Fig. 1. Engineering ultra-stable cytoplasmic antibodies (STANDs).
a Schematic representation of scFv constructs fused with various peptide tags: [1] non-tagged scFv, [2] scFv with N-terminal T7 and EGFP, and C-terminal 6× His (scFv-GFP), [3] scFv with N-terminal s3Flag (s3Flag-scFv), [4] ScFv with N-terminal s3Flag and C-terminal HA (s3Flag-scFv-HA). b Net charge comparison of scFv-A36 and scFv-M4 proteins fused with indicated peptide tags at cytoplasmic pH 6.6 (green), 7.03 (red), and 7.4 (blue), and the isoelectric point (pI) determination (grey circle) using in silico physicochemical analysis. c Intracellular stability comparison of scFv-A36 (left panels) and scFv-M4 (right panels) fused with different peptide tags expressed in HeLa cells using immunocytochemistry; anti-Flag (lower and middle panels) or anti-T7 (upper panels) antibodies were used to detect scFv proteins. Arrows indicate intracellular scFv aggregates. Arrowheads indicate scFvs stably expressed in the cytoplasm. Scale bar, 50 μm. d Percentage of scFv-expressing cells with aggregates in c (upper panel) and total cell and aggregated cell number in 3 independent experiments (bottom panel). Statistical analysis: two-tailed one-way analysis of variance (A36; percentage of aggregation, F (2, 6) = 834.25, P < 0.00001; Tukey’s multiple comparison test, s3Flag-A36-HA vs. s3Flag-A36: P = 0.01614, s3Flag-A36-HA vs. scFv-GFPA36: P < 0.00001, s3Flag-A36 vs. scFv-GFPA36: P < 0.00001; M4; percentage of aggregation, F (2, 6) = 180.65, P < 0.00001; Tukey’s multiple comparison test, s3Flag-M4-HA vs. s3Flag-M4: P = 0.01949, s3Flag-M4-HA vs. scFv-GFPM4: P < 0.00001, s3Flag-M4 vs. scFv-GFPM4: P < 0.00001). Error bars represent standard error of the mean. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.