Cell Stress and Chaperones

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 347–355 | Cite as

Endogenous epitope tagging of heat shock protein 70 isoform Hsc70 using CRISPR/Cas9

  • Nitika
  • Andrew W. TrumanEmail author
Original Paper


Heat shock protein 70 (Hsp70) is an evolutionarily well-conserved molecular chaperone involved in several cellular processes such as folding of proteins, modulating protein-protein interactions, and transport of proteins across the membrane. Binding partners of Hsp70 (known as “clients”) are identified on an individual basis as researchers discover their particular protein of interest binds to Hsp70. A full complement of Hsp70 interactors under multiple stress conditions remains to be determined. A promising approach to characterizing the Hsp70 “interactome” is the use of protein epitope tagging and then affinity purification followed by mass spectrometry (AP-MS/MS). AP-MS analysis is a widely used method to decipher protein-protein interaction networks and identifying protein functions. Conventionally, the proteins are overexpressed ectopically which interferes with protein complex stoichiometry, skewing AP-MS/MS data. In an attempt to solve this issue, we used CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing to integrate a tandem-affinity (TAP) epitope tag into the genomic locus of HSC70. This system offers several benefits over existing expression systems including native expression, no requirement for selection, and homogeneity between cells. This cell line, freely available to chaperone researchers, will aid in small and large-scale protein interaction studies as well as the study of biochemical activities and structure-function relationships of the Hsc70 protein.


Heat shock protein HSC70 CRISPR/Cas9 Genome-editing 



The authors thank F. Zhang for providing materials used in this study and M. Mollapour for helpful comments. We thank C. Richardson and D. Dreau for their technical assistance. This project was supported by NCI R15CA208773.

Supplementary material

12192_2017_845_MOESM1_ESM.seq (1 kb)
ESM 1 (SEQ 1 kb).


  1. Aebersold R, Mann M (2003) Mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Nature 422:198–207. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Boorstein WR, Ziegelhoffer T, Craig EA (1994) Molecular evolution of the HSP70 multigene family. J Mol Evol 38:1–17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Consortium EP (2012) An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome. Nature 489:57–74. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dalvai M et al (2015) A scalable genome-editing-based approach for mapping multiprotein complexes in human cells. Cell Rep 13:621–633. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. de Los Milagros Bassani Molinas M, Beer C, Hesse F, Wirth M, Wagner R (2014) Optimizing the transient transfection process of HEK-293 suspension cells for protein production by nucleotide ratio monitoring. Cytotechnology 66:493–514. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dunn DM et al (2015) c-Abl mediated tyrosine phosphorylation of Aha1 activates its co-chaperone function in cancer cells. Cell Rep 12:1006–1018. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Gavin AC et al (2002) Functional organization of the yeast proteome by systematic analysis of protein complexes. Nature 415:141–147. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Gong Y, Kakihara Y, Krogan N, Greenblatt J, Emili A, Zhang Z, Houry WA (2009) An atlas of chaperone-protein interactions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: implications to protein folding pathways in the cell. Mol Syst Biol 5:275. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Hartl FU, Bracher A, Hayer-Hartl M (2011) Molecular chaperones in protein folding and proteostasis. Nature 475:324–332. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. He X et al (2016) Knock-in of large reporter genes in human cells via CRISPR/Cas9-induced homology-dependent and independent DNA repair. Nucleic Acids Res 44:e85. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Ho Y et al (2002) Systematic identification of protein complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by mass spectrometry. Nature 415:180–183. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kelley WL (1999) Molecular chaperones: how J domains turn on Hsp70s. Curr Biol 9:R305–R308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kocher T, Superti-Furga G (2007) Mass spectrometry-based functional proteomics: from molecular machines to protein networks. Nat Methods 4:807–815. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu Q, Li H, Yang Y, Tian X, Su J, Zhou L, Liu Q (2017) A disulfide-bonded DnaK dimer is maintained in an ATP-bound state. Cell Stress Chaperones 22:201–212. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Mayer MP (2013) Hsp70 chaperone dynamics and molecular mechanism. Trends Biochem Sci 38:507–514. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Mayer MP, Bukau B (2005) Hsp70 chaperones: cellular functions and molecular mechanism. Cell Mol Life Sci 62:670–684. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Radons J (2016) The human HSP70 family of chaperones: where do we stand? Cell Stress Chaperones 21:379–404. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Ran FA, Hsu PD, Wright J, Agarwala V, Scott DA, Zhang F (2013) Genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system. Nat Protoc 8:2281–2308. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Rigaut G, Shevchenko A, Rutz B, Wilm M, Mann M, Seraphin B (1999) A generic protein purification method for protein complex characterization and proteome exploration. Nat Biotechnol 17:1030–1032. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Rodina A et al (2016) The epichaperome is an integrated chaperome network that facilitates tumour survival. Nature 538:397–401. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Rohde M, Daugaard M, Jensen MH, Helin K, Nylandsted J, Jaattela M (2005) Members of the heat-shock protein 70 family promote cancer cell growth by distinct mechanisms. Genes Dev 19:570–582. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Shaner L, Wegele H, Buchner J, Morano KA (2005) The yeast Hsp110 Sse1 functionally interacts with the Hsp70 chaperones Ssa and Ssb. J Biol Chem 280:41262–41269. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Shiota M et al (2010) Generation of a rat monoclonal antibody specific for heat shock cognate protein 70. Hybridoma (Larchmt) 29:453–456. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Taipale M, Krykbaeva I, Koeva M, Kayatekin C, Westover KD, Karras GI, Lindquist S (2012) Quantitative analysis of HSP90-client interactions reveals principles of substrate recognition. Cell 150:987–1001. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Takayama S, Reed JC (2001) Molecular chaperone targeting and regulation by BAG family proteins. Nat Cell Biol 3:E237–E241. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Tanaka M et al (2011) Generation of a rat monoclonal antibody specific for hsp72. Hybridoma (Larchmt) 30:397–400. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tanaka M et al (2014) Hsc70 contributes to cancer cell survival by preventing Rab1A degradation under stress conditions. PLoS One 9:e96785. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Tanaka M et al (2016) Identification of low-abundance proteins in serum via the isolation of HSP72 complexes. J Proteomics 136:214–221. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Taniguchi H et al (2014) Heat shock protein 90 inhibitor NVP-AUY922 exerts potent activity against adult T-cell leukemia-lymphoma cells. Cancer Sci 105:1601–1608. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Truman AW et al (2012) CDK-dependent Hsp70 phosphorylation controls G1 cyclin abundance and cell-cycle progression. Cell 151:1308–1318. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Truman AW et al (2015) Quantitative proteomics of the yeast Hsp70/Hsp90 interactomes during DNA damage reveal chaperone-dependent regulation of ribonucleotide reductase. J Proteomics 112:285–300. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Walton-Diaz A, Khan S, Bourboulia D, Trepel JB, Neckers L, Mollapour M (2013) Contributions of co-chaperones and post-translational modifications towards Hsp90 drug sensitivity. Future Med Chem 5:1059–1071. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Woodford MR, Dunn D, Miller JB, Jamal S, Neckers L, Mollapour M (2016a) Impact of posttranslational modifications on the anticancer activity of Hsp90 inhibitors. Adv Cancer Res 129:31–50. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Woodford MR et al (2016b) Mps1 mediated phosphorylation of Hsp90 confers renal cell carcinoma sensitivity and selectivity to Hsp90 inhibitors. Cell Rep 14:872–884. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Yang L, Yang JL, Byrne S, Pan J, Church GM (2014) CRISPR/Cas9-directed genome editing of cultured cells. Curr Protoc Mol Biol 107:31.31.31–31.31.17. Google Scholar
  36. Zhao R et al (2005) Navigating the chaperone network: an integrative map of physical and genetic interactions mediated by the hsp90 chaperone. Cell 120:715–727. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Cell Stress Society International 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of North Carolina CharlotteCharlotteUSA

Personalised recommendations