Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Print PDF (130K) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrow Commercial Re-use Guidelines
for Open Access NAR Content
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tanha, J.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, J. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tanha, J.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, J. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1997 Oxford University Press 1442-1449

Footnote

Thermodynamic analysis of monoclonal antibody binding to duplex DNA

Thermodynamic analysis of monoclonal antibody binding to duplex DNA Jamshid Tanha and Jeremy S. Lee*

Department of Biochemistry, University of Saskatchewan, 107 Wiggins Road, Saskatoon , Saskatchewan S7N 5E5, Canada

Received October 28, 1996; Revised and Accepted February 4, 1997

ABSTRACT

A technique based on fluorescence polarization (anisotropy) was used to measure the binding of antibodies to DNA under a variety of conditions. Fluorescein-labeled duplexes of 20 bp in length were employed as the standard because they are stable even at low ionic strength yet sufficiently short so that both arms of an IgG cannot bind to the same duplex. IgG Jel 274 binds duplexes in preference to single-stranded DNA; in 80 mM NaCl K obs for (dG)20[middot](dC)20 is 4.1 * 10 7 M -1 compared with 6.4 * 10 5 M -1 for d(A 5 C 10 A 5 ). There is little sequence specificity, but the interaction is very dependent on ionic strength. From plots of log K obs against log[Na + ] it was deduced that five or six ion pairs are involved in complex formation. At low ionic strength, K obs is independent of temperature and complex formation is entropy driven with [Delta] H o obs and [Delta] C o p,obs both zero. In contrast, in 80 mM NaCl [Delta] C o p,obs is -630 and -580 cal mol -1 K -1 for [d(TG)]10[middot][d(CA)]10 and (dG)20[middot](dC)20 respectively. IgG Jel 241 also binds more tightly to duplexes than single-stranded DNA, but sequence preferences were apparent. The values for K obs to [d(AT)]20 and [d(GC)]20 are 2.7 * 10 8 and 1.3 * 10 8 M -1 respectively compared with 5.7 * 10 6 M -1 for both (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 and (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 . As with Jel 274, the binding of Jel 241 is very dependent on ionic strength and four or five ionic bonds are involved in complex formation with all the duplex DNAs which were tested. [Delta] C o p,obs for Jel 241 binding to [d(AT)]20 was negative (-87 cal mol -1 K -1 ) in 80 mM NaCl but was zero at high ionic strength (130 mM NaCl). Therefore, for duplex-specific DNA binding antibodies [Delta] C o p,obs is dependent on [Na + ] and a large negative value does not correlate with sequence-specific interactions.

INTRODUCTION

Interaction of proteins with DNA is important in many cellular processes, such as replication and transcription. As a general classification, these proteins can be characterized in terms of their sequence specificity as well as their preferences for single-stranded or duplex DNA. An example of a well-studied single-strand binding protein is SSB from Escherichia coli ( 1 , 2 ). It only binds to single-stranded nucleic acids and has a preference for pyrimidines over purines. Thermodynamic parameters have been measured and this preference is probably due to the fact that purine oligonucleotides have considerable self-structure ( 2 ). In the case of sequence-specific duplex DNA binding proteins, such as phage [lambda] cro protein or the trp repressor, binding to the target sequence is many orders of magnitude greater than to random duplex DNA. The sequence preference is based on specific contacts between the protein and functional groups on the DNA. Thermodynamic analysis has allowed this binding to be characterized in terms of a highly complimentary or specific interface which is accompanied by a large negative [Delta] C o p,obs ( 3 , 4 ).

Monoclonal antibodies are another class of DNA binding protein which have received considerable attention because of their involvement in autoimmune diseases ( 5 - 8 ). They can be produced from autoimmune strains of mice in which they occur spontaneously or, alternatively, from mice which have been immunized with nuclease-resistant nucleic acids ( 9 - 11 ). Those produced by immunization include antibodies to Z DNA, triplex DNA and poly(dG)[middot]poly(dC) ( 12 - 14 ). In general they are structure specific and show limited cross-reactivity with other nucleic acids. Antibodies of autoimmune origin, on the other hand, tend to show limited sequence and structure specificity, which is consistent with the idea that binding is dominated by ionic interactions with the phosphodiester backbone. Exceptions to this rule include Hed 10 and BV04-01, which are single-strand-specific, with a preference for poly(dT), and Jel 241 and 274, which are duplex-specific, with minor sequence specificity ( 15 - 17 ).

The autoimmune antibodies Jel 241 and 274 are of particular interest because duplex binding antibodies of this type have been implicated in the pathogenesis of the disease systemic lupus erythematosus ( 18 , 19 ). They appear to have a propensity for binding to the glomeruli of the kidney, causing an inflammatory response which may eventually lead to nephritis ( 20 ). The origins of the antibodies are obscure, since most duplex DNAs are not immunogenic ( 7 ). It has been proposed that they arise from stimulation by some, as yet, unidentified antigen and by chance they cross-react with DNA ( 21 , 22 ). Alternatively, their presence may represent some defect in the immune system, such as inappropriate self-tolerance ( 23 , 24 ).

Previously, binding of Jel 241 and 274 was studied by a competitive solid phase radioimmunoassay (SPRIA), which allows measurement of relative binding constants ( 17 ). By this technique it was demonstrated that Jel 274 binds well to most duplex nucleic acids, whereas Jel 241 prefers duplexes with an alternating pyrimidine/purine sequence. In both cases binding to single-stranded DNA was at least 100-fold lower ( 17 ). However, this technique cannot be used to measure thermodynamic parameters. In this report binding studies for both Jel 241 and 274 have been extended to include a thermodynamic analysis of their interaction with duplex DNA. This was made possible by the use of fluorescence polarimetry ( 25 - 27 ).

Briefly, a fluorescein-labeled oligonucleotide is titrated with increasing concentrations of the antibody.

antibody + fluorescein-labeled oligonucleotide <-> complex

low polarizatio n high polarization

The free oligonucleotide tumbles rapidly and thus the fluorescein has a low polarization. The complex with bound antibody has a much higher molecular weight, tumbles more slowly and, thus, has a higher polarization. Binding parameters can then be calculated from a plot of polarization against antibody concentration (a modified Klotz plot) ( 28 ). The technique is rapid, versatile and applicable to any nucleic acid which can be labeled with fluorescein.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Oligonucleotides

5'-Fluorescein-labeled oligonucleotides were purchased from the Calgary Regional DNA Synthesis Facility. They were gel purified before use, except for (dG) 20 , which tends to form insoluble aggregates. All the oligonucleotides had the fluorescein label attached to their 5' purine with Pharmacia Fluoreprimetm. The oligonucleotide concentrations were estimated using the published extinction coefficients at 260 nm ( 29 - 32 ). Control experiments showed that the presence of fluorescein did not interfere with these determinations. (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20, [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10, [d(AT)] 20 , [d(GC)] 20 and [d(AT)] 10 were prepared in phosphate-buffered saline, pH 7.4 (2.7 mM KCl, 137 mM NaCl, 10 mM Na 2 HPO 4 , 1.4 mM KH 2 PO 4 ), whereas (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 was prepared in 10 mM Tris-HCl plus 0.1 mM EDTA, pH 8.0. Briefly, to prepare (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 , [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 and(dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 , equimolar amounts of the complementary strands were mixed, heated at 95oC for 10 min and slowly cooled down (>30 min) to room temperature. To prepare [d(AT)] 20 , [d(GC)] 20 and [d(GC)] 10 , the oligonucleotides were heated at 95oC for 10 min and quenched in an ice bath. Under these conditions the alternating sequence DNAs will preferentially form intramolecular duplexes with hairpin structure. Duplex formation was monitored by an ethidium bromide fluorescence assay ( 13 ) and T m measurements showed a single helix to coil transition. The triplex (dT) 20 [middot](dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 was formed by incubating the strands at a 2:1 ratio in 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0 plus 2 mM MgCl 2 for 2 h at 20oC. Triplex formation was monitored by the ethidium bromide fluorescence assay ( 13 ). Oligonucleotide duplexes (0.4 [mu]g 20mer or 1.6 [mu]g 10mer) were analyzed on non-denaturing 20% acrylamide gels and stained with ethidium ( 33 ).

Antibodies

Jel 274 is a re-clone of Jel 229 which has retained the original specificity as judged by SPRIA ( 34 ). IgG Jel 241 and 274 were purified by gel exclusion and ion exchange chromatography as described previously ( 35 ). Analysis of the antibodies on SDS-polyacrylamide gels showed the absence of contaminating protein. Fab 274 was prepared by papain digestion and purified as described previously ( 35 ). Concentrations were expressed in terms of binding sites (i.e. per Fab) and were calculated assuming 1.5 A 280 = 1 mg/ml and a molecular mass of 150 000.

Polarization measurements

A Panvera bioluminescent polarimeter (PanVera Corporation) was used for all experiments. The standard buffer was 10 mM potassium phosphate, pH 7.2, supplemented with NaCl to give the required ionic strength. Except where noted, the oligonucleotide concentration was 1 nM. For experiments with triplex (dT) 20 [middot](dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8, with 2 mM MgCl 2 was used. Briefly, antibodies were serially diluted in 12 * 75 mm borosilicate tubes (Fisher Scientific) containing a constant amount of fluorescein-labeled oligonucleotide in a total volume of 1 ml. Complex formation was rapid and reached equilibrium in <1 min (data not shown). Polarization values (in millipolarization units, mP) for each tube (and associated fluorescence intensity) were determined with the polarimeter in single blank mode. In this mode the polarimeter automatically subtracts the background fluorescence values for each sample and reports the corrected fluorescence intensity and polarization values. The maximum fluorescence intensity quenching ranged from 25 to 70%, depending on the combination of antigen and antibody used. The mP values were corrected for this drop in intensity as described ( 36 ). The results were plotted as polarization versus antibody concentration. K obs , the association constant, was determined by fitting the data to the single site binding isotherm

mP = ( mP max K obs [ AB ] + mP min )/(1 + K obs [ AB ]) 1

with Deltaplottm. mP max and mP min are the maximum and minimum millipolarization values and [ AB ] is the free antibody concentration. mP min was fixed and mP max and K obs were allowed to vary independently.

It should be noted that identical values for K obs can be calculated using anisotropy as the variable, rather than polarization. Control experiments showed that neither Jel 274 nor Jel 241 showed binding to free fluorescein. Also, binding to [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 was not dependent on which strand carried the fluorescein label (data not shown). In some cases K obs could also be determined from the fluoresence quenching data as described previously ( 15 ). For measurements at 5, 16, 30 and 38oC, the samples were incubated in a water bath at preset temperatures for ~5 min, wiped dry and then read immediately. Control tubes showed that the variation in temperature was +-1oC. Reported K obs values are based on the average of at least three determinations and experimental errors were 5-10%.

Thermodynamic parameters

K obs , [Delta] G o obs (the observed standard free energy change), [Delta] H o obs (the observed standard enthalpy change), [Delta] S o obs (the observed standard entropy change) and [Delta] C o p,obs (the observed standard heat capacity change) are related by the following functions [Delta] G o obs = - RT ln K obs 2 [Delta] G o obs = [Delta] H o obs - T [Delta] S o obs 3 ln K obs = (-[Delta] H o obs / R )(1/ T ) + ([Delta] S o obs / R ) (van't Hoff plot) 4 [Delta] C o p,obs = ([part][Delta] H o obs /[part] T ) p 5

Where R is the gas constant and T is the absolute temperature.

Thus, by measuring K obs as a function of temperature all the parameters can be calculated. [Delta] H o obs is obtained from -[Delta] H o obs / R , the slope of the plot of ln K obs against 1/ T (van't Hoff plot). In cases where van't Hoff plots were non-linear (i.e. [Delta] H o obs varied with temperature), the best fit was obtained by the second order function ln K obs = a (1/ T ) 2 + b (1/ T ) + c 6

The derivative of the above function with respect to 1/ T is equal to the slope of the van't Hoff plot -[Delta] H o obs / R = 2 a (1/ T ) + b 7

Therefore, [Delta] H o obs can be obtained at any temperature from equation 7 . As a result, if [Delta] H o obs varies with temperature, [Delta] C o p,obs is not zero and can be obtained from equation 5 .

RESULTS


Figure 1 . Analysis of duplexes on a 20% non-denaturing polyacrylamide gel stained with ethidium. Lane 1, [d(GC)] 10 annealed slowly; lane 2, [d(GC)] 10 rapidly cooled after denaturation; lane 3, [d(AT)] 20 ; lane 4, [d(GC)] 20 ; lane 5, (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 ; lane 6, (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 ; lane 7, [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 ; lane 8, d(A 5 C 10 A 5 )[middot]d(T 5 G 10 T 5 ). The 10 and 45 bp markers are based on the mobility of the tracking dyes (33).


Figure 2 . ( A ) Binding of Jel 274 IgG and Fab to (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 analyzed by fluorescence polarimetry in 10 mM KPi buffer, pH 7.2. mP, millipolarization (dimensionless). The curves were fitted by regression analysis to a single site binding isotherm. [squf], IgG ( r 2 = 0.98); -, Fab ( r 2 = 0.99). ( B ) Binding of IgG Jel 274 to 1 nM oligonucleotides in 10 mM KPi buffer, pH 7.2, plus 80 mM NaCl. [circle], [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 ; [squf], (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 ; [Delta], (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 ; +, d(A 5 C 10 A 5 ) (all r 2 > 0.99). ( C ) Binding of Jel 274 to 1 nM oligonucleotides in 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, plus 2 mM MgCl 2 . [Delta], (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 ( r 2 = 0.97); s, (dT) 20 [middot](dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 ( r 2 = 0.98).

The structure of the oligonucleotides was analyzed on acrylamide gels (Fig. 1 ). Except for (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 (lane 6) , the 20mer duplexes (lanes 3-8) ran as single bands with similar mobilities. The purine strand of (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 could not be gel purified and, therefore, there may be a small proportion of 19mer in the resulting duplex. Of particular importance is the mobility of the alternating sequences [d(AT)] 20 and [d(GC)] 20 , which potentially could form two alternative duplexes; namely a 40mer by pairing of two strands or a 20mer duplex by folding back of a single strand. It can be seen in lanes 3 and 4 that only the 20mer duplex is formed under these conditions (rapid cooling after denaturation). In contrast, the shorter oligonucleotide [d(GC)] 10 forms both a 10mer and 20mer duplex (lane 1) if re-annealing is slow and a smaller proportion of the 20mer duplex upon rapid quenching (lane 2). Once formed these structures were stable under the experimental conditions. Any aggregation to multimers, for example, would be accompanied by an increase in polarization even in the absence of added antibody. This was not observed.

The binding of IgG and Fab Jel 274 to (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 at low ionic strength is shown in Figure 2 a. On adding the IgG or Fab (measured in units of [Fab]) the millipolarization (mP) value of the duplex increases until a plateau is reached. The final mP value of the Fab complex is lower than the IgG complex, as expected on the basis of their size. As a control there was no detectable interaction between the antibodies and free fluorescein (data not shown). The association constant K obs was determined by regression analysis to a single site binding isotherm and in general the fit was excellent, especially at high ionic strength, with r 2 > 0.97. Multiple determinations showed that the K obs was very reproducible and the error is estimated to be <10%. The values are listed in Table 1 . For Fab and IgG Jel 274 binding to (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 , K obs was determined to be 5.4 and 6.0 * 10 7 M -1 . The slightly lower value for Fab may be due to the presence of some inactive protein, as has been demonstrated by others ( 37 ). However, the good agreement shows that only one arm of an IgG can bind to a 20mer duplex, as was expected, because the two arms of an IgG are separated by at least 120 ( 38 ). Therefore, a duplex of >40 bp is necessary to allow both arms of the IgG to be bound simultaneously, as has been observed experimentally ( 38 ).

Table 1 . K obs for the interaction of Jel 274 IgG and Fab a with various oligonucleotides under different buffer conditions at 24oC -- - - -
Oligonucleotide

K obs (M -1 )

K obs (M -1 )

K obs (M -1 )

(10 mM KPi, pH 7.2)

(10 mM KPi, pH 7.2,

(Tris-HCl, pH 8.0,

+ 80 mM NaCl)

+ 2 mM Mg 2+ )

(dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 a

5.4 * 10 7

(dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20

6.0 * 10 7

4.1 * 10 7

d(A 5 C 10 A 5 )

-

6.4 * 10 5

(dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20

-

2.3 * 10 7

1.4 * 10 8

(dT) 20 [middot](dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20

-

-

8.2 * 10 7

[d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10

-

1.2 * 10 8

K obs is the average of at least three determinations and the error is 5-10%. KPi is potassium phosphate buffer, pH 7.2.

Previous studies had shown that Jel 274 showed considerable duplex preference but only moderate sequence specificity ( 34 ). The binding of Jel 274 to several duplexes and single-stranded DNA at an intermediate [Na + ] is shown in Figure 2 b. For (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 the calculated K obs is ~2-fold lower than at low ionic strength (Table 1 ), showing that ionic forces play a prominent role in complex formation. The three duplexes gave similar curves and there was only a 5-fold difference in the calculated values of K obs (Table 1 ). For the single-stranded DNA d(A 5 C 10 A 5 ), binding is one to two orders of magnitude weaker. Binding to the duplex (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 and the triplex (dT) 20 [middot](dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 is shown in Figure 2 c. These experiments were performed in 2 mM MgCl 2 in order to stabilize the triplex. Perhaps surprisingly, binding to the duplex is tighter than to the triplex, showing that structure is important, as well as negative charge density.

The effects of [Na + ] on binding of Jel 274 to duplexes and one single-stranded DNA were examined in more detail (Fig. 3 a). The slope of a plot of log K obs against log[Na + ] is equal to -[psi] m , where [psi] is a constant and m is the number of ion pairs ( 39 ). [psi] = 0.88 for duplex DNA and 0.71 for single-stranded DNA and the calculated values of m are listed in the figure legend. The number of ion pairs is between five and six, even for the single-stranded oligomer, for which the affinity is much lower.


Figure 3 . ( A ) Log K obs versus log[Na + ] for the binding of Jel 274 to various oligonucleotides in standard buffer supplemented with increasing amounts of NaCl. m was determined from the slope of the graph as explained in the text. The [Na + ] on the log scale is expressed as mM. The error bars are contained within the data points. [circle], [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 ( m = 4.9); [squf], (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 ( m = 6.2); [Delta], (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 ( m = 5.8); +, d(A 5 C 10 A 5 ) ( m = 4.6). ( B ) Log K obs versus log[Na + ] for the binding of Jel 241. [circle], [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 ( m = 4.0); -, [d(AT)] 20 ( m = 4.8); [squ], [d(GC)] 20 ( m = 5.6); [Delta], (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 ( m = 4.8); +, d(A 5 C 10 A 5 ) ( m = 6.6).

Further thermodynamic parameters can be calculated from measurements of K obs as a function of temperature ( 40 ). For Jel 274 binding to (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 at low ionic strength K obs is independent of temperature (Fig. 4 a). Therefore, [Delta] H o obs and [Delta] C o p,obs are zero. At higher ionic strength (80 mM NaCl), the van't Hoff plot is non-linear and the data were fitted to the second order function of equation 6. (The curve shown in Fig. 4 a has r 2 = 0.86 compared with r 2 = 0.37 for linear regression.) K obs is at a maximum at 12oC and [Delta] C o p,obs is calculated to be -580 cal mol -1 K -1 . Since variation of [Delta] C o p,obs with [Na + ] has not been observed previously, this experiment was repeated with [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 . A similar pattern was observed (Fig. 4 b). At low ionic strength both [Delta] H o obs and [Delta] C o p,obs are zero; at higher ionic strength the van't Hoff plot is curved, with [Delta] C o p,obs equal to -630 cal mol -1 K -1 . (The curve shown in Fig. 4 b has r 2 = 0.82 compared with r 2 = 0.52 for linear regression.) A summary of the thermodynamic parameters is shown in Table 2 . At low ionic strength, complex formation between Jel 274 and both duplexes is entropy driven. At higher [Na + ], complex formation becomes increasingly driven by enthalpy as the temperature increases. In all cases there is compensation between enthalpy and entropy changes with temperature, so that [Delta] G o obs is essentially independent of temperature. This has been observed previously with many different antibody-antigen interactions ( 41 ).


Figure 4 . ( A ) van't Hoff plots in standard buffer ([squ]) or with 80 mM NaCl ([squf]) for binding of Jel 274 to (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 . At the high ionic strength a linear van't Hoff plot resulted in an unacceptable correlation coefficient ( r 2 = 0.37). Therefore, the best fit was obtained by a non-linear function ( r 2 = 0.86). [Delta] H o obs and [Delta] C o p,obs were obtained as explained in the text. The points are the average of at least three trials. ( B ) van't Hoff plots in standard buffer ([circle]) or with 80 mM NaCl (-) for binding of Jel 274 to [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 . At the high ionic strength a linear van't Hoff plot resulted in an unacceptable correlation coefficient ( r 2 = 0.51). Therefore, the best fit was obtained by a non-linear function ( r 2 = 0.82).

Jel 241 also shows preference for duplex DNAs but, in contrast to Jel 274, there is also an underlying sequence specificity ( 17 ). These results are confirmed by fluorescence polarimetry, as shown in Figure 5 a and b. At 50 mM [Na + ] binding to [d(AT)] 20 , [d(GC)] 20 and [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 is one to two orders of magnitude greater than to (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 , (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 and single-stranded d(A 5 C 10 A 5) . The calculated values of K obs are listed in Table 3 . As with Jel 274, there is a very strong ionic strength dependence and at 150 mM ionic strength all K obs values are reduced by at least 10-fold (Table 3 ). At very low ionic strength K obs for [d(AT)] 20 , for example, is >10 9 M -1 and an accurate value cannot be calculated because the free antibody concentration is lower than the duplex concentration. Binding of Jel 241 to (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 in 50 mM [Na + ] showed ~50% quenching of fluorescence which reached a distinct minimum. This allowed an independent determination of K obs , as shown in Figure 5 c. K obs was 5.4 * 10 6 M -1 compared with 5.7 * 10 6 M -1 from polarimetry.

Further examination of the [Na + ] dependence of Jel 241 is shown in Figure 3 b. As above, the number of ion pairs involved in complex formation can be calculated from the slope and these are listed in the figure legend. It is apparent that four or five ion pairs are involved in binding to duplexes, but there may be as many as seven for the weaker binding to single-stranded DNA.

Because Jel 241 shows sequence preferences it was expected to give a large negative [Delta] C o p,obs upon complex formation with a preferred antigen such as [d(AT)] 20 . However, at 80 mM NaCl, although the van't Hoff plot (Fig. 6 ) is non-linear, the calculated [Delta] C o p,obs is only -87 cal mol -1 K -1 . (The curve shown in Fig. 6 has r 2 = 0.85 compared with r 2 = 0.61 for linear regression.) At higher ionic strength (130 mM NaCl) the plot is linear and, therefore, [Delta] C o p,obs is zero. The thermodynamic profiles are summarized in Table 2 and again it is clear that complex formation is largely driven by entropy changes.

DISCUSSION

The fluorescence polarimetry technique is a rapid and versatile method for the measurement of binding constants. For Jel 241 binding to (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 K obs could also be determined by fluorescence quenching and the agreement was excellent. In general, the specificities of Jel 274 and 241 determined from fluorescence polarimetry are in agreement with the results from competitive SPRIA reported previously ( 17 , 34 ). Direct comparisons are not possible because in the competitive SPRIA long polymers were used, allowing both arms of an IgG to bind simultaneously. As shown in Figure 2 , Fab and IgG Jel 274 had similar binding constants and, therefore, the 20mer duplexes of the present study only allow monovalent binding of an IgG. In general, the relationship between affinity and avidity is difficult to estimate and may vary from one antibody to another ( 38 ).


Figure 5 . Binding of Jel 241 to various oligonucleotides analyzed by fluorescence polarimetry in standard buffer plus 50 ( A ) or 150 mM NaCl ( B ). mP, millipolarization (dimensionless). [circle], [d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10 ; [squf], (dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20 ; [Delta], (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 ; +, d(A 5 C 10 A 5 ); -, [d(AT)] 20 ; [squ], [d(GC)] 20 . ( C ) The data for (dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20 at 50 mM NaCl analyzed in terms of fluorescence quenching. See text for details.


Figure 6 . van't Hoff plots in standard buffer with 80 ([circle]) or 130 mM NaCl (-) for binding of Jel 241 to [d(AT)] 20 . In 80 mM NaCl a linear van't Hoff plot resulted in an unacceptable correlation coefficient ( r 2 = 0.61). Therefore, the best fit was obtained by a non-linear function ( r 2 = 0.85).

Table 2 . A summary of thermodynamic parameters (+- SE) for Jel 274 and Jel 241 binding to duplex DNA at two different [Na + ]
Antibody

20mer

[Na + ]

[Delta] G o obs

[Delta] H o obs

- T [Delta] S o obs

[Delta] C o p,obs

(mM)

(kcal mol -1 )

(cal mol -1 K -1 )

Jel 274

dG[middot]dC

0

-10.6 +- 0.1

0 +- 0.5

-10.6 +- 0.6

0 +- 30

Jel 274

dG[middot]dC

80

-10.3 +- 0.1

-4.5 +- 1.0

-5.8 +- 1.1

-580 +- 60

Jel 274

d(TG)[middot]d(CA)

0

-10.9 +- 0.1

0 +- 0.5

-10.9 +- 0.6

0 +- 30

Jel 274

d(TG)[middot]d(CA)

80

-11.0 +- 0.1

-6.2 +- 1.0

-4.8 +- 1.1

-630 +- 60

Jel 241

d(AT)

80

-11.1 +- 0.1

0.4 +- 0.5

-11.5 +- 0.6

-87 +- 30

Jel 241

d(AT)

130

-10.0 +- 0.1

3.1 +- 0.5

-13.1 +- 0.6

0 +- 30

The values for [Delta] G o obs , [Delta] H o obs and - T [Delta] S o obs correspond to the binding constant measurements at 24oC.

Table 3 . K obs for the interaction of Jel 241 and various oligonucleotides under different buffer conditions at 24oC - - -
Oligonucleotide

K obs (M -1 )

K obs (M -1 )

(10 mM KPi, pH 7.2,

(10 mM KPi, pH 7.2,

+ 50 mM NaCl)

+ 150 mM NaCl)

[d(AT)] 20

2.7 * 10 8

1.2 * 10 7

[d(TG)] 10 [middot][d(CA)] 10

2.9 * 10 8

1.3 * 10 7

[d(GC)] 20

1.3 * 10 8

1.8 * 10 6

(dA) 20 [middot](dT) 20

5.7 * 10 6

(dG) 20 [middot](dC) 20

5.7 * 10 6

d(A 5 C 10 A 5 )

1.2 * 10 6

K obs is the average of at least three determinations and the error is 5-10%. KPi is potassium phosphate buffer, pH 7.2.

As expected, K obs is very dependent on [Na + ]. For Jel 274, which shows little sequence specificity, there are seven positively charged amino acids in the CDRs of the heavy and light chains ( 42 ). From Figure 3 it was deduced that five to six ionic interactions were involved and, therefore, it would appear that the majority of these amino acids are involved in complex formation. For Jel 241, which shows some sequence preferences, the [Na + ] dependency suggested four or five ionic interactions for duplexes, but six or seven for single-stranded DNA. It seems possible that the single-stranded oligomer, being more flexible, may be able to interact with other positively charged amino acids which fall outside the binding site of more stiff duplexes.

It is clear, however, that the sequence specificity cannot be attributed solely to changes in ionic interactions, because the calculated value of m is lowest for the duplexes to which Jel 241 binds the tightest. Thus, the sequence preferences must derive from favorable hydrogen bonds or van der Waal's interactions with functional groups on the DNA. The same conclusion has been reached from crystallographic analysis and model building studies ( 43 ). The duplex DNA lies on a relatively flat antibody surface and some amino acid residues can penetrate into the grooves of the DNA, forming specific contacts.

Large negative heat capacity changes have been proposed to be characteristic of sequence-specific DNA-protein interactions; for example, for trp repressor binding to the operator DNA, [Delta] C o p,obs = -950 cal mol -1 K -1 , whereas it is zero for binding to non-operator DNA ( 4 ). Similar observations have been made for cro repressor binding to its operator or random sequence DNA ([Delta] C o p,obs = -360 and 0 cal mol -1 K -1 respectively) ( 3 ). [Delta] C o p,obs has been related to the change in polar ([Delta]A p ) and non-polar ([Delta] A np ) surface area (Å 2 ) which occurs during complex formation ( 44 ). [Delta] C o p,obs = 0.32[Delta] A np - 0.14[Delta] A p

A large negative [Delta] C o p,obs implies that it is mostly non-polar surfaces which are buried during complex formation (i.e. a large -[Delta] A np ). Therefore, a negative [Delta] C o p,obs is consistent with a reduction in solvent access to non-polar surfaces, which implies that there must be a good stereochemical fit between the protein and DNA.

From model building studies of antibody-DNA complexes the total surface area buried is estimated to be 1400 Å 2 ( 43 , 45 ). For Jel 274 at low ionic strength, [Delta] C o p,obs was zero, which gives values of -430 and -970 Å 2 for [Delta] A np and [Delta] A p respectively. At higher ionic strength, [Delta] C o p,obs was ~-600 cal mol -1 K -1 , yielding -1400 and 0 Å 2 for [Delta] A np and [Delta] A p respectively. Thus, the calculated change in the buried non-polar area increases by nearly 1000 Å 2 upon increasing the ionic strength. Obviously this interpretation is unacceptable and some other explanation is required. As discussed extensively by Ferrari and Lohman ( 2 ), an apparent negative [Delta] C o p,obs can result from coupling of conformational changes in either of the macromolecules to the binding process. For example, binding of SSB protein to poly(dA) proceeds with a large negative [Delta] C o p,obs because the bases must be unstacked as the protein binds and unstacking is temperature dependent ( 2 ). Alternatively, a conformational change may occur in the antibody, as has been observed in binding of BV04-01 to oligo(dT); however, other antibodies show only small changes on binding antigen ( 16 , 46 ). In the present case, a conformational change in the antibody seems unlikely, because the binding surface is relatively flat and the variable loops of the antibody are not free to wrap around the DNA during binding ( 43 ). Also, it is not clear why a conformational change in the antibody should be dependent on [Na + ]. On the other hand, conformational changes in duplex DNA with ionic strength have been documented ( 47 , 48 ). As the ionic strength increases, charge repulsion between the phosphates decreases and the helix becomes more tightly wound. This process is temperature dependent since the helix unwinds as the temperature increases ( 49 ).

For Jel 274 at low ionic strength, we postulate that the helix is minimally wound and this conformation maximizes ionic interactions between the antibody and the DNA phosphates. At higher ionic strength the DNA helix winds up, but must be unwound to allow antibody binding. For Jel 241 the negative value of [Delta] C o p,obs is smaller than for Jel 274 and is only apparent for thermodynamic parameters measured at the lower ionic strength. However, similar arguments concerning helix winding can be applied, except that we would anticipate that Jel 241 preferentially binds to a helix which is overwound compared with Jel 274. (It should be noted that such changes in [Delta] C o p,obs with [Na + ] contribute very little to the slope of plots of log K obs versus log[Na + ]. Therefore, the estimated values of m , the number of ion pairs, remain unchanged.)

In conclusion, Jel 274 binds to duplex DNA with little sequence specificity but can give rise to a large negative [Delta] C o p,obs at the appropriate [Na + ]. Jel 241 shows some sequence specificity in its binding to DNA but any changes in [Delta] C o p,obs are smaller. Therefore, negative values for [Delta] C o p,obs are not necessarily characteristic of sequence-specific binding and, more importantly, [Delta] C o p,obs may be very dependent on ionic strength. This is interpreted in terms of changes in helix winding which, although small, may occur during complex formation between other proteins and DNA. By necessity many techniques for measuring DNA binding (including fluorescent polarimetry) require non-physiological ionic conditions, so that the binding constants can be brought into the optimal range. Therefore, the contribution of ionic strength effects to the value of [Delta] C o p,obs needs to be considered when assessing DNA-protein interactions.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This research was supported by the Medical Research Council of Canada.

REFERENCES

1 Bujalowski,W., Overman,L.B. and Lohman,T.M. (1988) J. Biol. Chem., 263, 4629-4640. MEDLINE Abstract

2 Ferrari,M.E. and Lohman,T.M. (1994) Biochemistry, 33, 12896-12910. MEDLINE Abstract

3 Takeda,Y., Ross,P.D. and Mudd,C. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 89, 8180-8184. MEDLINE Abstract

4 Ladbury,J.E., Wright,J.G., Sturtevant,J.M. and Sigler,P.B. (1994) J. Mol. Biol., 238, 669-681. MEDLINE Abstract

5 Stollar,B.D. (1981) Clinics Immunol. Allergy, 1, 243-260.

6 Stollar,B.D. (1991) Mol. Immunol., 28, 1399-1412.

7 Stollar,B.D. (1994) FASEB J., 8, 337-342. MEDLINE Abstract

8 Voss,E.W. (1987) Anti-DNA Antibodies in SLE. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

9 Swanson,C.P., Ackroyd,C. and Glick,G.D. (1996) Biochemistry, 35, 1624-1633.

10 Braun,R.P. and Lee,J.S. (1988) J. Immunol., 141, 2084-2089. MEDLINE Abstract

11 Latimer,L.J.P., Agazie,Y.M., Braun,R.P., Hampel,K.J. and Lee,J.S. (1996) Mol. Immunol., 32, 1057-1064.

12 Rich,A., Nordheim,A. and Wang,A.H.J. (1984) Annu. Rev. Biochem., 53, 791-846. MEDLINE Abstract

13 Lee,J.S., Woodsworth,M.L. and Latimer,L.J.P. (1984) Biochemistry, 23, 3277-3281. MEDLINE Abstract

14 Agazie,Y.M., Lee,J.S. and Burkholder,G.D. (1994) J. Biol. Chem., 269, 7019-7023. MEDLINE Abstract

15 Lee,J.S., Dombroski,D.M. and Mosmann,T.R. (1982) Biochemistry, 21, 4940-4945.

16 Herron,J.N., He,X.M., Ballard,D.W., Blier,P.R., Pace,P.E., Bothwell,A.L. and Voss,E.W. (1991) Proteins, 11, 159-175. MEDLINE Abstract

17 Braun,R.P. and Lee,J.S. (1986) Nucleic Acids Res., 14, 5049-5065. MEDLINE Abstract

18 Koffler,D., Agnello,V. and Kunkel,H.G. (1974) Am. J. Pathol., 74, 109-124. MEDLINE Abstract

19 Tsao,B.P., Ebling,F.M., Roman,C., Panosian-Sahakian,N., Calame,K. and Hahn,B.H. (1990) J. Clin. Invest., 85, 530-540. MEDLINE Abstract

20 Vlahakos,D.V., Foster,M.H., Adams,S., Katz,M., Ucci,A.A., Barrett,K.J., Datta,S.K. and Madaio,M.P. (1992) Kidney Int., 41, 1690-1700. MEDLINE Abstract

21 Sabbaga,J., Line,S.R.P., Potocnjak,P. and Madaio,M.P. (1989) Eur. J. Immunol., 19, 137-143. MEDLINE Abstract

22 Satoh,M., Kumar,A., Kanwar,Y.S. and Reeves,W.H. (1995) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 92, 10934-10938. MEDLINE Abstract

23 Kiberd,B.A. (1993) J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., 4, 58-61. MEDLINE Abstract

24 Ryffel,B., Car,B.D., Gunn,H., Roman,D., Hiestand,P. and Mihatsch,M.J. (1994) Am. J. Pathol., 144, 927-937. MEDLINE Abstract

25 Heyduk,T. and Lee,J.C. (1990) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 87, 1744-1748. MEDLINE Abstract

26 LeTilly,V. and Royer,C.A. (1993) Biochemistry, 32, 7753-7758. MEDLINE Abstract

27 Gulliver,G.A., Bedzyk,W.D., Smith,R.G., Bode,S.L., Tetin,S.Y. and Voss,E.W. (1994) J. Biol. Chem., 269, 7934-7940. MEDLINE Abstract

28 Kowalczykowski,S.C., Paul,L.S., Lonberg,N., Newport,J.W., McSwiggen,J.A. and von Hippel,P.H. (1986) Biochemistry, 25, 1226-1240. MEDLINE Abstract

29 Ts'o,P.O.P., Rapaport,S.A. and Bollum,F.J. (1966) Biochemistry, 5, 4153-4170.

30 Chamberlin,M. (1965) Fedn Proc., 24, 1446-1457.

31 Lefler,C.F. and Bollum,F.J. (1969) J. Biol. Chem., 244, 594-601. MEDLINE Abstract

32 Wells,R.D., Larson,J.E., Grant,R.C., Shortle,B.E. and Cantor,C.R. (1970) J. Mol. Biol., 54, 465-497.

33 Sambrook,J., Fritsch,E.F. and Maniatis,T. (1989) Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual, 2nd Edn. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY.

34 Kuderova,A., Tanha,J. and Lee,J.S. (1994) J. Biol. Chem., 269, 32957-32962 MEDLINE Abstract

35 Braun,R.P. and Lee,J.S. (1987) J. Immunol., 139, 175-179. MEDLINE Abstract

36 Dandliker,W.B., Hsu,M.L., Levin,J. and Rao,B.R. (1981) Methods Enzymol., 3, 3-28.

37 Bird,E.R., Hardman,K.D., Jacobson,J.W., Johnson,S., Kaufman,B.M., Lee,S.-M., Lee,T., Pope,S.H., Riordan,G.S. and Whitlow,S. (1988) Science, 242, 423-426.

38 Papalian,M., Lafer,E., Wong,R. and Stollar,B.D. (1980) J. Clin. Invest., 65, 469-477. MEDLINE Abstract

39 Record,T.M., Lohman,T.M. and de Haseth,P. (1976) J. Mol. Biol., 107, 45-158.

40 Ha,J.-H., Spolar,R.S. and Record,M.T. (1989) J. Mol. Biol., 209, 801-816. MEDLINE Abstract

41 Herron,J.N., Kranz,D.M., Jameson,D.M. and Voss,E.W. (1986) Biochemistry, 25, 4602-4609. MEDLINE Abstract

42 Barry,M.M., Mol,C.D., Anderson,W.F. and Lee,J.S. (1994) J. Biol. Chem., 269, 3623-3632. MEDLINE Abstract

43 Eilat,D. and Anderson,W.F. (1994) Mol. Immunol., 31, 1377-1390. MEDLINE Abstract

44 Spolar,R.S. and Record,M.T. (1994) Science, 263, 777-784. MEDLINE Abstract

45 Mol,C.D., Muir,A.K.S., Lee,J.S. and Anderson,W.F. (1994) J. Biol. Chem., 269, 3605-3614. MEDLINE Abstract

46 Davies,D.R. and Cohen,G.H. (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 93, 7-12. MEDLINE Abstract

47 Wang,J.C. (1969) J. Mol. Biol., 43, 25-39. MEDLINE Abstract

48 Anderson,P. and Bauer,W. (1978) Biochemistry, 17, 594-601. MEDLINE Abstract

49 Depew,R.E. and Wang,J.C. (1975) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 72, 4275-4279.


Return

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel: +1 306 966 4371; Fax: +1 306 966 4390; Email: leejs@sask.usask.ca
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Protein Eng Des SelHome page
J. E. Smallshaw, F. Georges, J. S. Lee, and E.B. Waygood
Synthesis, cloning and expression of the single-chain Fv gene of the HPr-specific monoclonal antibody, Jel42. Determination of binding constants with wild-type and mutant HPrs
Protein Eng. Des. Sel., July 1, 1999; 12(7): 623 - 630.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Print PDF (130K) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrow Commercial Re-use Guidelines
for Open Access NAR Content
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tanha, J.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, J. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tanha, J.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, J. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?