2-2) Development of Noro-catcher

From these studies stated above, we thought of using a well known bacteria, E. coli to be a carrier of anti-NoV antibody to intestinal tracks. If we succeeded in delivering the anti-NoV antibody that binds to HBGA binding site of NoV, not only would it block the binding of NoV to HGBA, but might also physically remove E. coli-bound NoV from the intestinal tracks.

There are three steps in which we aim our Noro-catcher to carry out its intended purpose (Fig. 4). First, we deliver our Noro-catcher into the patient intestine. Second, after reaching the NoV-infested intestine, Noro-catcher will bind specifically to NoV using its surface expressed anti-NoV antibody. Third, the NoV-bound Noro-catcher will promptly be excreted from human digestive system. To achieve the first step, we could use exiting methods such as orally administering medicine, sterilized and capsule-enveloped, to patients. In our study, we created a biodevice with two handles in order to achieve the second and third steps. These two handles are both achieved through the same surface expression technology.

2-3 Surface Display

For this Noro-catcher to function, it is essential to express a functional antibody and CBD on the bacterial cell surface. We thus undertook the method commonly called surface display (Fig. 5).

Fusing passenger protein to anchoring protein anchored in lipid bilayer (the outer membrane of E. coli) with a linker peptide. Passenger will physically be anchored to the cell surface of E. coli

Surface display is a method to fix passenger protein to the cell surface using anchoring domain. We selected INPNC and BclA proteins as the anchor to fix passenger proteins. INPNC is a surface expressing protein derived from Pseudomonas Syringae[6]. BclA is a hair-like protein derived from Bacillus anthracis(34F2) that covers the B. anthracis’ spores. Despite its surprisingly compact size of 21 amino acid chain, BclA is known to display passenger proteins on bacterial outer membrane [7]. When INPNC and BclA are surface expressed, their N-terminal domains (NTD) faces the inner cell, C-terminal domains (CTD) faces outwards, and internal repeating domains fill the gap between NTD and CTD.

Although most anchoring domains are limited in its ability to carry large passenger proteins, INPNC and BclA are unique in that they can carry up to 120-kDa [7]. As the groundwork for our Noro-catcher, we considered the highly versatile INPNC and BclA as suitable anchors.

2-4 Anti-NoV Antibody and NoVLP

We used single-chained variable fragment (scFv) of anti-NoV antibody. scFv is a fusion protein consisting of VH and VL, a variable region of the antibody. VH and VL is fused by a linker peptide. (shown in Fig. 6).

To test scFv’s functionality, we decided to use NoV-like particles (NoVLP) instead of NoV particles, which are highly infectious (<20 copies to be infected) and too dangerous to be used in our lab. NoVLP consists only of capsid proteins of NoV, and does not include the viral RNA. By scanning electron microscopy (SEM), it was observed that NoVLP takes similar form to NoV. We also confirmed that NoVLP is recognized as the antigen by both the original antibody and scFv. Therefore, we expected that we can perform a highly accurate simulation of our Noro-catcher’s activity against NoV, by using NoVLP.

2-5 Cellulose binding domain

Among numerous CBDs with various characteristics and binding affinity, we decided to use CBDcex for our Norocatcher, which binds irreversibly to cellulose, as it was found on iGEM Registry thanks to iGEM Bielefeld 2012.

CBDcex derives from the exoglucanase of a bacteria, Cellulomonas fimi. This bacteria is known for high cellulolytic activities, using cellulose as a source of energy. CBDcex is 100 amino acid domains of 47.1-kDa exo-beta-1,4-glucanase.[*] It has a molecular weight of 10.3 kDa, and belongs to the Carbohydrate Binding Module family 2.

2-6 Criteria for Noro-catcher’s Functionality

In order to prove its practicality and functionality, we set our Noro-catcher four stages which it should clear.

1. Establish bacterial surface display system for both scFv and CBD in E. coli
2. Observe the functionality of surface expressed scFv by its binding of NoVLP
3. Observe the functionality of surface expressed CBD by its binding to cellulose
4. Dual express surface expressed scFv and CBD in E. coli and observe the Noro-catcher’s functionality

We organized our results in accordance to the above four criteria.

3-1 Primary Stage: We successfully enhanced upon the surface display system INPNC in E. coli

1) Construction of enhanced parts for surface display

As a device for surface display system、INPNC and BclA are already made into BioBrick parts by past iGEM teams. For example, WPI-Worcester 2014 surface expressed YFP (yellow fluorescent protein) using BclA and observed it through fluorescence microscopy. Penn 2012 used immunofluorescence microscopy to observe surface expression of INPNC-HA tag fusion protein. The functionality of their parts are well described in their respective pages.

We started our projects by modifying these existing parts to enhance its functions. As shown in Fig. 7, our plasmids encodes 6×histidine tag (His tag) directly downstream of the INPNC and BclA domain. The His-tagged polypeptide can be detected in Western blot in the same manner as HA tag in the INPNC-HA system. In addition, His tag has a unique property of enabling fusion protein purification under denaturing conditions. The fusion proteins used for surface display will be expressed in the insoluble membrane fraction of E. coli. Therefore, this His tag was expected to enable additional options in the characterization of the fusion protein.[20] (see below)

2) Construction of scFv plasmids and CBD plasmids

The scFv we used binds specifically to NoV GII.4 strain. We have kindly been given the scFv-encoding plasmid (NoV GII.4 strain-specific antibody 12A2 (vector: pSCCA5-E8d)) from Dr. Kyoko Moriguchi in the Fujita Health University Department of Virology Parasitology. We used the scFv coding region of this plasmid, amplified with PCR.

For CBDs, We chose iGEM parts K1321342 from iGEM Imperial 2014 for the construction of CBDcex [9]. We placed the passenger proteins (scFv and CBDcex) encoding region downstream of the INPNC-His and BclA-His surface expression modules. His tag was placed in between the two domains. The resulting constructs were sequenced and verified (Fig. 7).

The passenger proteins (scFv and CBDcex) encoding region were placed downstream of the INPNC-His and BclA-His surface expression modules. His tag was placed in between the two domains.
3) INPNC-His and BclA-His can be detected through Western blotting with a single anti-His tag antibody regardless of the passenger protein placed downstream.

Among the parts submitted in the past, Penn 2014 uses HA tag to detect INPNC-(passenger protein)-HA tag fusion protein. We anticipated our His tag plasmid can be used for protein detection in the similar manner. However, we noticed on their Wiki page that they did not test whether their INPNC-HA parts can be detected through HA tag if passenger proteins are placed downstream. We tested whether our His tag can be used for the full length detection of fusion proteins with passenger proteins. We used whole-cell

Marker,　 Negative Control　(BBa_K165002),　BclA-His-scFv　(33kDa),　INPNC-His-scFv　(63kDa),　BclA-His-CBDcex　(17-kDa),　INPNC-His-CBDcex　(47-kDa),　Positive control: BBa_K875004(43-kDa)
Whole-cell lysates were prepared from E. coli DH5alpha strain carrying various plasmids shown in the figure. Samples were separated by 10% SDS-PAGE and transferred to a PVDF membrane. His-tagged proteins were visualized by anti-His tag monoclonal antibody (clone #OGHis, MBL, Japan).

A band corresponding to INPNC-His-scFv (63-kDa) and INPNC-His-CBDcex (47-kDa) in their respective lanes was observed, which confirms expression of the fusion proteins. We also observed that BclA-His-scFv band (lane 3) was much smaller than the expected size (33-kDa). This may suggest that the protein coded by this plasmid may be prone to intracellular scissions. From these result, we conclude our INPNC-His-(passenger protein) and BclA-His-(passenger protein) can be detected with anti-His tag antibodies, and we eliminated the need to use individual antibodies for passenger proteins when using our INPNC-His or BclA-His surface expression modules.

4) INPNC-His and BclA-His can be purified using nickel columns that specifically bind to His-tag, regardless of the passenger proteins placed downstream

We then examined if the proteins’ His-tag can be used for pulldown under denaturing conditions by nickel beads. We tested this property by purifying INPNC-His-(passenger protein) and BclA-His-(passenger protein) from the membrane fraction of the cell, using Nickel Sepharose beads (GE) affinity purification. We prepared the membrane fraction from the E. coli lysate by ultracentrifugation, and solubilized them using 7M guanidine-HCl, then purified the target protein using Nickel Sepharose that specifically binds to his-tag. (Fig. 9)

Membrane fraction was solubilized and used for Nickel Sepharose purification and precipitates were examined by Western blotting against His-tag. The band corresponding with INPNC-His-scFv (63kDa) INPNC-His-CBDcex (47kDa) was observed in their respective lanes, while the band corresponding with BclA could not be observed. Marker, Negative Control (BBa_K165002), BclA-His- CBDcex (17kDa), INPNC-His-CBDcex（47kDa）, BclA-His-scFv (33kDa), INPNC-His-scFv (63kDa), BBa_K875004 (43kDa)

We concluded that INPNC-His modules can be detected and purified using His tag, even with the passenger protein fused directly downstream. This is a significant enhancement to the INPNC parts submitted by Penn2012（BBa_K811004, http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K811004）. Thus we registered and submitted this new part to the iGEM Registry (BBa_K1933001, http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1933001). The results shown above also confirm INPNC-His-(passenger protein)’s expression, and suggests they are surface expressed as expected.

3-2 Secondary Stage: We successfully observed the binding of NoVLP to surface expressed scFv expressing E. coli

1. Sample preparation and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)

In 3-1 we established a system of surface expression using INPNC-His module. The essential part of Noro-catcher lies in its binding to the NoV using surface expressed scFv. Thus, we decided to test scFv’s ability using NoVLP. We first conducted a Western blot for NoVLP using anti-NoVLP antibodies (Fig. 11). The anti-NoVLP antibody was also kindly given to us by Dr. Daisuke Sano in Hokkaido University.

We observed a single band at 58-kDa. This corresponds to the molecular weight of the monomer of capsid protein VP1, which makes up NoVLP [14]. Polyclonal antibodies made with NoV as the antigen were used for the Western blot. There were no clear indication of small peptides that could mean occurrence of degradation. Thus we used this for the next assay.

We then tested the functionality of scFv to bind to NoV. To this end, we prepared INP- and BclA-His-scFv expressing E. coli and incubated them with NoVLP. We then used low-speed centrifugation to recollect E. coli and bound NoV, and removed the supernatants where unbound NoV should be in. We observed the cells with SEM (Fig. 12).

As shown clearly in the picture, we observed a characteristic spherical objects in extremely close proximity to the cell surface of the INPNC-His-scFv expressing E. coli. We could not observe a similar phenomenon with BclA-His-scFv, presumably due to the cleavage in the cell (Fig. 8, lane 3) and absence in the membrane fraction (Fig. 10 lane 4, see signals at 33-kDa). This spherical objects match size with the reported size of the recombinant NoVLP (ここはFig. 11ではなくて、アグリゲーションを示唆した文献を引いて、サイズを書きます。山本さんが引用してたやつ). Furthermore, as it matches in form with the spherical object observed in samples with only NoVLP, we concluded this spherical object as the NoVLP, and the INPNC-His scFv expressing E. coli bound to NoVLP successfully.

2. The functionality of the surface display system was visually demonstrated

This observation suggests that our primary objective of binding NoV to E. coli using surface expressed scFv was achieved. In addition, this result further solidifies the functionality of INPNC-His surface display module in E. coli. This visual demonstration of the functionality of INPNC surface expression modules encourage further application of this part by future iGEM teams. We added this observation to Penn2012’s parts experience page

3. INPNC-expressing E. coli was observed with characteristic deformity

When comparing SEM pictures, we noticed that E. coli using INPNC system seems to be more elongated compared to those with BclA system. To confirm this, we determined aspect ratios of all E. coli from the SEM pictures using ImageJ (see Materials and Methods for more detail LINK). By Welch’s t-test (two-sided), we found that E. coli with INPNC system was in fact more elongated than BclA system expressing E. coli. (p=0.0015<0.05).

