NIH Public Access
Author Manuscript
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Published in final edited form as:
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2009 ; 48(5): 856–870. doi:10.1002/anie.200800370.
Molecular Engineering of DNA: Molecular Beacons
Kemin Wang [Prof.],
Department of Chemistry and Department of Physiology and Functional Genomics, Center for
Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, UF Genetics Institute and Shands Cancer Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200 (USA), Fax: (+1) 352-846-2410
Biomedical Engineering Center, State Key Laboratory of Chemo/Biosensing and Chemometrics,
College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha 410082 (P.R. China)
Zhiwen Tang,
Department of Chemistry and Department of Physiology and Functional Genomics, Center for
Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, UF Genetics Institute and Shands Cancer Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200 (USA), Fax: (+1) 352-846-2410
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Chaoyong James Yang,
Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen
University, Xiamen 361005 (P.R. China)
Youngmi Kim,
Department of Chemistry and Department of Physiology and Functional Genomics, Center for
Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, UF Genetics Institute and Shands Cancer Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200 (USA), Fax: (+1) 352-846-2410
Xiaohong Fang [Prof.],
Institute of Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences 2 Zhongguancun Beiyijie, Beijing 100190
(P.R. China)
Wei Li,
Biomedical Engineering Center, State Key Laboratory of Chemo/Biosensing and Chemometrics,
College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha 410082 (P.R. China)
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Yanrong Wu,
Department of Chemistry and Department of Physiology and Functional Genomics, Center for
Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, UF Genetics Institute and Shands Cancer Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200 (USA), Fax: (+1) 352-846-2410
Colin D. Medley,
Department of Chemistry and Department of Physiology and Functional Genomics, Center for
Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, UF Genetics Institute and Shands Cancer Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200 (USA), Fax: (+1) 352-846-2410
Zehui Cao,
Department of Chemistry and Department of Physiology and Functional Genomics, Center for
Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, UF Genetics Institute and Shands Cancer Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200 (USA), Fax: (+1) 352-846-2410
Jun Li,
Biomedical Engineering Center, State Key Laboratory of Chemo/Biosensing and Chemometrics,
College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha 410082 (P.R. China)
© 2009 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Correspondence to: Kemin Wang; Weihong Tan, tan@chem.ufl.edu.
Wang et al.
Page 2
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Patrick Colon,
Department of Chemistry and Department of Physiology and Functional Genomics, Center for
Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, UF Genetics Institute and Shands Cancer Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200 (USA), Fax: (+1) 352-846-2410
Hui Lin, and
Department of Chemistry and Department of Physiology and Functional Genomics, Center for
Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, UF Genetics Institute and Shands Cancer Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200 (USA), Fax: (+1) 352-846-2410
Weihong Tan [Prof.]
Department of Chemistry and Department of Physiology and Functional Genomics, Center for
Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, UF Genetics Institute and Shands Cancer Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200 (USA), Fax: (+1) 352-846-2410
Biomedical Engineering Center, State Key Laboratory of Chemo/Biosensing and Chemometrics,
College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha 410082 (P.R. China)
Kemin Wang: ; Zhiwen Tang: ; Chaoyong James Yang: ; Youngmi Kim: ; Xiaohong Fang: ; Wei Li: ; Yanrong Wu: ; Colin D.
Medley: ; Zehui Cao: ; Jun Li: ; Patrick Colon: ; Hui Lin: ; Weihong Tan: tan@chem.ufl.edu
Abstract
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Molecular beacons (MBs) are specifically designed DNA hairpin structures that are widely used as
fluorescent probes. Applications of MBs range from genetic screening, biosensor development,
biochip construction, and the detection of single-nucleotide polymorphisms to mRNA monitoring in
living cells. The inherent signal-transduction mechanism of MBs enables the analysis of target
oligonucleotides without the separation of unbound probes. The MB stem–loop structure holds the
fluorescence-donor and fluorescence-acceptor moieties in close proximity to one another, which
results in resonant energy transfer. A spontaneous conformation change occurs upon hybridization
to separate the two moieties and restore the fluorescence of the donor. Recent research has focused
on the improvement of probe composition, intracellular gene quantitation, protein–DNA interaction
studies, and protein recognition.
Keywords
aptamers; DNA; genomics; hairpin structures; molecular beacons
1. Introduction
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Nucleic acids, especially DNA bases, make an ideal framework for the molecular engineering
of probes for a variety of unique applications in biochemistry and biomedicine. The advantages
of nucleic acids lie in the simplicity of their synthesis, their suitability for structural
modification, and their high selectivity and affinity. Specifically engineered DNA molecules
can efficiently recognize target nucleic acids and other molecules, such as proteins and small
molecules. In this Minireview, we summarize recent advances in the molecular engineering of
DNA probes for a variety of applications, with a focus on molecular beacons (MBs). MBs are
now widely used in areas such as genetic screening, biosensor development, biochip
construction, the detection of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and messenger-RNA
(mRNA) monitoring in living cells. This broad spectrum of applications can be attributed to
the particular way in which these probes interact with DNA, RNA, and protein molecules. The
unique stem–loop structure and fluorophore–quencher pair enable the detection of target
nucleic acids to be reported in real time with excellent sensitivity and selectivity. Nevertheless,
there are still many challenges associated with the development of MB probes, for example,
in the design and engineering of MBs for optimal use in the intracellular monitoring of gene
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 3
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
expression. Therefore, in addition to the design of MBs and their application in bioanalysis
and biomedicine, we examine herein current approaches to the solution of specific problems
encountered in the use of these DNA probes.
The discovery of the double-stranded structure of DNA in 1953[1] shed light on our
understanding of the significant role that nucleic acids play in life processes.[2] The base
pairing of nucleic acids, one of the strongest and most specific biomolecular recognition events,
forms the foundation of almost all molecular probes for nucleic acids. Advances in molecular
biology and the chemical synthesis of nucleic acids have benefited the development of nucleic
acid probes, many types of which have been designed and applied in the fields of biology,
medicine, and chemistry since the early 1960s.[3–5] Today, nucleic acid probes, in particular
those based on DNA, are essential tools for exploring the biological processes of nucleic acid
duplication, recombination, transcription, and expression. In the postgenomic era, there is a
continuing demand for highly sensitive and selective DNA probes. Many kinds of DNA probes
have been developed in recent years through various molecular-engineering strategies to meet
this demand.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Molecular beacons, which were first described in 1996 by Tyagi and Kramer, are an excellent
example of such DNA probes.[6] The targeted design of MBs appears simple, but is in reality
quite sophisticated. Generally, MBs are DNA sequences composed of one target-recognition
region of about 15–30 bases flanked by two short complementary stem sequences, which force
the entire sequence to form a stem–loop structure in the absence of a target. The formation of
the stem–loop structure brings the quencher and fluorophore, which are located at opposite
ends of the MB, into close proximity, whereby fluorescence is quenched effectively. In the
presence of a target DNA or RNA molecule, hybridization between the target and the loop
sequence of the MB takes place, and the stronger intermolecular hybridization opens the weaker
stem helix. The spatial separation of the fluorophore and quencher results in the restoration of
fluorescence (Figure 1).[6–8] The thermodynamic stability of the hairpin structure, the highly
efficient intrinsic signal switching, and the possibility of using a variety of fluorophores make
MBs exceptional DNA probes with excellent sensitivity and selectivity, and real-timedetection capability. MBs are therefore used for a variety of applications,[6,9–25] such as DNA
and RNA detection,[6,9–11] the monitoring of living systems,[12–15] the investigation of
enzymatic processes,[16–18,27] the design of biosensors,[19,20] the study of protein–DNA
interactions,[21–23] and the fabrication of biochips.[19,24,25] However, the scope of this
Minireview is limited to fundamental aspects of MB design, recent applications of MBs in
bioanalysis and the monitoring of intracellular processes, and a discussion of problems that
still impede extensive application of MBs.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
2. Fundamentals and Design of Molecular Beacons
Despite numerous reports on the optimization of the structure of probes, on special base
modifications, and on alternative methods for fluorescence generation, the design of MBs is
based on two key factors, which determine their characteristics and functionality: a stem–loop
structure and fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET).[6,8] Accordingly, in this section
we explain briefly how the design of MB DNA probes is affected by signal transduction,
thermodynamics, kinetics, and selectivity. Table 1 lists the various MB types discussed herein.
2.1. Energy Transfer and the Design of DNA Probes
Many nucleic acid probes, including adjacent probes[28–39] and TaqMan probes,[40,41]
employ fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) as their signal-transduction
mechanism. These probes report the presence of target nucleic acids by various means.
Adjacent probes, for example, are usually composed of two oligonucleotides designed to
hybridize with target DNA or RNA at adjacent positions. TaqMan probes, which are
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 4
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
complementary to the target sequence and labeled with two fluorescent molecules, identify
target DNA or RNA through a decrease in the FRET signal upon digestion of the probe through
the 3′,5′ exonuclease activity of polymerase.[40,41] Owing to its convenience and the simple
molecular interactions that lead to signal generation, FRET has proved an efficient signaltransduction mechanism for many studies of biomolecular interactions.
To construct MBs, a fluorescent moiety (donor), is coupled covalently to one end of the
molecule, and a quenching moiety (acceptor) to the other end. When the two moieties are
brought into immediate proximity by the stem helix, most of the absorbed energy is dissipated
as heat, and only a small amount of energy is emitted as light, a phenomenon sometimes referred
to as static quenching. In the presence of the target molecule, the loop region of the MB forms
a hybrid helix that is longer and more stable than the stem helix. This interaction forces the
MB to undergo a conformational change, which separates the stem helix. As the quencher is
no longer positioned near the fluorophore, fluorescence is restored and signals the binding of
the MB to its target.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
MBs use different energy-transfer mechanisms for signal transduction. Essentially, two major
categories exist: dynamic and static fluorescence quenching. Dynamic quenching includes
Förster transfer (RET or FRET) and Dexter transfer (collisional quenching or electron-transfer
quenching). Dynamic quenching, or RET, occurs without the release of a photon and is the
result of long-range dipole–dipole interactions between the donor and the acceptor. In this case,
energy-transfer rates depend upon the extent of spectral overlap between the emission spectrum
of the donor and the absorption spectrum of the acceptor, the quantum yield of the donor, the
relative orientation of the donor and acceptor, and the distance between the donor and the
acceptor. Specifically, the distance at which RET occurs with 50% efficiency is known as the
Förster distance and is typically in the range of 20–70 Å. Static quenching requires the
formation of ground-state complexes. The exact mechanism depends upon the stem sequence
and the chromophores and linkers used.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
For signal transduction, most MBs depend upon static or contact quenching (which was the
original signaling mechanism of MBs).[11] The term of contact quenching describes the close
proximity of a donor fluorophore to a nonfluorescent acceptor. Under these circumstances, the
bulk of the transferred energy is not emitted as light, but through nonradiative processes, such
as the release of heat.[26,42] This phenomenon has been exploited in the development of MBs
through the use of nonfluorescent quenchers to further improve quenching efficiency and
decrease background noise. The overall result is more-sensitive detection. Frequently used
nonfluorescent quenchers include dabcyl (4-(dimethy-laminoazo) benzene-4-carboxylic acid)
and Black-Hole Quenchers BHQ1 and BHQ2. The typical static/contact quenching efficiency
of these compounds lies between 85 and 97%. They can be paired with many common
fluorophores;[26,42] dabcyl, for example, is often used in MBs with near-infrared
fluorophores, even though its maximum absorption occurs at around 475 nm.
2.2. Thermodynamic Aspects
The hybridization of MBs with their targets can, in large part, be explained by the
thermodynamics of the system. A simple all-or-nothing (or “on”/“off”) model has been used
as an approximation of the initial and final states of the reaction. This model was supported by
experimental data, which showed that the melting temperature of a perfectly matched MB–
target helix was 42°C, whereas that of MB–target helices with a single mismatched base pair
was between 28 and 31 °C. Thus, the model predicted the negligible effect of a mismatched
base pair in the target DNA/RNA, but also predicted that the selectivity would be highest when
the mutation point was positioned centrally within the loop region.[12,49,50]
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 5
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
A comparison of the thermodynamics of MBs and linear DNA or RNA probes further illustrates
the relationship between melting temperature and selectivity, and explains why MBs are more
selective than linear probes. First, linear DNA and RNA probes have two possible states or
phases, that is, they can be free or bound to a target, whereas MBs have three possible states
or phases: hybridized with a target, free in the stem–loop conformation, and free as a random
coil.[48] The selectivity potential of a given probe is determined by the difference between the
phase-transition temperatures of a perfect target–probe helix and a mismatched target–probe
duplex. Detailed thermodynamic studies have shown that the free energy of MBs is lower in
the stem–loop conformation (hairpin-structured MBs) than in the random coiled state.[9,10,
12,47–49] These results suggest that the temperature difference causes the phase change from
a duplex to a hairpin conformation before transition to the random-coil state, in which
hybridization is most likely to occur. Thus, a longer or more stable stem helix should give more
selective MBs, as the difference in the temperature of the phase transition between the perfect
complementary helix and the mismatched duplex is increased.[48,49] Hence, it is the threephase thermodynamic behavior of MBs (in contrast to linear DNA and RNA probes) that
increases the difference in the transition temperatures between the perfectly matched helix and
the mismatched duplex and thus causes the enhanced selectivity.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
MB probes can be attached to surfaces and interfaces and thus used for the development of
biosensors.[19,25,51,52] Their high sensitivity and excellent selectivity make MBs effective
biosensor probes on gene chips and microarrays,[24] as well as for near-field optical and
microfiber sensors.[20] To gain an understanding of the specificity of surface-immobilized
MBs, the hybridization of MBs with target DNA (cDNA) was investigated at the singlemolecule level by atomic force microscopy (AFM)[46] by measuring the force required to
separate the MB from the target. The difference between the mean rupture force measured for
a MB/cDNA hybrid and that measured for a MB/DNA hybrid with a single mismatched base
pair was 0.50±0.11 nN and thus considerably higher than the corresponding difference found
for a linear DNA probe (0.21±0.08 nN). These results show that immobilized MBs are much
more specific probes than linear DNA probes for the detection of single mismatched bases.
2.3. Selectivity versus Kinetics
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The excellent selectivity of MBs is a major advantage with respect to linear DNA and RNA
probes. This high degree of selectivity results directly from the hairpin structure of MBs. The
selectivity of MBs can be improved readily by optimizing their sequence.[49,53] For example,
according to thermodynamic considerations, a longer or more stable stem helix should improve
selectivity by increasing the difference between the phase-transition temperatures for the
perfect complementary helix and mismatched duplexes,[48,49,59] as explained in Section 2.2.
Therefore, the simplest way to improve the selectivity of MBs should be to elongate the stem
or increase the G,C content in the stem region. Unfortunately, although a more stable stem
helix increases the stability of the hairpin structure of the MB, it also decreases the rate of
hybridization. Thus, the rate constant for the formation of a helix is about 104M−1 s−1 for linear
DNA probes of 17–19 bases in length, whereas the rate constant for MBs decreases
dramatically from about 5000M−1 s−1 to 40–300M−1 s−1 when the stem length is increased from
four to six base pairs.[49] On the other hand, shorter stem sequences result in a higher
fluorescence background and thus a decrease in the detection sensitivity. Therefore, a
compromise must be found between the higher selectivity of longer stem sequences and the
faster hybridization of shorter stem sequences. Usually, the stem sequence is about five to
seven base pairs in length, and the loop contains between 15 and 25 bases. An alternative
strategy is to use a longer stem sequence that is part of the target-binding sequence. In this
way, higher hybridization rates are possible without sacrificing the specificity of the longer
stem sequences.[50]
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 6
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The relationship between selectivity and hybridization kinetics is also uniquely affected by
another critical factor: the temperature difference. Therefore, temperature is an important
external factor that should also be taken into account when designing MBs for certain
applications. Higher temperatures drive free MBs from the hairpin structure to a random-coil
state, in which fluorescence is partially restored. Consequently, applications with temperatures
higher than 25 °C, such as in vivo imaging or real-time PCR detection, require MBs with morestable stem regions for low background fluorescence to be observed.[6,13] At temperatures
over 50 °C, the hairpin structure begins to melt into a random coil. They then cause such a high
background signal that they are ineffective as MBs.[48,49] This problem can be overcome by
synthesizing MBs from locked nucleic acids (LNAs), which have a bicyclic furanose unit
locked in an RNA-mimicking sugar conformation (Figure 2).[54,55] Since LNA–DNA
hybridization is stronger than DNA–DNA hybridization,[56–58] LNA-MBs are more selective
than DNA-MBs. Melting-temperature measurements indicate that the LNA-MBs remain in a
hairpin structure even at 95 °C, a temperature at which DNA and RNA would be denatured.
The hybridization of LNA-MBs with target DNA at 95 °C has also been observed.[54] Thus,
LNA-MBs hold promise for use in special biological applications for which normal DNA-MBs
are unsuitable. Besides LNA-MBs, other temperature-stable stem systems have been
developed and could be considered in the design of MBs.[143–145]
3. Bioanalytical Applications of Molecular Beacons
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The advantages described in the previous sections have made MBs attractive systems for a
variety of bioanalytical applications in the biomedical sciences, biotechnology, and chemistry.
[8,53,60] The target molecules in these applications have expanded from DNA and RNA
molecules to other biomolecules, such as proteins and enzymes. We discuss the major
applications briefly in the following sections.
3.1. Real-Time PCR and Other Gene-Detection Assays
MBs are most commonly used for real-time PCR and other gene-detection assays.[53,60] To
monitor the DNA amplification of the target sequence during the PCR process, MBs designed
to hybridize with the forward/reverse PCR product are introduced into the PCR solution. With
an increasing number of PCR cycles, a growing number of amplified target DNA molecules
are produced and hybridize with the MB during the annealing stage. This process generates
increasing fluorescence from the MB, and this fluorescence provides a measure of PCR
progress in real time. MBs offer higher sensitivity and better specificity for target detection
than TaqMan probes.[6,10] Moreover, the signaling mechanism of MBs enables multiplexed
detection in homogeneous PCR reactions, which improves the throughput and precision of the
assay.[9,10]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
In other methods for DNA and RNA amplification, such as rolling cycle amplification (RCA)
and nucleic acid sequence based amplification (NASBA), MBs are also effective reporters.
[61–63] For the detection of RCA products, MBs constructed from 2′-OMe RNA are used to
avoid degradation by 3′ exonuclease activity of polymerase. A stem length of four base pairs
is sufficient in the 2′-OMe RNA MBs because of binding of 2′-OMe RNA to DNA, compared
to DNA–DNA hybridization.[62] NASBA is an efficient, robust, and sensitive RNAamplification method, but had the disadvantage of labor-intensive and time-consuming
postamplification product detection. However, with the introduction of MBs designed to
complement the antisense RNA amplicon, the NASBA product can be detected in real time
and quantitatively.[62,63]
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 7
3.2. Detection of Triplex DNA
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
MBs are ideal for monitoring DNA and RNA interaction processes[8,48] and have been used
to study the kinetics of triplex-DNA formation.[64] The formation of triplex DNA is known
to inhibit the promoter site of disease-relevant genes. Real-time analysis of these processes
could very well facilitate the development of gene and antigene therapeutic strategies. As an
example, the melting profiles of intramolecular and intermolecular DNA duplexes, triplexes,
and quadruplexes were investigated by using DNA probes that mimic the signal-transduction
mechanism of molecular beacons.[65] Furthermore, MBs have been used to monitor DNA
sticky-end pairing[130] (Figure 3). The study of DNA sticky-end pairing advanced our
understanding of DNA characteristics, DNA assembly, and heterogeneous pairing at DNA
ends and thus resulted in an overall improvement in MB design.
