Back

Benchmarking cassette-based deep mutagenesis by Golden Gate assembly

Whitehead, T. A.; Daffern, N.; Baumer, Z. T.; Francino-Urdaniz, I. M.

2023-04-13 bioengineering
10.1101/2023.04.13.536781 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Protocols for the construction of large, deeply mutagenized protein encoding libraries via Golden Gate assembly of synthetic DNA cassettes employ disparate, system specific methodology. Here we benchmark a broadly applicable Golden Gate method for building user-defined libraries. We demonstrate that a 25 l reaction, using 40 fmol of input DNA, can generate a library on the order of 1x106 members and that reaction volume or input DNA concentration can be scaled up with no losses in transformation efficiency. Such libraries can be constructed from dsDNA cassettes generated either by degenerate oligonucleotides or oligo pools. We demonstrate its real-world effectiveness by building custom, user-defined libraries on the order of 104 to 107 unique protein encoding variants for two orthogonal protein engineering systems. We include a detailed protocol and provide several general-use destination vectors.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
ACS Synthetic Biology
● 287 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
30.5%
Similar papers in this journal
2
ACS Chemical Biology
● 167 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
8.7%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 26%
6.1%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Cell Systems
○ 201 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
5
Cell Reports Methods
○ 165 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Protein Science
○ 246 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.2%
7
Nature Methods
○ 385 papers in training set
Top 3%
4.0%
8
Synthetic Biology
◐ 24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
9
Nature Biotechnology
○ 172 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.4%
10
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.2%
11
Biotechnology and Bioengineering
○ 53 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
12
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 28%
1.7%
13
Biochemistry
● 148 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
14
The CRISPR Journal
○ 39 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
15
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.5%
16
Trends in Biotechnology
○ 12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.1%
17
Protein Engineering, Design and Selection
◐ 15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.1%
18
Nature Chemical Biology
○ 119 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
19
Cell Chemical Biology
○ 94 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
20
Metabolic Engineering
○ 75 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
21
Analytical Chemistry
● 218 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
RSC Chemical Biology
● 39 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
23
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 71%
0.6%
24
Cell Genomics
○ 172 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
25
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.