Abstract
The specific binding of DNA-binding proteins to their cognate DNA motifs is a crucial step for gene expression control and chromatin organization in vivo. The development of methods for the identification of in vivo binding regions by, e.g. chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) or DNA adenine methyltransferase identification (Dam-ID) added an additional level of qualitative information for data mining in systems biology or applications in synthetic biology. In this respect, the in vivo techniques outpaced methods for thorough characterization of protein–DNA interaction and, especially, of the binding motifs at single base-pair resolution. The elucidation of DNA-binding capacities of proteins is frequently done with methods such as yeast one-hybrid, electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) or systematic evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment (SELEX) that provide only qualitative binding information and are not suited for automation or high-throughput screening of several DNA motifs. Here, we describe the quantitative DNA–protein-Interaction-ELISA (qDPI-ELISA) protocol, which makes use of fluorescent fusion proteins and, hence, is faster and easier to handle than the classical DPI-ELISA. Although every DPI-ELISA experiment delivers quantitative information, the qDPI-ELISA has an increased consistency, as it does not depend on immunological detection. We demonstrate the high comparability between probes and different protein extracts in qDPI-ELISA experiments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Brand LH, Satbhai SB, Kolukisaoglu Ü, Wanke D (2013) Limits and prospects of methods for the analysis of DNA-protein interaction. In: Berendzen KW (ed.), Kilian J, Wanke D (co-eds.) The analysis of regulatory DNA: current developments, knowledge and applications uncovering gene regulation. Bentham Science Publishers, pp. 124–148
Gordan R, Hartemink AJ, Bulyk ML (2009) Distinguishing direct versus indirect transcription factor-DNA interactions. Genome Res 19:2090–2100
Massie CE, Mills IG (2008) ChIPping away at gene regulation. EMBO Rep 9:337–343
Germann S, Gaudin V (2011) Mapping in vivo protein-DNA interactions in plants by DamID, a DNA adenine methylation-based method. Methods Mol Biol 754:307–321
Orian A, Abed M, Kenyagin-Karsenti D, Boico O (2009) DamID: a methylation-based chromatin profiling approach. Methods Mol Biol 567:155–169
Brand LH, Henneges C, Schussler A, Kolukisaoglu HU, Koch G, Wallmeroth N, Hecker A, Thurow K, Zell A, Harter K et al (2013) Screening for protein-DNA interactions by automatable DNA-protein interaction ELISA. PLoS One 8, e75177
Rohs R, Jin X, West SM, Joshi R, Honig B, Mann RS (2010) Origins of specificity in protein-DNA recognition. Annu Rev Biochem 79:233–269
Rohs R, West SM, Liu P, Honig B (2009) Nuance in the double-helix and its role in protein-DNA recognition. Curr Opin Struct Biol 19:171–177
Schroder A, Eichner J, Supper J, Wanke D, Henneges C, Zell A (2010) Predicting DNA-binding specificities of eukaryotic transcription factors. PLoS One 5, e13876
Fried MG, Bromberg JL (1997) Factors that affect the stability of protein-DNA complexes during gel electrophoresis. Electrophoresis 18:6–11
Gaudreault M, Gingras ME, Lessard M, Leclerc S, Guerin SL (2009) Electrophoretic mobility shift assays for the analysis of DNA-protein interactions. Methods Mol Biol 543:15–35
Hellman LM, Fried MG (2007) Electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) for detecting protein-nucleic acid interactions. Nat Protoc 2:1849–1861
Wong D, Teixeira A, Oikonomopoulos S, Humburg P, Lone IN, Saliba D, Siggers T, Bulyk M, Angelov D, Dimitrov S et al (2011) Extensive characterization of NF-kappaB binding uncovers non-canonical motifs and advances the interpretation of genetic functional traits. Genome Biol 12:R70
Chai C, Xie Z, Grotewold E (2011) SELEX (Systematic Evolution of Ligands by EXponential Enrichment), as a powerful tool for deciphering the protein-DNA interaction space. Methods Mol Biol 754:249–258
Roulet E, Busso S, Camargo AA, Simpson AJ, Mermod N, Bucher P (2002) High-throughput SELEX SAGE method for quantitative modeling of transcription-factor binding sites. Nat Biotechnol 20:831–835
Bonvin AM, Boelens R, Kaptein R (2005) NMR analysis of protein interactions. Curr Opin Chem Biol 9:501–508
Wang X, Kuwahara H, Gao X (2014) Modeling DNA affinity landscape through two-round support vector regression with weighted degree kernels. BMC Syst Biol 8:S5
Agius P, Arvey A, Chang W, Noble WS, Leslie C (2010) High resolution models of transcription factor-DNA affinities improve in vitro and in vivo binding predictions. PLoS Comput Biol 6, e1000916
Berger MF, Bulyk ML (2009) Universal protein-binding microarrays for the comprehensive characterization of the DNA-binding specificities of transcription factors. Nat Protoc 4:393–411
Bulyk ML (2006) Analysis of sequence specificities of DNA-binding proteins with protein binding microarrays. Methods Enzymol 410:279–299
Brand LH, Fischer NM, Harter K, Kohlbacher O, Wanke D (2013) Elucidating the evolutionary conserved DNA-binding specificities of WRKY transcription factors by molecular dynamics and in vitro binding assays. Nucleic Acids Res 41:9764–9778
Brand LH, Kirchler T, Hummel S, Chaban C, Wanke D (2010) DPI-ELISA: a fast and versatile method to specify the binding of plant transcription factors to DNA in vitro. Plant Methods 6:25
Hecker A, Brand LH, Peter S, Simoncello N, Kilian J, Harter K, Gaudin V, Wanke D (2015) The Arabidopsis GAGA-Binding Factor BASIC PENTACYSTEINE6 Recruits the POLYCOMB-REPRESSIVE COMPLEX1 Component LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN PROTEIN1 to GAGA DNA Motifs. Plant Physiol 168:1013–1024
Alonso N, Guillen R, Chambers JW, Leng F (2015) A rapid and sensitive high-throughput screening method to identify compounds targeting protein-nucleic acids interactions. Nucleic Acids Res 43, e52
Soyk S, Simkova K, Zurcher E, Luginbuhl L, Brand LH, Vaughan CK, Wanke D, Zeeman SC (2014) The enzyme-like domain of Arabidopsis nuclear beta-amylases is critical for DNA sequence recognition and transcriptional activation. Plant Cell 26:1746–1763
Santi L, Wang Y, Stile MR, Berendzen K, Wanke D, Roig C, Pozzi C, Muller K, Muller J, Rohde W et al (2003) The GA octodinucleotide repeat binding factor BBR participates in the transcriptional regulation of the homeobox gene Bkn3. Plant J 34:813–826
Kooiker M, Airoldi CA, Losa A, Manzotti PS, Finzi L, Kater MM, Colombo L (2005) BASIC PENTACYSTEINE1, a GA binding protein that induces conformational changes in the regulatory region of the homeotic Arabidopsis gene SEEDSTICK. Plant Cell 17:722–729
Acknowledgements
We like to thank Luise H. Brand and Klaus Harter for continuous support. We acknowledge Angelika Anna and Sabine Hummel for technical assistance.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Fischer, S.M., Böser, A., Hirsch, J.P., Wanke, D. (2016). Quantitative Analysis of Protein–DNA Interaction by qDPI-ELISA. In: Hehl, R. (eds) Plant Synthetic Promoters. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 1482. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6396-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6396-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-6394-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-6396-6
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols