Abstract
An in vitro domainal shuffling strategy for protein evolution was proposed in (J. Kolkman and W. Stemmer, Nat. Biotech. 19 (423) 2001). Due to backhybridization, however this method appears unlikely to be an efficient means of iteratively generating massive libraries of combinatorially shuffled genes. Recombination at the domain level (30–300 residues) also appears too coarse to support the evolution of proteins with substantially new folds. In this work, the module (10–25 residues long) and pseudomodule are adopted as the fundamental units of protein structure. Each protein is modelled as an N to C-terminal tour of a digraph composed of pseudomodules. An in vitro method based on PNA-mediated Whiplash PCR (PWPCR), RNA-protein fusion, and restriction-based recombination, XWPCR is then presented for evolving proteins with a high affinity for a given motif, subject to the constraint that each corresponds to a walk on the pseudomodule digraph of interest. Simulations predict that PWPCR is an efficient method of producing massive, shuffled gene libraries encoding for proteins as long as roughly 600 residues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
L. Adleman, “Molecular computation of solutions to combinatorial problems,” Science, vol. 266, pp. 1021-1024, 1994.
C. Anfinsen, “Principles that govern the folding of protein chains,” Science, vol. 181, pp. 223-230, 1973.
L. Bogarad and M. Deem, “A hierarchical approach to protein molecular evolution,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 96, pp. 2591-2595, 1999.
C. Cantor and P. Schimmel, Biophysical Chemistry, Part I: The Conformation of Biological Macromolecules, W. H. Freeman: San Francisco, 1980.
C. Cantor and P. Schimmel, Biophysical Chemistry, Part III: The Behavior of Biological Macromolecules, W. H. Freeman: San Francisco, 1980.
S. de Souza et al., “Intron positions correlate with module boundaries in ancient proteins,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 93, pp. 14632-14636, 1996.
R. Doolittle, “The multiplicity of domains in proteins,” Annu. Rev. Biochem., vol. 64, pp. 287-314, 1995.
J. Ellman et al., “Biosynthetic method for introducing unnatural amino acids site-specifically into proteins,” Methods Enzymol., vol. 202, pp. 301-336, 1991.
W. Gilbert, “Why genes in pieces?,” Nature, vol. 271, p. 501, 1978.
C. Giovannangeli and C. Helene, “Triplex-forming molecules for modulation of DNA information processing,” Curr. Opin. Molec. Ther., vol. 2, pp. 288-296, 2000.
M. Go, “Correlation of DNA exonic regions with protein structural units in Haemoglobin,” Nature, vol. 291, pp. 90-92, 1981.
M. Go and M. Nosaka, “Protein architecture and the origin of introns,” Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol., vol. 52, pp. 915-924, 1987.
A. Griffiths and D. Tawfik, “Man-made enzymes-from design to in vitro compartmentalisation,” Curr. Opin. Biotech., vol. 11, pp. 338-353, 2000.
K. Inaba et al., “Structural and functional roles of modules in hemoglobin,” J. Biol. Chem., vol. 272, pp. 30054-30060, 1998.
K. Inaba et al., “Structural and functional effects of pseudo-module substitution in hemoglobin subunits,” J. Biol. Chem., vol. 273, pp. 8080-8087, 1998.
P. Kaplan et al., “Parallel overlap assembly for the construction of computational DNA libraries,” J. Theor. Biol., vol. 188, pp. 333-341, 1997.
J. Kolkman and W. Stemmer, “Directed evolution of proteins by exon shuffling,” Nat. Biotech., vol. 19, pp. 423-428, 2001.
M. Kozak, “Comparison of the initiation of protein synthesis in prokaryotes, eukaryotes, and organelles,” Microbiol. Rev., vol. 47, pp. 1-45, 1983.
H. Kuhn et al., “Kinetic sequence discrimination of cationic bis-PNAs upon targeting of double-stranded DNA,” Nuc. Acids Res., vol. 26, pp. 582-587, 1998.
R. Liu et al., “Optimized synthesis of RNA-Protein fusions for in vitro protein selection,” Methods Enzymol., vol. 318, pp. 268-293, 2000.
J. Milligan and O. Uhlenbeck, “Synthesis of small RNAs using T7 RNA polymerase,” Methods Enzymol., vol. 180, pp. 51-62, 1989.
N. Nemoto et al., “In vitro virus: Bonding of mRNA bearing puromycin at the 3′-terminal end to the C-terminal end of its encoded protein on the ribosome in vitro,” FEBS Lett., vol. 414, pp. 405-408, 1997.
M. Oobatake and T. Ooi, “Hydration and heat stability effects on protein unfolding,” Prog. Biophys. Molec. Biol., vol. 59, pp. 237-284, 1993.
P. Peyret et al., “Nearest-neighbor thermodynamics and NMR of DNA sequences with internal A·A, C·C and T·T mismatches,” Biochemistry, vol. 38, pp. 3468-3477, 1999.
REBase restriction enzyme database, http://rebase.neb.com.
R. Roberts, and J. Szostak, “RNA-Peptide fusions for the in vitro selection of peptides and proteins,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 94, pp. 12297-12302, 1997.
J. Rose, The Fidelity of DNA Computation, Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Memphis (R. Deaton, Major advisor), 1999.
J. Rose, R. Deaton, M. Hagiya, and A. Suyama, “Equilibrium analysis of the efficiency of an autonomous molecular computer,” Phys. Rev. E. 65, Article 021910, pp. 1-13, 2002.
J. Rose, M. Hagiya, R. Deaton, and A. Suyama, “A DNA-based in vitro genetic program,” J. Biol. Phys., vol. 28, pp. 493-498, 2002.
J. Rose, M. Takano, and A. Suyama, “A PNA-mediated Whiplash PCR-based Program for in vitro protein evolution,” in Proc. of the 8th Int'l Conference on DNA Based Computers, M. Hagiya and A. Ohuchi (eds.), 2002, pp. 5-18.
K. Sakamoto et al., “State transitions by molecules,” Biosystems, vol. 52, pp. 81-91, 1999.
J. Sambrook, E. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis, Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual 3rd Cold Spring Harbor Press: Cold Spring Harbor, NY, 2001.
W. Stemmer, “Rapid evolution of a protein in vitro by DNA shuffling,” Nature, vol. 370, pp. 389-391, 1994.
K. Yura and M. Go, “Helix-turn-helix module distribution and module shuffling,” 3rd Ed., Tracing Biological Evolution in Protein and Gene Structures, M. Go and P. Schimmel (eds.), Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1995, pp. 187-196.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rose, J.A., Takano, M., Hagiya, M. et al. A DNA Computing-based Genetic Program for In Vitro Protein Evolution via Constrained Pseudomodule Shuffling. Genet Program Evolvable Mach 4, 139–152 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023932912559
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023932912559