Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Apparent activation energies of protein–protein complex dissociation in the gas–phase determined by electrospray mass spectrometry

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We have developed a method to determine apparent activation energies of dissociation for ionized protein–protein complexes in the gas phase using electrospray ionization mass spectrometry following the Rice-Ramsperger-Kassel-Marcus quasi-equilibrium theory. Protein–protein complexes were formed in solution, transferred into the gas phase, and separated from excess free protein by ion mobility filtering. Afterwards, complex disassembly was initiated by collision-induced dissociation with step-wise increasing energies. Relative intensities of ion signals were used to calculate apparent activation energies of dissociation in the gas phase by applying linear free energy relations. The method was developed using streptavidin tetramers. Experimentally determined apparent gas-phase activation energies for dissociation (\( {E}_{A\ m0g}^{\#} \)) of complexes consisting of Fc parts from immunoglobulins (IgG-Fc) and three closely related protein G' variants (IgG-Fc•protein G'e, IgG-Fc•protein G'f, and IgG-Fc•protein G'g) show the same order of stabilities as can be inferred from their in-solution binding constants. Differences in stabilities between the protein–protein complexes correspond to single amino acid residue exchanges in the IgG-binding regions of the protein G' variants.

Electrospray mass spectrometry and collision-induced dissociation delivers apparent activation energies and supramolecular bond force constants of protein-protein complexes in the gas phase.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ESI:

electrospray ionization

\( {E}_{A\ m0g}^{\#} \) :

EA: energy of activation, #: apparent (with merged temperature term), m: mean of charge states, 0: at Ecom = 0 eV, g: gas phase

Fc part:

fragment crystallizable part

IgG:

immunoglobulin G

IVIG:

intravenous immunoglobulin

KD s :

dissociation constant in solution

\( {K}_{D\ m0g}^{\#} \) :

KD: dissociation constant, #: apparent (with merged temperature term), m: mean of charge states, 0: at Ecom = 0 eV, g: gas phase

LFE:

linear free energy

Protein G′:

protein G prime

Protein G′e:

protein G prime e (extended)

Protein G′f:

protein G prime f

Protein G′g:

protein G prime g

ToF:

time of flight

ΔG s :

Gibbs free energy difference in solution

References

  1. Przybylski M, Glocker MO. Electrospray mass spectrometry of biomacromolecular complexes with noncovalent interactions—new analytical perspectives for supramolecular chemistry and molecular recognition processes. Angew Chem Int Ed. 1996;35(8):807–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.199608061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Loo JA. Studying noncovalent protein complexes by electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Mass Spectrom Rev. 1997;16(1):1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2787(1997)16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Pagel K, Natan E, Hall Z, Fersht AR, Robinson CV. Intrinsically disordered p53 and its complexes populate compact conformations in the gas phase. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2013;52(1):361–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201203047.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bornschein RE, Ruotolo BT. Ion mobility-mass spectrometry of charge-reduced protein complexes reveals general trends in the collisional ejection of compact subunits. Analyst. 2015;14(20):7020–9. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5an01242b.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen F, Gulbakan B, Weidmann S, Fagerer SR, Ibanez AJ, Zenobi R. Applying mass spectrometry to study non-covalent biomolecule complexes. Mass Spectrom Rev. 2016;35(1):48–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/mas.21462.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hoaglund CS, Valentine SJ, Sporleder CR, Reilly JP, Clemmer DE. Three-dimensional ion mobility/TOFMS analysis of electrosprayed biomolecules. Anal Chem. 1998;70(11):2236–42. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac980059c.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Konijnenberg A, Butterer A, Sobott F. Native ion mobility-mass spectrometry and related methods in structural biology. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2013;1834(6):1239–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbapap.2012.11.013.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sobott F, Benesch JL, Vierling E, Robinson CV. Subunit exchange of multimeric protein complexes. Real-time monitoring of subunit exchange between small heat shock proteins by using electrospray mass spectrometry. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(41):38921–9. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M206060200.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhong YY, Hyung SJ, Ruotolo BT. Ion mobility-mass spectrometry for structural proteomics. Expert Rev Proteomics. 2012;9(1):47–58. https://doi.org/10.1586/Epr.11.75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Cooper A (1999) Thermodynamic analysis of biomolecular interactions. Curr Opin Chem biol 3 (5):557-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1367-5931(99)00008-3.

  11. Robertson AD, Murphy KP. Protein structure and the energetics of protein stability. Chem Rev. 1997;97(5):1251–67. https://doi.org/10.1021/Cr960383c.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Erba EB, Barylyuk K, Yang Y, Zenobi R. Quantifying protein-protein interactions within noncovalent complexes using electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Anal Chem. 2011;83(24):9251–9. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac201576e.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jorgensen TJD, Roepstorff P, Heck AJR. Direct determination of solution binding constants for noncovalent complexes between bacterial cell wall peptide analogues and vancomycin group antibiotics by electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Anal Chem. 1998;70(20):4427–32. https://doi.org/10.1021/Ac980563h.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Krishnaswamy SR, Williams ER, Kirsch JF. Free energies of protein-protein association determined by electrospray ionization mass spectrometry correlate accurately with values obtained by solution methods. Prot Sci. 2006;15(6):1465–75. https://doi.org/10.1110/ps.062083406.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. West GM, Tang L, Fitzgerald MC. Thermodynamic analysis of protein stability and ligand binding using a chemical modification- and mass-spectrometry based strategy. Anal Chem. 2008;80(11):4175–85. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac702610a.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Cech NB, Enke CG. Practical implications of some recent studies in electrospray ionization fundamentals. Mass Spectrom Rev. 2001;20(6):362–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/mas.10008.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sinelnikov I, Kitova EN, Klassen JS. Influence of Coulombic repulsion on the dissociation pathways and energetics of multiprotein complexes in the gas phase. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2007;18(4):617–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasms.2006.11.006.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Catalina MI, de Mol NJ, Fischer MJE, Heck AJR. Probing factors affecting the gas phase stabilities of noncovalent complexes formed by peptides bound to the Grb2 SH2 domain protein. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2004;6(10):2572–9. https://doi.org/10.1039/b315435a.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Baer T, Mayer PM. Statistical Rice-Ramsperger-Kassel-Marcus quasiequilibrium theory calculations in mass spectrometry. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 1997;8(2):103–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1044-0305(96)00212-7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rosenstock HM, Wallenstein MB, Wahrhaftig AL, Eyring H. Absolute rate theory for isolated systems and the mass spectra of polyatomic molecules. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1952;38(8):667–78. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.38.8.667.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Vekey K. Internal energy effects in mass spectrometry. J Mass Spectrom. 1996;31(5):445–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/(Sici)1096-9888(199605)31:5<445::Aid-Jms354>3.0.Co;2-G.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Yefremova Y, Al-Majdoub M, Opuni KFM, Koy C, Yan Y, Gross ML, et al. A dynamic model of pH-induced protein G' e higher order structure changes derived from mass spectrometric analyses. Anal Chem. 2016;88(1):890–7. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b03536.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sauer-Eriksson AE, Kleywegt GJ, Uhlen M, Jones TA. Crystal structure of the C2 fragment of streptococcal protein G in complex with the Fc domain of human IgG. Structure. 1995;3(3):265–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-2126(01)00157-5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Gulich S, Linhult M, Stahl S, Hober S. Engineering streptococcal protein G for increased alkaline stability. Protein Eng. 2002;15(10):835–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/protein/15.10.835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Yefremova Y, Al-Majdoub M, Opuni KFM, Koy C, Cui WD, Yan YT, et al. "De-novo" amino acid sequence elucidation of protein G'e by combined "top-down" and "bottom-up" mass spectrometry. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2015;26(3):482–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13361-014-1053-2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Nesatyy VJ. Gas-phase binding of non-covalent protein complexes between bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor and its target enzymes studied by electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry. J Mass Spectrom. 2001;36:950–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/jms.199.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Nesatyy VJ. Mass spectrometry evaluation of the solution and gas-phase binding properties of noncovalent protein complexes. Int J Mass Spectrom. 2002;221:147–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1387-3806(02)00956-9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Pace CN, Shaw KL. Linear extrapolation method of analyzing solvent denaturation curves. Proteins Suppl. 2000;4:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0134(2000)41:4+3.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bolen DW, Santoro MM. Unfolding free energy changes determined by the linear extrapolation method. 2. Incorporation of delta G degrees N-U values in a thermodynamic cycle. Biochemistry. 1988;27(21):8069–74. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi00421a014.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Yefremova Y, Danquah BD, Opuni KFM, El-Kased RF, Koy C, Glocker MO (2017) Mass spectrometric characterization of protein structures and protein complexes in condensed and gas phase. Eur J Mass Spectrom 23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469066717722256.

  31. Harvey SR, Yan J, Brown JM, Hoyes E, Wysocki VH. Extended gas-phase trapping followed by surface-induced dissociation of noncovalent protein complexes. Anal Chem. 2016;88:1218–21. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b03479.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Quintyn RS, Zhou MW, Yan J, Wysocki VH. Surface-induced dissociation mass spectra as a tool for distinguishing different structural forms of gas-phase multimeric protein complexes. Anal Chem. 2015;87:11879–86. https://doi.org/10.1021/ar400223t.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhou M, Dagan S, Wysocki VH. Protein subunits released by surface collisions of noncovalent complexes: native-like compact structures revealed by ion mobility mass spectrometry. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2012;51:4336–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201108700.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Myers JK, Pace CN, Scholtz JM. Denaturant m values and heat capacity changes: relation to changes in accessible surface areas of protein unfolding. Protein Sci. 1995;4(10):2138–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.5560041020.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Pace CN. Determination and analysis of urea and guanidine hydrochloride denaturation curves. Methods Enzymol. 1986;131:266–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/0076-6879(86)31045-0.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Drahos L, Vekey K. Entropy evaluation using the kinetic method: is it feasible? J Mass Spectrom. 2003;38(10):1025–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jms.538.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Wu L, Lemr K, Aggerholm T, Cooks RG. Recognition and quantification of binary and ternary mixtures of isomeric peptides by the kinetic method: metal ion and ligand effects on the dissociation of metal-bound complexes. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2003;14(2):152–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1044-0305(02)00868-1.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Parker MJ, Spencer J, Clarke AR. An integrated kinetic analysis of intermediates and transition states in protein folding reactions. J Mol Biol. 1995;253(5):771–86. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.1995.0590.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Staniforth RA, Burston SG, Smith CJ, Jackson GS, Badcoe IG, Atkinson T, et al. The energetics and cooperativity of protein folding: a simple experimental analysis based upon the solvation of internal residues. Biochemistry. 1993;32(15):3842–51. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi00066a003.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Benesch JL, Ruotolo BT, Simmons DA, Robinson CV. Protein complexes in the gas phase: technology for structural genomics and proteomics. Chem Rev. 2007;107(8):3544–67. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr068289b.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Jurchen JC, Williams ER. Origin of asymmetric charge partitioning in the dissociation of gas-phase protein homodimers. J Am Chem Soc. 2003;125(9):2817–26. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja0211508.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Sciuto SV, Liu JJ, Konermann L. An electrostatic charge partitioning model for the dissociation of protein complexes in the gas phase. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2011;22(10):1679–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13361-011-0205-x.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Sobott F, Robinson CV. Characterising electrosprayed biomolecules using tandem-MS—the noncovalent GroEL chaperonin assembly. Int J Mass Spectrom. 2004;236(1–3):25–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijms.2004.05.010.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Benesch JL. Collisional activation of protein complexes: picking up the pieces. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2009;20(3):341–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasms.2008.11.014.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Dragusanu M, Petre BA, Slamnoiu S, Vlad C, Tu TT, Przybylski M. On-line bioaffinity-electrospray mass spectrometry for simultaneous detection, identification, and quantification of protein-ligand interactions. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2010;21(10):1643–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasms.2010.06.011.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Gronewold TMA. Surface acoustic wave sensors in the bioanalytical field: recent trends and challenges. Anal Chim Acta. 2007;603(2):119–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2007.09.056.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Thomas PD, Kejariwal A. Coding single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with complex vs. Mendelian disease: evolutionary evidence for differences in molecular effects. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(43):15398–403. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0404380101.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Zhao N, Han JG, Shyu CR, Korkin D. Determining effects of non-synonymous SNPs on protein-protein interactions using supervised and semi-supervised learning. PLoS Comput Biol. 2014;10(5). ARTN):e1003592. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Stunnenberg HG, Hubner NC. Genomics meets proteomics: identifying the culprits in disease. Hum Genet. 2014;133(6):689–700. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-013-1376-2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. David A, Razali R, Wass MN, Sternberg MJ. Protein-protein interaction sites are hot spots for disease-associated nonsynonymous SNPs. Hum Mutat. 2012;33(2):359–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.21656.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Back AL, Kwok WW, Hickstein DD. Identification of two molecular defects in a child with leukocyte adherence deficiency. J Biol Chem. 1992;267(8):5482–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Ohashi Y, Yambe T, Tsuchiya S, Kikuchi H, Konno T. Familial genetic-defect in a case of leukocyte adhesion deficiency. Hum Mutat. 1993;2(6):458–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.1380020606.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Etzioni A. Adhesion molecules—their role in health and disease. Pediatr Res. 1996;39(2):191–8. https://doi.org/10.1203/00006450-199602000-00001.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We express our thanks to Dr. Stephan Mikkat for providing expertise on mass spectrometry and to Ms Ursula Glocker for preliminary technical assistance. We also thank Dr. Marcus Frank for providing access to the capillary sputter. We acknowledge the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) for providing scholarships for YY (no. 91523785), BD (no. 91566064), and KO (no. 91548123). The WATERS Synapt G2S mass spectrometer has been bought through an EU grant (EFRE-UHROM 9) made available to MOG.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Kwabena F.M. Opuni

    Present address: School of Pharmacy, University of Ghana, P.O. Box LG43, Legon Accra, Ghana

  2. Alexandra Ehrens

    Present address: University Hospital of Bonn, Sigmung-Freud-Str. 25, 53105, Bonn, Germany

  3. Yelena Yefremova and F. Teresa I. Melder contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Proteome Center Rostock, University Rostock Medical Center, Schillingallee 69, 18059, Rostock, Germany

    Yelena Yefremova, F. Teresa I. Melder, Bright D. Danquah, Kwabena F.M. Opuni, Cornelia Koy & Michael O. Glocker

  2. University of Applied Sciences Bonn-Rhein-Sieg, von-Liebig-Str. 20, 53359, Rheinbach, Germany

    Alexandra Ehrens, David Frommholz & Harald Illges

  3. Department of Chemistry, University of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 171, 2020, Antwerp, Belgium

    Knut Koelbel & Frank Sobott

  4. Astbury Centre for Structural Molecular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

    Frank Sobott

  5. School of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

    Frank Sobott

Authors
  1. Yelena Yefremova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Teresa I. Melder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bright D. Danquah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kwabena F.M. Opuni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Cornelia Koy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Alexandra Ehrens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. David Frommholz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Harald Illges
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Knut Koelbel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Frank Sobott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Michael O. Glocker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael O. Glocker.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 950 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yefremova, Y., Melder, F.T.I., Danquah, B.D. et al. Apparent activation energies of protein–protein complex dissociation in the gas–phase determined by electrospray mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem 409, 6549–6558 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-017-0603-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-017-0603-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation