Abstract
A key component of efforts to address the reproducibility crisis in biomedical research is the development of rigorously validated and renewable protein-affinity reagents. As part of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) Protein Capture Reagents Program (PCRP), we have generated a collection of 1,406 highly validated immunoprecipitation- and/or immunoblotting-grade mouse monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to 737 human transcription factors, using an integrated production and validation pipeline. We used HuProt human protein microarrays as a primary validation tool to identify mAbs with high specificity for their cognate targets. We further validated PCRP mAbs by means of multiple experimental applications, including immunoprecipitation, immunoblotting, chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by sequencing (ChIP-seq), and immunohistochemistry. We also conducted a meta-analysis that identified critical variables that contribute to the generation of high-quality mAbs. All validation data, protocols, and links to PCRP mAb suppliers are available at http://proteincapture.org.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Accession codes
References
Bradbury, A. & Plückthun, A. Reproducibility: standardize antibodies used in research. Nature 518, 27–29 (2015).
Weller, M.G. Quality issues of research antibodies. Anal. Chem. Insights 11, 21–27 (2016).
Pauly, D. & Hanack, K. How to avoid pitfalls in antibody use. F1000Res. 4, 691 (2015).
Bordeaux, J. et al. Antibody validation. Biotechniques 48, 197–209 (2010).
Saper, C.B. & Sawchenko, P.E. Magic peptides, magic antibodies: guidelines for appropriate controls for immunohistochemistry. J. Comp. Neurol. 465, 161–163 (2003).
Schonbrunn, A. Antibody can get it right: confronting problems of antibody specificity and irreproducibility. Mol. Endocrinol. 28, 1403–1407 (2014).
Hornsby, M. et al. A high through-put platform for recombinant antibodies to folded proteins. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 14, 2833–2847 (2015).
Marcon, E. et al. Assessment of a method to characterize antibody selectivity and specificity for use in immunoprecipitation. Nat. Methods 12, 725–731 (2015).
Na, H. et al. A high-throughput pipeline for the production of synthetic antibodies for analysis of ribonucleoprotein complexes. RNA 22, 636–655 (2016).
Rhodes, K.J. & Trimmer, J.S. Antibodies as valuable neuroscience research tools versus reagents of mass distraction. J. Neurosci. 26, 8017–8020 (2006).
Uhlén, M. et al. Tissue-based map of the human proteome. Science 347, 1260419 (2015).
Blackshaw, S. et al. The NIH Protein Capture Reagents Program (PCRP): a standardized protein affinity reagent toolbox. Nat. Methods 13, 805–806 (2016).
Jeong, J.S. et al. Rapid identification of monospecific monoclonal antibodies using a human proteome microarray. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 11, O111.016253 (2012).
Hu, C.J. et al. Identification of new autoantigens for primary biliary cirrhosis using human proteome microarrays. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 11, 669–680 (2012).
Hu, S. et al. DNA methylation presents distinct binding sites for human transcription factors. eLife 2, e00726 (2013).
Hu, S. et al. Profiling the human protein-DNA interactome reveals ERK2 as a transcriptional repressor of interferon signaling. Cell 139, 610–622 (2009).
Newman, R.H. et al. Construction of human activity-based phosphorylation networks. Mol. Syst. Biol. 9, 655 (2013).
Cox, E. et al. Identification of SUMO E3 ligase-specific substrates using the HuProt human proteome microarray. Methods Mol. Biol. 1295, 455–463 (2015).
Uzoma, I. et al. Global identification of SUMO substrates reveals crosstalk between SUMOylation and phosphorylation promotes cell migration. Mol. Cell. Proteomics https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.RA117.000014 (2018).
Chu, C. et al. Systematic discovery of Xist RNA binding proteins. Cell 161, 404–416 (2015).
McHugh, C.A. et al. The Xist lncRNA interacts directly with SHARP to silence transcription through HDAC3. Nature 521, 232–236 (2015).
Vaquerizas, J.M., Kummerfeld, S.K., Teichmann, S.A. & Luscombe, N.M. A census of human transcription factors: function, expression and evolution. Nat. Rev. Genet. 10, 252–263 (2009).