We have also made a growth curve of the INPNC- and BclA- system expressing E. coli. (Fig. 13). It shows that INPNC-His-scFv expressing E. coli has significant delays in growth compared to its BclA counterpart. The results from growth curve and elongated shape both suggests that expression of INPNC-His-scFv to the outer membrane caused significant stress and deformation to the host E. coli.

3-3 Tertiary Stage: We succeeded in observing the binding of CBD to cellulose

As shown in 3-1, we observed the expression of INPNC-His-CBDcex on the membrane fraction. We next tested the passenger protein’s functionality, e.g. CBDcex’s binding to cellulose.

1. Observing the binding to cellulose on a macroscopic level

This was initially examined by measuring the optical density (OD600) of cell suspension before and after incubation with cellulose, as well as its washing buffer (Fig. 14), as reported in Ref15. The results were summarized in Fig. 15.

Unfortunately, we could not observe significant differences between the binding of INPNC-His-CBDcex to cellulose and binding of negative control (without CBDcex) to cellulose under this assay condition. This experiment was performed essentially in accordance to previously reported assays (Wang et al) [15]. However, there are a few differences between the two assays. They expressed CBDcex with Lpp-OmpA surface expression modules, instead of INPNC in our case, to conduct cellulose binding assays. LPP-OmpA is a well-characterized surface display system, too.We concluded that our CBD’s binding to cellulose under our condition was not as efficient as the reported system.

2. Observing the binding to cellulose with fluorescence microscopy

We next conducted fluorescence microscopy to directly observe E. coli cells bound to cellulose sheet. This would allow for detection of binding with increased sensitivity. （Fig16）

Fig. 16 shows the results. After incubating E. coli with about 35~38 micrometer cellulose powder, we DAPI stained E. coli and observed it under fluorescence microscopy. As shown, CBD-surface expressing E. coli was observed binding to cellulose, showing the functional expression of INP-His-CBD in our system. When control plasmid was used, the numbers of cellulose-bound E. coli cells were significantly reduced (Talbe XXX).

From these results, we concluded that our INPNC-His-CBDcex can be used to physically link E. coli and cellulose beads.

3-4 Quaternary Stage: We tried dual expression of the two surface expressing proteins

We worked on the simultaneous expressions of INPNC-His-scFv and INPNC-His-CBDcex. We co-transformed the two plasmids. These two plasmids both have chloramphenicol resistance (Cp resistance) marker, but they have different replication origins (p15A for scFv and pMB1 derivative for CBD), each belonging to a different incompatibility group. In theory, the two plasmids can be stably inherited. We first tested whether the Cp resistant colony from the co-transformation have both of the plasmids with colony PCR.

As shown in fig#, colony amplified in lane ## are observed to have two different plasmids. This is the first time in our project that we had both of our surface expressing-fusion protein-encoding plasmid simultaneously.

In order to test whether the two plasmids could be stably inherited, we single colony-isolated this strain and conducted a colony PCR on the newly formed 4 colonies. As shown in fig##, the band corresponding to the INPNC-His-CBDcex were observed in all the colonies, while the band for low-copy plasmid, INPNC-His-scFv couldn’t be observed in any of the lanes. This result strongly suggests that the low-copy plasmid dropped out during the formation of new colonies. As both the plasmids are Cp-resistant, deleting one plasmid will not affect their antibiotic status. In order for our noro-catcher to stably pass down both plasmids, we need to construct one plasmid with a different antibiotic marker and grow the bacteria on a medium with two different antibiotics. Also, a previous study done on using the same surface expression system for surface display of two functional proteins reported a possible competition for the same surface expression mechanisms, and a resulting dramatic loss of functionalities [15]. In addition to changing the antibiotic resistance, it may be better to use a different surface display systems for stable expression of scFv and CBDcex.