Journal of Biochemistry and Cell Biology
Open Access

Structural biology; X-ray crystallography; Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR); Cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM); Small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS); Biomolecular interactions

Introduction

Structural biology is a branch of molecular biology that focuses on determining the molecular structures of biological macromolecules [1-4]. The structural arrangement of these macromolecules dictates their function within living systems, influencing processes ranging from enzyme catalysis to gene expression regulation. To gain insights into these structures, scientists rely on biophysical techniques that enable the visualization of molecules at atomic resolution. These techniques have evolved to overcome the challenges posed by the inherent complexity, size, and flexibility of biological molecules. Historically, X-ray crystallography and NMR spectroscopy were the cornerstone techniques for studying macromolecular structures [5]. In recent years, however, advances in cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) have significantly altered the landscape of structural biology, particularly for large, flexible, or membrane-bound proteins that are difficult to analyze using traditional methods. Alongside these established techniques, methods like small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) and solid-state NMR continue to contribute valuable information, particularly for studying dynamic systems in solution or on membrane surfaces [6]. This manuscript discusses these advanced techniques in detail, emphasizing their individual capabilities, the challenges they address, and how they contribute to our understanding of biomolecular structure and function. The integration of multiple techniques has become crucial for tackling complex biological questions, and we conclude by discussing the future of structural biology in light of these advancements.

Results and Discussion

X-ray crystallography remains one of the most widely used methods for determining the atomic structure of macromolecules [7]. The technique involves crystallizing the target molecule, which is then bombarded with X-rays. The diffraction pattern produced is analyzed to create an electron density map, from which the atomic positions of the molecule are derived. This method is particularly well-suited for small- to medium-sized proteins and nucleic acids, provided high-quality crystals can be obtained. X-ray crystallography has been instrumental in solving the structures of numerous enzymes, antibodies, and viral proteins. It has also been key in drug design, where high-resolution structures are used to inform the development of small molecule inhibitors. Advances in synchrotron radiation sources and cryogenic techniques have improved the resolution and speed of data collection, pushing the boundaries of what can be achieved with this technique [8]. Obtaining high-quality crystals for large proteins or membrane proteins remains a significant challenge. Furthermore, X-ray crystallography provides static, averaged structural data, making it difficult to capture conformational flexibility and dynamic processes in solution. Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy involves the interaction of atomic nuclei with a magnetic field. The technique provides information on the local environment, connectivity, and dynamics of atoms within a molecule, making it invaluable for studying the structure and dynamics of proteins, nucleic acids, and small molecules in solution. Through the use of two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) NMR experiments, researchers can extract detailed structural and dynamic information about biomolecules in their native, flexible forms.

NMR is particularly effective for studying smaller proteins and complexes (up to approximately 50 kDa), where it can reveal detailed structural information as well as conformational changes and molecular dynamics. NMR has also been used extensively in the study of protein-ligand interactions, folding pathways, and allosteric regulation. The primary limitation of NMR is the size of the molecule; large proteins or complexes with molecular weights over 50 kDa become challenging to study due to the increasing complexity of the NMR spectra. Additionally, NMR requires relatively large quantities of sample and is less effective for studying proteins in non-aqueous environments, such as membranes. Cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) has emerged as a transformative tool for structural biology, enabling the study of large and flexible biomolecular complexes in a near-native state. Unlike traditional electron microscopy, cryo-EM involves rapidly freezing biological samples to preserve their structure in solution, thus avoiding the artifacts introduced by dehydration or staining. The resulting images are reconstructed into high-resolution 3D models using computational techniques, allowing researchers to visualize macromolecular structures at near-atomic resolution. Cryo-EM is particularly powerful for studying large protein complexes, molecular machines, and membrane proteins biomolecules that are difficult to study using X-ray crystallography or NMR [9]. Recent breakthroughs in cryo-EM have enabled the determination of the structures of viral capsids, ribosomes, and ATPases, among others. Additionally, cryo-EM's ability to study heterogeneous populations and conformational dynamics makes it indispensable in understanding biomolecular mechanisms. While cryo-EM has made significant strides, it is still limited by the resolution achievable for certain types of samples. Cryo-EM is also heavily dependent on sample quality and the availability of high-powered electron microscopes. Furthermore, although cryo-EM can reveal high-resolution structures, it typically lacks the level of detailed atomic-level information that X-ray crystallography or NMR can provide.

Small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) is a technique that provides information on the overall shape, size, and conformational flexibility of macromolecules in solution. SAXS measures the scattering of X-rays by a sample at low angles, providing data that can be used to model the low-resolution shape of the molecule. SAXS is especially useful for studying biomolecules in their native environment, without the need for crystallization or labeling. SAXS is valuable for studying flexible, large, or asymmetric biomolecular complexes, such as protein-protein interactions, protein folding, and molecular assemblies. It is particularly helpful in combination with other techniques (such as NMR, cryo-EM, or X-ray crystallography) to provide complementary low-resolution structural information. SAXS provides only low-resolution information (typically in the range of 10-30 Å), which means it cannot resolve atomic details [10]. However, it is excellent for obtaining information on the overall shape and conformational changes of macromolecules. In recent years, researchers have increasingly adopted an integrative approach to structural biology, combining multiple biophysical techniques to overcome individual limitations. For example, X-ray crystallography can provide high-resolution structural data, while cryo-EM can be used to analyze large complexes and SAXS can offer insights into conformational changes in solution. By combining these methods, researchers can gain a more comprehensive understanding of biomolecular function and dynamics. In drug discovery, for instance, the combination of NMR, cryo-EM, and SAXS allows for the detailed study of protein-ligand interactions, while simultaneously offering insights into the conformational flexibility and structural changes induced by binding. This integrative approach is especially valuable for developing therapeutic agents targeting complex macromolecular systems, such as multi-subunit proteins and membrane-bound receptors.

Conclusion

Advanced biophysical techniques have reshaped the landscape of structural biology, enabling unprecedented insights into the atomic-level architecture and dynamics of biomolecules. X-ray crystallography, NMR, cryo-EM, and SAXS each provide unique and complementary information that contributes to a more holistic understanding of molecular structure and function. As these techniques continue to evolve and become more integrated, they will play an even greater role in advancing our understanding of biology, disease mechanisms, and therapeutic development.

Acknowledgement

None

Conflict of Interest

None

References

1. Cross FR (2020) Regulation of multiple fission and cell-cycle-dependent gene expression by CDKA1 and the Rb-E2F pathway in Chlamydomonas. Curr Biol 3010: 1855-2654.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Demidenko ZN, Blagosklonny MV (2008) Growth stimulation leads to cellular senescence when the cell cycle is blocked. Cell Cycle 721:335-561.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Curran S, Dey G, Rees P, Nurse P (2022) A quantitative and spatial analysis of cell cycle regulators during the fission yeast cycle. bioRxiv 48: 81-127.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Dannenberg JH, Rossum A, Schuijff L, Riele H (2000) Ablation of the retinoblastoma gene family deregulates G1 control causing immortalization and increased cell turnover under growth-restricting conditions. Genes Dev 1423:3051-3064.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Dolfi SC, Chan LL-Y, Qiu J, Tedeschi PM, Bertino JR, et al. (2013) The metabolic demands of cancer cells are coupled to their size and protein synthesis rates. Cancer Metab 1: 20-29.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Bastajian N, Friesen H, Andrews BJ (2013) Bck2 acts through the MADS box protein Mcm1 to activate cell-cycle-regulated genes in budding yeast. PLOS Genet 95:100-3507.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Venkova L, Recho P, Lagomarsino MC, Piel M (2019) The physics of cell-size regulation across timescales. Nat Phys 1510: 993-1004.

Google Scholar

8. Campos M, Surovtsev IV, Kato S, Paintdakhi A, Beltran B, et al. (2014) A constant size extension drives bacterial cell size homeostasis. Cell 1596: 1433-1446.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Chen Y, Zhao G, Zahumensky J, Honey S, Futcher B, et al. (2020) Differential scaling of gene expression with cell size may explain size control in budding yeast. Mol Cell 782: 359-706.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Cockcroff C, den Boer BGW, Healy JMS, Murray JAH (2000) Cyclin D control of growth rate in plants. Nature 405: 575-679.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref