SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · PPR

Purification of recombinant α-Synuclein: a comparison of commonly used protocols

· 2020-05-15

DOI: 10.1101/2020.05.13.093286

Check source for accessPreprintOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

The insoluble aggregated form of the protein alpha-synuclein (aSyn) is associated with synucleinopathies, such as Parkinson’s Disease, therefore great effort is put into understanding why and how this initially soluble protein misfolds. The initial state of aSyn, e.g. presence of contaminants, adducts, oligomers or degradation products, can greatly influence the outcome of an assay, such as determining its aggregation kinetics. Here, we compare four commonly used protocols for the isolation of recombinant aSyn from E. coli by boiling, acid precipitation, ammonium sulphate precipitation and periplasmic lysis followed by ion exchange chromatography and gel filtration. We identified, using non-denaturing electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry of the differently extracted aSyn samples, that aSyn isolated by acid precipitation and periplasmic lysis yielded the highest percentage of monomer, 100% and 96.5% respectively. aSyn purity was again highest in samples isolated by acid precipitation and periplasmic lysis, yet aggregation assays displayed differences in the aggregation rate of aSyn isolated by all four methods. Highlights A rapid protocol; expression day one, two step purification day two. The periplasmic lysis-based protocol yielded 95% pure aSyn. Acid precipitation and periplasmic lysis-based protocols yielded the highest proportion of monomeric aSyn at 100% and 96.5%, respectively.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.