Article19 May 2009Open Access Targeted tandem affinity purification of PSD-95 recovers core postsynaptic complexes and schizophrenia susceptibility proteins Esperanza Fernández Esperanza Fernández Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Mark O Collins Mark O Collins Proteomic Mass Spectrometry, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Rachel T Uren Rachel T Uren Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Maksym V Kopanitsa Maksym V Kopanitsa Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Noboru H Komiyama Noboru H Komiyama Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Mike D R Croning Mike D R Croning Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Lysimachos Zografos Lysimachos Zografos School of Informatics, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, UK Search for more papers by this author J Douglas Armstrong J Douglas Armstrong School of Informatics, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, UK Search for more papers by this author Jyoti S Choudhary Jyoti S Choudhary Proteomic Mass Spectrometry, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Seth G N Grant Corresponding Author Seth G N Grant Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Esperanza Fernández Esperanza Fernández Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Mark O Collins Mark O Collins Proteomic Mass Spectrometry, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Rachel T Uren Rachel T Uren Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Maksym V Kopanitsa Maksym V Kopanitsa Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Noboru H Komiyama Noboru H Komiyama Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Mike D R Croning Mike D R Croning Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Lysimachos Zografos Lysimachos Zografos School of Informatics, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, UK Search for more papers by this author J Douglas Armstrong J Douglas Armstrong School of Informatics, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, UK Search for more papers by this author Jyoti S Choudhary Jyoti S Choudhary Proteomic Mass Spectrometry, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Seth G N Grant Corresponding Author Seth G N Grant Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK Search for more papers by this author Author Information Esperanza Fernández1, Mark O Collins2, Rachel T Uren1, Maksym V Kopanitsa1, Noboru H Komiyama1, Mike D R Croning1, Lysimachos Zografos3, J Douglas Armstrong3, Jyoti S Choudhary2 and Seth G N Grant 1 1Genes to Cognition Programme, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK 2Proteomic Mass Spectrometry, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK 3School of Informatics, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, UK *Corresponding author. Genes to Cognition Programme, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridgeshire CB10 1SA, UK. Tel.: +44 0 1223 494 908; Fax: +44 0 1223 494 919; Molecular Systems Biology (2009)5:269https://doi.org/10.1038/msb.2009.27 PDFDownload PDF of article text and main figures. ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions Figures & Info The molecular complexity of mammalian proteomes demands new methods for mapping the organization of multiprotein complexes. Here, we combine mouse genetics and proteomics to characterize synapse protein complexes and interaction networks. New tandem affinity purification (TAP) tags were fused to the carboxyl terminus of PSD-95 using gene targeting in mice. Homozygous mice showed no detectable abnormalities in PSD-95 expression, subcellular localization or synaptic electrophysiological function. Analysis of multiprotein complexes purified under native conditions by mass spectrometry defined known and new interactors: 118 proteins comprising crucial functional components of synapses, including glutamate receptors, K+ channels, scaffolding and signaling proteins, were recovered. Network clustering of protein interactions generated five connected clusters, with two clusters containing all the major ionotropic glutamate receptors and one cluster with voltage-dependent K+ channels. Annotation of clusters with human disease associations revealed that multiple disorders map to the network, with a significant correlation of schizophrenia within the glutamate receptor clusters. This targeted TAP tagging strategy is generally applicable to mammalian proteomics and systems biology approaches to disease. Synopsis Systems biology has the potential to explain physiological processes as emergent properties of sets of genes and proteins. Beyond simple cellular systems, the challenge of delivering systems biology into the intact and freely behaving animal will require new methods. Currently, the most widely used approach is immunoprecipitation of the target protein and its associate binding proteins. This method suffers from the drawbacks of single step purification strategies that include a high level of non-specific background proteins amongst other limitations. To overcome these limitations we demonstrate that the tandem affinity purification (TAP) technology originally developed in yeast (Rigaut et al, 1999), when combined with gene targeting, can be used to efficiently isolate highly specific complexes from mouse. The ‘targeted TAP tagging’ strategy combines the two major advantages of each system. The first advantage is that the insertion of two tags into the protein of interest allows two consecutive purification steps that facilitate the recovery of protein complexes with high confidence and decreases the recovery of non-specific proteins or weak interactors. The second advantage, conferred by targeting the endogenous gene, is that the tagged protein is expressed under its natural regulatory mechanisms. We have designed an endogenous TAP targeting strategy to isolate complexes from mouse brain excitatory synapses. The brain is the most complex organ from a cellular and molecular perspective and thus an ideal model to explore the TAP method. Post Synaptic Density 95 (PSD-95/Dlg4) is an adaptor protein comprised of PDZ, SH3 and GK domains and is expressed in the postsynaptic terminal of excitatory synapses where it organizes signaling from neurotransmitter receptors to downstream pathways (Kornau et al, 1995; Hunt et al, 1996; Tu et al, 1999; Husi et al, 2000; Nehring et al, 2000; Dosemeci et al, 2007; Carlisle et al, 2008). Mice carrying a knockout mutation in PSD-95 show it is essential for synaptic plasticity and a range of important behaviours (Migaud et al, 1998; El-Husseini et al, 2000; Beique et al, 2006). Here, a new TAP tag was fused to the carboxyl terminus of PSD-95 using gene targeting in mice. Homozygous mice showed no detectable abnormalities in PSD-95 expression, subcellular localization or synaptic electrophysiological function (Figure 2). As a result of four independent tandem purifications and mass spectrometry analysis, we were able to define PSD-95 core complexes with high sensitivity and reproducibility. The four purifications show an average of 125±19 proteins, having 118 proteins (94%) common in at least three of four replicates. This reproducibility rate is among the highest rate reported for systematic protein complex isolation. To further validate this interaction data we compared it to information from public datasets. Of the 118 proteins, 22% were proteins that directly bind PSD-95 and 18% were proteins not previously found in other PSD-95 analysis. All together, these data show robust reproducibility and sensitivity of this method for purifying synaptic complexes. These PSD-95 core complexes comprise key functional components of synapses including the glutamate neurotransmitter receptors, K+ channels, scaffolding and signaling proteins. These complexes contain ionotropic glutamate receptors of the NMDA, AMPA and kainate subtypes as well as major K+ channels that together are the major postsynaptic constituents responsible for synaptic transmission and shaping the postsynaptic electrophysiological response to presynaptic input (Watanabe et al, 2002; Chen et al, 2006; Kim et al, 2007). We believe that this is the first method that has allowed the robust copurification of these proteins. To explore functional organization using network models, we manually curated interactions (Pocklington et al, 2006) and the UniHi database (http://www.mdc-berlin.de/unihi) to identify 119 interactions between 50 proteins (excluding self-interactions) of the PSD-95 core complexes. Network clustering of the interacting proteins showed 40 out of the 50 proteins formed a large connected component (major connected component, MCC) and a modular structure that was segregated into 5 clusters referred to as cluster a (Cla) to cluster e (Cle) (Figure 5A). In addition to the 5 MCC clusters, 2 further disconnected clusters (‘Clf’ and ‘Clg’) were found. Of great interest is the location and proximity of the receptors and channels responsible for the postsynaptic depolarization and subsequent action potential generation. All NMDA, AMPA and kainate glutamate receptors were restricted to Cla and Clb and the voltage-dependent K+ channels were found in Cla and Clc (entirely comprised of K+ channels). It therefore appears that Cla, Clb and Clc are enriched with membrane proteins responsible for electrical properties of the postsynaptic terminal. The central role of PSD-95 was supported by calculation of the shortest path from each protein to every other protein and PSD-95 showed the lowest. Annotation of clusters with human disease associations revealed that multiple disorders map onto the network with a highly significant correlation of schizophrenia within the glutamate receptor clusters (P<10−6). 20 genes involved in schizophrenia were significantly associated with the clusters Cla and Clb that contains all the glutamate receptors and MAGUK/Dlg proteins (Figure 5B). Mapping the primary interactors of these schizophrenia proteins recruited many other proteins found in the other modules of the network. This suggests that the overall network and its different modules are a substrate for schizophrenia, and not simply the glutamate receptors, as was generally considered in the ‘glutamate hypothesis’ of schizophrenia (Greene, 2001; Coyle, 2006; Lisman et al, 2008). This targeted TAP tagging strategy is generally applicable to mammalian proteomics and systems biology approaches to disease. TAP tagged mice are a valuable resource and useful for a wide range of physiological studies and whole animal studies. Introduction Synapses are fundamental structural and functional units of the nervous system responsible for information processing. Their principal role is the transmission of electrical activity by the release of neurotransmitter from the presynaptic terminal onto postsynaptic receptors and ion channels. Postsynaptic ionotropic receptors initiate the postsynaptic depolarization that elicits action potential generation in the postsynaptic neuron. The second major role is the detection and processing of information contained in the patterns of electrical activity. This is achieved by the coupling of neurotransmitter receptors to second-messenger signaling pathways that modulate downstream effectors, ranging from modulation of ion channels themselves to structural changes and gene expression. In recent years, proteomic studies have revealed that mammalian synapses comprise up to 2000 proteins in the presynaptic and postsynaptic terminals (Husi et al, 2000; Walikonis et al, 2000; Husi and Grant, 2001; Sheng and Kim, 2002; Peng et al, 2004; Takamori et al, 2006; Trinidad et al, 2008). To understand the macromolecular organization of complexes and substructures, isolation of complexes by antibody, peptide and ligand affinity methods was used to recover smaller sets of proteins (Husi et al, 2000; Farr et al, 2004; Collins et al, 2006; Dosemeci et al, 2007; Klemmer et al, 2009; Paulo et al, 2009). These methods generally involve a single purification step, which is limited by the specificity of the affinity reagent and potentially recovers more contaminants than those with multiple steps. Furthermore, these protocols are not generally suitable for recovery of native complexes in solution, which could be used for enzymatic and structural studies. A potential solution to this major problem has been achieved in yeast through genetic modification of the endogenous protein by fusion with a Tandem Affinity Purification (TAP) tag into the C- or N-terminus of the protein of interest (Rigaut et al, 1999). This tagged protein can be isolated (with its associated proteins) in a tandem procedure, overcoming many of the inherent specificity and sensitivity limitations of traditional fractionation methods, as well as antibody, ligand and peptide affinity purification methods. In mammalian tissues, where developmental and cell-type control of regulation is more complex, the targeting of the TAP tag into the endogenous gene provides advantages over transgenic random integration or cDNA overexpression systems (Knuesel et al, 2003; Bouwmeester et al, 2004; Brajenovic et al, 2004; Drakas et al, 2005; Wang et al, 2005, 2006; Angrand et al, 2006; Burckstummer et al, 2006). For those reasons we chose to explore TAP tagging in mammals using gene targeting in mouse. Our first aim was to test TAP tagging using a gene-targeting approach in mice, with the specific objective of purifying signaling complexes from the synapse. We generated knockin mice in which TAP tags were inserted into the endogenous locus of post synaptic density-95 (PSD-95), which is one of the most abundant scaffold proteins at excitatory brain synapses (Nourry et al, 2003; Peng et al, 2004). PSD-95 is localized to the postsynaptic compartment in which it interacts with neurotransmitter receptors and ion channels to assemble signaling complexes (Kornau et al, 1995; Hunt et al, 1996; Tu et al, 1999; Husi et al, 2000; Nehring et al, 2000; Dosemeci et al, 2007) controlling neuronal plasticity (Migaud et al, 1998; Carlisle et al, 2008; Cuthbert et al, 2007) underlying learning and memory (Migaud et al, 1998), pain (Garry et al, 2003) and drug addiction (Yao et al, 2004). Our second aim was to integrate TAP tag proteomic data with systems biology approaches to analyze the organization and function of complexes. We show the first example of gene-targeted TAP tagging in mice and show that the tagging did not introduce a mutation or alter the expression or localization of the protein. Clear advantages of two-step purification methods over the existing single-step methods were found. Mass spectrometry analysis of four replicates of the purification revealed that PSD-95-associated complexes comprise the principal ionotropic glutamate receptors and K+ channels in addition to important signaling proteins. Text mining and systematic annotation together with clustering of proteins using protein interaction data revealed the network substructure with a core subnetwork involved in schizophrenia. Results A strategy for purification of in vivo multiprotein complexes We used a TAP tag consisting of a poly-histidine affinity tag (HAT) and a triple FLAG tag (Terpe, 2003) in tandem, separated by a unique TEV-protease cleavage site (Figure 1A). This 5-kDa tag is considerably smaller than the tag first applied in yeast (20 kDa) (Rigaut et al, 1999) and exploits the specificity of both FLAG and HAT-tag binding. Targeting the endogenous gene allows a thorough testing of the potential mutant phenotype by breeding to homozygosity and comparing with the existing mutant mice. Figure 1.Generation of Tandem Affinity Purification (TAP)-tagged PSD-95 knockin mice. (A) Domain structure of TAP modified PSD-95. PSD-95 domains, including three PDZ (PSD-95/discs large/zona occludens), a SH3 (Src homology 3), a GK (guanylate kinase) and C-terminal TAP-tag domain. Amino-acid sequence of the TAP tag comprising a histidine affinity tag (HAT)-domain (bold), a TEV site (underlined) and a 3XFLAG domain (bold) separated by a spacer. (B) Scheme of the targeted genomic PSD-95/Dlg4 locus. The Dlg4 allele was targeted with the TAP sequence inserted before the stop codon. Crossing the transgenic Cre-recombinase-expressing mice deleted the neomycin resistance cassette (neo) between loxP sites (bottom). Asterisk: stop codon of the coding sequence; black thick lane: TAP tag sequence; triangle: loxP site. (C) PCR genotyping of TAP-tagged PSD-95 mice, using a common forward primer PSD-95 F5 and two reverse primers PSD-95 R6 and pneoR4, which amplify the wild type (upper band) and targeted allele (lower band), respectively. (D) Immunoblot with PSD-95 antibody for immunoprecipitations. Three different heterozygous mice are shown (PSD-95TAP/+, left panel). PSD-95TAP/+ forebrain was also affinity purified with a FLAG antibody (right panel). (E) PSD-95 protein expression in wt and PSD-95TAP/TAP mouse forebrains. Brain lysates of 5, 10 and 15 μg were loaded and immunoblotted with antibodies against PSD-95 (upper panel) and tubulin (lower panel), which is a loading control. Wt, wild type; PSD-95TAP/TAP, homozygous TAP-tagged PSD-95 mice; c-, PCR water; IgG, mouse total IgG used as a negative control of the immunoprecipitation. Download figure Download PowerPoint Generation of a TAP-tagged PSD-95 knockin mouse line We chose to test TAP tagging in mice, with a focus on PSD-95 as a first model gene for the following reasons: (i) PSD-95 has discrete expression in the postsynaptic compartment of excitatory synapses of the brain, (ii) PSD-95 mutant mice are well characterized and show robust phenotypes in electrophysiological studies of synapses and behavior (Migaud et al, 1998; El-Husseini et al, 2000; Yao et al, 2004; Beique et al, 2006), and (iii) this protein has been extensively studied using methods that identify binary interaction partners (Kim and Sheng, 2004). PSD-95 is a scaffold protein with three PDZ domains, an SH3 and a guanylate kinase domain that mediate protein interactions (Figure 1A). As mouse PSD-95 is known to have multiple isoforms generated by multiple promoters and all forms utilize a common C-terminus (Bence et al, 2005), the TAP tag was inserted into the open reading frame in the 3′-end before the stop codon of exon 19, using Escherichia coli recombineering-based methods (Zhou et al, 2004) (Figure 1B). The final targeting vector, containing a 5′-end homology arm of 6.3 kb and a 3′-end homology arm of 2.9 kb, was transfected into ES cells and integration was detected using standard methods. PCR of neomycin-resistant ES-cell DNA confirmed the expected 3388 bp band in 16 clones (targeting efficiency was 5.6%), and germline transmission of the TAP-tag insertion was established (Figure 1C). This line of mice is referred to herein as PSD-95TAP. Normal expression and synaptic localization of TAP-tagged PSD-95 We first intercrossed PSD-95TAP heterozygous mice (PSD-95TAP/+) and found no distortion of transmission frequency in the offspring of PSD-95TAP/+ intercrosses (data not shown). We next examined protein expression of TAP-tagged PSD-95 to ensure that introduction of the tag into the gene did not affect the expression and localization of the tagged protein. The solubilization conditions used here have been reported as the best conditions to mostly purify N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors and PSD-95 from adult mouse brain (Husi and Grant, 2001). The forebrain tissue was solubilized from heterozygous (PSD-95TAP/+) mice and PSD-95 was immunoprecipitated and immunoblotted using an anti-PSD-95 antibody (Figure 1D). Two bands of similar intensity were observed, where the upper band corresponded to the TAP-tagged PSD-95 (confirmed by immunoprecipitation using anti-FLAG antibody, right panel) and the lower band to the endogenous PSD-95. Comparison of extracts (5, 10, 15 μg) from wild-type (wt) and homozygous (PSD-95TAP/TAP) mice showed similar amounts of PSD-95 on immunoblots compared with an internal control immunoblot using anti-tubulin antibody (Figure 1E). We next carried out immunohistochemistry with an anti-PSD-95 antibody on sagittal brain sections to examine the expression pattern of TAP-tagged PSD-95. As shown in Figure 2A, the expression pattern of PSD-95 in PSD-95TAP/TAP brain was the same as in the brains of wt animals, with the highest expression in the CA1 area, dentate gyrus, cortex, cerebellum and lower expression in striatum and brainstem (Figure 2A). There was no detectable abnormality of brain morphology in the PSD-95TAP/TAP mice. As shown in Figure 2B, the expression of PSD-95 in the hippocampal subfields was unaffected by the genetic manipulation and particularly in the stratum radiatum, where the electrophysiological experiments were carried out (described below), was normal. Figure 2.Analysis of TAP-tagged PSD-95 localization and synaptic plasticity in PSD-95TAP/TAP mice. (A) Immunohistochemical staining of PSD-95 in sagittal brain sections from PSD-95TAP/TAP and wt mice. B, brainstem; C, cortex; CB, cerebellum; H, hippocampus; S, striatum. Scale bar=1 mm. (B) Immunohistochemical staining of PSD-95 in sagittal hippocampus sections from PSD-95TAP/TAP and wt mice showing CA1, CA3 and dentate gyrus (DG). Scale bar=1 mm. (C) Synaptic localization of TAP-tagged PSD-95 in primary hippocampus neurons. DIV14 neurons from wt and PSD-95TAP/TAP mice were stained with PSD-95 and MAP2B antibodies (top panels). Three lower panel show PSD-95 and FLAG antibody staining in a culture from PSD-95TAP/TAP mice (bottom panels). Inset panels show higher magnification of synaptic puncta labeling with each antibody and merged image. Scale bar=10 μm. (D) Long-term potentiation of fEPSPs induced by theta-burst stimulation in CA1 area of hippocampal slices is similar in PSD-95TAP/TAP (13 slices from 4 animals) and wild-type mice (15 slices from 4 animals). Download figure Download PowerPoint To examine the synaptic localization of TAP-tagged PSD-95, we cultured embryonic hippocampal neurons from PSD-95TAP/TAP and wt mice. The specific subcellular localization of PSD-95 to the postsynaptic compartment of synapses (dendritic spines) was monitored using postsynaptic markers for glutamate neurotransmitter receptors (GluR1 or NR1), presynaptic marker (synaptophysin) and dendritic markers (MAP2) (Figure 2B and Supplementary Figure 1). Similar to PSD-95 staining in wt neurons, TAP-tagged PSD-95 was localized to punctate structures along the length of dendrites in PSD-95TAP/TAP neurons (Figure 2C, top panels). FLAG staining also shows the punctate structures in PSD-95TAP/TAP neurons (Figure 2C, bottom panels). Synaptophysin staining shows typical juxtaposition, indicating that TAP-tagged PSD-95 is found at synapses in PSD-95TAP/TAP neurons (Supplementary Figure 1, top panels). Furthermore, the co-localization of GluR1 and NR1 subunits with TAP-tagged PSD-95 (Supplementary Figure 1, middle and bottom panels, respectively) confirms its postsynaptic localization in the excitatory synapses, just as occurs for wt PSD-95. The TAP tag does not affect the synaptic electrophysiology Knockout mutations or overexpression of PSD-95 results in striking changes in synaptic physiology (Migaud et al, 1998; El-Husseini et al, 2000; Beique et al, 2006). In particular, long-term potentiation (LTP) of the excitatory synaptic transmission is greatly enhanced in PSD-95 knockout mice (Migaud et al, 1998; Komiyama et al, 2002; Beique et al, 2006). To determine whether TAP tagging of PSD-95 also altered the synaptic physiology, we studied short- and long-term plasticity in hippocampal slices of PSD-95TAP/TAP mice (Figure 2D). A short episode of theta-burst stimulation was used to induce LTP of field extracellular post-synaptic potentials (fEPSPs) in the CA1 area of the hippocampus. In the period of 60–65 min after theta-burst stimulation, amplitudes of fEPSPs in the test pathway normalized relative to control pathway were not different between PSD95TAP/TAP and wt mice (194±15% versus 176±8%; P=0.295) (Figure 2D). Likewise, paired-pulse facilitation, an established measure of short-term plasticity, was similar in wt and PSD-95TAP/TAP animals (Supplementary Figure 2), whereas it is known that this parameter is significantly enhanced in PSD-95 knockout mice (Migaud et al, 1998; Beique et al, 2006). Therefore, we conclude that the engineering of the TAP tag into PSD-95 using the knockin strategy has not altered the synaptic physiological function of PSD-95. Together, the physiological, biochemical, tissue and subcellular localization studies indicate that the presence of the TAP tag did not significantly alter the expression or function of PSD-95. Optimization of single-step and tandem affinity purification of PSD-95-associated complexes The following four-stage protocol for isolation of PSD-95 complexes was used (Figure 3A). First, TAP-tagged PSD-95 (from homozygous PSD-95TAP/TAP mice) was captured from brain extracts with an anti-FLAG antibody covalently coupled to Dynal beads. Second, the complex was eluted by cleavage with TEV protease completing the single step of purification. In the third stage, the complex was recovered from solution by Ni2+–NTA–agarose column that binds the HAT-tagged PSD-95. The fourth and final stage was the release of the PSD-95 complex from the column using imidazole, completing the tandem purification. Figure 3.Tandem affinity purification of PSD-95 complexes. (A) Overview of the TAP protocol. In the first step, the TAP-tagged PSD-95 was captured by FLAG antibody (1) and eluted by TEV cleavage (2). Cleaved TAP-tagged PSD-95 was then captured with Ni2+–NTA–agarose beads (3) and eluted with 250 mM imidazole (4). (B) TAP-tagged PSD-95 was affinity purified with FLAG antibody from forebrain extracts from PSD-95TAP/TAP (left panel) and wt (right panel) mice, then cleaved using TEV protease (TEV) and monitored using immunoblotting with a PSD-95 antibody. The eluted (El) and column retained PSD-95 (BB) are shown. TEV protease was added to the reaction as indicated (TEV) or to control without TEV (non-TEV). Input, total lysate; El, elution after TEV reaction; BB, beads boiled with Laemmli sample buffer after TEV cleavage. (C) HAT-tagged PSD-95 purification monitored using immunoblotting against PSD-95. Following TEV cleavage the eluate (TEV El) was incubated with Ni2+–NTA–agarose, washed and eluted by imidazole 250 mM and collected in 7 fractions. TEV, TEV elution before the Ni2+ column; SN, supernatant remaining after coupling to the Ni2+ column; 1–7, fractions recovered in the imidazole elution. BB, boiled Ni2+–agarose beads after elution. (D) TAP-tagged PSD-95 complex was affinity purified using FLAG antibody (single step, left gel) and tandem (two step, right panel) from wt and PSD-95TAP/TAP forebrain and resolved by SDS–PAGE stained with colloidal Coomasie stain. The lanes were cut for mass spectrometry analysis and the identified proteins listed in Supplementary Table 1. PSD-95 and the TEV enzyme are indicated in both gels. (E) Schematic representation of the total number (301) of proteins identified in the combined single and tandem purifications. In four independent tandem purifications, a total of 158 proteins were identified and 118 appeared in at least three of four replicates (PSD-95 core complexes). (F) Venn diagram with the number of proteins from either single or tandem purifications showing the common proteins (87) and proteins masked (71) in the single-step purification. Download figure Download PowerPoint We examined the efficiency of the different steps in this protocol by monitoring PSD-95. All the solubilized PSD-95 was captured by FLAG-Dynal beads and >90% was cleaved using TEV protease (Supplementary Figure 3A). In the absence of TEV, there was no spontaneous release of TAP-tagged PSD-95 during incubations (Figure 3B, lane 4, 5 Non-TEV, El lane). TEV incubation released 50–70% of cleaved PSD-95 (Figure 3B, lane 2, El) and 30–50% of cleaved PSD-95 remained on the beads (Figure 3B, lane 3, BB). TEV had efficiently cleaved the retained protein as the size of PSD-95 in the BB lane corresponded to cleaved TAP-tagged PSD-95, and moreover, was not recognized by anti-FLAG antibodies on immunoblotting (Supplementary Figure 3A, comparison of BB lanes). This partial retention of cleaved protein seems to be a protein-specific phenomenon as we have observed this with other proteins studied in a similar manner (data not shown). For other controls, as expected, the FLAG antibody did not precipitate PSD-95 from wt mouse forebrain (Figure 3B, right panel). The recovery of PSD-95 using a Ni2+–NTA–agarose column that binds the HAT-tagged PSD-95 was very efficient (>95%) (Figure 3C, lanes 2 and 3, TEV El, SN). Subsequent elution using imidazole was also highly efficient (>95%) (no detectable retained-PSD-95 in BB lane, Figure 3C). Overall, we estimate that