Single-molecule Förster resonance energy transfer (smFRET) is increasingly being used to determine distances, structures, and dynamics of biomolecules in vitro and in vivo. However, generalized protocols and FRET standards to ensure the reproducibility and accuracy of measurements of FRET efficiencies are currently lacking. Here we report the results of a comparative blind study in which 20 labs determined the FRET efficiencies (E) of several dye-labeled DNA duplexes. Using a unified, straightforward method, we obtained FRET efficiencies with s.d. between ±0.02 and ±0.05. We suggest experimental and computational procedures for converting FRET efficiencies into accurate distances, and discuss potential uncertainties in the experiment and the modeling. Our quantitative assessment of the reproducibility of intensity-based smFRET measurements and a unified correction procedure represents an important step toward the validation of distance networks, with the ultimate aim of achieving reliable structural models of biomolecular systems by smFRET-based hybrid methods.

Intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) that lack a unique 3D structure and comprise a large fraction of the human proteome play important roles in numerous cellular functions. ProstateAssociated Gene 4 (PAGE4) is an IDP that acts as a potentiator of the Activator Protein-1 (AP-1) transcription factor. HomeodomainInteracting Protein Kinase 1 (HIPK1) phosphorylates PAGE4 at S9 and T51, but only T51 is critical for its activity. Here, we identify a second kinase, CDC-Like Kinase 2 (CLK2), which acts on PAGE4 and hyperphosphorylates it at multiple S/T residues, including S9 and T51. We demonstrate that HIPK1 is expressed in both androgendependent and androgen-independent prostate cancer (PCa) cells, whereas CLK2 and PAGE4 are expressed only in androgendependent cells. Cell-based studies indicate that PAGE4 interaction with the two kinases leads to opposing functions. HIPK1-phosphorylated PAGE4 (HIPK1-PAGE4) potentiates c-Jun, whereas CLK2-phosphorylated PAGE4 (CLK2-PAGE4) attenuates c-Jun activity. Consistent with the cellular data, biophysical measurements (small-angle X-ray scattering, single-molecule fluorescence resonance energy transfer, and NMR) indicate that HIPK1-PAGE4 exhibits a relatively compact conformational ensemble that binds AP-1, whereas CLK2-PAGE4 is more expanded and resembles a random coil with diminished affinity for AP-1. Taken together, the results suggest that the phosphorylation-induced conformational dynamics of PAGE4 may play a role in modulating changes between PCa cell phenotypes. A mathematical model based on our experimental data demonstrates how differential phosphorylation of PAGE4 can lead to transitions between androgen-dependent and androgen-independent phenotypes by altering the AP-1/androgen receptor regulatory circuit in PCa cells.intrinsic disorder | androgen resistance | prostate cancer | PAGE-4 | phenotypic heterogeneity C ontrary to conventional wisdom that structure defines protein function (1), it is now increasingly evident that a large fraction of the human proteome is composed of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) lacking rigid 3D structure (2-4). IDPs exist as conformational ensembles that are highly malleable, facilitating their interactions with multiple partners. These interactions are "wired" to form scale-free networks (5, 6) that represent the main conduit of information flow in the cell. Furthermore, the organization and properties of such protein interaction networks are evolutionarily conserved, underscoring their functional significance (7).By occupying hub positions in such networks, IDPs play critical roles in many biological processes, such as transcription, translation, and signaling (8, 9). IDPs also participate in higher order phenomena, such as regulation of the cell division cycle (10-12), circadian rhythmicity (13, 14), and phenotypic plasticity (15, 16). Recent evidence suggests that several IDPs can act in a prion-like manner to create protein-based molecular memories that drive the emergence and inheritance of biological traits (17), furt...

MutS homologs identify base-pairing errors made in DNA during replication and initiate their repair. In the presence of adenosine triphosphate, MutS induces DNA bending upon mismatch recognition and subsequently undergoes conformational transitions that promote its interaction with MutL to signal repair. In the absence of MutL, these transitions lead to formation of a MutS mobile clamp that can move along the DNA. Previous single-molecule FRET (smFRET) studies characterized the dynamics of MutS DNA-binding domains during these transitions. Here, we use protein–DNA and DNA–DNA smFRET to monitor DNA conformational changes, and we use kinetic analyses to correlate DNA and protein conformational changes to one another and to the steps on the pathway to mobile clamp formation. The results reveal multiple sequential structural changes in both MutS and DNA, and they suggest that DNA dynamics play a critical role in the formation of the MutS mobile clamp. Taking these findings together with data from our previous studies, we propose a unified model of coordinated MutS and DNA conformational changes wherein initiation of mismatch repair is governed by a balance of DNA bending/unbending energetics and MutS conformational changes coupled to its nucleotide binding properties.

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) corrects errors that occur during DNA replication. In humans, mutations in the proteins MutSα and MutLα that initiate MMR cause Lynch syndrome, the most common hereditary cancer. MutSα surveilles the DNA, and upon recognition of a replication error it undergoes adenosine triphosphate-dependent conformational changes and recruits MutLα. Subsequently, proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) activates MutLα to nick the error-containing strand to allow excision and resynthesis. The structure–function properties of these obligate MutSα–MutLα complexes remain mostly unexplored in higher eukaryotes, and models are predominately based on studies of prokaryotic proteins. Here, we utilize atomic force microscopy (AFM) coupled with other methods to reveal time- and concentration-dependent stoichiometries and conformations of assembling human MutSα–MutLα–DNA complexes. We find that they assemble into multimeric complexes comprising three to eight proteins around a mismatch on DNA. On the timescale of a few minutes, these complexes rearrange, folding and compacting the DNA. These observations contrast with dominant models of MMR initiation that envision diffusive MutS–MutL complexes that move away from the mismatch. Our results suggest MutSα localizes MutLα near the mismatch and promotes DNA configurations that could enhance MMR efficiency by facilitating MutLα nicking the DNA at multiple sites around the mismatch. In addition, such complexes may also protect the mismatch region from nucleosome reassembly until repair occurs, and they could potentially remodel adjacent nucleosomes.

DNA mismatch repair (MMR), the guardian of the genome, commences when MutS identifies a mismatch and recruits MutL to nick the error-containing strand, allowing excision and DNA resynthesis. Dominant MMR models posit that after mismatch recognition, ATP converts MutS to a hydrolysis-independent, diffusive mobile clamp that no longer recognizes the mismatch. Little is known about the postrecognition MutS mobile clamp and its interactions with MutL. Two disparate frameworks have been proposed: One in which MutS–MutL complexes remain mobile on the DNA, and one in which MutL stops MutS movement. Here we use single-molecule FRET to follow the postrecognition states of MutS and the impact of MutL on its properties. In contrast to current thinking, we find that after the initial mobile clamp formation event, MutS undergoes frequent cycles of mismatch rebinding and mobile clamp reformation without releasing DNA. Notably, ATP hydrolysis is required to alter the conformation of MutS such that it can recognize the mismatch again instead of bypassing it; thus, ATP hydrolysis licenses the MutS mobile clamp to rebind the mismatch. Moreover, interaction with MutL can both trap MutS at the mismatch en route to mobile clamp formation and stop movement of the mobile clamp on DNA. MutS’s frequent rebinding of the mismatch, which increases its residence time in the vicinity of the mismatch, coupled with MutL’s ability to trap MutS, should increase the probability that MutS–MutL MMR initiation complexes localize near the mismatch.