Greenspan, N.S. Cohen's Conjecture, Howard's Hypothesis, and Ptashne's Ptruth: an exploration of the relationship between affinity and specificity. Trends Immunol. 31, 138–143 (2010).
Steward, M.W. & Lew, A.M. The importance of antibody affinity in the performance of immunoassays for antibody. J. Immunol. Methods 78, 173–190 (1985).
Abdiche, Y., Malashock, D., Pinkerton, A. & Pons, J. Determining kinetics and affinities of protein interactions using a parallel real-time label-free biosensor, the Octet. Anal. Biochem. 377, 209–217 (2008).
Mita, P. et al. Fluorescence ImmunoPrecipitation (FLIP): a novel assay for high-throughput IP. Biol. Proced. Online 18, 16 (2016).
de Melo, J. et al. Lhx2 is an essential factor for retinal gliogenesis and Notch signaling. J. Neurosci. 36, 2391–2405 (2016).
Harlow, E. & Lane, D. Using Antibodies: A Laboratory Manual (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 1998).
Roncador, G. et al. The European antibody network's practical guide to finding and validating suitable antibodies for research. MAbs 8, 27–36 (2016).
Uhlen, M. et al. A proposal for validation of antibodies. Nat. Methods 13, 823–827 (2016).
Zhu, H. et al. Global analysis of protein activities using proteome chips. Science 293, 2101–2105 (2001).
Rapicavoli, N.A., Poth, E.M., Zhu, H. & Blackshaw, S. The long noncoding RNA Six3OS acts in trans to regulate retinal development by modulating Six3 activity. Neural Dev. 6, 32 (2011).
Taylor, M.S. et al. Affinity proteomics reveals human host factors implicated in discrete stages of LINE-1 retrotransposition. Cell 155, 1034–1048 (2013).
Dai, L., Taylor, M.S., O'Donnell, K.A. & Boeke, J.D. Poly(A) binding protein C1 is essential for efficient L1 retrotransposition and affects L1 RNP formation. Mol. Cell. Biol. 32, 4323–4336 (2012).
Longo, P.A., Kavran, J.M., Kim, M.S. & Leahy, D.J. Transient mammalian cell transfection with polyethylenimine (PEI). Methods Enzymol. 529, 227–240 (2013).
de Melo, J. et al. Injury-independent induction of reactive gliosis in retina by loss of function of the LIM homeodomain transcription factor Lhx2. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 4657–4662 (2012).
Lee, D.A. et al. Tanycytes of the hypothalamic median eminence form a diet-responsive neurogenic niche. Nat. Neurosci. 15, 700–702 (2012).
Edgar, R., Domrachev, M. & Lash, A.E. Gene Expression Omnibus: NCBI gene expression and hybridization array data repository. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 207–210 (2002).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the NIH Common Fund (awards U54HG006434 (to J.D.B., S.B., and H.Z.) and U01DC011485 (to S.A. and G.T.M.)). Cy5-UTP-incorporated cRNA probes of Xist produced by T7-directed transcription were a kind gift from E. Lander's lab (MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.V., M.M., P.M., Z.K., L.X., Y.L., D.G., S.L., P.R., S.H., D.B.K., H. Zhang, F.P.-B., G.S., E.A., L.A., L.R., L.L., G.M., J.R., K.R., R.A., L.N., K.M., I.V., Z.A.R.-P., C.R., M.V., J.M., B.S.C., S.Y., S.G.K., J.d.M., M.S., L.J., B.J., A.T. and E.C. performed experimental work. R.S. and S.C. performed independent validation of PCRP mAbs. K.Y., J.I. and S.K. designed algorithms and implemented software. W.Y.Y., S.A., G.T.M., R.M.M., J.D.B., D.F., G.W., D.J.E., J.S.B., I.P., H. Zhu and S.B. contributed expertise and supervision. All authors contributed to manuscript preparation.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
S.B., H. Zhu, I.P., D.J.E., and J.D.B. are cofounders and shareholders of CDI Labs Inc. J.I., P.R., D.B.K., E.A., L.A., L.R., L.L., G.M., J.R., K.R., R.A., L.N., K.M., I.V., Z.A.R.-P., C.R., M.V., and W.Y.Y. are employees of CDI Labs Inc. A.V. and J.D.B. are consultants to CDI Labs Inc. J.D.B. serves on the Board of Directors of CDI Labs, and J.D.B.'s relationship with CDI Labs is managed by NYU Langone Health's committee on conflicts of interest. B.J. is an employee of NeoBiotechnologies, Inc. A.T. is the founder and sole owner of NeoBiotechnologies, Inc. G.T.M. is founder and shareholder of Nexomics Biosciences, Inc.
