Independent education resourceInformation here does not replace care from a qualified health professional.
Peptide Therapy GuideClear peptide education

Educational guide

Plant Hormone Controls Protein Levels in Living Worm, Improves Aging Model

The causal role of a gene is interrogated by experimentally perturbing its function, often using interventions that produce strong protein knockouts. However, biological systems possess complex quantitative dynamics, with strong knockdowns being less informati

Written by Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team
For education only

This guide cannot diagnose a condition or recommend a personal treatment plan. Discuss medical questions with a qualified professional.

The causal role of a gene is interrogated by experimentally perturbing its function, often using interventions that produce strong protein knockouts. However, biological systems possess complex quantitative dynamics, with strong knockdowns being less informative than more subtle, quantitative perturbations.

In a new study published in Nature Communications titled, “Engineering the auxin-inducible degron system for tunable in vivo control of organismal physiology,” researchers from the Centre for Genomic Regulation in Barcelona and the University of Cambridge have leveraged the auxin-inducible degron (AID) system to tune protein levels with precision in the model worm, Caenorhabditis elegans. The advance has applications in uncovering the molecular underpinnings of aging and disease.

The AID system evolved in plants as a mechanism through which the hormone auxin regulates proteins required for growth and development and possesses many practical advantages over other methods, including rapid and reversible degradation. Notably, the involvement of an easily-deliverable, small-molecule activating compound makes the AID system a particularly promising technology for quantitative control over protein abundance in vivo.

“No protein acts alone. Our new approach lets us study how multiple proteins in different tissues cooperate to control how the body functions and ages,” said Nicholas Stroustrup, PhD researcher at the Centre for Genomic Regulation and corresponding author of the paper.

The lack of precise, lifelong, tissue-by-tissue control has been a bottleneck to understanding how subtle molecular changes impact an entire organism over time. The new method has implications for studying whole-body, systemic processes, such as aging, that are shaped by interactions across different organs.

“To unpick nuance in biology, sometimes you need half the concentration of a protein here and a quarter there, but all we’ve had up till now are techniques focused on wiping a protein out. We wanted to be able to control proteins like you turn the volume up or down on a TV, and now we can now ask all sorts of new questions,” explained Stroustrup.

The AID system identifies a protein with a degron tag for recognition by TIR1 for degradation when auxin is present. The researchers genetically engineering worms to produce a TIR1 enzyme in specific tissues only. When the worms are fed auxin-containing food, TIR1 is activated, causing the cell to remove the appropriate amount of protein. The technique allows scientists to control how much of a protein remains, where in the body it is controlled, and when the change happens while the worm continues its normal living functions.

Notably, the study combined two different TIR1 enzymes, each triggered by a separate auxin compound. By placing the system in separate tissues, the researchers independently controlled the same protein in the worm’s intestine and neurons or controlled two different proteins at the same time

“Getting this to work was quite an engineering challenge. We had to test different combinations of synthetic switches to find the perfect pair that didn’t interfere with one another. Now that we’ve cracked it, we can control two separate proteins simultaneously with incredible precision. It’s a powerful tool that we hope will open up new possibilities for biologists everywhere,” said Jeremy Vicencio, PhD postdoctoral researcher at the Centre for Genomic Regulation and first author of the study.

Connected reading

Helpful context for this guide

Source-derived material selected through this article’s indexed topics.

Related questions

01Undruggable or unscreenable?

Another obstacle to discovering new PPI inhibitors is the lack of libraries designed to hunt for them, points out Philippe Roche, PhD, senior scientist at the Integrative Structural and Chemical Biology team at the Cancer Research Center of Marseilles, France. “If you screen PPIs using libraries that were designed for kinases or GPCRs, that’s why you don’t get a lot of good results,” he says. To that end, his group began assembling a library focused on orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs. The result was 2P2Idb, a hand-curated, structural database cataloguing orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs for which the interface had been 3D characterized. From analyzing these known PPI inhibitors, and what structures they had in common, Roche and his colleagues developed a model to predict whether compounds would likely inhibit PPIs. Using this method, 2P2Idb creates an enriched screening library that dramatically increases the hit rate compared to standard libraries. Having proven their success with a small library of 1600 compounds, they are in the process of expanding the library to 10,000 compounds. Once that’s published, “the idea is to make this library available to labs around the world,” Roche says. “We will provide the library free of charge for people to be able to screen PPI targets.”

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
02How stable is the antibody?

A crucial question often addressed during preclinical development focuses on the in vivo stability of therapeutic antibodies. Increasing the half-life of a therapeutic antibody has several benefits ranging from higher treatment efficacy to increased advantages for the patients who will have a fewer number of therapy sessions and a reduced cost. Given these compelling benefits, following the identification of therapeutic antibodies with the desired specificity, developers usually subject them to a refinement step to increase their stability. This process is often hindered by the lack of reliable experimental tools to predict the half-life of antibodies in patients. The major hurdle of using mouse models to predict antibody stability in the serum lies in the way immunoglobulin proteins are processed by the organism. In mammals, most proteins circulating in the serum undergo constant uptake by endothelial cells and are routed through the endosomes to the lysosomal compartment for degradation. In the endosomes, immunoglobulin G (IgG) proteins are recognized and bound by a transmembrane protein, called the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), which mediates their recycling to the plasma membrane and subsequent release back into the serum. As a result, the half-life of IgGs are significantly extended by this mechanism. Since most therapeutic antibodies belong to the IgG class, this recycling system is very relevant for their relative stability in the body. Remarkably, the relative affinity between IgGs and FcRn is extremely disparate between different species, with the mouse receptor showing a much higher affinity than its human counterpart.

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
P

About the author

Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team

Editorial team for Peptide Therapy Guide.

View all articles →