A Swiss Army Knife of Methods

Deciphering the structure, dynamics and interactions of non-canonical DNA

Eric Largy

ARNA, INSERM U1212, CNRS UMR 5320, Université de Bordeaux

UFR des Sciences Pharmaceutiques, Université de Bordeaux

May 12, 2026

Hello from Bordeaux

Conformational polymorphism
of DNA

DNA can adopt many secondary structures

G-quadruplexes are particularly peculiar

 

G-quadruplexes are particularly peculiar

 

 

G4s are DNA/RNA drug targets distinct from dsDNA

G4s may also be drugs themselves

G4s are very polymorphic…

…and in equilibrium

 

Topology, stability and stoichiometry determination

Topologies are poor structural descriptors

Topologies are poor structural descriptors

Stability measurements are often innacurate

Stability measurements are often innacurate

\[ A_T=(a^FT+b^F) \times \frac{1}{1+exp(-\frac{\Delta H^0 (1- \frac{T}{T_m})}{RT})} + (a^UT+b^U) \times \frac{exp(-\frac{\Delta H^0 (1- \frac{T}{T_m})}{RT})}{1+exp(-\frac{\Delta H^0 (1- \frac{T}{T_m})}{RT})} \]

\[ A_T=\textcolor{forestgreen}{(a^FT+b^F)} \times \frac{1}{1+exp(-\frac{\Delta H^0 (1- \frac{T}{T_m})}{RT})} + \textcolor{forestgreen}{(a^UT+b^U)} \times \frac{exp(-\frac{\Delta H^0 (1- \frac{T}{T_m})}{RT})}{1+exp(-\frac{\Delta H^0 (1- \frac{T}{T_m})}{RT})} \]

\[ A_T=(a^FT+b^F) \times \frac{1}{1+exp(-\frac{\Delta H^0 (1- \frac{T}{\textcolor{coral}{T_m}})}{RT})} + (a^UT+b^U) \times \frac{exp(-\frac{\Delta H^0 (1- \frac{T}{\textcolor{coral}{T_m}})}{RT})}{1+exp(-\frac{\Delta H^0 (1- \frac{T}{\textcolor{coral}{T_m}})}{RT})} \]

\[ A_T=(a^FT+b^F) \times \frac{1}{1+exp(-\frac{\textcolor{steelblue}{\Delta H^0} (1- \frac{T}{T_m})}{RT})} + (a^UT+b^U) \times \frac{exp(-\frac{\textcolor{steelblue}{\Delta H^0} (1- \frac{T}{T_m})}{RT})}{1+exp(-\frac{\textcolor{steelblue}{\Delta H^0} (1- \frac{T}{T_m})}{RT})} \]

meltR allows high-throughput and robust Tm determination

SEC allows robust stoichiometry determination

 

SEC allows robust stoichiometry determination

 

 

Going further with native MS

Native MS probes non-covalent interactions

 

 

Adapting to a potassium-deficient buffer

G4 conformations can be tuned with cations

222T: TGGGTTGGGTTGGGTTGGGT

The interconversion occurs at low [KCl]

The interconversion is fast

The interconversion arises from large ΔTm

The interconversion can be monitored by UV

The interconversion can be monitored by nMS

The combination of methods allows thermodynamic
and kinetic characterization of complex system

Combining methods to decipher ligand interactions

G4 can be targeted by small molecules

Most G4 ligands are \(\pi\)-stacking on external tetrads

Sometimes luck does better than reason

Binding preference to parallel topology

Selectivity confirmed by high-throughput nMS K titrations

Not completely crystal clear binding

 

NMR confirms the stacking on both ends

Final models supported by MD simulations

Foldamers allow precisal structural control
of artifical protein assemblies

SEC and nMS are methods of choice
to determine stoichiometries

Foldamers also bind proteins in unexpected ways

Native HDX/MS
from proteins to nucleic acids

HDX/MS gives insights
into protein structural dynamics

HDX/MS allows epitope mapping
in regulated environments

 

DNA is amenable to HDX/MS

  • H/D exchange ideal for structure probing
    • Full sequence coverage
    • Directly involved in folding
    • Minimal primary/secondary structure change
  • Rate of HDX should be structure dependent
  • Native MS measurements

Coupling in-solution HDX to native MS

Exchange rates are sensitive to folding

 

 

The number of protected sites scales
with the number of tetrads

The number of protected sites scales
with the number of tetrads

The number of protected sites scales
with the number of tetrads

Exchange protection scales with stability

Higher stability G4s exchange via local fluctuations

Lower stability G4s exchange via unfolded conformers

Exchange-competent species
resemble folding intermediates

Drift-tube IMS can separate analytes by shape

Drift-tube IMS can separate analytes by shape

Minor conformers revealed by HDX/IMS

 

 

HDX kinetics inform on binding modes

Beating structure prediction models?

Feeding structure prediction models

Aptamer structures are seldom characterized

NMR provides (non-canonical !)
starting models

NMR provides many constraints

  • DNA (806)
    • intra-residue
    • inter-residue
  • Dopamine (67)
    • intramolecular
    • intermolecular

MD simulations informs on dynamics

A minimized ensemble that cannot be predicted

  • CASP16
    Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction
    • 107 models submitted
    • 0 with RMSD < 10 Å

The structural landscape
of DNA is large

A robust method toolbox is required to explore it

Acknowledgements

Université de Bordeaux

  • Cameron Mackereth
    • Samir Amrane
    • Stéphane Thore
  • Yann Ferrand
    • Vincent Laffilé

Université de BordeauxInstitut Polytechnique de Paris

  • Jean-Louis Mergny
    • Aurore Guedin-Beaurepaire
    • Marie Toulisse

Université de BordeauxUniversité de Genève

  • Valérie Gabelica
    • Frédéric Rosu
    • Clarisse Fourel
    • Anirban Ghosh
    • Romane Guisiano
    • Alexander König
    • Adrien Marchand
    • Matthieu Ranz
    • Liliya Yatsunyk

York University

  • Philip Johnson
    • Emily Chao

Université de Sherbrooke

  • Philippe Dauphin Ducharme

LMU München

  • Yvan Huc
    • Jonas Sigl

Quality Assistance &
Ose Immunotherapeutics

Funding sources

Thank you for your attention!