Back

Mapping the evolution of computationally designed protein binders

Alcantar, M. A.; Paulk, A. M.; Moradi, S.; Bhar, D.; Keller, G. L. J.; Sanyal, T.; Bai, H.; Camdere, G.; Han, S. J.; Jain, M.; Jew, B.; Vatansever Inak, S.; Langmead, C. J.; Tinberg, C. E.; Chen, I.; Liu, C. C.

2025-10-05 synthetic biology
10.1101/2025.10.04.680454 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Computational protein design enables the generation of binders that target specific epitopes on proteins. However, current approaches often require substantial screening from which hits require further affinity maturation. Methods for experimentally improving designed proteins and exploring their sequence-affinity landscapes could therefore streamline the development of high-affinity binders and inform future design strategies. Here, we use OrthoRep, a system for continuous hypermutation in vivo, to drive the evolution of computationally designed mini protein binders ("minibinders") that target a mammalian receptor. Despite their small sizes (59-72 amino acids), we successfully affinity matured multiple minibinders through strong selection for improved binding and also sampled new regions of minibinder fitness landscapes through extensive neutral drift. One evolved minibinder variant was used to construct a combinatorially complete sequence-affinity map for its six affinity increasing mutations, which revealed nearly full additivity in their contributions to binding. Another minibinder was subjected to both deep mutational scanning and extensive evolution under weak selection, resulting in an evolutionarily diverged collection of binder sequences that revealed non-additive relationships among mutations. Our results highlight that the affinity of computationally designed binders can be rapidly increased through evolution and provide a scalable approach for the evolutionary exploration and subsequent mapping of sequence-affinity landscapes. We suggest that this work will complement protein binder design both as a reliable experimental optimization process and as a vehicle for generating new training data.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Protein Engineering, Design and Selection
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.3%
2
ACS Synthetic Biology
256 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
9.9%
3
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 21%
9.0%
4
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 3%
4.8%
5
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.2%
6
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 20%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
Protein Science
221 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.9%
8
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
207 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
9
mAbs
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
10
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 11%
3.0%
11
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.4%
12
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.0%
13
Journal of Molecular Biology
217 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
Structure
175 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
15
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 35%
1.5%
16
Journal of the American Chemical Society
199 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
17
Chemical Science
71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
18
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 67%
1.2%
19
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 14%
1.1%
20
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.9%
21
ACS Omega
90 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
22
JACS Au
35 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
23
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.9%
24
Cell Genomics
162 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
25
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
82 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
26
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.7%
27
Synthetic Biology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
28
Communications Chemistry
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
29
Journal of Cheminformatics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
30
Nature Chemical Biology
104 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%