Integrated supplementary information
Supplementary Figure 1 HuProt proteins are in native conformation.
HuProt proteins are in native conformation. (a) Categories of proteins based on GO annotation as represented on HuProt compared to the entire human proteome as per Uniprot. (b) Top panels. Anti-ACO2 6D1BE4 mAb (Catalog #ab110320, Abcam), which recognizes a conformational specific epitope, tested for target binding on a native HuProt (left) and HuProt denatured with 9M Urea and 5 mM DTT (right). Bottom panels. Anti-SMAD4 mAb (CDI Labs, #R516.2.1G11), which recognizes a linear epitope, tested for target binding on native HuProt (left) and denatured HuProt (right). Data shown here is representative of three independent technical replicates. (c,d) A conformation-specific anti-GST antibody (CDI Labs, #27.3.6G8) tested for binding to GST-tagged proteins on the native HuProt (c, top) and denatured HuProt (c, bottom).(d) Scatter plot of signal intensity measured with the conformation-specific anti-GST antibody (CDI Labs, #27.3.6G8) in native versus denatured HuProt (e) Micrographs representing the HuProt signal observed for known Xist interaction partner (HNRNPC) and potential new partners identified in our screen (RBM46 and ELAVL2). (f) Scatter plot of signal intensity measured with Xist probe on native HuProt versus a denatured HuProt.
Supplementary Figure 2 Competitive IP analysis.
Commercially sourced antibodies when tested on HuProt exhibit interactions with targets other than the intended target. These antibodies also interact with the off-targets in a competitive immunoprecipitation experiment. Rank, z and S-score for off-targets represented here are indicated in Table S5. Antibodies tested are as follows: (a,b) Novus Biological anti-RELA (catalog# NB100-56055, lot# AB071609E) and PCRP anti-RELA (#YP268.1.2B6). (c) Santa Cruz Biotechnology anti-FOSL1 (Catalog# SC-28310, Lot# I1415) and PCRP anti-FOSL1 (clone ID# R1024.1.1G1). (d,e) Cell Signaling Technologies anti-FOSL1 (Catalog#5281, Lot#2) and PCRP anti-FOSL1 (#R1024.1.1G1). (f) Abgent anti-USF2 (Catalog# AT4478a, Lot# 11189) and PCRP anti-USF2 (clone ID# R1156.1.1A7). (g) LifeSpan Biotechnology anti-ZEB2 (Catalog# LS-C175748, Lot# 51937). * indicated in the immunoblots refer to unidentified off-targets detected by the commercial mAbs.
Supplementary Figure 3 IHC staining of paraffin-embedded human tissue.
IHC staining using clinical gold standard for diagnosing cancer in (a) colon (anti-P53, clone ID# BP53-12, NeoBiotechnologies), (b) pancreas (anti-SOX9, clone ID# 3B10.1F9, NeoBiotechnologies) and (c) colon (anti-CDX2, Clone ID #1690, NeoBiotechnologies). IHC staining using PCRP mAbs graded as true positive by certified clinical pathologist in cancerous tissue of (d) colon (anti-P53, clone ID# JH66.2.2A10), (e) pancreas (anti-SOX9, clone ID# YP73.1.1A2) and (f) colon (anti-CDX2, clone ID #R1435.1.1A3). IHC staining with anti-CDX2 (clone ID# R1435.1.1A3) shows no detectable signal in human cancer tissue from (g) liver,(h) skeletal-muscle, (i) prostate, (j) ovary, (k) skin and (l) lungs. IHC staining with anti-STAT3 (clone ID# R1231.1.2F12) allows detection of this nearly ubiquitously expressed target in human cancers of the (m) colon, (n) kidney, (o) lung, (p) ovary and (q) uterus. (r) IHC staining with anti-STAT3 (clone ID# R1231.1.2F12) exhibits no discernible signal in human skeletal muscle. Images are captured at 200x magnification.
Supplementary Figure 4 Full-length (FL) immunogens provide efficiencies comparable to those of domain antigens.
Key to the graphs represent abbreviations for mAb grouping using a single immunogen for immunization (see online methods for details). D-A-f.p. =Domain-All-footpad. F-F-f.p. = Full length-Full length- footpad (a) z-/S- score are higher in D-A-f.p. (n=174) versus the F-F-f.p (n=530) mAbs. Mean ± S.D.DAfp = 58.36 ± 79.18, nDFA=174; Mean ± S.DFFfp= 89.06 ± 32.05, nDDA=530. * and *** represents p=0.01 and 1.39E-06 respectively by Benjamini-Hochberg FDR (b) Comparing success rates of D-A-f.p. (n=33) and F-F-f.p (n=215) mAbs at different stages of the validation pipeline.
Supplementary Figure 5 Summary of HuProt+ mAbs.
HuProt+ mAbs that were tested and passed IP and/or IB by (a) mAbs (b) targets classified into target class.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Text and Figures
Supplementary Figures 1–5 and Supplementary Note 1
Supplementary Table 1
List of proteins recognized by the Xist probe on HuProt
Supplementary Table 2
List of approved targets for the PCRP project
Supplementary Table 3
List of recombinant domain antigens produced in E. coli
Supplementary Table 4
List of recombinant full-length proteins produced in yeast
Supplementary Table 5
List of commercially sourced mAbs and PCRP mAbs tested in a competitive IP protocol
Supplementary Table 6
Competitive IP analysis
Supplementary Table 7
List of mAbs that passed in ChIP-seq
Supplementary Table 8
List of all mAbs that passed HuProt, along with all recorded parameters
Supplementary Table 9
List of all targets in the approved target list with corresponding details on passing mAbs at different stages of the pipeline
Supplementary Table 10
List of all parameters and groups used in comparisons for the meta-analysis
Supplementary Table 11
Parametric comparisons and corresponding P values for mAbs generated by immunization with a single versus multiple antigens
Supplementary Table 12
Parametric comparisons and corresponding P values at the levels of targets
Supplementary Table 13
Parametric comparisons and corresponding P values for mAbs generated by intraperitoneal (i.p.) versus footpad (f.p.) immunization
Supplementary Table 14
Parametric comparisons and corresponding P values at the levels of targets
Supplementary Table 15
Parametric comparisons and corresponding P values between mAbs that recognize only their cognate immunized domain and those that recognize their intended full-length target on HuProt
Supplementary Table 16
Parametric comparisons and corresponding P values at the levels of targets
Supplementary Table 17
List of IB+ and IB− mAbs that were tested and the corresponding parameters measured for these mAbs on denatured HuProt
Supplementary Table 18
Summary of mAbs at different stages of the pipeline by target class/subclass
Supplementary Table 19
Summary and success rates of targets at different stages of the pipeline classified by target class/subclass
Supplementary Table 20
Summary of targets and success rates at different stages of the pipeline classified by type and route of immunization used to generate the mAbs
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Venkataraman, A., Yang, K., Irizarry, J. et al. A toolbox of immunoprecipitation-grade monoclonal antibodies to human transcription factors. Nat Methods 15, 330–338 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4632
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4632
This article is cited by
-
A fluid biomarker reveals loss of TDP-43 splicing repression in presymptomatic ALS–FTD
Nature Medicine (2024)
-
Redefining serological diagnostics with immunoaffinity proteomics
Clinical Proteomics (2023)
-
Identification of novel serological autoantibodies in Chinese prostate cancer patients using high-throughput protein arrays
Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy (2023)
-
The ETS transcription factor ETV6 constrains the transcriptional activity of EWS–FLI to promote Ewing sarcoma
Nature Cell Biology (2023)
-
Dual function NFI factors control fetal hemoglobin silencing in adult erythroid cells
Nature Genetics (2022)
