ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Antibody Validation Article
Revised

Referencing cross-reactivity of detection antibodies for protein array experiments

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]
PUBLISHED 23 May 2017
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Antibody Validations gateway.

Abstract

Protein arrays are frequently used to profile antibody repertoires in humans and animals. High-throughput protein array characterisation of complex antibody repertoires necessitates the use of extensively validated secondary detection antibodies. This article details the validation of an affinity-isolated anti-chicken IgY antibody produced in rabbit and a goat anti-rabbit IgG antibody conjugated with alkaline phosphatase using protein arrays consisting of 7,390 distinct human proteins. Probing protein arrays with secondary antibodies in absence of chicken serum revealed non-specific binding to 61 distinct human proteins. Despite the identified non-specific binding, the tested antibodies are well suited for use in protein array experiments as the cross-reactive binding partners can be readily excluded from further analysis. The evident cross-reactivity of the tested secondary detection antibodies points towards the necessity of platform-specific antibody characterisation studies for all secondary immunoreagents. Furthermore, secondary antibody characterisation using protein arrays enables the generation of reference lists of cross-reactive proteins, which can be then marked as potential false positives in follow-up experiments. Providing such cross-reactivity reference lists accessible to the wider research community may help to interpret data generated with the same antibodies in applications not only related to protein arrays such as immunoprecipitation, Western blots or other immunoassays.

Keywords

Protein arrays, Whole-cell immunisation, Antibody profiling, Cross-reactivity,, Chicken IgY, Reference list, Secondary antibody, Detection antibody

Revised Amendments from Version 1

Following the reviewers’ comments, this revised version of the manuscript now includes additional in silico sequence analysis assessing identified antibody cross-reactivities. The results and conclusion sections are now addressing the additional findings.

A new Table 5 and Supplementary Table S1 have been added showing results for all possible two-pair sequence alignment combinations presented as BLAST scores, SIM scores and E-values.

See the authors' detailed response to the review by Carsten Grötzinger
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Konrad Büssow
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Brigitte Hantusch

Introduction

Secondary label-conjugated and non-conjugated detection antibodies are frequently used in a wide range of research applications. However, they are often affinity-isolated, polyclonal reagents that may lack the highest standard of antibody validation. The antibodies characterised in this study are a polyclonal anti-chicken IgY antibody produced in rabbit (31104, Thermo Fisher) and a polyclonal goat anti-rabbit IgG antibody conjugated with alkaline phosphatase (AP) (A3687, Sigma-Aldrich). Although the use of the rabbit anti-IgY antibody in the literature is limited, the goat anti-rabbit IgG AP has been extensively utilised for over 15 years1,2.

The research conducted in this laboratory examines complex antibody repertoires in humans and animals by means of protein arrays. Protein arrays are frequently used to profile antibody binding to human proteins in autoimmune disease3, cancer4 and in healthy individuals5. Other protein array applications include recombinant6 and hybridoma-derived7 antibody characterisation studies. This article investigates the cross-reactivity of a rabbit anti-chicken IgY and an alkaline phosphatase-conjugated goat anti-rabbit IgG, which were used for the profiling of IgY antibody responses to human antigens in chickens immunised with human cancer cells. The protein array technology applied here, developed by Büssow and colleagues8, is comprised in its current version of a fully annotated set of 7,390 distinct human proteins, that may serve as potential antigens. The aim of this study is to define a cross-reactivity reference list for the two described secondary antibodies, which can then be used to eliminate non-specific binders from ongoing chicken IgY profiling studies. Furthermore, publication of the cross-reactivity reference list provides a valuable resource of potential false-positive binders to researchers using the same antibodies. may support other researchers using these antibodies in the evaluation of their experiments.

