Abstract
Genetically encoded peptide libraries enabled the discovery of ligands for clinically relevant targets and functional materials. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of these libraries improved the selection of ligands by detecting low abundant clones and quantifying changes in copy numbers of clones without many rounds of selection. Although NGS platforms have been widely used in genome assembly, quantification of gene expression (RNA-seq), and metagenomic analyses, few examples in the literature describe sequencing phage libraries. This chapter aims to provide a detailed method for sequencing a Ph.D.-7 phage display library by Ion Torrent. The main techniques covered in this chapter include (1) preparation of a phage library for sequencing, (2) sequencing, and (3) analysis of the sequencing data by a custom Matlab script.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Glenn TC (2011) Field guide to next-generation DNA sequencers. Mol Ecol Resour 11:759–769
Dias-Neto E, Nunes DN, Giordano RJ et al (2009) Next-generation phage display: integrating and comparing available molecular tools to enable cost-effective high-throughput analysis. PLoS One 4:e8338
Ernst A, Gfeller D, Kan Z et al (2010) Coevolution of PDZ domain-ligand interactions analyzed by high-throughput phage display and deep sequencing. Mol Biosyst 6:1782–1790
Matochko WL, Chu KK, Jin BJ et al (2012) Deep sequencing analysis of phage libraries using Illumina platform. Methods 58:47–55
McLaughlin ME, Sidhu SS (2013) Engineering and analysis of peptide-recognition domain specificities by phage display and deep sequencing. In: Keating AE (ed) Methods in protein design, vol 523. Academic, New York, NY, pp 327–349
Ravn U, Gueneau F, Baerlocher L et al (2010) By-passing in vitro screening-next generation sequencing technologies applied to antibody display and in silico candidate selection. Nucleic Acids Res 38:e193
Ravn U, Didelot G, Venet S et al (2013) Deep sequencing of phage display libraries to support antibody discovery. Methods 60:99–110
Ryvkin A, Ashkenazy H, Smelyanski L et al (2012) Deep panning: steps towards probing the IgOme. PLoS One 7:e41469
Staquicini FI, Cardo-Vila M, Kolonin MG et al (2011) Vascular ligand-receptor mapping by direct combinatorial selection in cancer patients. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:18637–18642
‘t Hoen PAC, Jirka SMG, Ten Broeke BR et al (2012) Phage display screening without repetitious selection rounds. Anal Biochem 421:622–631
Zhang H, Torkamani A, Jones TM et al (2011) Phenotype-information-phenotype cycle for deconvolution of combinatorial antibody libraries selected against complex systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:13456–13461
Kim T, Tyndel MS, Huang H et al (2012) MUSI: an integrated system for identifying multiple specificity from very large peptide or nucleic acid data sets. Nucleic Acids Res 40:e47
D’Angelo S, Mignone F, Deantonio C et al (2013) Profiling celiac disease antibody repertoire. Clin Immunol 148:99–109
Matochko WL, Cory LS, Tang SKY et al (2013) Prospective identification of parasitic sequences in phage display screens. Nucleic Acids Res 42:1784
Merriman B, Rothberg JM, Ion Torrent R et al (2012) Progress in Ion Torrent semiconductor chip based sequencing. Electrophoresis 33:3397–3417
Derda R, Tang SKY, Li SC et al (2011) Diversity of phage-displayed libraries of peptides during panning and amplification. Molecules 16:1776–1803
Bellot G, McClintock MA, Lin C et al (2011) Recovery of intact DNA nanostructures after agarose gel-based separation. Nat Methods 8:192–194
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Sophie Dang and Corey Davis at the Molecular Biology Service Unit for the use of the Ion Torrent Personal Sequencing platform and for helpful advice. This work was supported by funds from the University of Alberta and Alberta Glycomic Centre.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix 1: List of Barcodes Used for Multiplexing
ID | Barcode | ID | Barcode | ID | Barcode |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
01 | CTAAGGTAAC | 18 | AGGCAATTGC | 35 | CTTGAGAATGTC |
02 | TAAGGAGAAC | 19 | TTAGTCGGAC | 36 | TGGAGGACGGAC |
03 | AAGAGGATTC | 20 | CAGATCCATC | 37 | TTGGAGGCCAGC |
04 | TACCAAGATC | 21 | TCGCAATTAC | 38 | TGGAGCTTCCTC |
05 | CAGAAGGAAC | 22 | TTCGAGACGC | 39 | TAAGGCAACCAC |
06 | CTGCAAGTTC | 23 | TGCCACGAAC | 40 | TCCTAACATAAC |
07 | TTCGTGATTC | 24 | AACCTCATTC | 41 | TTGAGCCTATTC |
08 | TTCCGATAAC | 25 | CCTGAGATAC | 42 | CTGGCAATCCTC |
09 | TGAGCGGAAC | 26 | TTACAACCTC | 43 | CCGGAGAATCGC |
10 | CTGACCGAAC | 27 | AACCATCCGC | 44 | CAGCATTAATTC |
11 | TCCTCGAATC | 28 | ATCCGGAATC | 45 | TCTGGCAACGGC |
12 | TAGGTGGTTC | 29 | TCGACCACTC | 46 | TCCTTGATGTTC |
13 | TCTAACGGAC | 30 | CGAGGTTATC | 47 | TTCCTGCTTCAC |
14 | TTGGAGTGTC | 31 | TCCAAGCTGC | 48 | CTGAGTTCCGAC |
15 | TCTAGAGGTC | 32 | TCTTACACAC | 49 | TCCTGGCACATC |
16 | TCTGGATGAC | 33 | TTCTCATTGAAC | 50 | TTCCTACCAGTC |
17 | TCTATTCGTC | 34 | TAAGCCATTGTC | Â | Â |
Appendix 2: Optimization of Forward and Reverse Primer Sets
To amplify the phage library region, both forward and reverse strands need to bind at the same conditions. Primer sets of the complementary region were chosen by similarities in their melting temperatures. Table 1 lists the forward and reverse primer sets tested to determine which combination generates the most PCR products with the least impurities.
First, all primer combinations (12-bp reverse with 12-bp, 18-bp, and 21-bp forward and 13-bp reverse with 12-bp, 18-bp, and 21-bp forward) were tested at the same annealing temperature (62 °C). The 12-bp reverse primer with 12-bp, 18-bp, and 21-bp forward primers did not result in any PCR product at an annealing temperature of 62 °C. PCR amplification of the forward primers with the 13-bp reverse primer resulted in the PCR product. To determine the optimal annealing temperature, the forward and reverse primer pairs were tested at annealing temperatures from 45 to 65 °C. The primer set containing the 18-bp forward and 13-bp reverse compliment sequences gave the most dsDNA fragment with the least impurities.
Appendix 3: Optimizing Emulsion PCR Conditions
The recommended concentration for emulsion PCR is 26 pM (1.56 × 107 molecules per μL) of dsDNA PCR fragments. 25 μL is added to emulsion PCR to give a final amount of 0.65 pmol. The library region of Ph.D. libraries is small; the total amplicon to be sequenced is 62 bp in a Ph.D.-7 library. Emulsion PCR of this small amplicon can cause polyclonal populations. In order to achieve mostly monoclonal populations, we tested different concentrations of dsDNA in emulsion PCR. It was determined that adding 75 fmol (25 μL of a 3 pM solution) gave sufficient sequencing data (Table 2).
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Matochko, W.L., Derda, R. (2015). Next-Generation Sequencing of Phage-Displayed Peptide Libraries. In: Derda, R. (eds) Peptide Libraries. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 1248. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2020-4_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2020-4_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2019-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2020-4
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols