Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Jun 10.
Published in final edited form as: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2013 Apr 29;52(24):10.1002/anie.201302339. doi: 10.1002/anie.201302339

A Single Mutation in a Regulatory Protein Produces Evolvable Allosterically Regulated Catalyst of Unnatural Reaction

Olesia V Moroz 1, Yurii S Moroz 2, Yibing Wu 3, Alissa B Olsen 4, Hong Cheng 5, Korrie L Mack 6, Jaclyn M McLaughlin 7, Elizabeth A Raymond 8, Krystyna Zhezherya 9, Heinrich Roder 10, Ivan V Korendovych 11,
PMCID: PMC3817844  NIHMSID: NIHMS521624  PMID: 23630096

Abstract

graphic file with name nihms521624u1.jpg

It only takes one mutation: a strategically placed single mutation in a non-enzymatic protein scaffold produced AlleyCat, a small, allosterically regulated catalyst of Kemp elimination. In only 7 rounds of directed evolution enzymatic efficiency of the original 74 amino acid residue catalyst was improved more than 220-fold to achieve kcat value higher than that of catalytic antibodies for the same reaction, still preserving allosteric regulation.

Keywords: Metalloproteins, Catalysts, Enzyme catalysis


Despite the progress in creating novel catalysts for unnatural reactions and reengineering existing enzymes to adopt new properties, the problem of creating a catalyst for a particular chemical transformation is far from solved. Current successful approaches to develop enzymes for unnatural reactions combine sophisticated computational algorithms with directed evolution methods.[1] Most available algorithms focus on introducing multiple mutations into existing protein scaffolds and optimizing interactions to satisfy a potential function developed to predict thermodynamic stability of a protein.[2] However, catalysis often requires destabilizing specific groups to enhance their chemical reactivity and thus a purely thermodynamic approach may not sample the whole range of available scaffolds. Could one introduce a highly reactive functional group in a protein without extensive engineering of the protein scaffold followed by optimization by directed evolution to achieve function? Using a very basic minimalist design strategy we have shown that a single mutation in a non-catalytic calmodulin scaffold produced a small (74 amino acid long) allosterically regulated enzyme, AlleyCat,[3] that catalyzes Kemp elimination (Scheme 1), a benchmark reaction for testing various catalyst design methodologies.

Scheme 1.

Scheme 1

Kemp Elimination.

While catalytic efficiency of the original AlleyCat catalyst is modest, here we show that our design approach produced a catalyst that could be optimized using standard directed evolution techniques. The activity of the evolved catalyst is on par with those designed by the best computational algorithms and catalytic antibodies.

AlleyCat contains only the C-terminal domain of calmodulin. In our directed evolution studies we reintroduced the N-terminal domain to obtain an additional way of purifying the protein and to improve expression yield in E. coli. The N-terminal domain did not significantly influence the catalytic activity. The resulting protein CaM F92E has essentially the same enzymatic efficiency and pKa values as AlleyCat (Table 1). Next, we identified eight positions near the active site likely to influence the reactivity of the catalyst and performed saturation mutagenesis to generate libraries with complete coverage of all possible single mutants in these positions. Several mutants with substantially improved activity were identified; the best (M144R) showed more than 6-fold increase in enzymatic efficiency. In the second round of directed evolution, we performed gene shuffling of the mutants identified in the first round to achieve an overall 14-fold improvement in activity with only two mutations. Two subsequent rounds of error-prone PCR identified mutations outside the active site region, to produce an overall 65-fold increase in kcat/KM. After one more round of gene shuffling and an additional round of error-prone PCR, we turned back to saturation mutagenesis. Reetz et al. showed[4] that extensive use of saturation mutagenesis often provides a more optimal path to finding active mutants. In agreement with this finding we observed that saturation mutagenesis in a position found to have no effect on activity in round 1, yielded a mutant (A88Q) with an additional 2-fold activity increase. Subsequent removal of the N-terminal domain resulted in a further improved 74-residue catalyst AlleyCat7. Detailed kinetic parameters for the evolved proteins are summarized in Table 1 and the Supporting Information. Overall, with only 7 rounds of directed evolution, having screened less than 6000 mutants, we achieved a 220-fold improvement in kcat/KM. This value compares well to the results of extensive directed evolution of Kemp eliminases reported by Tawfik and Baker: the catalytic efficiencies of KE07 and KE59, that, as in AlleyCat, use a single Glu as a catalytic base, were improved by 210-fold and 180–380-fold, respectively.[2b, 5] The kcat value for the evolved protein AlleyCat7 is only ~3-fold lower than that of the best evolved KE variant (KE59 R13-3/11H) and ~5-fold higher than that of a catalytic antibody for Kemp elimination.[6] The kcat/kuncat value for AlleyCat is more than 106. The improvement in enzymatic efficiency of AlleyCat over 7 rounds of directed evolution is achieved almost exclusively due to increase in kcat. Unlike the KE family designs, improvement in kcat is not a result of increased basicity of the active residue as the apparent pKa of the catalytic Glu92 residue generally decreases in the evolved variants. This is consistent with our overall approach to introduce a highly reactive glutamate residue without complete pre-optimization of the active site.

Table 1.

Kinetic parameters of the evolved mutants.

Round, method[a] Mutatios[b] (kcat/KM) max,[c] s−1M−1 kcat,[d] s−1 KM,[d] mM pKa[c]
AlleyCat F92E 5.8±0.3 6.9±0.1
CaM F92E F92E 6.3±0.2 6.98±0.05
1, SM M144R 47±2 0.10±0.02 4.1±1.0 7.21±0.06
2, GS H107I 93±2[e] 0.17±0.02 [e] 2.6±0.4[e] 6.73±0.03[e]
3, epPCR L112R 200±3 0.37±0.04 3.1±0.4 6.70±0.03
4, epPCR I85L 296±5 0.67±0.09 2.9±0.5 6.93±0.03
5, GS A128T 414±4 0.54±0.02 2.0±0.1 6.60±0.02
524±9[e] 0.78±0.07 [e] 1.9±0.2[e] 6.47±0.03[e]
6, epPCR M124L 543±4 0.65±0.06 2.2±0.3 6.67±0.01
7, SM A88Q 1069±14[e] 1.86±0.10 [e] 2.1±0.2[e] 6.43±0.02[e]
AlleyCat7 1283±13[e] 1.87±0.14 [e] 2.0±0.2[e] 6.39±0.02[e]
3.2±0.2[f] 2.4±0.2 [f]
[a]

SM - saturation mutagenesis, GS - gene shuffling, epPCR - error-prone PCR.

[b]

in addition to the ones in the preceding round. The numbering scheme refers to the positions of residues in parent chicken calmodulin.[7]

[c]

(kcat/KM)max and pKa values were obtained from the pH activity profile as described in detail in the Supporting Information. Each individual kcat/KM value was obtained from the linear portion of the Michaelis-Menten plot.

[d]

Individual kcat and KM values were obtained from fitting the data to the Michaelis-Menten equation at pH 7.0. Note that due to limited substrate solubility these values could be subject to higher uncertainty.

[e]

with affinity tag removed.

[f]

at pH 8.0.

Mutation of Glu92 to Gln reduces activity by at least 2200-fold, confirming that the original reaction mechanism is preserved. Evolution of catalytic activity of AlleyCat did not significantly influence its affinity for calcium; hence, the allosteric regulation of activity is still intact in the evolved protein as the protein is completely inactive in the absence of Ca2+. Moreover, the protein can be cycled through the on and off states without any loss of activity or product inhibition (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Allosteric regulation of AlleyCat7. Experimental conditions: initial concentrations: 130 nM protein, 100 mM NaCl, 20 mM HEPES, pH 7.0, 0.1 mM CaCl2, 0.1 mM substrate. At 300 s EDTA was added to the final concentration of 0.2 mM, followed by addition of CaCl2 at 540 s to the final concentration of 0.3 mM and, again, EDTA at 840 s to the final concentration of 0.5 mM.

Most of the newly identified mutations (M144R, L112R, A128T and A88Q) introduced additional polar groups in the hydrophobic region of the protein. Two mutations, I85L and M124L, could be improving packing around the active site. H107I increases steric bulk around the catalytic residue and could be locking the active site carboxylate in the productive conformation. Interestingly, the backbone amide proton resonance of H107 in AlleyCat is quite broad, but the peak of I107 in CaM F92E 5R HSQC spectrum is sharp and well defined, consistent with improved stability of the helix formed by residues 103–111.

Evolution of protein function is often limited by the ability of the protein scaffold to accept additional mutations. We used circular dichroism (CD) spectroscopy to characterize the secondary structure and stability of the mutants identified in our studies. All evolved proteins showed well-defined helical structure, nearly identical to that of holo calmodulin. Chemical denaturation experiments with guanidinium chloride were performed to quantify the stability of the protein fold. In line with previous directed evolution studies,[5a, 8] mutations that greatly improved activity in the initial rounds had a profound detrimental effect on scaffold stability. However, additional mutations did not substantially disrupt the fold and after round 5 an overall increase in free energy of unfolding was observed (Figure S25, Table S3, Supporting Information). In all cases the energy provided by calcium binding to EF-hands is sufficient to preserve the proper protein fold.

The round 5 protein, which we found to be the least stable by chemical denaturation, was structurally characterized by NMR (Figure 2). The structure is very similar to that of the original AlleyCat design (rmsd 1.9 Å), but shows somewhat tighter packing around the active site. As in the original design, the side chain of the active site glutamate is pointing into the middle of the hydrophobic pocket. The position of the side chain of arginine 144 on the other side of the substrate-binding pocket is consistent with proton-donation to the oxygen of the benzisoxazole ring, shown to be beneficial for the reaction.[9] Interestingly, the L112R mutation brings the arginine side chain within a hydrogen-bonding distance to the carboxylate of the active site glutamate. This interaction, which does not greatly perturb the pKa of Glu92, can lock the position of the Glu side chain in the productive conformation and/or stabilize the charged carboxylate in the hydrophobic environment.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

NMR structure of the CaM F92E 5R mutant (only the C-terminal domain is shown). The side chains for mutations introduced through the design (F92E) and directed evolution are shown in color. The side chains for the residues facing the active sites and the calcium atoms (spheres) are shown in grey. The rest of the side chains are omitted for clarity. PDB code 2m3s. The substrate was docked into the structure using Autodock 3.0.

AlleyCat7 is effectively (KI = 18 μM) inhibited by 5-nitro-benzotriazole (5-NBT), a transition state analog. Analysis of the backbone amide NH chemical shift perturbation data for the round 5 variant shows that 5-NBT binds to the C-terminal domain in the pose consistent with our previous modeling studies[3] (Figure S33, Supporting Information). Analysis of the backbone NH residual dipolar couplings shows that the most active round 7 variant has nearly identical fold to that of the round 5 variant (Figure S34, Supporting Information).

Our findings underscore the importance of two factors for determining whether a particular designed protein could be evolvable. First, in agreement with Arnold et al.[10] we find that stability of the protein scaffold is extremely important for functional innovation. While directed evolution approaches that utilize enzymes originating from thermophiles or introduce consensus mutations have been well established, we show that metal-binding domains can also provide the necessary structural stability to the designed protein. The highly stable calmodulin fold tolerated multiple mutations that would be detrimental in the absence of calcium. Additionally, metal-binding loops provide allosteric control of the function and could be independently evolved to respond to different metals.[11] The resulting Kemp eliminases can serve as catalytically amplified colorimetric sensors. Second, evolvability of proteins is linked to their conformational dynamism.[12] While calmodulin has a fairly rigid scaffold, it is capable of tight binding to a great variety of diverse binding partners.[13] This unique property is made possible by a number of flexible, predominantly hydrophobic side chains lining the recognition site, which was used in AlleyCat’s design. The large number of possible conformations available for these residues likely improved evolvability.

The current consensus is that new function emerges from latent, promiscuous enzymes that can take on multiple substrates giving a starting point for further evolution.[8c] This hypothesis was practically proven by multiple examples of redesigning proteins to perform novel unnatural reactions starting from enzymes that have similar function and use chemically similar substrates.[14] What about reactions that have no obvious natural analogs? Here we have shown that our approach, combining simple physico-chemical principles combined with basic computational techniques can give rise to catalysts with enough starting activity for subsequent directed evolution. Moreover, given enough stability, even a small 74-residue protein, can be successfully evolved to match activity of catalytic antibodies for a particular unnatural reaction. We expect that our minimalistic approach based on introducing highly reactive residues into protein scaffolds will greatly enhance future design work, allowing more sophisticated computations to reach their full potential.

Supplementary Material

Supporting Information

Acknowledgments

We thank Prof. Robert P. Doyle for providing access to CD instrument. The Spectroscopy Support Facility at FCCC provided access to a 600 MHz NMR spectrometer.

Footnotes

Supporting information for this article is available on the WWW under http://www.angewandte.org or from the author.

Contributor Information

Dr. Olesia V. Moroz, Department of Chemistry, Syracuse University, 111 College Place, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA, Fax: (+1) 315-443-4070

Dr. Yurii S. Moroz, Department of Chemistry, Syracuse University, 111 College Place, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA, Fax: (+1) 315-443-4070. Department of Chemistry, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kiev, 64 Volodymyrska St., Kiev, 01033, Ukraine

Dr. Yibing Wu, Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California – San Francisco, 555 Mission Bay Blvd. South, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA

Alissa B. Olsen, Department of Chemistry, Syracuse University, 111 College Place, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA, Fax: (+1) 315-443-4070

Dr. Hong Cheng, Fox Chase Cancer Center, 333 Cottman Ave., Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA

Korrie L. Mack, Department of Chemistry, Syracuse University, 111 College Place, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA, Fax: (+1) 315-443-4070

Jaclyn M. McLaughlin, Department of Chemistry, Syracuse University, 111 College Place, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA, Fax: (+1) 315-443-4070

Elizabeth A. Raymond, Department of Chemistry, Syracuse University, 111 College Place, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA, Fax: (+1) 315-443-4070

Krystyna Zhezherya, Department of Chemistry, Syracuse University, 111 College Place, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA, Fax: (+1) 315-443-4070.

Prof. Dr. Heinrich Roder, Fox Chase Cancer Center, 333 Cottman Ave., Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA

Prof. Dr. Ivan V. Korendovych, Department of Chemistry, Syracuse University, 111 College Place, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA, Fax: (+1) 315-443-4070

References

  • 1.a) Brustad EM, Arnold FH. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2011;15:201–210. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2010.11.020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Lutz S. Curr Opin Biotech. 2010;21:734–743. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2010.08.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.a) Lassila JK, Privett HK, Allen BD, Mayo SL. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:16710–16715. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0607691103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Rothlisberger D, Khersonsky O, Wollacott AM, Jiang L, DeChancie J, Betker J, Gallaher JL, Althoff EA, Zanghellini A, Dym O, Albeck S, Houk KN, Tawfik DS, Baker D. Nature. 2008;453:190–195. doi: 10.1038/nature06879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Korendovych IV, Kulp DW, Wu Y, Cheng H, Roder H, DeGrado WF. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:6823–6827. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1018191108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.a) Feng X, Sanchis J, Reetz MT, Rabitz H. Chem Eur J. 2012;18:5646–5664. doi: 10.1002/chem.201103811. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Gumulya Y, Sanchis J, Reetz MT. ChemBioChem. 2012;13:1060–1066. doi: 10.1002/cbic.201100784. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Khersonsky O, Kiss G, Rothlisberger D, Dym O, Albeck S, Houk KN, Baker D, Tawfik DS. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109:10358–10363. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1121063109.b) Original KE59 design is unstable and its enzymatic efficieny cannot be accurately determined.
  • 6.Thorn SN, Daniels RG, Auditor MT, Hilvert D. Nature. 1995;373:228–230. doi: 10.1038/373228a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Urbauer JL, Short JH, Dow LK, Wand AJ. Biochemistry. 1995;34:8099–8109. doi: 10.1021/bi00025a016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.a) Khersonsky O, Rothlisberger D, Dym O, Albeck S, Jackson CJ, Baker D, Tawfik DS. J Mol Biol. 2010;396:1025–1042. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2009.12.031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Khersonsky O, Rothlisberger D, Wollacott AM, Murphy P, Dym O, Albeck S, Kiss G, Houk KN, Baker D, Tawfik DS. J Mol Biol. 2011;407:391–412. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2011.01.041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Khersonsky O, Tawfik DS. Annu Rev Biochem. 2010;79:471–505. doi: 10.1146/annurev-biochem-030409-143718. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Debler EW, Muller R, Hilvert D, Wilson IA. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2009;106:18539–18544. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0902700106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Bloom JD, Labthavikul ST, Otey CR, Arnold FH. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2006;103:5869–6874. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510098103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Mack KL, Moroz OV, Moroz YS, Olsen AB, McLaughlin JM, Korendovych IV. J Biol Inorg Chem. 2013;18:411–418. doi: 10.1007/s00775-013-0985-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Tokuriki N, Tawfik DS. Science. 2009;324:203–207. doi: 10.1126/science.1169375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.O’Neil KT, DeGrado WF. Trends in Biochem Sci. 1990;15:59–64. doi: 10.1016/0968-0004(90)90177-d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.a) Lutz S, Patrick WM. Curr Opin Biotech. 2004;15:291–297. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2004.05.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Toscano MD, Woycechowsky KJ, Hilvert D. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2007;46:3212–3236. doi: 10.1002/anie.200604205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supporting Information

RESOURCES