Materials and methods

Antibody details

Rabbit anti-chicken IgY (H+L) secondary antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Product number 31104, Lot code PK19380211) is a polyclonal antibody that targets the variable heavy and light chains of chicken IgY immunoglobulins (Table 1). The antibody was isolated from the serum of the antigen-immunised rabbit through immunoaffinity chromatography using antigen coupled to agarose beads. The antibody was added to the protein array at a 1/1,000 dilution in 2% (w/v) bovine serum albumin (BSA, Sigma-Aldrich, A2153) in tris-buffered saline (TBS, Trizma® Base, Sigma-Aldrich, T6066 and sodium chloride, Fisher Scientific, S/3160/68) with 0.1%, v/v, Tween 20 (Sigma-Aldrich, P1379).

Table 1. Details of characterised antibodies.

AntibodyManufacturerCatalogue
Number
Lot NumberStock
Concentration
RRID
Rabbit anti-Chicken IgY (H+L)Thermo Fisher Scientific31104PK193802112.3 mg/mLAB_228382
Goat anti-rabbit IgG Alkaline
Phosphatase conjugated
Sigma-AldrichA3687SLBJ6146V4.0 mg/mLAB_258103

Alkaline phosphatase-conjugated goat anti-rabbit IgG (whole molecule) (Sigma-Aldrich, Product number A3687, Lot code SLBJ6146V) is a polyclonal antibody that targets all rabbit IgGs (Table 1). The antibody was isolated through immunospecific purification of antisera from a rabbit IgG-immunised goat. Following isolation, the anti-rabbit IgG was conjugated to alkaline phosphatase using glutaraldehyde-based cross-linkage. The antibody was added to the protein array at a 1/1,000 dilution in 2% (w/v) BSA in tris-buffered saline (TBS) with 0.1%, v/v, Tween 20.

Protein arrays

Unipex protein arrays were obtained from Source Bioscience Life Sciences (Nottingham, UK). The Unipex arrays comprise of 15,300 fully annotated E. coli clones expressing a total of 7,390 distinct in-frame ORF human recombinant proteins. The Unipex proteins are immobilized under denaturing conditions directly on the PVDF membrane surfaces exposing linear sequence epitopes ideally suited for epitope mapping, antibody profiling and antibody cross-reactivity analyses. The details of protein arrays utilised in this study are provided in Table 2. For general information on Unipex protein arrays please refer to: (http://www.lifesciences.sourcebioscience.com/media/290406/sbs_ig_manual_proteinarray_v1.pdf).

Table 2. Details of protein arrays.

Protein arrayLibrary NumberArray NumberManufacturer
Unipex 1 pt.1 9027633.4.730Source Bioscience
Unipex 2 pt.19028634.5.737Source Bioscience

Cross-reactivity assessment

Antibody cross-reactivity was assessed using Unipex protein arrays. The detailed experimental protocol is provided in Table 3. Briefly, secondary rabbit anti-chicken IgY and goat anti-rabbit IgG AP were validated in preparation for a chicken IgY antibody profiling experiment of a chicken immunised with human cancer cells. Protein arrays were probed with secondary antibodies in the absence of IgY-containing chicken serum, as described in Table 3. Signal generation for array-bound secondary antibodies was obtained using AttoPhos AP fluorescent substrate system (Promega, S1001) diluted 1 in 8 in AP buffer (1mM MgCl2, Sigma-Aldrich, M4880 and 100mM Tris base, pH 9.5). Protein array image acquisition was conducted using a Fuji scanner Fla5100. Positive signals were localized according to the manufacturer’s protocol. Briefly, array proteins were spotted in duplicate in a 3×3 square pattern. The centre spot of each square being a guide dot surrounded by eight flanking protein spots. Each protein was spotted around the navigation dot in one of four predetermined patterns (see Figure 1b). Varying background intensities were controlled by adjusting brightness and contrast of the image using Visual Grid software (GPC Biotech) to allow best possible scoring conditions. The degree of signal intensity was evaluated for each protein pair with the value 1 corresponding to a weak signal, value 2 corresponding to a moderate signal and value 3 corresponding to a strong signal. The x- y- coordinates of each positive pattern were merged with the Unipex protein database provided by the manufacturer (Source Bioscience) resulting in identification of GenBank and UniGene ID’s for each positive signal. This is a commonly used method for scoring signal intensities as previously shown by this group4 and others9,10. Protein annotations were retrieved from the Unipex database provided by the manufacturer and updated using the National Cancer Institute’s UniGene CGAP Gene Finder tool (http://cgap.nci.nih.gov/Genes/GeneFinder).

Table 3. Secondary antibody protein array analysis protocol.

Protocol stepsObjectiveReagentTime
Protein array
preparation
Rinse array70% (v/v) ethanol5 min
Remove ethanol and rinsedH20 for 22 min
Wipe off all E. coli colonieslaminar tissueAs appropriate
Wash 1Wash off any E. coli debrisTBST-T10min (x3)
TBS2min (x2)
TBS10 min
Array blockingBlock arrays by shaking5% (w/v) Milk Marvel TBS-T2h
Wash 2Wash off any Blocking solutionTBS-T15min (x3)
Incubate first
antibody
Rabbit anti-chicken IgY1 in 1,000 (no recommended
western dil.) in 2% (w/v) BSA TBS-T
2h
Wash 2Wash off any unbound antibodyTBS-T15 min (x3)
Incubate second
antibody
Goat anti-rabbit IgG-AP1 in 1,000 in 2% (w/v) BSA TBS-T2h
Wash 3Wash off any unbound antibodyTBS-T10 min (x2)
TBS10 min (x2)
Protein array signal
detection
Signal generation for array
bound goat anti-rabbit IgG-AP
AttoPhos AP Fluorescent Substrate
diluted 1 in 8 in AP buffer (1mM
MgCl2, 100mM Tris base, pH 9.5)
10 min
Protein array image acquisitionFujiScanner Fla5100 (Settings Laser:
473, Filter: LPB, Resolution 50μm
18 min

Epitope analysis

To investigate whether antibody binding to protein arrays was due to epitope similarities between the animal immunogens used to produce the secondary antibodies and the human proteins on the arrays we performed a comparative analysis as follows. Sequences of human antigens on the array bound by the secondary antibodies were obtained from the PubMed website (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/protein/) using IDs present in the Unipex protein database and compared to chicken immunoglobulin proteins [Ig lambda chain C region (NCBI Accession: P20763.1), Ig lambda chain V-1 region (NCBI Accession: P04210.1), immunoglobulin Y heavy chain constant region (NCBI Accession: XP_015130394.1) and immunoglobulin Y heavy chain variable region (NCBI Accession: ADF29959.1)], as well as to rabbit immunoglobulin proteins [Ig gamma chain C region (UniProtKB: P01870), immunoglobulin heavy chain VDJ region, partial (NCBI Accession: AAA51320.1), Ig lambda chain C region (UniProtKB: P01847.2) and Ig lambda chain variable region, partial (NCBI Accession: AAA31364.1)]. For antigen similarity comparisons, sequence similarities were analysed using BLAST. Non-intersecting protein sequence alignments were analysed using the local similarity program SIM adjusted to the BLOSUM62 comparison matrix to ensure amino acid complementarity of linear B-cell epitopes as previously shown11. The threshold for sequence similarity was set to BLAST E-values below 1 × 10-10 and SIM score values above 50.

Results

Probing protein arrays with antibodies allows the assessment of their specificity and cross-reactivity across a large numbers of potential antigens in parallel12,13. Here we investigated the cross-reactivity of a secondary rabbit anti-chicken IgY and a goat anti-rabbit IgG labelled with AP, using a single set of human protein arrays in the absence of chicken serum. We identified a total of 63 binding events, of which 61 corresponded to unique proteins (Table 4). The identified positive signals varied in strength, as shown in Figure 1, with intensity 3 being the strongest and 1 the weakest. Five of the identified signals were scored as intensity 3, twelve signals were scored as intensity 2 and remainder scored as intensity 1. The original protein array images are shown in Figure S1 and Figure S2 (Supplementary material) and protein array images with highlighted positive signals, which correspond the cross-reactive proteins listed in Table 4, are shown in Figure S3 and Figure S4 (Supplementary material).

7145520f-e856-4315-ab14-e9559e3703fb_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Cross-reactivity of rabbit anti-chicken IgY and goat anti-rabbit IgG identified by protein array screening.

(A) Image of a whole protein array and a representative section illustrating antibody-antigen binding at three different signal intensities; 3 = strong, 2 = intermediate and 1 = weak. (B) The proteins are arranged in a 3×3 pattern on the array and all proteins are arrayed twice and appear as duplicate spots in a particular pattern within a block after a successful hybridization. (C) Description of proteins chosen as examples provided on the representative array image above; signal intensities, patterns, Unigene IDs and protein names are listed.

Table 4. Reference list of antibody cross-reactivity identified by protein array analysis.

Protein array
clone ID
Signal
Intensity*
GenBankIDUnigeneIDName
IMGSp9028F0610D3BM914329Hs.533963Clone SFV019_2F05H immunoglobulin heavy
chain variable region
IMGSp9028H079D3BQ711793Hs.547404Clone IgA-MZ-aa42c-2 immunoglobulin alpha
heavy chain variable region (IgA)
IMGSp9028F0316D3BQ709082Hs.620437IGH mRNA for immunoglobulin heavy chain
VHDJ region, partial cds, clone:TRH1-16
IMGSp9028G0921D3BX417981Hs.698070Immunoglobulin heavy constant gamma 1
(G1m marker)
IMGSp9027F0514D3118471Hs.15951Proline-rich acidic protein 1
IMGSp9027H0434D2BC044933Hs.135094Kinesin family member 18B
IMGSp9027G0658D2BC010132Hs.445893KH domain containing, RNA binding, signal
transduction- associated 1
IMGSp9027F0369D2AK092483Hs.470417Penta-EF-hand domain containing 1
IMGSp9027D1015D2NM_006814Hs.471917Proteasome (prosome, macropain) inhibitor
subunit 1 (PI31)
IMGSp9028C0313D2DA970556Hs.510650Clone IP80 immunoglobulin heavy chain
variable region
IMGSp9027G0525D2NM_002228Hs.525704Jun proto-oncogene
IMGSp9027E0966D2BC041022Hs.584909SCAN domain containing 1
IMGSp9027F0171D2BC018708Hs.632706Zinc finger CCCH-type containing 10
IMGSp9027F0625D2BC018708Hs.632706Zinc finger CCCH-type containing 10
IMGSp9028G0311D2BM920476Hs.633485Enhancer of polycomb homolog 1 (Drosophila)e
IMGSp9028G027D2BX417981Hs.698070Immunoglobulin heavy constant gamma 1
(G1m marker)
IMGSp9028F099D2BG754662Hs.698202UniGene entry Hs.698202 has been retired;
current entry: Transcribed locus, moderately
similar to XP_001496515.2 PREDICTED: ig
gamma-3 chain C region [Equus caballus]
IMGSp9027H0728D1NM_001978Hs.106124Erythrocyte membrane protein band 4.9 (dematin)
IMGSp9027C0116D1NM_080881Hs.130316Drebrin 1
IMGSp9027D129D1NM_001012426Hs.131436Homo sapiens forkhead box P4 (FOXP4),
transcript variant 1, mRNA
IMGSp9027G0310D1BX647115Hs.173381Dihydropyrimidinase-like 2
IMGSp9027G0172D1AF479827Hs.182081BR serine/threonine kinase 1
IMGSp9028E0623D1NM_022489Hs.24956Inverted formin, FH2 and WH2 domain
containing
IMGSp9027C0164D1BC000786Hs.25584ADP-ribosylation factor GTPase activating
protein 1
IMGSp9027A0339D1BC008343Hs.292493X-ray repair complementing defective repair in
Chinese hamster cells 6
IMGSp9027C1211D1BC000459Hs.306791Polymerase (DNA directed), delta 2, accessory
subunit
IMGSp9027E0916D1BC040880Hs.315568Chromosome 10 open reading frame 114
IMGSp9027H0366D1NM_003260Hs.332173Transducin-like enhancer of split 2 (E(sp1)
homolog, Drosophila)
IMGSp9028A0867D1AL833379Hs.333388Eukaryotic translation elongation factor 1 delta
(guanine nucleotide exchange protein)
IMGSp9027F1049D1NM_006548Hs.35354Insulin-like growth factor 2 mRNA binding
protein 2
IMGSp9027G1059D1AK097073Hs.361323ATP-binding cassette, sub-family F (GCN20),
member 3
IMGSp9027H0825D1AK127401Hs.407368LSM14A, SCD6 homolog A (S. cerevisiae)
IMGSp9028A0819D1BC036307Hs.465929Calponin 1, basic, smooth muscle
IMGSp9027D1063D1BC146654Hs.493796RUN and SH3 domain containing 2
IMGSp9028D0712D1BC022890Hs.511149Synaptosomal-associated protein, 23kDa
IMGSp9027F0118D1NM_002087Hs.514220Granulin
IMGSp9027B0725D1NM_032627Hs.515259Single stranded DNA binding protein 4
IMGSp9027G1020D1AK127255Hs.515364Rho GTPase activating protein 33
IMGSp9027F0926D1BC090883Hs.516160Splicing factor 3b, subunit 4, 49kDa
IMGSp9027H0318D1NM_003768Hs.517216Phosphoprotein enriched in astrocytes 15
IMGSp9027B0425D1AB002328Hs.517478Calcineurin binding protein 1
IMGSp9027D0732D1AK096320Hs.517543Pescadillo ribosomal biogenesis factor 1
IMGSp9027E0219D1NM_015695Hs.520096Bromodomain and PHD finger containing, 3
IMGSp9027B0369D1NM_007371Hs.522472Bromodomain containing 3
IMGSp9027H1010D1NM_014866Hs.522500SEC16 homolog A (S. cerevisiae)
IMGSp9027B0757D1NM_031372Hs.527105Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein D-like
IMGSp9027C0965D1NM_014811Hs.533260Protein phosphatase 1, regulatory subunit 26
IMGSp9027E0964D1NM_001098800Hs.571729Melanoma antigen family D, 4
IMGSp9027G0156D1BC037307Hs.590990Anoctamin 8
IMGSp9027C1216D1AB208876Hs.592082Axin 1
IMGSp9027F0322D1BF110897Hs.612694Transcribed locus
IMGSp9027E0122D1BC004352Hs.613351Kinesin family member 22
IMGSp9027G0312D1AK225632Hs.631593Protein phosphatase 1, regulatory subunit 15A
IMGSp9027E104D1AL133055Hs.636446Zinc finger protein 853
IMGSp9027A1171D1NM_032329Hs.645460Inhibitor of growth family, member 5
IMGSp9027B0415D1XR_015693Hs.654404Major histocompatibility complex, class I, B
IMGSp9027A0861D1BC006105Hs.654798Alpha tubulin acetyltransferase 1
IMGSp9027F0471D1NM_002140Hs.695973Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein K
IMGSp9027D0731D1NM_001270Hs.696018Chromodomain helicase DNA binding protein 1
IMGSp9027B0439D1AK124880Hs.696054Protein phosphatase 1, regulatory subunit 18
IMGSp9027C0140D1AB209272Hs.76662Zinc finger, DHHC-type containing 16
IMGSp9027C1264D1CR606311Hs.77100General transcription factor IIE, polypeptide 2,
beta 34kDa
IMGSp9027E1075D1AK128584Hs.79110Nucleolin

The 61 identified proteins comprised of a wide range of human proteins, including immunoglobulins, as well as a variety of nuclear, cytoplasmic and cell-membrane proteins with a diverse range of functions (Table 4). In order to identify shared epitopes that could explain the observed antibody cross-reactivity, and to deduce the origin of the non-specific binding to either of the two tested antibodies, we investigated sequence similarities between the human proteins and the immunogens used to produce the antibodies. We conducted a linear (BLAST) and a segmented (SIM) in silico sequence analysis of chicken IgY and rabbit IgG immunoglobulins against 61 array-identified human proteins as detailed in supplementary Table 1. In total, 5 proteins met the BLAST threshold criteria of E-values below 1 × 10-10, as well as the SIM threshold criteria of scores above 50. A further 9 proteins met the SIM threshold, but they did not meet the BLAST criteria (Table 5).

All 5 proteins that met both threshold criteria belong to the immunoglobulin class of proteins, four being variable regions of Ig heavy chains and one a heavy constant gamma chain. The in silico sequence analysis revealed the highest sequence similarity to Ig heavy variable and constant chains, respectively, of both, the chicken IgY and rabbit IgG in all cases (Supplementary Table 1) making it impossible with this approach to deduce the origin of the cross-reactivity.

Table 5. In silico sequence similarity analysis between chicken IgY and rabbit IgG and array-identified human proteins.

14 most similar human proteins detected in this study, prioritised by sequence similarity.

Human proteinChicken ImmunoglobulinsRabbit ImmunoglobulinsSignal
Intensity
BLAST
overlaps*
Highest
BLAST
E-value
SIM
overlaps*
Highest
Score
BLAST
overlaps*
BLASTSIM
overlaps*
Highest
Score
Clone SFV019_2F0 5H
immunoglobulin heavy
chain variable region
11.00E-48239323.00E-4743563
Clone IgA-MZ-aa42c-2
immunoglobulin alpha
heavy chain variable region
(IgA)
14.00E-30221011.00E-2911943
IGH mRNA for
immunoglobulin heavy
chain VHDJ region, partial
cds, clone:TRH1-16
22.00E-34121811.00E-4122913
Immunoglobulin heavy
constant gamma 1 (G1m
marker)
13.00E-1318622.00E-12528903
Clone IP80 immunoglobulin
heavy chain variable region
13.00E-44131313.00E-4923572
Enhancer of polycomb
homolog 1 (Drosophila)e
0BT1510BT0BT2
Inverted formin, FH2 and
WH2 domain containing
0BT0NA0BT1511
Chromosome 10 open
reading frame 114
0BT1510BT0BT1
RUN and SH3 domain
containing 2
0BT1520BT0BT1
Single stranded DNA
binding protein 4
0BT1560BT0BT1
Rho GTPase activating
protein 33
0BT1540BT0BT1
Splicing factor 3b, subunit 4,
49kDa
0BT1610BT0BT1
Protein phosphatase 1,
regulatory subunit 26
0BT1590BT0BT1
Alpha tubulin
acetyltransferase 1
0BT1500BT0BT1

‘BT’ signifies ‘Below Threshold Value’. Threshold values were BLAST E-values below 1 × 10-10 and SIM values above 50. ‘NA’ signifies ‘No significant similarity was detected’

*BLAST and SIM overlaps indicate the number of sequence categories meeting threshold criteria for similarity as shown in Supplementary Table 1.

The 9 proteins that met only the SIM threshold criteria belong to a wide range of protein classes, however, none of those proteins belongs to the immunoglobulin class of proteins. In silico sequence analysis revealed that 8 of those proteins have a high local sequence similarity to the chicken immunoglobulin Y heavy chain constant region, but not to any other chicken and rabbit Ig regions. The analysis revealed further, that Inverted Formin, FH2 and WH2 Domain Containing (INF2) showed high local similarity exclusively to the rabbit Ig gamma chain constant region (Supplementary Table 1).

Conclusion

This work illustrates the cross-reactivity of an antibody-based detection system for IgY binding. The polyclonal anti-IgY rabbit antibody in combination with an anti-rabbit IgG alkaline phosphatase-conjugated antibody was shown to bind to 61 human proteins present on Unipex protein arrays comprising of 7,390 human proteins. Characterisation of this cross-reactivity provides a ‘false-positive’ database for future chicken antisera characterisation on protein array systems not limited to the Unipex protein array used here. These results, in combination with ‘false-positives’ from earlier research investigating antibody cross-reactivity by this group12 and others13 may provide valuable information for future protein array-based experiments. Reference lists provided by such experiments would be further strengthened by arrays that include additional portions of the human proteome and/or post-translational modifications. Using antibodies that have been extensively characterised on protein arrays will reduce the risk of identifying irrelevant cross-reactive secondary antibody binding to the array as a host-antigen response.

It is important to note that the current study was a one-off experiment and repeat experiments may increase the reliability of the data. The reproducibility of the binding events identified in this study was further warranted by evaluating each protein in two discrete positions on the array. Of the 63 binding events, five were scored as intensity 3, twelve were scored as intensity 2 and the remainder were intensity 1. While the assay is unable to conclusively distinguish the precise cause of the differences in signal intensities, it can be assumed to be due to variations in antibody affinity and avidity, the availability of the epitope for binding, and protein concentrations on the array. A follow-up quantitative Western blot analyses and titration experiments would help further to shed more light into differences in antigen-binding kinetics.

The secondary antibodies utilized in this study are polyclonal, isolated by immunoaffinity chromatography. The presented cross-reactivity reference list may, therefore, show some variation when a different lot of the antibody is used. We have previously shown that conditions applied during affinity chromatography may affect specificity14. When assessing protein array images, we found a considerable discrepancy in background intensity of array part 1 and 2. It is important to highlight that the part 1 and part 2 of the array are generated from distinct clone libraries of different tissue origin. Part 1 of the array was generated from human brain tissue using a pQE30NST vector, whereas part 2 of the array was generated from different sources of tissue, including T cells and lung tissue, using a pQE80LSN vector. The tissue origin and the utilised bacterial vector are potential contributing factors for the variances in background noise.

Since both antibodies were used as a pair in this study, it was not possible to directly deduce the exact cross-reactivity profile for each individual antibody. We have therefore taken an in silico sequence analysis approach and we found that five of the identified proteins were of the immunoglobulin class of proteins with very high sequence similarities to both, the chicken IgY and the rabbit IgG immunoglobulins. Such cross-reactivity is not surprising considering that the antibodies are polyclonal and the immunogens were immunoglobulins of both hosts. In addition, the data sheet provided with the anti-chicken IgY antibody produced in rabbit (31104, Thermo Fisher) has specified that this antibody may cross-react with immunoglobulins from other species. The data sheet for the goat anti-rabbit IgG AP antibody (A3687, Sigma-Aldrich) has specified binding to all rabbit immunoglobulins. The in silico sequence analysis revealed furthermore 8 proteins with high sequence similarity to chicken IgY heavy chain constant region and one protein with high sequence similarity to rabbit Ig gamma chain constant region. In order to tackle this issue experimentally, a single labelled antibody should be tested on its own in future experiments. Furthermore, if a non-labelled antibody is to be tested, two experiments should be performed, one with a labelled and non-labelled antibody pair such as demonstrated in this study, and one additional experiment with the labelled antibody alone, thereby allowing allocation of exact cross-reactivates by simply subtracting ‘false-positives’ from both sets of results.

In conclusion, the antibodies tested in this study showed cross-reactivity to unrelated human proteins as well as to human immunoglobulin proteins, which are homologous to the original immunogens. Despite the identified non-specific binding, the tested antibodies are suitable for use in protein array experiments as the cross-reactive binding partners can be readily excluded from further analysis. As both antibodies were used as a pair in this study, the possibility to deduce the exact cross-reactivity profile for each individual antibody may be limited. However, the cross-reactivity reference list provided in this paper can be further utilised to validate research using those antibodies in applications other than protein arrays.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 18 Jan 2016
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Lemass D, O'Kennedy R and Kijanka GS. Referencing cross-reactivity of detection antibodies for protein array experiments [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2017, 5:73 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7668.2)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 2
VERSION 2
PUBLISHED 23 May 2017
Revised
Views
5
Cite
Reviewer Report 02 Jun 2017
Konrad Büssow, Structural Biology, Helmholtz Center for Infection Research, Braunschweig, Germany 
Approved
VIEWS 5
The authors have improved their manuscript considerably. The last sentence of the ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Büssow K. Reviewer Report For: Referencing cross-reactivity of detection antibodies for protein array experiments [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2017, 5:73 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.12612.r22973)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 18 Jan 2016
Views
15
Cite
Reviewer Report 04 Apr 2016
Konrad Büssow, Structural Biology, Helmholtz Center for Infection Research, Braunschweig, Germany 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 15
In the present work, the authors have tested direct binding of secondary antibodies to arrays of human proteins.

Readers who use array technology may benefit from the present work, since they will become aware of the problem of signals caused by ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Büssow K. Reviewer Report For: Referencing cross-reactivity of detection antibodies for protein array experiments [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2017, 5:73 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.8257.r12773)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 23 May 2017
    Gregor Kijanka, Biomedical Diagnostics Institute, National Centre for Sensor Research, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
    23 May 2017
    Author Response
    The authors would like to thank Dr. Konrad Büssow for his thorough review of this article and his helpful comments. Dr. Büssow points out that the authors should stress that ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 23 May 2017
    Gregor Kijanka, Biomedical Diagnostics Institute, National Centre for Sensor Research, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
    23 May 2017
    Author Response
    The authors would like to thank Dr. Konrad Büssow for his thorough review of this article and his helpful comments. Dr. Büssow points out that the authors should stress that ... Continue reading
Views
24
Cite
Reviewer Report 30 Mar 2016
Carsten Grötzinger, Department of Gastroenterology and Molecular Cancer Research Center, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 24
This article describes an experiment performed to characterize the background signals in a particular combination of three commercially available research tools: a protein macroarray on PVDF membranes used in conjunction with two antibodies used for detection. As no first antibody ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Grötzinger C. Reviewer Report For: Referencing cross-reactivity of detection antibodies for protein array experiments [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2017, 5:73 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.8257.r12776)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 23 May 2017
    Gregor Kijanka, Biomedical Diagnostics Institute, National Centre for Sensor Research, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
    23 May 2017
    Author Response
    The authors would like to thank Dr. Carsten Grötzinger for his very helpful observations which prompted us to perform additional in silico analysis resulting in an improvement of this paper. ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 23 May 2017
    Gregor Kijanka, Biomedical Diagnostics Institute, National Centre for Sensor Research, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
    23 May 2017
    Author Response
    The authors would like to thank Dr. Carsten Grötzinger for his very helpful observations which prompted us to perform additional in silico analysis resulting in an improvement of this paper. ... Continue reading
Views
37
Cite
Reviewer Report 03 Feb 2016
Brigitte Hantusch, Clinical Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria 
Approved
VIEWS 37
This study presents data concerning the issue of secondary antibody cross-reactivity towards antigens other than desired immunoglobulins. By screening a high-throughput protein array, the authors establish the amount and identity of proteins detected by commercially available secondary antibodies, a rabbit ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Hantusch B. Reviewer Report For: Referencing cross-reactivity of detection antibodies for protein array experiments [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2017, 5:73 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.8257.r12247)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 23 May 2017
    Gregor Kijanka, Biomedical Diagnostics Institute, National Centre for Sensor Research, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
    23 May 2017
    Author Response
    The authors would like to thank Dr. Brigitte Hantusch for kindly reviewing this manuscript and the helpful and detailed comments. We have discussed the signal intensity differences in more detail ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 23 May 2017
    Gregor Kijanka, Biomedical Diagnostics Institute, National Centre for Sensor Research, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
    23 May 2017
    Author Response
    The authors would like to thank Dr. Brigitte Hantusch for kindly reviewing this manuscript and the helpful and detailed comments. We have discussed the signal intensity differences in more detail ... Continue reading

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 18 Jan 2016
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.