|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 275, Issue 7, 4937-4942, February 18, 2000
In Vitro Selection of RNA Molecules That Inhibit
the Activity of Ricin A-chain*
Jay R.
Hesselberth ,
Darcie
Miller,
Jon
Robertus, and
Andrew D.
Ellington
From the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of
Texas, Austin, Texas 78712
 |
ABSTRACT |
The cytotoxin ricin disables translation by
depurinating a conserved site in eukaryotic rRNA. In vitro
selection has been used to generate RNA ligands (aptamers) specific for
the catalytic ricin A-chain (RTA). The anti-RTA aptamers bear no
resemblance to the normal RTA substrate, the sarcin-ricin loop (SRL),
and were not depurinated by RTA. An initial 80-nucleotide RNA ligand was minimized to a 31-nucleotide aptamer that contained all sequences and structures necessary for interacting with RTA. This minimal RNA
formed high affinity complexes with RTA (Kd = 7.3 nM) which could compete directly with the SRL for binding
to RTA. The aptamer inhibited RTA depurination of the SRL and could
partially protect translation from RTA inhibition. The IC50
of the aptamer for RTA in an in vitro translation assay is
100 nM, roughly 3 orders of magnitude lower than a small
molecule inhibitor of ricin, pteroic acid, and 2 orders of magnitude
lower than the best known RNA inhibitor. The novel anti-RTA aptamers
may find application as diagnostic reagents for a potential biological
warfare agent and hold promise as scaffolds for the development of
strong ricin inhibitors.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Ribosome-inactivating proteins inhibit protein synthesis by
disabling the translation machinery. Class I ribosome-inactivating proteins have a catalytic A-chain that recognizes and depurinates a
universally conserved adenosine found in a GAGA tetraloop in the
sarcin-ricin loop (SRL)1 of
eukaryotic 23-28 S rRNA (1, 2). Class II ribosome-inactivating proteins have an additional lectin B-chain that is required for cell
surface attachment and subsequent endocytosis of the toxin domain
(3).
Ricin, from the castor bean plant Ricinus communis, is a
class II ribosome-inactivating protein that has the potential of being
used as a weapon in a biological attack (4, 5). Once inside a cell,
ricin is extremely toxic; one resident molecule is sufficient to kill
the cell, and the enzyme has been reported to inactivate 1777 ribosomes
min 1 (2). Aerosolized ricin causes severe respiratory
distress and is lethal when injected intravenously at a level of only
3-5 µg/kg (6). Ricin has so far proved to be a relatively
inefficient biological weapon but is prepared easily even by Third
World nations and terrorist groups. Therefore, facile detection of the
toxin and the development of antidotes remain priorities (6, 7).
In vitro selection is a powerful molecular tool that can be
used to generate ligands for a wide variety of targets, including both
nucleic acid and non-nucleic acid-binding proteins (8, 9). Aptamers can
be engineered readily to function as either therapeutics or sensors.
For instance, RNA aptamers that bind to human immunodeficiency virus
type I Rev also inhibit viral replication (10). Similarly, RNA aptamers
that bind to the 2 integrin leukocyte
function-associated antigen 1 specifically inhibit a signal
transduction pathway when expressed in vivo (11). Consequently, aptamers that recognize and potentially inhibit ricin
might be useful prophylactic or therapeutic agents or could be adapted
to function as biosensor elements for the detection of aerosolized
ricin or areas contaminated by the toxin.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Pools and Oligonucleotides--
The random sequence pool (N30)
has been described previously (9, 12). Following chemical synthesis,
the single-stranded DNA pool was purified on a 6% denaturing
polyacrylamide gel and eluted by diffusion. The pool was then
amplified via the polymerase chain reaction using primers 41.30 (5'-GATAATACGACTCACTATAGGGAATGGATCCACATCTACG-3') and 24.30 (5'-AAGCTTCGTCAAGTCTGCAGTGAA-3'). The selected aptamer 80RA was
resynthesized as a doped sequence pool (D30). The sequence of the
D30 pool was
5'-GGGAATGGATCCACATCTACGAATTCAGGGGACGTAGCAATGACTGAGATGCTGGGTTCACTGCACTTGACGAAGC- TT-3',
where italicized residues indicate positions that were doped at
85% wild type and 5% of each non-wild type nucleotide. All other
residues were kept constant. The 5'-primer used for amplification was
three nucleotides shorter from the 3'-end than 41.30, and the 3'-primer
was 24.30.
A small version of the ribosomal SRL binds the catalytic ricin A-chain
(RTA) and has been used previously as a substrate in depurination
assays (13). The sequence of the 34-nucleotide SRL (34SRL) was
5'-GGAAUCCUGCUCAGUACGAGAGGAACCGCAGGUU-3'; a double-stranded DNA
template containing a T7 RNA polymerase promoter was used to transcribe 34SRL.
In Vitro Selection--
The RNA pool (2.2 × 1014 molecules) was transcribed from the amplified DNA
template (1.1 × 1014 molecules) using an Ampliscribe
T7 in vitro transcription kit (Epicenter Technologies,
Madison, WI). After purification on an 8% denaturing polyacrylamide
gel, the RNA pellet was dissolved in 1 × phosphate-buffered
saline and 5 mM MgCl2, then heated to 65 °C
for 3 min and allowed to cool to room temperature over 10 min. To
exclude filter-binding RNA sequences from the pool, the RNA was passed
over a 0.45-µm HAWP filter (Millipore, Bedford, MA) and washed with
an equal volume of buffer. RTA was added to the binding reaction (200 µl final volume) in varying amounts throughout the course of the
selection (Table I). Binding reaction mixtures were incubated for 1 h at room temperature. After 1 h, the solution was vacuum-filtered over a HAWP filter at 5 p.s.i. and washed twice with 0.5 ml of the selection buffer. RNA retained on
the filter was eluted twice with 0.2 ml of 7 M urea, 100 mM sodium citrate (pH 5.0) and 3 mM EDTA for 3 min at 100 °C, and the eluted RNA was precipitated with isopropyl
alcohol. For the eighth and ninth rounds, the eluted RNA pool was
passed over a HAWP filter after selection and precipitation to remove
filter-binding species. Selected RNAs were reverse transcribed using
SuperScript II reverse transcriptase (Life Technologies, Inc.) and the
3'-primer (24.30). The cDNA products were polymerase chain reaction
amplified after the addition of 5'-primer (41.30) and DisplayTaq (PGC
Scientific, Gaithersburg, MD). The polymerase chain reaction products
were transcribed and gel purified to begin the next round of
selection.
After round 9, the pool was cloned (Topo TA cloning kit, Invitrogen,
Carlsbad, CA) and sequenced using standard dideoxy methods. The
dominant clone (80RA) and its derivatives (31RA) were characterized using a nitrocellulose filtration assay similar to that used for selection.
The doped sequence selection was carried out using procedures identical
to those used in the initial selection. A total of 1.84 × 1013 DNA molecules were used for transcription, and a total
of 1.2 × 1014 RNA molecules were introduced at the
first round of selection. Based on the rate of mutagenesis and the size
of the pool, this should have represented all possible single to
hextuple mutations. Table I again summarizes selection conditions.
Competition Assay--
31RA and 34SRL were body labeled in a
transcription reaction containing [ -32P]UTP (3000 Ci/mmol, NEN Life Science Products). After labeling, products were gel
purified and precipitated. In competition assays, the minimal aptamer,
31RA and 34SRL RNAs were incubated at equimolar amounts (0.5 µM) in the presence of limiting RTA (0.1 µM) in the selection buffer. The binding reaction mixture
was incubated at 25 °C for 1 h, and 80% of the volume was
filtered over nitrocellulose and washed twice with 300 µl of
selection buffer. Retained RNA molecules were eluted and precipitated.
The remaining 20% of the reaction mixture was also precipitated. Both
filtered and unfiltered samples were dissolved in 5 µl of stop dye (7 M urea, 1 × TBE, 0.1% bromphenol blue) and analyzed
on a denaturing 12% acrylamide gel. The amount of radioactivity in
individual bands was quantitated using a PhosphorImager (Molecular
Dynamics, Sunnyvale, CA). The relative binding activity was calculated
based on the formula: ((counts filtered, 31RA/counts unfiltered,
31RA))/((counts filtered, 34SRL)/(counts unfiltered, 34SRL)). This
formula has been used previously to assess the relative binding
activities of RNA ligands (14, 15). Assuming that the binding reaction
is at equilibrium (a likely assumption, given the length of the binding
reaction), the binding ratio represents a ratio of the dissociation
constants of individual RNA-protein complexes.
Filter Binding Assays--
After rounds 4, 7, and 9 of the
initial selection, and at every round of the doped selection, the RNA
pool was body labeled in a transcription reaction using
[ -32P]UTP (3000 Ci/mmol, NEN Life Science Products).
Products were gel purified and precipitated. The labeled RNA (0.5 µM final concentration) was incubated with RTA (0.5 µM final concentration) in 0.1 ml of selection buffer for
1 h at room temperature. The solution was filtered and washed
three times with selection buffer. The filter was exposed to a
PhosphorImager plate, and the amount of retained radioactivity was
determined. The fraction of the pool or clone that bound RTA was
calculated by comparing the counts retained on the filter with the
total number of counts in the original RNA.
For the determination of dissociation constants, 1.5 pmol of RNA was
end labeled with [ -32P]ATP (0.03 mCi, 6000 Ci/mmol,
ICN Biomedicals, Costa Mesa, CA) after 5'-dephosphorylation. Labeled
RNA was purified by two successive precipitations using ammonium
acetate. The labeled RNA (2 nM final concentration) was
incubated with increasing concentrations of RTA (1.2-450
nM) in 50 µl of the selection buffer for 1 h at room temperature. The mixture was filtered on a vacuum manifold (Schleicher & Schuell) equipped with a piece of pure nitrocellulose membrane (Schleicher & Schuell) over a piece of Hybond (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) as described previously (16, 17). The radioactivity on the
nitrocellulose and nylon filter was quantitated, and the dissociation
constant (Kd) for aptamer-RTA complexes was
determined using a curve-fitting algorithm on the program Kaleidagraph
(Adelbeck Software, Reading, PA).
Assay for RNA Depurination--
The assay was performed as
described previously (13). RNA (2 µM) was denatured at
65 °C in 1 × phosphate-buffered saline, 5 mM
MgCl2 and allowed to cool to room temperature for 10 min. Dithiothreitol and EDTA were added to a 1 mM final
concentration (20 µl final volume), and the reaction mixtures were
incubated with varying concentrations of RTA for 60 min at 30 °C.
After a phenol/CHCl3 extraction and ethanol precipitation,
pellets were resuspended in 20 µl of a buffered aniline solution and
incubated for 15 min on ice. After a second precipitation, RNA
molecules were 5'-end labeled using T4 polynucleotide kinase and
[ -32P]ATP (0.03 mCi, 6000 Ci/mmol, ICN Biomedicals) in
a 5-µl reaction volume. The RNA was precipitated and resuspended in
loading dye, and products were analyzed on a 20% denaturing
polyacrylamide gel. The gel was fixed, and counts were quantitated
using a PhosphorImager.
Protein Synthesis Inhibition Assay--
Recombinant RTA was
prepared as described previously (18). A standard assay for RTA
function is to observe the degradation of translation ability by
isolated Artemia salinas ribosomes (19). When RTA (2 nM) was added to an A. salinas in vitro
translation system, the synthesis of 14C-labeled
polyphenylalanine was reduced by 80%. Using this basal assay as our
standard, different concentrations of 31RA were then assayed for their
ability to inhibit RTA degradation of translation ability. Prior to
use, solutions containing 31RA were heated at 65 °C for 3 min and
allowed to cool at 25 °C for 10 min.
 |
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION |
Selection of Anti-RTA Aptamers--
Recombinant RTA was used as a
selection target; the recombinant protein has been shown to possess
full activity toward rat liver ribosomes as well as toward small
variants of the SRL of 28 S rRNA (13) (Fig.
1a). In vitro
selection experiments were initiated with an RNA pool (N30) that
contained 30 randomized positions. This pool has been utilized
successfully in the past to generate aptamers against both small
molecules and proteins (8). In each round of selection, the protein was
mixed with the RNA pool, and bound species were separated from unbound
by passing the mixture over a modified cellulose filter. After seven rounds of selection, modest protein-dependent binding
activity was observed (Table I). To rid the pool of matrix-binding
sequences the stringency of the selection was increased by increasing
the ratio of input RNA to protein. After an additional two rounds of
selection the protein-dependent binding ability of the pool had reached 51% in our standard assay, whereas matrix binding was only
2.5%.

View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Predicted secondary structures of RTA
ligands. a, the SRL of 23 S rRNA. The universally
conserved GAGA tetraloop of the SRL is boxed, and an
arrow points to the canonical adenosine substrate.
b, the selected anti-RTA aptamer, RA80.
|
|
After round 9 of the selection, 24 individual aptamers were cloned and
sequenced. Although the initial pool had contained approximately
2.2 × 1014 different sequences, the selected pool had
been winnowed to a single consensus sequence. The program MulFold was
used to model the secondary structure of the aptamer (RA80). The
conformer predicted to be most stable contained a long paired stem
topped by a large loop and is shown in Fig. 1b.
To determine which sequences in the limit aptamer contributed to
recognition of RTA, a doped sequence population was prepared based on
the apparent secondary structure of the aptamer. Each position in the
original random sequence region and three positions from the
5'-constant region that contributed to the hypothesized stem structure
contained 85% wild type residues and 5% of each non-wild type residue
(e.g. 85% G, 5% A, 5% T, 5% C at position 21). This
level of mutagenesis should have been sufficient to identify sequences
and structures required for RTA binding function (21) because the
population would have contained all possible single to hextuple
sequence substitutions. The constant regions and amplification primers
were as before, except that the 5'-primer used for amplification was 3 residues shorter than previously.
After four cycles of selection and amplification the population could
bind as well as the parental aptamer to RTA. Early in the selection the
population was sequenced to ensure that numerous mutants were present
and were competing for RTA (Fig.
2a). In contrast, many of the
positions that contained mutations in the first round of selection had
completely returned to their wild type progenitors by the third round
of selection (Fig. 2b). Overall, the distribution of
mutations within the variants suggests that mutations in the stem
portion of the doped region were tolerated, whereas the loop region was
much more highly conserved. These results were expected to some extent
because the loop region was derived completely from the random sequence
region, whereas the stem was established in part by pairing between the
random sequence region and the 5'-constant region.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
The anti-RTA aptamer has high information
content. a, mutations present after the first round of
selection. The number and type of mutations are superimposed on the
predicted secondary structure. Residues that were not doped are shown
in bold. b, mutations present after the third and
fourth rounds of selection.
|
|
Minimization of an Anti-RTA Aptamer--
Surprisingly, neither the
limit aptamer nor its predicted secondary structure showed any gross
similarity to 28 S rRNA. To determine if more subtle similarities
existed, we compared the aptamer with the SRL of 28 S rRNA. The
conformation of the SRL has been studied extensively (22-24), and both
NMR and crystallography studies have indicated that it is essentially a
continuous helix interrupted by a G-bulge and topped by a GAGA
tetraloop. The sequence of the tetraloop has been shown to be critical
for toxin recognition and binding (25).
The original aptamer indeed contained a GAGA motif, but it is ensconced
within a stable stem structure (Fig. 1b). However, an
alternative, less stable conformer was predicted to contain a putative
GAGA recognition site in a loop (Fig. 3).
To ascertain whether the original (RA80.1) or alternative (RA80.2)
conformer was the active ricin-binding species, several deletion
variants were prepared. The deletion variants that were predicted to
favor the original conformer were active; those that were predicted to
favor the alternative conformer were inactive. The selection of a
completely non-native, anti-RTA aptamer is not necessarily unusual;
many aptamers bear little or no resemblance to corresponding wild type
RNA ligands (26, 27).

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Comparison of aptamer conformers. RA80.1
is the originally predicted conformer; RA80.2 is an alternative
conformer that presents a single-stranded GAGA sequence
(boxed) that might be recognized by ricin. Deletion
constructs that were predicted to enforce either the RA80.1 conformer
(RA80.1.d1 and RA80.1.d2) or the RA80.2 conformer (RA80.2.d1) were
synthesized and assayed for their ability to bind ricin. Residues in
the constant regions are in bold, and those that differ from
the original aptamer are circled. Binding is indicated by + (observed binding) and (no observed binding).
|
|
Multiple mutations occurred in the stem region after mutagenesis and
reselection, indicating that many of the residues in the stem might not
contribute to RTA binding. To test whether the loop was primarily
responsible for interactions with RTA, we prepared a short, 31-mer RNA
that contained most of the residues that were conserved on reselection
(31RA, Fig. 3). The secondary structure of the minimal aptamer was
stabilized by the inclusion of several designed G:C base pairings. The
minimal aptamer was fully competent to bind RTA. The fact that a
functional, quadruple mutant (the two designed G:C pairs) could be
designed based on the predicted aptamer secondary structure is further
evidence in favor of our nascent structural model. Interestingly, the
minimal aptamer lacked the GAGA sequence but did contain a GGGG
sequence in its loop. It is possible that this altered run of purines
encourages tight interactions with RTA while avoiding the presentation
of an adenosine substrate.
Anti-RTA Aptamers Bind RTA with High Affinity--
The interaction
between anti-RTA aptamers and RTA was assessed as a function of protein
concentration using a filter binding assay similar to that used for
selection. The RTA·RA80.1 complex was found to have a
Kd of 240 nM (data not shown), whereas the RTA·31RA complex was found to have a Kd of 7.4 nM (Fig. 4). Because the
binding ability of the aptamer actually improved after truncation it
can again be argued that sequences in the loop region are primarily
responsible for RTA recognition. Indeed, one of the reasons that the
binding ability may have improved was that the shorter structure could
no longer fold into alternate conformations (such as RA80.2).

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Binding isotherm for the minimal anti-RTA
aptamer (31RA). Different concentrations of protein were mixed
with a fixed concentration (2 nM) of aptamer. The binding
reactions were allowed to come to equilibrium at room temperature over
1 h, and the complexed RNA was separated from free RNA by
filtration. 100% binding is likely not observed at saturation because
of inefficient capture of complexes. This phenomenon has been noted
previously for other aptamer-protein complexes (44, 45). The curve was
fit assuming a single RTA binding site for the aptamer, and the
calculated dissociation constant (Kd) is 7.4 ± 1.1 nM.
|
|
Although the affinity of the anti-RTA aptamer for RTA is reminiscent of
the affinities of other anti-protein aptamers for their targets (28),
it is actually quite extraordinary considering that the SRL itself has
a Km of 13.55 µM in a depurination assay (13). Even a small, SRL-like RNA containing a predesigned transition-state analog has been reported to inhibit RTA activity with
a Ki of only 0.73 µM (29). Molecular
modeling studies have identified pteroic acid as an inhibitor of RTA
activity, but the Ki for pteroic acid is around 0.6 mM (30, 31). The anti-RTA aptamer therefore binds at least
3 orders of magnitude better than the best known small molecule
inhibitor of ricin, and 2 orders of magnitude better than a designed
RNA analog. The high affinity of the aptamer relative to other ligands
exemplifies the dramatic possibilities afforded by in vitro selection.
Anti-RTA Aptamers Compete with the SRL but Are Not
Depurinated--
To prove that anti-RTA aptamers bound to the active
site of RTA, a competition assay was employed. Briefly, 31RA and 34SRL were incubated with a limiting amount of RTA. A portion of the reaction
was filtered, and bound RNAs were then separated by gel electrophoresis. As Fig. 5 shows, 31RA
completely displaced the 34SRL substrate from RTA. This competition
assay can also be used to quantitate the relative degree of binding
(15). The specific activities of the samples before filtration were
compared with the specific activities after filtration. Within the
limits of the assay, 31RA binds RTA at least 9-fold better than
34SRL.

View larger version (50K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
The anti-RTA aptamer competes with the SRL
for the same site on RTA. Body-labeled 31RA and 34SRL were
incubated in equal amounts with a limiting amount of RTA. A portion of
the binding reaction was filtered over nitrocellulose, and filtered and
unfiltered RNAs were precipitated and analyzed by electrophoresis. No
detectable 34SRL was observed after filtration, and 31RA out-competes
34SRL by at least a factor of 9.
|
|
Although 31RA does not contain a canonical GAGA
recognition sequence, it might still be
depurinated (for example, at A32, A36, or even A39). To assess this
possibility, we employed a depurination assay in which the accumulation
of radiolabeled cleavage fragments is monitored (13). When 31RA was
incubated with RTA and the same depurination assay used for the SRL was
carried out, no RTA-specific radiolabeled cleavage products were
observed (data not shown). In contrast, when the SRL was incubated with
RTA, a characteristic depurination and cleavage product was observed
(Fig. 6). When 31RA and the SRL were
incubated together (5:1 31RA·SRL), the cleavage of SRL was inhibited,
as would be expected if the two RNAs were binding to the same site on
the enzyme. No inhibition of depurination was observed with a
nonspecific RNA molecule, tRNA. Because of the many steps associated
with the depurination assay, it was not feasible to attempt a shorter
time course, nor could a Ki value for the aptamer be
derived. Overall, though, the data strongly support the nascent
hypothesis originally suggested by the sequence and structure of 31RA:
the aptamer binds to RTA, competes with the SRL, but is not itself a
substrate for RTA.

View larger version (61K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
The anti-RTA aptamer inhibits depurination of
the SRL by RTA. Different concentrations of RTA were mixed and
incubated with a fixed amount of labeled substrate RNA for 1 h.
The resulting RNA was treated with aniline to cleave the SRL at
depurinated, abasic sites. The products were then analyzed on a 20%
gel and quantitated using a PhosphorImager. The expected cleavage
product appears in a concentration-dependent manner
relative to RTA. The doubling of the band representing the cleavage
product is likely due to the presence of untemplated, 3' additions of
nucleotides to the full-length transcription product (20). Competition
with a five molar excess of unlabeled 31RA resulted in a 50% decrease
in cleavage product.
|
|
31RA Inhibits Ribosomal Inactivation by RTA--
RTA activity can
also be measured by observing the disruption of in vitro
protein synthesis by A. salina ribosomes. This sensitive method has been used previously to assess the activity of other RTA
inhibitors (19). The inhibition of RTA activity was assayed as a
function of 31RA concentration, and Fig.
7 shows that as the aptamer saturates
RTA, the enzyme loses about 60% of its activity. The amount of 31RA
that gives 50% of this maximal RTA inhibition (IC50) was
approximately 100 nM. It may be that the bound aptamer partially occludes the RTA active site, retarding activity about 60%;
partial active site occlusion has been observed previously in aptamers
that bind to protein tyrosine phosphatases (12). In the absence of RTA,
the aptamer had no toxic effect on ribosomes. A non-cognate, anti-basic
fibroblast growth factor aptamer, PS8 (32), was used as a negative
control. PS8 was not an inhibitor of RTA function and did not have an
effect on Artemia ribosomes (data not shown).

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
The anti-RTA aptamer inhibits RTA activity in
an in vitro protein synthesis assay. The
degradation of the translation capacity of A. salinas
ribosomes was judged by determining the amount of radiolabeled protein
produced (19). The minimal anti-RTA aptamer 31RA was added at varying
concentrations. The percent RTA inhibition was normalized to the amount
of protein produced when no aptamer was added. Points are the average
of triplicate experiments; a curve-fitting algorithm was used to derive
the IC50 for 31RA, which was calculated to be 104 ± 25 nM.
|
|
The minimal aptamer may have protected translation more effectively
than it protected the SRL from depurination because it was in greater
excess over RTA in the translation assays. In addition, RTA acted on
ribosomes for only 5 min in the in vitro translation assay,
whereas it acted for 60 min on the isolated SRL. Nonetheless, the
ability of the aptamer to inhibit the toxic effects of RTA at
relatively low concentrations suggests that it may have promise as a
scaffold for the development of gene or more conventional therapies for
ricin exposure. For example, aptamers or their derivatives could be
conjugated to pteroic acid to produce a highly efficient chimeric
inhibitor in which the aptamer binds tightly and the pteroic acid
completely inactivates RTA. Similar approaches in which aptamers were
conjugated to peptides or transition state analogs yielded inhibitors
with very high affinities for human neutrophil elastase (33, 34).
Anti-RTA Aptamers Represent a Novel Class of Nucleic Acid
Inhibitors--
Aptamers have been shown previously to inhibit a
variety of protein targets (35, 36). In general, though, there was
little or no possibility that previous aptamers could be acted on by their targets. To our knowledge, RTA is the first selection target that
could catalyze the cleavage of individual species in a RNA pool.
It has been shown previously that short stems capped by GAGA tetraloops
serve as substrates for RTA (25). Given these minimal requirements for
interaction with RTA it is still somewhat surprising that the most
bountiful anti-RTA aptamers were not also substrates. Minimal binding
motifs frequently overrun in vitro selection experiments, a
phenomenon that has been termed the "tyranny of small motifs" (37).
However, any depurinated anti-RTA aptamers would have been copied
inefficiently and would not have contained an adenosine in future
generations, likely obviating the tyranny in these experiments. In
addition, the selection of a novel sequence and structure is somewhat
less startling when it is realized that the natural target of RTA is
the ribosome. The SRL is surrounded by other RNA structures in the
ribosome (38), and there are multiple amino acid residues in or
adjacent to the RTA active site which could interact with these RNA
structures (39). Differences between rRNA interactions with RTA and SRL
interactions with RTA are highlighted further by the fact that rRNA is
depurinated 77,000-fold faster than the SRL (2, 13). Because the
relatively short RNA molecules present in the N30 pools lack the
structural context of rRNA, very different sequences may be required to
bind tightly to RTA.
The anti-RTA aptamer contrived to bind to the active site of the
enzyme, but in a way that eluded depurination. RNA molecules that
inhibit a RNA glycosidase are reminiscent of proteins that inhibit
proteases (40). For example, even though bovine pancreatic trypsin
inhibitor and soybean trypsin inhibitor are cleaved by trypsin, the
inhibitor remains bound to the active site, allowing resynthesis. In
addition, new evidence suggests that these inhibitors may bind in a
"nonproductive" mode that is substantially different than the way
in which substrates are bound and which preferentially stabilizes the
ground state of the reaction (41). Similarly, structural studies of
bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor complexed with a thrombin mutant
reveal that surface loops of the protease are rearranged, leading to
inactivation (42). Using this co-crystal structure as a model,
mutagenesis studies have shown that a lack of productive electrostatic
contacts may also contribute to the ability of plasminogen activator
inhibitor-1 to inhibit thrombin (43). Indeed, the "unnatural"
interaction of bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor with a mutant
thrombin may be especially germane to understanding 31RA function, in
that it is possible that the unnatural aptamer similarly induces
unproductive structural transitions in RTA. Efforts are now under way
to determine the precise binding mode of the aptamer-RTA complex by
x-ray diffraction analysis.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Chemistry and
Biochemistry, University of Texas, 2500 Speedway/A4800, MBB 3.424, Austin, TX 78712. Tel.: 512-471-6445; Fax: 512-471-7014. E-mail:
andy.ellington@mail.utexas.edu.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
SRL, sarcin-ricin
loop;
RTA, catalytic ricin A-chain.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Endo, Y.,
and Tsurugi, K.
(1987)
J. Biol. Chem.
262,
8128-8130[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Endo, Y.,
and Tsurugi, K.
(1988)
J. Biol. Chem.
263,
8735-8739[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Lord, J. M.,
Hartley, M. R.,
and Roberts, L. M.
(1991)
Semin. Cell Biol.
2,
15-22[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Zilinskas, R. A.
(1997)
JAMA
278,
418-424[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Wiener, S. L.
(1996)
Mil. Med.
161,
251-256[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Eitzen, E., Pavlin, J., Cieslak, T., Christopher, G., and Culpepper, R.
(eds)
(1998)
Medical Management of Biological Casualties
, U. S. Army Medical Research, Fort Detrick, MD
|
| 7.
|
Christopher, G.,
Cieslak, T.,
Pavlin, J.,
and Eitzen, E.
(1997)
JAMA
278,
412-417[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Famulok, M.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol.
9,
324-329[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Conrad, R. C.,
Giver, L.,
Tian, Y.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1996)
Methods Enzymol.
267,
336-367[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Symensma, T. L.,
Giver, L.,
Zapp, M.,
Takle, G. B.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1996)
J Virol.
70,
179-187[Abstract]
|
| 11.
|
Blind, M.,
Kolanus, W.,
and Famulok, M.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
3606-3610[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Bell, S. D.,
Denu, J. M.,
Dixon, J. E.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
14309-14314[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Endo, Y.,
Glück, A.,
and Wool, I. G.
(1991)
J. Mol. Biol.
221,
193-207[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Hirao, I.,
Spingola, M.,
Peabody, D.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1998)
Mol. Divers.
4,
75-89[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Giver, L.,
Bartel, D.,
Zapp, M.,
Pawul, A.,
Green, M.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1993)
Nucleic Acids Res.
21,
5509-5516[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Conrad, R. C.,
Baskerville, S.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1995)
Mol. Divers.
1,
69-78[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Weeks, K. M.,
and Cech, T. R.
(1995)
Biochemistry
34,
7728-7738[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Ready, M. P.,
Kim, Y.,
and Robertus, J. D.
(1991)
Proteins
10,
270-278[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Day, P. J.,
Ernst, S. R.,
Frankel, A. E.,
Monzingo, A. F.,
Pascal, J. M.,
Molina-Svinth, M. C.,
and Robertus, J. D.
(1996)
Biochemistry
35,
11098-11103[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Milligan, J. F.,
Groebe, D. R.,
Witherell, G. W.,
and Uhlenbeck, O. C.
(1987)
Nucleic Acids Res.
15,
8783-8798[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Green, R.,
Ellington, A. D.,
and Szostak, J. W.
(1990)
Nature
347,
406-408[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Munishkin, A.,
and Wool, I. G.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
12280-12284[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Szewczak, A. A.,
Moore, P. B.,
Chang, Y. L.,
and Wool, I. G.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
9581-9585[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Correll, C. C.,
Munishkin, A.,
Chan, Y. L.,
Ren, Z.,
Wool, I. G.,
and Steitz, T. A.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
13436-13441[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Chen, X. Y.,
Link, T. M.,
and Schramm, V. L.
(1998)
Biochemistry
37,
11605-11613[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Tuerk, C.,
MacDougal, S.,
and Gold, L.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
6988-6992[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Giver, L.,
Bartel, D. P.,
Zapp, M. L.,
Green, M. R.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1993)
Gene (Amst.)
137,
19-24[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Gold, L.,
Polisky, B.,
Uhlenbeck, O.,
and Yarus, M.
(1995)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
64,
763-797[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Chen, X.-Y.,
Link, T. M.,
Schramm, V. L. U.,
and Bronx, N. U.
(1996)
J. Am. Chem. Soc.
118,
3067-3068[CrossRef]
|
| 30.
|
Robertus, J. D.,
Yan, X.,
Ernst, S.,
Monzingo, A.,
Worley, S.,
Day, P.,
Hollis, T.,
and Svinth, M.
(1996)
Toxicon
34,
1325-1334[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Yan, X.,
Hollis, T.,
Svinth, M.,
Day, P.,
Monzingo, A. F.,
Milne, G. W.,
and Robertus, J. D.
(1997)
J. Mol. Biol.
266,
1043-1049[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 32.
|
Jhaveri, S.,
Olwin, B.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1998)
Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett.
8,
2285-2290[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Good, P. D.,
Krikos, A. J.,
Li, S. X.,
Bertrand, E.,
Lee, N. S.,
Giver, L.,
Ellington, A.,
Zaia, J. A.,
Rossi, J. J.,
and Engelke, D. R.
(1997)
Gene Ther.
4,
45-54[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Symensma, T. L.,
Baskerville, S.,
Yan, A.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1999)
J. Virol.
73,
4341-4349[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Osborne, S. E.,
Matsumura, I.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1997)
Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol.
1,
5-9[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Famulok, M.,
and Jenne, A.
(1998)
Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol.
2,
320-327[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Jhaveri, S.,
Hirao, I.,
Bell, S.,
Uphoff, K.,
and Ellington, A. D.
(1997)
in
Annual Reports in Combinatorial Chemistry and Molecular Diversity
(Moos, W.
, Ellington, A.
, and Kay, B., eds), Vol. 1
, pp. 169-191, ESCOM Science Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands
|
| 38.
|
Ban, N.,
Nissen, P.,
Hansen, J.,
Capel, M.,
Moore, P. B.,
and Steitz, T. A.
(1999)
Nature
400,
841-847[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Mlsna, D.,
Monzingo, A. F.,
Katzin, B. J.,
Ernst, S.,
and Robertus, J. D.
(1993)
Protein Sci.
2,
429-435[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 40.
|
Laskowski, M., Jr.,
and Kato, I.
(1980)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
49,
593-626[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 41.
|
Coombs, G. S.,
Rao, M. S.,
Olson, A. J.,
Dawson, P. E.,
and Madison, E. L.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
24074-24079[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
van de Locht, A.,
Bode, W.,
Huber, R.,
Le Bonniec, B. F.,
Stone, S. R.,
Esmon, C. T.,
and Stubbs, M. T.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
2977-2984[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 43.
|
Rezaie, A. R.
(1998)
Biochemistry
37,
13138-13142[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 44.
|
Jellinek, D.,
Lynott, C. K.,
Rifkin, D. B.,
and Janjic, N.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
11227-11231[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 45.
|
Jellinek, D.,
Green, L. S.,
Bell, C.,
and Janjic, N.
(1994)
Biochemistry
33,
10450-10456[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. J. Boese and R. R. Breaker
In vitro selection and characterization of cellulose-binding DNA aptamers
Nucleic Acids Res.,
October 8, 2007;
35(19):
6378 - 6388.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. N. Krylov
Nonequilibrium Capillary Electrophoresis of Equilibrium Mixtures (NECEEM): A Novel Method for Biomolecular Screening
J Biomol Screen,
March 1, 2006;
11(2):
115 - 122.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
W. J. PEUMANS, Q. HAO, and E. J. M. VAN DAMME
Ribosome-inactivating proteins from plants: more than RNA N-glycosidases?
FASEB J,
July 1, 2001;
15(9):
1493 - 1506.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2000 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|