Advertisement

Activity-Based Protein Profiling Methods to Study Bacteria: The Power of Small-Molecule Electrophiles

  • Shabnam Sharifzadeh
  • Joshua D. Shirley
  • Erin E. CarlsonEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology book series (CT MICROBIOLOGY, volume 420)

Abstract

ABPP methods have been utilized for the last two decades as a means to investigate complex proteomes in all three domains of life. Extensive use in eukaryotes has provided a more fundamental understanding of the biological processes involved in numerous diseases and has driven drug discovery and treatment campaigns. However, the use of ABPP in prokaryotes has been less common, although it has gained more attention over the last decade. The urgent need for understanding bacteriophysiology and bacterial pathogenicity at a foundational level has never been more apparent, as the rise in antibiotic resistance has resulted in the inadequate and ineffective treatment of infections. This is not only a result of resistance to clinically used antibiotics, but also a lack of new drugs and equally as important, new drug targets. ABPP provides a means for which new, clinically relevant drug targets may be identified through gaining insight into biological processes. In this chapter, we place particular focus on the discussion of ABPP strategies that have been applied to study different classes of bacterial enzymes.

References

  1. Agard NJ, Prescher JA, Bertozzi CR (2004) A strain-promoted [3 + 2] azide-alkyne cycloaddition for covalent modification of biomolecules in living systems. J Am Chem Soc 126:15046–15047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agard NJ, Baskin JM, Prescher JA, Lo A, Bertozzi CR (2006) A comparative study of bioorthogonal reactions with azides. ACS Chem Biol 1:644–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Battenberg OA, Yang Y, Verhelst SH, Sieber SA (2013) Target profiling of 4-hydroxyderricin in S. aureus reveals seryl-tRNA synthetase binding and inhibition by covalent modification. Mol BioSyst 9:343–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beatty KE, Fisk JD, Smart BP, Lu YY, Szychowski J, Hangauer MJ, Baskin JM, Bertozzi CR, Tirrell DA (2010) Live-cell imaging of cellular proteins by a strain-promoted azide-alkyne cycloaddition. ChemBioChem 11:2092–2095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bender KO, Ofori L, Van Der Linden WA, Mock ED, Datta GK, Chowdhury S, Li H, Segal E, Lopez MS, Ellman JA, Figdor CG, Bogyo M, Verdoes M (2015) Design of a highly selective quenched activity-based probe and its application in dual color imaging studies of cathepsin S activity localization. J Am Chem Soc 137:4771–4777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blum G, Mullins SR, Keren K, Fonovic M, Jedeszko C, Rice MJ, Sloane BF, Bogyo M (2005) Dynamic imaging of protease activity with fluorescently quenched activity-based probes. Nat Chem Biol 1:203–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bogyo M, Verhelst S, Bellingard-Dubouchaud V, Toba S, Greenbaum D (2000) Selective targeting of lysosomal cysteine proteases with radiolabeled electrophilic substrate analogs. Chem Biol 7:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bottcher T, Sieber SA (2008a) Beta-lactones as privileged structures for the active-site labeling of versatile bacterial enzyme classes. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 47:4600–4603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bottcher T, Sieber SA (2008b) Beta-lactones as specific inhibitors of ClpP attenuate the production of extracellular virulence factors of Staphylococcus aureus. J Am Chem Soc 130:14400–14401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bottcher T, Sieber SA (2010) Showdomycin as a versatile chemical tool for the detection of pathogenesis-associated enzymes in bacteria. J Am Chem Soc 132:6964–6972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cardoza JD, Parikh JR, Ficarro SB, Marto JA (2012) Mass spectrometry-based proteomics: qualitative identification to activity-based protein profiling. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med 4:141–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carlson EE (2010) Natural products as chemical probes. ACS Chem Biol 5:639–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chang PV, Prescher JA, Sletten EM, Baskin JM, Miller IA, Agard NJ, Lo A, Bertozzi CR (2010) Copper-free click chemistry in living animals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107:1821–1826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chauvigne-Hines LM, Anderson LN, Weaver HM, Brown JN, Koech PK, Nicora CD, Hofstad BA, Smith RD, Wilkins MJ, Callister SJ, Wright AT (2012) Suite of activity-based probes for cellulose-degrading enzymes. J Am Chem Soc 134:20521–20532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chen X, Wong YK, Wang J, Zhang J, Lee YM, Shen HM, Lin Q, Hua ZC (2017) Target identification with quantitative activity based protein profiling (ABPP). Proteomics 17Google Scholar
  16. Drahl C, Cravatt BF, Sorensen EJ (2005) Protein-reactive natural products. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 44:5788–5809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Edgington LE, Verdoes M, Bogyo M (2011) Functional imaging of proteases: recent advances in the design and application of substrate-based and activity-based probes. Curr Opin Chem Biol 15:798–805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eirich J, Orth R, Sieber SA (2011) Unraveling the protein targets of vancomycin in living S. aureus and E. faecalis cells. J Am Chem Soc 133:12144–12153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ekkebus R, Van Kasteren SI, Kulathu Y, Scholten A, Berlin I, Geurink PP, De Jong A, Goerdayal S, Neefjes J, Heck AJ, Komander D, Ovaa H (2013) On terminal alkynes that can react with active-site cysteine nucleophiles in proteases. J Am Chem Soc 135:2867–2870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gandy MN, Debowski AW, Stubbs KA (2011) A general method for affinity-based proteomic profiling of exo-alpha-glycosidases. Chem Commun (Camb) 47:5037–5039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Greenbaum D, Medzihradszky KF, Burlingame A, Bogyo M (2000) Epoxide electrophiles as activity-dependent cysteine protease profiling and discovery tools. Chem Biol 7:569–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hang HC, Yu C, Kato DL, Bertozzi CR (2003) A metabolic labeling approach toward proteomic analysis of mucin-type O-linked glycosylation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:14846–14851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hatzios SK, Abel S, Martell J, Hubbard T, Sasabe J, Munera D, Clark L, Bachovchin DA, Qadri F, Ryan ET, Davis BM, Weerapana E, Waldor MK (2016) Chemoproteomic profiling of host and pathogen enzymes active in cholera. Nat Chem Biol 12:268–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heal WP, Tate EW (2012) Application of activity-based protein profiling to the study of microbial pathogenesis. Top Curr Chem 324:115–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jessani N, Niessen S, Wei BQ, Nicolau M, Humphrey M, Ji Y, Han W, Noh DY, Yates JR 3rd, Jeffrey SS, Cravatt BF (2005) A streamlined platform for high-content functional proteomics of primary human specimens. Nat Methods 2:691–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kato D, Boatright KM, Berger AB, Nazif T, Blum G, Ryan C, Chehade KA, Salvesen GS, Bogyo M (2005) Activity-based probes that target diverse cysteine protease families. Nat Chem Biol 1:33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kim HY, Tallman KA, Liebler DC, Porter NA (2009) An azido-biotin reagent for use in the isolation of protein adducts of lipid-derived electrophiles by streptavidin catch and photorelease. Mol Cell Proteomics 8:2080–2089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kocaoglu O, Calvo RA, Sham LT, Cozy LM, Lanning BR, Francis S, Winkler ME, Kearns DB, Carlson EE (2012) Selective penicillin-binding protein imaging probes reveal substructure in bacterial cell division. ACS Chem Biol 7:1746–1753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kolb HC, Sharpless KB (2003) The growing impact of click chemistry on drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 8:1128–1137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kolb HC, Finn MG, Sharpless KB (2001) Click chemistry: diverse chemical function from a few good reactions. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 40:2004–2021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Krysiak J, Breinbauer R (2012) Activity-based protein profiling for natural product target discovery. Top Curr Chem 324:43–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lang K, Chin JW (2014) Bioorthogonal reactions for labeling proteins. ACS Chem Biol 9:16–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lee J, Zhang L (2015) The hierarchy quorum sensing network in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Protein Cell 6:26–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lentz CS, Ordonez AA, Kasperkiewicz P, La Greca F, O’donoghue AJ, Schulze CJ, Powers JC, Craik CS, Drag M, Jain SK, Bogyo M (2016) Design of selective substrates and activity-based probes for Hydrolase Important for Pathogenesis 1 (HIP1) from Mycobacterium tuberculosis. ACS Infect Dis 2:807–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leriche G, Chisholm L, Wagner A (2012) Cleavable linkers in chemical biology. Bioorg Med Chem 20:571–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Liu Y, Fredrickson JK, Sadler NC, Nandhikonda P, Smith RD, Wright AT (2015) Advancing understanding of microbial bioenergy conversion processes by activity-based protein profiling. Biotechnol Biofuels 8:156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Matthews ML, He L, Horning BD, Olson EJ, Correia BE, Yates JR 3rd, Dawson PE, Cravatt BF (2017) Chemoproteomic profiling and discovery of protein electrophiles in human cells. Nat Chem 9:234–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mckay CS, Finn MG (2014) Click chemistry in complex mixtures: bioorthogonal bioconjugation. Chem Biol 21:1075–1101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Narayanan A, Jones LH (2015) Sulfonyl fluorides as privileged warheads in chemical biology. Chem Sci 6:2650–2659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nomura DK, Dix MM, Cravatt BF (2010) Activity-based protein profiling for biochemical pathway discovery in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 10:630–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ortega C, Anderson LN, Frando A, Sadler NC, Brown RW, Smith RD, Wright AT, Grundner C (2016) Systematic survey of serine hydrolase activity in Mycobacterium tuberculosis defines changes associated with persistence. Cell Chem Biol 23:290–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Orth R, Sieber SA (2009) A photolabile linker for the mild and selective cleavage of enriched biomolecules from solid support. J Org Chem 74:8476–8479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pan Z, Jeffery DA, Chehade K, Beltman J, Clark JM, Grothaus P, Bogyo M, Baruch A (2006) Development of activity-based probes for trypsin-family serine proteases. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 16:2882–2885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Patricelli MP, Giang DK, Stamp LM, Burbaum JJ (2001) Direct visualization of serine hydrolase activities in complex proteomes using fluorescent active site-directed probes. Proteomics 1:1067–1071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pearson RG (1990) Hard and soft acids and bases—the evolution of a chemical concept. Coord Chem Rev 100:403–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Powers JC, Asgian JL, Ekici OD, James KE (2002) Irreversible inhibitors of serine, cysteine, and threonine proteases. Chem Rev 102:4639–4750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Prothiwa M, Szamosvari D, Glasmacher S, Bottcher T (2016) Chemical probes for competitive profiling of the quorum sensing signal synthase PqsD of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Beilstein J Org Chem 12:2784–2792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Roncase EJ, Moon C, Chatterjee S, Gonzalez-Paez GE, Craik CS, O’donoghue AJ, Wolan DW (2017) Substrate profiling and high resolution co-complex crystal structure of a secreted C11 protease conserved across commensal bacteria. ACS Chem Biol 12:1556–1565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rostovtsev VV, Green LG, Fokin VV, Sharpless KB (2002) A stepwise huisgen cycloaddition process: copper(I)-catalyzed regioselective “ligation” of azides and terminal alkynes. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 41:2596–2599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rudolf GC, Heydenreuter W, Sieber SA (2013) Chemical proteomics: ligation and cleavage of protein modifications. Curr Opin Chem Biol 17:110–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sadaghiani AM, Verhelst SH, Bogyo M (2007) Tagging and detection strategies for activity-based proteomics. Curr Opin Chem Biol 11:20–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sadler NC, Wright AT (2015) Activity-based protein profiling of microbes. Curr Opin Chem Biol 24:139–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shannon DA, Weerapana E (2015) Covalent protein modification: the current landscape of residue-specific electrophiles. Curr Opin Chem Biol 24:18–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sharifzadeh S, Boersma MJ, Kocaoglu O, Shokri A, Brown CL, Shirley JD, Winkler ME, Carlson EE (2017) Novel electrophilic scaffold for imaging of essential penicillin-binding proteins in Streptococcus pneumoniae. ACS Chem Biol 12:2849–2857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Siklos M, Benaissa M, Thatcher GR (2015) Cysteine proteases as therapeutic targets: does selectivity matter? A systematic review of calpain and cathepsin inhibitors. Acta Pharm Sin B 5:506–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sletten EM, Bertozzi CR (2011) From mechanism to mouse: a tale of two bioorthogonal reactions. Acc Chem Res 44:666–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Speers AE, Cravatt BF (2004) Profiling enzyme activities in vivo using click chemistry methods. Chem Biol 11:535–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Speers AE, Cravatt BF (2009) Activity-Based Protein Profiling (ABPP) and Click Chemistry (CC)-ABPP by MudPIT mass spectrometry. Curr Protoc Chem Biol 1:29–41PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. Staub I, Sieber SA (2008) Beta-lactams as selective chemical probes for the in vivo labeling of bacterial enzymes involved in cell wall biosynthesis, antibiotic resistance, and virulence. J Am Chem Soc 130:13400–13409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stubbs KA, Scaffidi A, Debowski AW, Mark BL, Stick RV, Vocadlo DJ (2008) Synthesis and use of mechanism-based protein-profiling probes for retaining beta-d-glucosaminidases facilitate identification of Pseudomonas aeruginosa NagZ. J Am Chem Soc 130:327–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tallman KR, Levine SR, Beatty KE (2016) Small-molecule probes reveal esterases with persistent activity in dormant and reactivating Mycobacterium tuberculosis. ACS Infect Dis 2:936–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Verheggen K, Raeder H, Berven FS, Martens L, Barsnes H, Vaudel M (2017) Anatomy and evolution of database search engines-a central component of mass spectrometry based proteomic workflows. Mass Spectrom RevGoogle Scholar
  63. Vocadlo DJ, Bertozzi CR (2004) A strategy for functional proteomic analysis of glycosidase activity from cell lysates. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 43:5338–5342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vogel C, Marcotte EM (2012) Insights into the regulation of protein abundance from proteomic and transcriptomic analyses. Nat Rev Genet 13:227–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Vosyka O, Vinothkumar KR, Wolf EV, Brouwer AJ, Liskamp RM, Verhelst SH (2013) Activity-based probes for rhomboid proteases discovered in a mass spectrometry-based assay. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:2472–2477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wang S, Tian Y, Wang M, Wang M, Sun GB, Sun XB (2018) Advanced activity-based protein profiling application strategies for drug development. Front Pharmacol 9:353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Weerapana E, Speers AE, Cravatt BF (2007) Tandem orthogonal proteolysis-activity-based protein profiling (TOP-ABPP)—a general method for mapping sites of probe modification in proteomes. Nat Protoc 2:1414–1425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Weerapana E, Simon GM, Cravatt BF (2008) Disparate proteome reactivity profiles of carbon electrophiles. Nat Chem Biol 4:405–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Weerapana E, Wang C, Simon GM, Richter F, Khare S, Dillon MB, Bachovchin DA, Mowen K, Baker D, Cravatt BF (2010) Quantitative reactivity profiling predicts functional cysteines in proteomes. Nature 468:790–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Weinandy F, Lorenz-Baath K, Korotkov VS, Bottcher T, Sethi S, Chakraborty T, Sieber SA (2014) A beta-lactone-based antivirulence drug ameliorates Staphylococcus aureus skin infections in mice. ChemMedChem 9:710–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wicki J, Rose DR, Withers SG (2002) Trapping covalent intermediates on beta-glycosidases. Methods Enzymol 354:84–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Willems LI, Overkleeft HS, Van Kasteren SI (2014) Current developments in activity-based protein profiling. Bioconjug Chem 25:1181–1191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Withana NP, Garland M, Verdoes M, Ofori LO, Segal E, Bogyo M (2016) Labeling of active proteases in fresh-frozen tissues by topical application of quenched activity-based probes. Nat Protoc 11:184–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Withers SG, Street IP, Bird P, Dolphin DH (1987) 2-Deoxy-2-Fluoroglucosides—a novel class of mechanism-based glucosidase inhibitors. J Am Chem Soc 109:7530–7531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wright MH, Sieber SA (2016) Chemical proteomics approaches for identifying the cellular targets of natural products. Nat Prod Rep 33:681–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wu H, Devaraj NK (2018) Advances in tetrazine bioorthogonal chemistry driven by the synthesis of novel tetrazines and dienophiles. Acc Chem Res 51:1249–1259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Yang Y, Hahne H, Kuster B, Verhelst SH (2013) A simple and effective cleavable linker for chemical proteomics applications. Mol Cell Proteomics 12:237–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zechel DL, Withers SG (2000) Glycosidase mechanisms: anatomy of a finely tuned catalyst. Acc Chem Res 33:11–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shabnam Sharifzadeh
    • 1
  • Joshua D. Shirley
    • 2
  • Erin E. Carlson
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryUniversity of Minnesota-Twin CitiesMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Medicinal ChemistryUniversity of Minnesota-Twin CitiesMinneapolisUSA
  3. 3.Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and BiophysicsUniversity of Minnesota-Twin CitiesMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations