Here, we present a protocol detailing the acquisition, processing, and analysis of a series of NMR experiments aimed at characterizing protein-glycan interactions in solution. Most common ligand-based and protein-based methodologies are outlined, which undoubtedly contribute to the fields of structural glycobiology and molecular recognition studies.
The interactions of glycans with proteins modulate many events related to health and disease. In fact, the establishment of these recognition events and their biological consequences are intimately related to the three-dimensional structures of both partners, as well as to their dynamic features and their presentation on the corresponding cell compartments. NMR techniques are unique to disentangle these characteristics and, indeed, diverse NMR-based methodologies have been developed and applied to monitor the binding events of glycans with their associate receptors. This protocol outlines the procedures to acquire, process and analyze two of the most powerful NMR methodologies employed in the NMR-glycobiology field, 1H-Saturation transfer difference (STD) and 1H,15N-Heteronuclear single quantum coherence (HSQC) titration experiments, which complementarily offer information from the glycan and protein perspective, respectively. Indeed, when combined they offer a powerful toolkit for elucidating both the structural and dynamic aspects of molecular recognition processes. This comprehensive approach enhances our understanding of glycan-protein interactions and contributes to advancing research in the chemical glycobiology field.
Molecular recognition of glycans is essential for many processes related to health and disease. The specificity and selectivity of biological receptors (lectins, antibodies, enzymes) for glycans heavily depend on adjusting the precarious balance between the diverse components of enthalpy (CH-π and van der Waals, hydrogen bonds, electrostatics) and entropy (hydrophobicity, dynamics, solvation-desolvation)1.
Given the large chemical diversity and dynamic nature of glycans, NMR methods have been widely employed to dissect glycan interactions for more than 25 years2, since these methodologies afford superb information on molecular recognition events with precise details, at atomic resolution3,4, even when the required interaction evidence cannot be retrieved by employing other methodologies. As key point, NMR is versatile and allows studying dynamic events, at the atomic level, at different time scales, constituting the best technique by far for studying the structure, conformation, and dynamics of glycans in solution. Nevertheless, disentangling this information may be a rather complex process that requires the employment of well-defined strategies together with careful data analysis5.
NMR techniques are diverse and, indeed, there are many methodologies that can be employed to unravel glycan-protein interactions6. We herein describe two basic NMR approaches that are currently employed to decipher glycan-receptor interactions7,8, making emphasis on how to untangle the presentation of the key glycan epitope as well as the protein binding site9.
In any molecular recognition event, when a receptor binds to a given ligand, there is a chemical exchange process that affects many NMR parameters of the participants in the binding10. Therefore, from the NMR perspective, the interaction can be monitored either from the point of view of the glycan ligand or from that of the protein receptor11. Generally speaking, the protein receptor is a large biomolecule (slow rotational motion, with rates in the ns timescale, and therefore, fast transverse relaxation), while the interacting glycan can be considered as a small-medium size molecule (fast rotational motion, with rates in the ps timescale, and slow transverse relaxation)12. From a standard perspective, the NMR signals of the glycan are narrow, while those of the receptor are broad13.
Ligand-based NMR methods rely on the dramatic change that many glycan NMR parameters experience when passing from the free to the bound state14. STD-NMR is the most employed experimental NMR technique to assess diverse glycan binding features15, from deducing the existence of binding in the solution state to the determination of the glycan binding epitope; that is, the atoms of the ligand that are in contact with the protein receptor16.
Alternatively, receptor-based NMR methods monitor the changes that take place in the signals of the protein receptor in the presence of the glycan with respect to those recorded for the apo state17. These are mainly focused on screening the chemical shift perturbations of the protein signals between both states. The most commonly employed experiment is 1H-15N HSQC, or its TROSY alternatives18.
The combination of both approaches allows applying NMR to many diverse systems that display a wide range of affinities. However, for the receptor-based NMR methods, in contrast to those based on the ligand, a relatively large amount of soluble, non-aggregated, stable isotope-labelled (15N) protein must be available.
We herein describe both methods, highlighting their strengths, and weaknesses. Note that the basic steps described in the protocol serve as examples for the use of Bruker spectrometers. Consequently, commands and parameters names align with those utilized in TopSpin (Bruker's spectrometers control software).
Saturation transfer difference NMR (STD-NMR) has become the most used and versatile NMR method for studying ligand-protein interactions. As shown above, it relies on the saturation transfer phenomenon, and the experimental setup involves the acquisition of two one-dimensional (1D) 1H spectra: the on-resonance¬ and the ¬off-resonance spectra. During the on-resonance experiment, saturation of specific protons of the protein is achieved by applying a train of low-power radiofrequency pulses during a certain period (saturation time typically ranges from 1-3 s). To avoid direct saturation of the ligand, the frequency and length of the saturation pulses are optimized for selectively irradiating specific protons of the protein; i.e., they must be applied at a frequency vacant of any ligand signals and with an appropriate length (Figure 1). As a rule of thumb for 50 ms saturation pulses, 1 ppm difference should be kept from the saturation region to the closest ligand signals. Generally, selective saturation pulses applied on the aliphatic region of the protein provide increased saturation effects. Alternatively, aromatic protons (6-7 ppm) can also be irradiated if the ligand molecule does not contain any aromatic signals. This is very useful for naturally occurring glycans, as they do not bear aromatic groups. Once a certain region of the protein is selectively irradiated, the saturation propagates along the protein via dipolar 1H-1H cross-relaxation (spin diffusion). Eventually, the saturation reaches the protein protons at the binding site, which is then transferred to the sugar protons that are in close contact (r < 5 Å) with the receptor via intermolecular 1H-1H NOEs. Obviously, the intensity of the signals of the saturated ligand protons decreases. After receiving the saturation, due to the binding kinetics, the transiently bound ligands (fast exchange is required) dissociate and the saturation information is accumulated in the free state. Due to this process, the NMR on-resonance spectra present diminished signals (Figure 2).
To clearly exhibit this intensity perturbation of the 1H nuclei of a binding glycan, a control proton NMR spectrum (off-resonance) is acquired in which the saturation is applied far away from any receptor or carbohydrate signal (usually between 40-100 ppm), under the same conditions. The subtracted 1D spectrum between the off-resonance and on-resonance exclusively shows the signals of the 1H nuclei of the ligand that have modified intensities: those that were close enough to the receptor binding site to receive the magnetization (Figure 2).
Nevertheless, not all the 1H nuclei of the bound carbohydrate receive the same amount of saturation. Theoretically, the magnetization transfer from the receptor to the bound ligand is distance-dependent (1/r6). This means that the intensities of transferred saturation among the glycan 1H nuclei contain information on the spatial proximities between the protons of the ligand and those of the receptor, and the STD NMR intensities are larger for those protons that are closer to the receptor. Accordingly, the STD NMR experiment also allows determining the binding epitope of the carbohydrate (Figure 2 and Figure 3) since protons of the ligand sitting closer to the protein surface show higher intensities than those that do not directly participate in the binding.
The experiment can be applied to systems with weak-medium affinity, rarely to systems with strong affinities in the low µM or nM range. Indeed, it requires that the dissociation rate be fast in the relaxation time scale. Otherwise, the saturation transfer information is lost through relaxation before the ligand dissociates.
On the other hand, protein-based NMR experiments are unique to unraveling ligand-protein interaction with amino acid level accuracy without solving the atomic resolution structures. It directly examines molecular recognition phenomena in solution without the need for co-crystallization. CSP analysis mapping is exceptionally powerful for discovering ligands and mapping the protein binding site (Figure 4 and Figure 5). This method is applicable to any range of affinities between the mM and nM range, even for systems where the exchange rate is slow in the chemical shift time scale21.
Nevertheless, this approach will probably not work for proteins with molecular weights above 30-40 kDa due to relaxation issues. The TROSY alternative18 can then be used, being particularly powerful when coupled with protein deuteration. Moreover, the protein should be uniformly labeled with 15N (and another sample double labeled with 13C and 15N to be able to complete the required backbone assignment). Therefore, protein expression conditions, including the corresponding expression system should be optimized to be able to obtain milligram amounts of protein. Proteins that display a tendency to oligomerize or aggregate are also not suitable for this analysis. The instrument used herein to record the NMR data is a Bruker 800 MHz spectrometer equipped with a TCI cryoprobe. It would be highly challenging to use this methodology using instruments below 600 MHz or without a cryogenic probe.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
We thank Agencia Estatal de Investigación of Spain for the Severo Ochoa Center of Excellence Accreditation CEX2021-001136-S, funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/ 501100011033, and CIBERES, an initiative of Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII, Madrid, Spain). We also thank the European commission for the GLYCOTWINNING project.
5 mm Shigemi microtube set mat | CortecNet SAS | S30BMS-005B | |
Alpha-Lactose-Agarose | Sigma-Aldrich Química S.L. | 7634-5ML | |
Ammonium chloride (15 N, 99%) | LC-0179-N-50G | Tracer Tecnologías Analíticas S.L | |
Ampicillin (Sodium Salt) | Melford Laboratories LTD | A40040 | |
BIOVIA Discovery studio | BIOVIA, Dassault Systèmes | ||
BL21(DE3) Chemically Competent Cells | Merck Life Science, S.L.U. | CMC0014-40X40UL | |
Centrifuge | Beckman Coulter | Allegra X-22R | |
D2O | Cambridge Isotope Laboratories, Inc. | DLM-4-1000 | |
Incubator | Eppendorf | Innova 42 | |
IPTG (Isopropyl ß-D-1-thiogalactopyranoside) | VWR International Eurolab S.L. | VW437144N | |
LacNAc | Elicityl | GLY008 | |
Luria Bertani (LB) Broth | Merck Life Science, S.L.U. | 3397-1KG | |
Matraz Erlenmeyer B N 5000 CC | VWR International Eurolab S.L. | 214-1137 | |
PBS 10x | Bio-Rad | 1610780 | |
PyMOL | PyMOL Molecular Graphics System | Version 2.0 Schrödinger | |
Sonicator | Sonics & Materials, Inc. | VC 505 | |
Superconducting NMR magnet | Bruker | 600 MHz AVANCE III | |
Superconducting NMR magnet | Bruker | 800 MHz AVANCE III |
.