A Study into the Collision-induced Dissociation (CID) Behavior of Cross-Linked Peptides

Cross-linking/mass spectrometry resolves protein–protein interactions or protein folds by help of distance constraints. Cross-linkers with specific properties such as isotope-labeled or collision-induced dissociation (CID)-cleavable cross-linkers are in frequent use to simplify the identification of cross-linked peptides. Here, we analyzed the mass spectrometric behavior of 910 unique cross-linked peptides in high-resolution MS1 and MS2 from published data and validate the observation by a ninefold larger set from currently unpublished data to explore if detailed understanding of their fragmentation behavior would allow computational delivery of information that otherwise would be obtained via isotope labels or CID cleavage of cross-linkers. Isotope-labeled cross-linkers reveal cross-linked and linear fragments in fragmentation spectra. We show that fragment mass and charge alone provide this information, alleviating the need for isotope-labeling for this purpose. Isotope-labeled cross-linkers also indicate cross-linker-containing, albeit not specifically cross-linked, peptides in MS1. We observed that acquisition can be guided to better than twofold enrich cross-linked peptides with minimal losses based on peptide mass and charge alone. By help of CID-cleavable cross-linkers, individual spectra with only linear fragments can be recorded for each peptide in a cross-link. We show that cross-linked fragments of ordinary cross-linked peptides can be linearized computationally and that a simplified subspectrum can be extracted that is enriched in information on one of the two linked peptides. This allows identifying candidates for this peptide in a simplified database search as we propose in a search strategy here. We conclude that the specific behavior of cross-linked peptides in mass spectrometers can be exploited to relax the requirements on cross-linkers.Cross-linking/mass spectrometry extends the use of mass-spectrometry-based proteomics from identification (1, 2), quantification (3), and characterization of protein complexes (4) into resolving protein structures and protein–protein interactions (5–8). Chemical reagents (cross-linkers) covalently connect amino acid pairs that are within a cross-linker-specific distance range in the native three-dimensional structure of a protein or protein complex. A cross-linking/mass spectrometry experiment is typically conducted in four steps: (1) cross-linking of the target protein or complex, (2) protein digestion (usually with trypsin), (3) LC-MS analysis, and (4) database search. The digested peptide mixture consists of linear and cross-linked peptides, and the latter can be enriched by strong cation exchange (9) or size exclusion chromatography (10). Cross-linked peptides are of high value as they provide direct information on the structure and interactions of proteins.Cross-linked peptides fragment under collision-induced dissociation (CID) conditions primarily into b- and y-ions, as do their linear counterparts. An important difference regarding database searches between linear and cross-linked peptides stems from not knowing which peptides might be cross-linked. Therefore, one has to consider each single peptide and all pairwise combinations of peptides in the database. Having n peptides leads to (n2 + n)/2 possible pairwise combinations. This leads to two major challenges: With increasing size of the database, search time and the risk of identifying false positives increases. One way of circumventing these problems is to use MS2-cleavable cross-linkers (11, 12), at the cost of limited experimental design and choice of cross-linker.In a first database search approach (13), all pairwise combinations of peptides in a database were considered in a concatenated and linearized form. Thereby, all possible single bond fragments are considered in one of the two database entries per peptide pair, and the cross-link can be identified by a normal protein identification algorithm. Already, the second search approach split the peptides for the purpose of their identification (14). Linear fragments were used to retrieve candidate peptides from the database that are then matched based on the known mass of the cross-linked pair and scored as a pair against the spectrum. Isotope-labeled cross-linkers were used to sort the linear and cross-linked fragments apart. Many other search tools and approaches have been developed since (10, 15–19); see (20) for a more detailed list, at least some of which follow the general idea of an open modification search (21–24).As a general concept for open modification search of cross-linked peptides, cross-linked peptides represent two peptides, each with an unknown modification given by the mass of the other peptide and the cross-linker. One identifies both peptides individually and then matches them based on knowing the mass of cross-linked pair (14, 22, 24). Alternatively, one peptide is identified first and, using that peptide and the cross-linker as a modification mass, the second peptide is identified from the database (21, 23). An important element of the open modification search approach is that it essentially converts the quadratic search space of the cross-linked peptides into a linear search space of modified peptides. Still, many peptides and many modification positions have to be considered, especially when working with large databases or when using highly reactive cross-linkers with limited amino acid selectivity (25).We hypothesize that detailed knowledge of the fragmentation behavior of cross-linked peptides might reveal ways to improve the identification of cross-linked peptides. Detailed analyses of the fragmentation behavior of linear peptides exist (26–28), and the analysis of the fragmentation behavior of cross-linked peptides has guided the design of scores (24, 29). Further, cross-link-specific ions have been observed from higher energy collision dissociation (HCD) data (30). Isotope-labeled cross-linkers are used to distinguish cross-linked from linear fragments, generally in low-resolution MS2 of cross-linked peptides (14).We compared the mass spectrometric behavior of cross-linked peptides to that of linear peptides, using 910 high-resolution fragment spectra matched to unique cross-linked peptides from multiple different public datasets at 5% peptide-spectrum match (PSM)¹ false discovery rate (FDR). In addition, we repeated all experiments with a larger sample set that contains 8,301 spectra—also including data from ongoing studies from our lab (Supplemental material S9-S12). This paper presents the mass spectrometric signature of cross-linked peptides that we identified in our analysis and the resulting heuristics that are incorporated into an integrated strategy for the analysis and identification of cross-linked peptides. We present computational strategies that indicate the possibility of alleviating the need for mass-spectrometrically restricted cross-linker choice.