Communications
were cloned. Sequencing of 20 randomly selected clones
yielded 19 full sequences, including 2 pairs of duplicates and
15 unique sequences with no apparent similarity (see
Supporting Information).
Examination of these sequences showed that they con-
tained 7–14 glycosylation (EdU) sites. Three glycoclusters
(clones 4/5, 16/23, 18), each containing 10 glycosylation sites,
were synthesized and their Kd values with 2G12 were
measured in a filter binding assay. Glycoclusters 4/5, 16/23,
and 18 displayed moderate affinity for 2G12, with values of
Kd = 270 ꢁ 40 nm, 220 ꢁ 50 nm, and 330 ꢁ 30 nm, respectively
(Figure 3a).[17] This moderate affinity, combined with the
large number of glycosylation sites, might have suggested that
high valency alone was responsible for the observed binding
to 2G12. However, neither the starting library (of which
> 75% contained 7–15 glycosylations)[18] nor a random
sequence containing 10 glycosylated positions showed detect-
able binding to 2G12. Therefore, the affinity of our selection
winners is sequence-dependent and not simply the result of
high valency.
We then performed several experiments with glycocluster
16/23 to clarify the elements necessary for binding to 2G12
(Figure 3b). When annealed to its complementary DNA
strand, glycocluster 16/23 bound 2G12 significantly less
efficiently, showing that binding is dependent on tertiary
structure. Additionally, no binding was observed in the
absence of glycosylation, strongly suggesting the binding
contacts with 2G12 are mostly or exclusively made through
glycans and not through DNA alone. Gratifyingly, binding
was significantly diminished in the presence of gp120, showing
that gp120 and glycocluster 16/23 compete for the same (or
overlapping) site(s) on 2G12.
Figure 2. PAGE Analysis of Individual SELMA Steps.
glyco-ssDNA–dsDNA hybrid structure of the library (see
Scheme 1d) was confirmed by several observations and
control experiments. First, it ran as a smear in the gel
(Figure 2, lane 5). Additionally, treatment with exonuclease I
(which digests the 3’-terminal ssDNA portion) resulted in the
appearance of a sharp 80 bp band corresponding to the
dsDNA portion (Figure 2, lane 6). By contrast, the glyco-
dsDNA hairpins (Scheme 1c) showed no change upon
exonuclease treatment (Figure 2, lanes 3 vs. 4). Heating the
hybrids to 958C (but not 758C) destabilized the duplex
portion of the hybrid structure, allowing the glycosylated
strand to reinvade and expel the unglycosylated single strand.
This results in a return to the glyco-dsDNA hairpin structure
(Scheme 1c), which is impervious to the exonuclease
(Figure 2, lane 8, same as lanes 3 and 4).
After this confirmation of the desired dsDNA–ssDNA
hybrid structure, we began selection: the library was incu-
bated with 2G12 and the 2G12-bound fraction was captured
with protein A beads. Bound glycoclusters were retrieved
from the beads by thermal denaturation and subjected to
PCR with biotinylated primer 2, giving the 2nd-generation
library in dsDNA format (Scheme 1 f), which ran as the
expected sharp 80 bp band on the PAGE gel (Figure 2,
lane 9). The library was then converted back to its ssDNA
hairpin form (Scheme 1i) in three steps. Removal of primer-2-
derived biotinylated strand with streptavidin beads and
polymerase extension with an overhanging biotinylated
primer afforded 120 bp dsDNA product (Scheme 1h and
Figure 2, lane 10). Finally, removal of the biotinylated strand
from the 120 bp duplex afforded the 2nd-generation library in
ssDNA hairpin format (Scheme 1i). This ssDNA hairpin
could now be extended with dATP, dCTP, dGTP and EdUTP,
to produce the 2nd-generation library in dsDNA hairpin form
(Scheme 1b) which again ran as a sharp band, identical to the
first cycle (Figure 2, lane 11 vs. lane 2).
Next, we carefully dissected the binding determinants of
glycocluster 16/23 through a series of mutagenesis experi-
ments (Figure 3c), starting with truncation at both the 5’ and
3’ ends (entries 1–8). The extreme ends were not essential for
binding to 2G12; however, truncations extending beyond the
first and last glycosylation sites did result in total loss of
binding. We then performed point mutagenesis, replacing
each glycosylated EdU residue with cytosine (entries 9–21).
Seven of these mutations produced little change in the value
of Kd, but mutations in the 2nd, 4th, and 10th glycosylation
positions (entries 11, 13, and 19) caused a drastic loss of
binding (Kd @ 800 nm), suggesting that these glycans directly
contact 2G12. However, glycoclusters containing only these
three glycosylation sites (entries 20 and 21) failed to bind to
2G12, suggesting that the other glycans may be important for
maintaining tertiary structure. We attempted to gain addi-
tional insight into this question by Mfold secondary structure
prediction,[19] but the resulting structures did not provide an
obvious explanation for the importance of the 2nd, 4th, and 10th
glycosylation sites. Mfold calculation is probably of limited
validity in this case, as it does not take into account the Man4-
modification of ten bases.
Now that all SELMA steps had been validated, the entire
cycle was repeated through multiple rounds. Rounds 2, 4, and
6 included a negative selection to remove library members
that bound to protein A beads. Enrichment of 2G12 binders
in the population was assessed by monitoring the number of
PCR cycles required to regenerate the library. Between
rounds 5, 6 and 7, enrichment of the library leveled off, so the
selection was terminated and the resulting PCR products
In conclusion, this work is the first to demonstrate the
feasibility of directed evolution for glycocluster design. We
have shown that an “evolved” Man4 glycocluster binds to
2G12 and can compete with gp120. Future work will involve
structural studies of these glycoclusters, refinement of the
ꢀ 2011 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 11238 –11242