p>
-
        <a class="fancybox fancyGraphical" href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/7/75/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig_multiplot.png">
+
<p>11. Hahn M, Stachelhaus T (2004) Selective interaction between nonribosomal peptide synthetases is facilitated by short communication-mediating domains. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101: 15585–15590.</p>
-
    <img style="width:60%; margin-bottom:10px; padding:1%;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-radius: 5px;" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/7/75/Heidelberg_IndPD_Fig_multiplot.png"></img>
+
--!>
-
    <figcaption><b>Figure 12</b>:  
+
<p>1. Doekel S, Marahiel MA (2000) Dipeptide formation on engineered hybrid peptide synthetases. Chem Biol 7: 373–384.</p>
-
    </figcaption>
+
<p>2. Brachmann AO, Kirchner F, Kegler C, Kinski SC, Schmitt I, et al. (2012) Triggering the production of the cryptic blue pigment indigoidine from Photorhabdus luminescens. J Biotechnol 157: 96–99.</p>
-
        </a>
+
<p>3. Nguyen KT, Ritz D, Gu J-Q, Alexander D, Chu M, et al. (2006) Combinatorial biosynthesis of novel antibiotics related to daptomycin. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103: 17462–17467.</p>
-
 
+
<p>4. Reverchon S, Rouanet C, Expert D, Nasser W (2002) Characterization of indigoidine biosynthetic genes in Erwinia chrysanthemi and role of this blue pigment in pathogenicity. J Bacteriol 184: 654–665.</p>
-
            </div>
+
<p>5. Yin J, Straight PD, McLoughlin SM, Zhou Z, Lin AJ, et al. (2005) Genetically encoded short peptide tag for versatile protein labeling by Sfp phosphopantetheinyl transferase. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102: 15815–15820.</p>
-
           
+
<p>6. Zhou Z, Cironi P, Lin AJ, Xu Y, Hrvatin S, et al. (2007) Genetically encoded short peptide tags for orthogonal protein labeling by Sfp and AcpS phosphopantetheinyl transferases. ACS chemical biology 2: 337–346.</p>
-
            <div class="references jumbotron" style="margin-top:5%">
+
<p>7. Butz D, Schmiederer T, Hadatsch B, Wohlleben W, Weber T, et al. (2008) Module extension of a non-ribosomal peptide synthetase of the glycopeptide antibiotic balhimycin produced by Amycolatopsis balhimycina. Chembiochem 9: 1195–1200.</p>
-
<p>1. Fischbach MA, Walsh CT (2006) Assembly-line enzymology for
+
<p>8. Mootz HD, Schwarzer D, Marahiel MA (2000) Construction of hybrid peptide synthetases by module and domain fusions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 5848–5853.</p>
-
polyketide and nonribosomal Peptide antibiotics: logic, machinery, and
+
<p>9. Franke R, Doll C, Eichler J (2005) Peptide ligation through click chemistry for the generation of assembled and scaffolded peptides. Tetrahedron letters 46: 4479–4482.</p>
-
mechanisms. Chem Rev 106: 3468–3496.</p>
+
<p>10. Kolb HC, Finn MG, Sharpless KB (2001) Click chemistry: diverse chemical function from a few good reactions. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 40: 2004–2021.</p>
-
<p>2. Takahashi H, Kumagai T, Kitani K, Mori M, Matoba Y, et al.
+
-
(2007) Cloning and characterization of a Streptomyces single module
+
-
type non-ribosomal peptide synthetase catalyzing a blue pigment
+
-
synthesis. In:. Vol. 282. pp. 9073–9081.</p>
+
-
<p>3. Brachmann AO, Kirchner F, Kegler C, Kinski SC, Schmitt I, et al.
+
-
(2012) Triggering the production of the cryptic blue pigment
+
-
indigoidine from Photorhabdus luminescens. In:. Vol. 157. pp.
+
-
96–99.</p>
+
-
<p>4. Owen JG, Robins KJ, Parachin NS, Ackerley DF (2012) A functional
+
-
screen for recovery of 4’-phosphopantetheinyl transferase and
+
-
associated natural product biosynthesis genes from metagenome
+
-
libraries. In:. Vol. 14. pp. 1198–1209.</p>
+
-
<p>5. Doekel S, Marahiel MA (2000) Dipeptide formation on engineered
+
-
hybrid peptide synthetases. In:. Vol. 7. pp. 373–384.</p>
+
-
<p>6. Thirlway J, Lewis R, Nunns L, Al Nakeeb M, Styles M, et al.
+
-
(2012) Introduction of a non-natural amino acid into a nonribosomal
+
-
peptide antibiotic by modification of adenylation domain specificity.
+
-
In:. Vol. 51. pp. 7181–7184.</p>
+
-
<p>7. Pfeifer BA, Admiraal SJ, Gramajo H, Cane DE, Khosla C (2001)
+
-
Biosynthesis of complex polyketides in a metabolically engineered
+
-
strain of E. coli. In:. Vol. 291. pp. 1790–1792.</p>
+
</div>
</div>
         </div>
         </div>

Latest revision as of 03:52, 29 October 2013

Indigoidine-Tag. Introducing the GFP for NRPs.

Highlights

  • Creation of an easily detectable, inert and universal NRPS-Tag using the indigoidine Synthetase
  • Simple Verification of Non-Ribosomal Peptides via Thin Layer Chromatography
  • Proof of principle module shuffling and domain-import among species
  • Establishment of a standardized protocol for High-Throughput NRPS-assays: RFC 100 and RFC 99

Abstract

Synthesizing peptides with various functions using Non-Ribosomal Peptide Syntheatses (NRPS) provides access to more than 500 building blocks, and hence opens up a diverse spectrum of possible products. However, detection of the Non-Ribosomal Peptide (NRP), as well as high-throughput screening of peptide functionality remained complicated or even impossible. Thus, an easily detectable, inert and universal tag that allows simplified screening and detection, similar to the GFP-tag for proteins would be required.

Indigoidine, a blue pigment which is synthesized by the NRPS IndC from Photorhabdus luminescens laumondii TT01 (DSM15139), was established as a novel and application-oriented tag functionally fused to synthesized peptides. Streamlining this process demonstrates a substantial reinforcement of the NRPS-Designer, our software tool, and offers the possibility to evaluate and optimize synthesis of NRPs in a high-throughput manner (RFC 99 & RFC 100).

Introduction

Non-Ribosomal Peptide Synthetases (NRPS) are assembly lines which consist of several modules, each module incorporating one specific amino acid into the growing peptide chain (for a more detailled introduction into NRPS, please refer to our Background Page). As previously shown by both other research groups [1] and our work (Project Peptide-Synthesis), NRPS modules can be rearranged to form a novel assembly line which produces a custom, non-ribosomal peptide. However, the detection of those synhetic peptides using mass spectrometry is still challenging. In order to simplify the detection of peptides created by custom NRPSs, we developed a blue pigment tag for non-ribosomal peptides - the Indigoidine-Tag.

The indigoidine synthetase indC from Photorhabdus luminescens laumondii TT01 consists of an Adenylation domain with an internal Oxidation domain, a Thiolation domain and a ThioEsterase domain. The A-domain adenylates L-glutamine which is then attached to the T-domain via a thioester bond. The TE-domain catalyzes the cyclization of the glutamine and cleaves it from the T-domain. Two cyclic glutamines are oxidized by the Ox-domain, resulting in the blue pigment dimer indigoidine (Fig. 1a)[2]. This leads to a blue phenotype of E. coli cells expressing the indC gene when grown on plates or in liquid cultures (Fig. 1b). The blue pigment can be purified and dissolved in DMSO using a simple protocol.


Figure 1: The indigoidine synthetase IndC catalyzes the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine. a) The indigoidine synthetase indC from P. luminescens is a single module NRPS catalyzing the formation of the blue pigment indigoidine by cyclization and oxidation of two L-glutamines. b) Expression of a functional indigoidine synthetase in E. coli BAP1 cells leads to a blue phenotype.

