Robust model-based analysis of single-particle tracking experiments with Spot-On

  1. Anders S Hansen  Is a corresponding author
  2. Maxime Woringer
  3. Jonathan B Grimm
  4. Luke D Lavis
  5. Robert Tjian  Is a corresponding author
  6. Xavier Darzacq  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California, Berkeley, United States
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States

Abstract

Single-particle tracking (SPT) has become an important method to bridge biochemistry and cell biology since it allows direct observation of protein binding and diffusion dynamics in live cells. However, accurately inferring information from SPT studies is challenging due to biases in both data analysis and experimental design. To address analysis bias, we introduce 'Spot-On', an intuitive web-interface. Spot-On implements a kinetic modeling framework that accounts for known biases, including molecules moving out-of-focus, and robustly infers diffusion constants and subpopulations from pooled single-molecule trajectories. To minimize inherent experimental biases, we implement and validate stroboscopic photo-activation SPT (spaSPT), which minimizes motion-blur bias and tracking errors. We validate Spot-On using experimentally realistic simulations and show that Spot-On outperforms other methods. We then apply Spot-On to spaSPT data from live mammalian cells spanning a wide range of nuclear dynamics and demonstrate that Spot-On consistently and robustly infers subpopulation fractions and diffusion constants.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Anders S Hansen

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    For correspondence
    anders.sejr.hansen@berkeley.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Maxime Woringer

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2581-9808
  3. Jonathan B Grimm

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    Jonathan B Grimm, has filed patent applications (e.g. PCT/US2015/023953) whose value may be affected by this publication.
  4. Luke D Lavis

    Janelia Farm Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    Luke D Lavis, has filed patent applications (e.g. PCT/US2015/023953) whose value may be affected by this publication.
  5. Robert Tjian

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    For correspondence
    jmlim@berkeley.edu
    Competing interests
    Robert Tjian, One of the three founding funders of eLife and a member of eLife's Board of Directors.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0539-8217
  6. Xavier Darzacq

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    For correspondence
    darzacq@berkeley.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2537-8395

Funding

National Institutes of Health (UO1-EB021236)

  • Xavier Darzacq

National Institutes of Health (U54-DK107980)

  • Xavier Darzacq

California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (LA1-08013)

  • Xavier Darzacq

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (3061)

  • Robert Tjian

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Luke D Lavis

Siebel Stem Cell Institute

  • Anders S Hansen

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2018, Hansen et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 14,636
    views
  • 1,641
    downloads
  • 266
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Anders S Hansen
  2. Maxime Woringer
  3. Jonathan B Grimm
  4. Luke D Lavis
  5. Robert Tjian
  6. Xavier Darzacq
(2018)
Robust model-based analysis of single-particle tracking experiments with Spot-On
eLife 7:e33125.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33125

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33125

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Christopher T Schafer, Raymond F Pauszek III ... David P Millar
    Research Article

    The canonical chemokine receptor CXCR4 and atypical receptor ACKR3 both respond to CXCL12 but induce different effector responses to regulate cell migration. While CXCR4 couples to G proteins and directly promotes cell migration, ACKR3 is G-protein-independent and scavenges CXCL12 to regulate extracellular chemokine levels and maintain CXCR4 responsiveness, thereby indirectly influencing migration. The receptors also have distinct activation requirements. CXCR4 only responds to wild-type CXCL12 and is sensitive to mutation of the chemokine. By contrast, ACKR3 recruits GPCR kinases (GRKs) and β-arrestins and promiscuously responds to CXCL12, CXCL12 variants, other peptides and proteins, and is relatively insensitive to mutation. To investigate the role of conformational dynamics in the distinct pharmacological behaviors of CXCR4 and ACKR3, we employed single-molecule FRET to track discrete conformational states of the receptors in real-time. The data revealed that apo-CXCR4 preferentially populates a high-FRET inactive state, while apo-ACKR3 shows little conformational preference and high transition probabilities among multiple inactive, intermediate and active conformations, consistent with its propensity for activation. Multiple active-like ACKR3 conformations are populated in response to agonists, compared to the single CXCR4 active-state. This and the markedly different conformational landscapes of the receptors suggest that activation of ACKR3 may be achieved by a broader distribution of conformational states than CXCR4. Much of the conformational heterogeneity of ACKR3 is linked to a single residue that differs between ACKR3 and CXCR4. The dynamic properties of ACKR3 may underly its inability to form productive interactions with G proteins that would drive canonical GPCR signaling.

    1. Immunology and Inflammation
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Ana Cristina Chang-Gonzalez, Aoi Akitsu ... Wonmuk Hwang
    Research Advance

    Increasing evidence suggests that mechanical load on the αβ T-cell receptor (TCR) is crucial for recognizing the antigenic peptide-bound major histocompatibility complex (pMHC) molecule. Our recent all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations revealed that the inter-domain motion of the TCR is responsible for the load-induced catch bond behavior of the TCR-pMHC complex and peptide discrimination (Chang-Gonzalez et al., 2024). To further examine the generality of the mechanism, we perform all-atom MD simulations of the B7 TCR under different conditions for comparison with our previous simulations of the A6 TCR. The two TCRs recognize the same pMHC and have similar interfaces with pMHC in crystal structures. We find that the B7 TCR-pMHC interface stabilizes under ∼15 pN load using a conserved dynamic allostery mechanism that involves the asymmetric motion of the TCR chassis. However, despite forming comparable contacts with pMHC as A6 in the crystal structure, B7 has fewer high-occupancy contacts with pMHC and exhibits higher mechanical compliance during the simulation. These results indicate that the dynamic allostery common to the TCRαβ chassis can amplify slight differences in interfacial contacts into distinctive mechanical responses and nuanced biological outcomes.