Abstract

Bioluminescence imaging (BLI) is ubiquitous in scientific research for the sensitive tracking of biological processes in small animal models. However, due to the attenuation of visible light by tissue, and the limited set of near-infrared bioluminescent enzymes, BLI is largely restricted to monitoring single processes in vivo. Here we show, that by combining stabilised colour mutants of firefly luciferase (FLuc) with the luciferin (LH2) analogue infraluciferin (iLH2), near-infrared dual BLI can be achievedin vivo. The X-ray crystal structure of FLuc with a high-energy intermediate analogue, 5'-O-[N-(dehydroinfraluciferyl)sulfamoyl] adenosine (iDLSA) provides insight into the FLuc-iLH2 reaction leading to near-infrared light emission. The spectral characterisation and unmixing validation studies reported here established that iLH2 is superior to LH2 for the spectral unmixing of bioluminescent signals in vivo; which led to this novel near-infrared dual BLI system being applied to monitor both tumour burden and CAR T cell therapy within a systemically induced mouse tumour model.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Raw image files are available on Dryad Digital repository, at doi:10.5061/dryad.3j9kd51cs.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Cassandra L Stowe

    Cancer Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Thomas A Burley

    Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Helen Allan

    Department of Chemistry, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Maria Vinci

    Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Gabriela Kramer-Marek

    Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Daniela M Ciobota

    Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Gary N Parkinson

    School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Tara L Southworth

    Department of Chemistry, Connecticut College, New London, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Giulia Agliardi

    Cancer Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Alastair Hotblack

    Cancer Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Mark F Lythgoe

    Centre for Advanced Biomedical Imaging, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Bruce R Branchini

    Department of Chemistry, Connecticut College, New London, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Tammy L Kalber

    Centre for Advanced Biomedical Imaging, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. James C Anderson

    Department of Chemistry, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    j.c.anderson@ucl.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8120-4125
  15. Martin A Pule

    Cancer Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    m.pule@ucl.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

National Science Foundation (MCB-1410390)

  • Tara L Southworth
  • Bruce R Branchini

Air Force Office of Scientific Research (FA9550-18-1-0017)

  • Tara L Southworth
  • Bruce R Branchini

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/L504889/1)

  • Helen Allan
  • James C Anderson

University College London

  • Helen Allan
  • James C Anderson

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council

  • Cassandra L Stowe

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal procedures were conducted in accordance with the Home Office Scientific Procedures Act (1986), within the guidelines of the relevant personal and project licences.

Copyright

© 2019, Stowe 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

  • 6,642
    views
  • 734
    downloads
  • 52
    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. Cassandra L Stowe
  2. Thomas A Burley
  3. Helen Allan
  4. Maria Vinci
  5. Gabriela Kramer-Marek
  6. Daniela M Ciobota
  7. Gary N Parkinson
  8. Tara L Southworth
  9. Giulia Agliardi
  10. Alastair Hotblack
  11. Mark F Lythgoe
  12. Bruce R Branchini
  13. Tammy L Kalber
  14. James C Anderson
  15. Martin A Pule
(2019)
Near-infrared dual bioluminescence imaging in mouse models of cancer using infraluciferin
eLife 8:e45801.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.45801

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.45801

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Mai Nguyen, Elda Bauda ... Cecile Morlot
    Research Article

    Teichoic acids (TA) are linear phospho-saccharidic polymers and important constituents of the cell envelope of Gram-positive bacteria, either bound to the peptidoglycan as wall teichoic acids (WTA) or to the membrane as lipoteichoic acids (LTA). The composition of TA varies greatly but the presence of both WTA and LTA is highly conserved, hinting at an underlying fundamental function that is distinct from their specific roles in diverse organisms. We report the observation of a periplasmic space in Streptococcus pneumoniae by cryo-electron microscopy of vitreous sections. The thickness and appearance of this region change upon deletion of genes involved in the attachment of TA, supporting their role in the maintenance of a periplasmic space in Gram-positive bacteria as a possible universal function. Consequences of these mutations were further examined by super-resolved microscopy, following metabolic labeling and fluorophore coupling by click chemistry. This novel labeling method also enabled in-gel analysis of cell fractions. With this approach, we were able to titrate the actual amount of TA per cell and to determine the ratio of WTA to LTA. In addition, we followed the change of TA length during growth phases, and discovered that a mutant devoid of LTA accumulates the membrane-bound polymerized TA precursor.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Shinichi Kawaguchi, Xin Xu ... Toshie Kai
    Research Article

    Protein–protein interactions are fundamental to understanding the molecular functions and regulation of proteins. Despite the availability of extensive databases, many interactions remain uncharacterized due to the labor-intensive nature of experimental validation. In this study, we utilized the AlphaFold2 program to predict interactions among proteins localized in the nuage, a germline-specific non-membrane organelle essential for piRNA biogenesis in Drosophila. We screened 20 nuage proteins for 1:1 interactions and predicted dimer structures. Among these, five represented novel interaction candidates. Three pairs, including Spn-E_Squ, were verified by co-immunoprecipitation. Disruption of the salt bridges at the Spn-E_Squ interface confirmed their functional importance, underscoring the predictive model’s accuracy. We extended our analysis to include interactions between three representative nuage components—Vas, Squ, and Tej—and approximately 430 oogenesis-related proteins. Co-immunoprecipitation verified interactions for three pairs: Mei-W68_Squ, CSN3_Squ, and Pka-C1_Tej. Furthermore, we screened the majority of Drosophila proteins (~12,000) for potential interaction with the Piwi protein, a central player in the piRNA pathway, identifying 164 pairs as potential binding partners. This in silico approach not only efficiently identifies potential interaction partners but also significantly bridges the gap by facilitating the integration of bioinformatics and experimental biology.