We fused the indC gene to NRPS modules of the tyrocidine synthesis cluster from Brevibacillus parabrevis to create novel NRPS assembly lines which attach the blue pigment indigoidine to the last amino acid of the synthesized peptide (Fig. 2). After purification, the tagged peptide can be validated using comparative Thin Layer Chromatography (TLC) or Mass-Spectrometry (MassSpec) after purification by High Pressure Liquid Chromatography (HPLC).


Figure 2: The IndC module is fused to other NRPS modules to establish the Indigoidine-Tag. When combining the coding sequences of NRPS modules from diverse Non-Ribosomal Peptide Synthetases, such as antibiotic biosynthesis clusters, with the indC indigoidine synthetase module, the resulting assembly line will eventually produce a indigoidine-tagged peptide.

The possibility of tagging non-ribosomal peptides makes high-throughput protocols possible. Therefore, we created a standardized procedure for the production of NRPs in our RFC100: i) design of novel NRPSs with our NRPS-Designer software, ii) high-throughput construction of NRPS-libraries, iii) the detection and validation of the synthetic peptides and iv) functional assays with possible upscaling of the peptide production to industrial level.


Results

Showing Inter-Species Module Compatibility by Fusion of Tyrocidine Modules to the Indigoidine Synthetase

Our module-shuffling approach within the tyrocidine cluster was confirmed by MassSpec. Access to such special technical devices and the referring expertise is demanded for detection of small peptides but often limited. That is why we were thinking of a potential alternative to test for the synthesis of NRPs. We wanted to establish an assay accessible to the majority of the community for validation of the presence of custom peptides. Since the synthetase for indigoidine consists of only a single module, it could serve as a paradigm for the fusion to modules of other NRPSs. The pigment indigoidine could potentially ease detection of peptides when they are fused to the dye that is visible by eye.

Thus we wanted to investigate whether it is possible to fuse indigoidine as a tag to NRPs of other pathways even originating from other species. In the following, we will showcase the extent of NRPSs’ modular compatibility by creating inter-species module-fusions between the indigoidine synthetase from P. luminescens and modules of the tyrocidine synthetase from B. parabrevis. In those fusion NRPs, indigoidine serves as a tag that eases identification of E. coli clones synthesizing the customized peptide.

Fusing Single Amino Acids to Indigoidine

First, we combined single modules of the tyrocidine synthetase with the indC synthetase resulting in three distinct NRPSs producing asparagine, valine or phenylalanine respectively, all tagged with indigoidine (see Fig. 3).


Figure 3: Composition of three fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC). Figure 3: Composition of three fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC). Labeling of modules in the first row describes the modules of the tyrocidine synthetase. Coloured modules in the three rows below were fused together to create plasmids encoding for novel NRPSs (depicted in gray rectangle).

To assure compatibility, the indigoidine module was always preceded by the C2 module, as the tyc-C2 is specific for glutamine which is required for indigoidine production. SDS-PAGE showed the expected bands for the expression of the NRP synthetases in the transformed BAP1. The E. coli strain BAP1 was used for expression of the NRPS fusions because it carries the required PPTase sfp under the control of a T7 promoter. All three of the fusion variants turned the colonies blue even before expression induction with IPTG. The blue pigment thus served a first indicator that peptide synthesis was successful. To further verify the existence of the fusion peptide, we ran comparative TLC. The native, purified indigoidine ran further than our purified dipeptides suggesting that the amino acids were indeed fused to the pigment (Fig. 4). The peptides were detected under visible and UV light due to indigoidine’s properties as a dye.


Figure 4: Comparative TLC of our tagged NRP Val-Ind with native indigoidine. Three different biological replicates of the produced NRP, a valin-indigoidine fusion peptide (Val-Ind), are compared to an indigoidine control (Ind-ctrl). Clearly visibly, the tagged NRP shows an altered migration behavior on TLC with Dichloromethane as running solvent.

Using Indigoidine as a Tag for Non-Ribosomal Peptides

To gather additional evidence for our functional indigoidine tag, we assembled seven variants with up to three modules in front of the indigoidine synthetase (Fig. 5) following the same approach as described above.


Figure 5: Composition of seven fusion constructs originating from tyrocidine (tyc) synthetase modules and the indigoidine synthetase (indC). The contructs depicted above serve as a proof of principle for the tagging of Non-Ribosomal Peptides with indigoidine. Several constructs were created using a valin-spacer in order to assess the influence of sterically hindrance of bigger or polar amino acids. To be able to show the applicability of the tag most clearly, the di- and tripeptide constructs described on the Peptide Synthesis page, were tagged with indigoidine as well.

Again the constructs pPW06, pPW09, pPW10, pPW11 and pPW12 (Fig. 5) turned E. coli BAP1 colonies blue upon transformation. Even with increasing peptide length, synthesis did not seem to be affected and the dye-properties of the indigoidine were still preserved (Fig. 6).


Figure 6: Comparison of liquid cultures of E. coli BAP1 transformed with different Indigoidine-Tag constructs. The image shows a comparison of different constructs, varying in length. Shown are two tagged amino acids (Val-Ind and Asn-Ind), one tagged dipeptide (Orn-Val-Ind) and one tagged tripeptide (Phe-Orn-Leu-Ind). The constructs are hence two dimers, one trimer and one tetramer.

From this, we deduced that indigoidine possesses characteristics required for a proper peptide tag that we would like to propose for the use within the community (RFC 100). For this purpose we have created a ccdB-dependent vector to ease the tagging of NRPs, accessible through the parts registry. Design of such constructs is enabled with our software, the NRPS Designer. The ccdB-helper-construct (BBa_K1152007) is designed to lower the background of negative transformants: If the insert is cloned in the vecor correctly, there is no active ccdB present and the cell will survive. If the backbone religates or template-backbone is still present in the Gibson-Mix, cells will die due to ccdB expression. The impact of ccdB expression is depicted in Fig. 7


Figure 7: Effect of ccdB on non-resistant cells. Regular E. coli TOP10 cells die in presence of active ccdB (left side), while ccdB-resistant cells survive (right side). Hence this comparison shows the effectiveness of ccdB and the minimization of background to about 0%. Using the ccdB-helper plasmid for a Gibson-driven tagging-approach enhances effectiveness significantly.

Experimental Validation of Software Predictions

We propose the Indigoidine-Tag as a part of our standards RFC 99 and RFC 100. The crucial tool in this standardized process is the NRPS Designer. The NRPS Designer predicts module boundaries and linker regions based on Hidden Markov Models. We used these predictions for our module shuffling experiments, which all worked successfully in our constructs. However, other tools predict different boarders, hence, we wanted to evaluate the predictions to contribute more data to the NRPS Designer and to provide experimental feedback to our software. Therefore, we systematically varied the module boundaries of the A domain and C domain of C2 within the Val-Ind-construct in relation to the Pfam prediction. Based on this altered domain positioning, eight constructs were designed combining narrow, broad and original Pfam module regions (Fig. 8). Their functionality was always compared to the original construct based on the boundaries obtained from Pfam. We could induce the production of Val-Ind in two of our constructs: pLV03 (narrow and Pfam border) and pLV08 (broad and narrow border)


Figure 8: Overview of our constructs for investigation of the different domain borders in relation to Pfam. Dark colors are variations in the start-region of the A domain borders and light colors are variations in the end-region of the C domain. Setting of proper domain boarders is crucial for module shuffling, both, within and in between pathways and organisms. We hence assessed adequate definitions of where and how to build the linker regions by vaying them and checking for functionality. We therefore created the eight constructs shown above. Those are all valin-indigoidine synthetases with different settings of domain boarders.

To summarize, we successfully validated the concept of modularity both for intra- and interspecies shuffeling. We have integrated our experimental data and fuelled it into our software to improve its prediction accuracy. To make NRPSs and their custom design more accessible to the community, we have submitted standardized versions of the modules we used for our shuffling experiments, to the parts registry (see the parts registry entries).


Discussion

The bottleneck to test libraries of combinatorial NRPSs with an array of different modules is in fact the screening for functional enzymes [3] [4]. How to identify novel NRPSs consisting of compatible modules? Our experimental results (Fig. 4) strongly support the hypothesis that the synthesis of short peptides can be easily monitored when fused to indigoidine. This novel technique that represents an equivalence of the GFP-tag for proteins in NRPs outrules classical detection by Mass-Spec due to the increased efficiency and high-throughput character. Our findings that NRPSs seem to offer a framework going beyond species borders confirm the results shown by Marahiel [1]. Using indigoidine as pigment-module for the fusion results in a fusion NRP which is even detectable by eye.

With this, we offer a novel and very efficient way of tagging NRPs with indigoidine. The dye can be easily measured, quantified and even optimized. This aspect furthermore appends a valuable feature of the NRPS Designer. Users now have the opportunity to easily add an Indigoidine-Tag when they design their constructs, which is also described in our proposed RFC (RFC 100). Noteworthy, our experiments we could show that the indigoidine tag works fine when put behind modules for different amino acids, but the tagging clearly works best, when an apolar, small spacer amino-acid such as Glycine, Alanine or, as in our experiments, valin is used, due to less steric hindrance.


Figure 9: Predicted tertiary structure of the valin-indigoidine-Synthetase. Crucial domains are clearly visible and distinguishable in prediction. Prediction was carried out using PHYRE2 secondary structure prediction with multiple subsets of the protein sequence.

Compared to other potential methods for in-vivo tagging of NRPs, as it has been described before [5] and [6], the Indigoidine tag has the apparent advantage that it is relatively small compared to e.g. a His tag, for which four to nine Histidines are required. Synthesizing a short peptide with several modules for Histidine is imaginable, but would double or triple the size of the required NRPS, and hence of the vector, which is highly ineffective. Fluorescent proteins (FPs) have the advantage of easy detection but are simply too big to use them. Imagining e.g. GFP synthesized by an NRPS is practically not feasible. In summary, the Indigoidine-Tag, in contrast to all other imaginable tagging methods for NRPs fulfills the required characteristics of being small, inert, universal and easily detectable.

As far as in-vitro approaches are concerned, there are, in principle, two ways.

I) Either one could add a tagging agent to the cells or the medium before purification – which would be the case for e.g. Click-Chemistry.
II) Or one could add a certain tag such as a His tag to the NRPS and perform the entire synthesis of the NRP in vitro.

The latter approach has been widely used [7] [8], is, however in vitro and hence less effective for a high-throughput advance as a functioning in-vivo-method. Besides, the upscaling of such an approach would hardly be feasible due to increasing expenses that would turn down financability. We ourselves thought of using methods such as Click-Chemistry for the purification of the short, synthetic peptides. Increased masses and easy cleavage enable high purities and can be determined via HPLC with UV and ESI-MS detection [9]. This approach, however, does not offer any opportunity to evaluate expression in vivo [10].

Hence, using and Indigoidine-Tag, which can be added to the nascent NRP in the process of its formation by adding a 4 kbp indigoidine-module to the NRPS is a novel and effective approach for labeling NRPs for quantitative expression analysis. Its properties and effects for peptide synthesis via NRPS compare to the ones of GFP for proteins: it is relatively inert, easily detectable and universal.


Methods

Purification of Indigoidine and Tagged Constructs

1 ml of IPTG-induced, blue culture was spun down at full speed (14,000 rpm) for 20 minutes, washed in 1 ml of methanol and centrifuged once more for 5 minutes at 14,000 rpm. Methanol was discarded and samples were dissolved in 200-400 µl DMSO.


Figure 10: Workflow followed during purification of the tagged peptides. A: Blue overnight culture with the secreted tagged peptide to purify. B: Blue pellet after spinning down cells for 20 minutes at 14,000 rpm. C: The pellet is washed in methanol and spun down again. D: The tagged peptide dissolves in DMSO and can be applied to TLC or further purified if wished.

Thin Layer Chromatography

TLC was carried out on silica-gel as immobile phase and Dichloromethane as mobile phase. For the procedure, a 50 ml beaker was filled with ~15 ml Dichloromethane and let stand for about 10 minutes (in order to let the Dichloromethane-vapor fill the beaker). The TLC plate, coated with silica-gel was spotted with sample 0.5 to 1 cm above the lower edge and placed in the beaker. TLC was run until the solvent front was at two thirds of the TLC plate. As indigoidine is light-sensitive, the beaker was covered with aluminium foil in order to prevent direct light irradiation.

Column Chromatography

In order to show that further purification (beyond the regular purification procedure) is feasible and easy with the tagged peptides, we provide a protocol for analysis and purification of the sample via column-chromatography. For this purpose, the purified sample that is dissolved in DMSO is applied to a Pre-Packed column G25, as running buffer, DMSO was used. DMSO is constantly applied to the column to prevent it from drying. All uncolored fractions are discarded, while the blue fraction is kept and collected in a 2 ml Eppendorf tube. This purified extract (with the sample dissolved in DMSO) can then be used for TLC or Mass-Spectrometry if desired.


Figure 11: Column Chromatography of tagged peptides. A: The blue fraction can be easily detected and collected. B: The purified product is dissolved and DMSO and can then be further analyzed.

RFC 100

For the entire practical procedure of the lab-work that is involved in our standardized protocol for high-throughput cloning and fast purification and validation of the product, feel welcome to visit the RFC 100-page.


1. Doekel S, Marahiel MA (2000) Dipeptide formation on engineered hybrid peptide synthetases. Chem Biol 7: 373–384.

2. Brachmann AO, Kirchner F, Kegler C, Kinski SC, Schmitt I, et al. (2012) Triggering the production of the cryptic blue pigment indigoidine from Photorhabdus luminescens. J Biotechnol 157: 96–99.

3. Nguyen KT, Ritz D, Gu J-Q, Alexander D, Chu M, et al. (2006) Combinatorial biosynthesis of novel antibiotics related to daptomycin. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103: 17462–17467.

4. Reverchon S, Rouanet C, Expert D, Nasser W (2002) Characterization of indigoidine biosynthetic genes in Erwinia chrysanthemi and role of this blue pigment in pathogenicity. J Bacteriol 184: 654–665.

5. Yin J, Straight PD, McLoughlin SM, Zhou Z, Lin AJ, et al. (2005) Genetically encoded short peptide tag for versatile protein labeling by Sfp phosphopantetheinyl transferase. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102: 15815–15820.

6. Zhou Z, Cironi P, Lin AJ, Xu Y, Hrvatin S, et al. (2007) Genetically encoded short peptide tags for orthogonal protein labeling by Sfp and AcpS phosphopantetheinyl transferases. ACS chemical biology 2: 337–346.

7. Butz D, Schmiederer T, Hadatsch B, Wohlleben W, Weber T, et al. (2008) Module extension of a non-ribosomal peptide synthetase of the glycopeptide antibiotic balhimycin produced by Amycolatopsis balhimycina. Chembiochem 9: 1195–1200.

8. Mootz HD, Schwarzer D, Marahiel MA (2000) Construction of hybrid peptide synthetases by module and domain fusions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 5848–5853.

9. Franke R, Doll C, Eichler J (2005) Peptide ligation through click chemistry for the generation of assembled and scaffolded peptides. Tetrahedron letters 46: 4479–4482.

10. Kolb HC, Finn MG, Sharpless KB (2001) Click chemistry: diverse chemical function from a few good reactions. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 40: 2004–2021.

Thanks to