3.3. SNP and Genetic Screening
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which make up about 90% of human genetic
variation, are regarded as potent molecular genetic markers and valuable indicators for
biomedical research, drug development, clinical diagnosis, and disease therapy.[66–70] The
inherent signaling mechanism by energy transfer and the high selectivity of MBs enable the
simple, rapid, and sensitive detection of SNPs.[10,71–73] MBs can be used to score SNPs in
a homogeneous solution during the PCR process by introducing MBs with sequences
complementary to those of the wild type and variant alleles, respectively. The loop portion of
the MB is designed to have a melting temperature slightly higher than the PCR annealing
temperature, and the stem is selected to dissociate at a temperature about 7–10 °C higher than
the PCR annealing temperature. The allelic base is typically located in the middle of the loop
portion of the MB to enhance its SNP-discrimination ability. To obtain an optimum signal,
PCR primers are generally designed to produce a PCR product with a length of fewer than 250
base pairs; the detection zone should be within 20–30 bases from a primer end.[71] In
comparison with other FRET-based homogeneous hybridization methods for SNP scoring,
such as TaqMan assays, MBs can provide more reliable genotyping results as well as more
flexible fluorescence detection for multiplexed analyses. Homogeneous and simultaneous
signal amplification and target detection make MB-based SNP assays suitable for highthroughput genotyping studies. The identification of multiple SNPs in this manner is of interest
to applications such as the construction of criminal DNA databases.[74]
3.4. Monitoring of Proteins and Small-Molecules
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
MBs are sensitive probes for monitoring interactions of proteins and enzymes with DNA.[7,
8] The protein-recognition ability of MBs was first demonstrated with a single-stranded DNAbinding protein (SSB) from E. coli. The binding stoichiometry and binding constant were
measured by monitoring the fluorescence enhancement caused by SSB-induced
conformational changes of the MB (Figure 4a).[22]
Interactions between enzymes and DNA, for example, the digestion of ssDNA by nucleases,
can also be detected with MBs (Figure 4b).[16] The cleavage of the loop sequence destabilizes
the stem duplex and restores fluorescence. The cleavage processes induced by three different
nucleases (S1 nuclease, DNase I, and mung bean nuclease) were monitored and studied.
Similarly, interactions between lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and ssDNA have also been
studied by using MBs (Figure 4c).[21] Variant LDH isoenzymes were found to have different
binding affinities for ssDNA; for example, a binding stoichiometry of 1:1 and a binding
constant of 1.9 × 10−7M−1 were measured for the complex LDH-5/MB.
As understanding of the characteristics and functions of MBs has increased, MB-based assays
have been designed to study more-specific and more-sophisticated processes involving DNA
and proteins, such as DNA ligation and phosphorylation,[17,18,75,76] which are involved in
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 8
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
DNA duplication, DNA recombination, and the repair of DNA damage. For the monitoring of
DNA ligation, MBs are designed to bridge two ssDNA sequences to form a nick structure
(Figure 5a). The two ssDNA sequences are complementary to two adjacent zones of the loop
portion of the MB. The melting temperature of these two short sequences is much lower than
that of the MB; therefore the loop–stem structure of the MB will remain intact. When the DNA
ligase is introduced, it catalyzes the junction of the nick structure by using the loop of the MB
as the template to form a longer DNA sequence that is complementary to the entire loop
sequence. This process leads to the separation of the stem and the restoration of fluorescence.
The DNA-ligation process can thus be monitored in real time.[18,75,76]
A number of DNA ligations catalyzed by different DNA ligases, including T4 DNA ligase and
the DNA ligase from E. coli, have been explored by using this principle. The DNA ligase from
E. coli operated much more precisely than T4 DNA ligase; however, a T-G mismatch at the 5′
end of the nick led to the highest error rate for the ligation with both ligases. The effects of
metal ions, small biomolecules, and drugs on the activity of DNA ligases have also been
examined. This assay might be useful for the identification and development of ligase-targeted
drugs.[76] However, as we still do not know exactly how the ligation process takes place, the
results of the studies with molecular beacons should be interpreted with caution.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
A similar strategy with MBs was used to study DNA phosphorylation, an important process
for the repair of DNA damage (Figure 5b).[17] In this case, the DNA fragment located at the
5′ side of the nick was modified to mimic dephosphorylation damage at the 5′ end of DNA
(that is, one hydroxy group at the 5’ end of the DNA is not phosphorylated). Consequently,
the nick cannot be sealed by a DNA ligase. Phosphorylation of the damaged DNA under the
catalysis of a polynucleotide kinase (PNK) is required before the two DNA fragments can be
ligated to form the longer oligonucleotide sequence complementary to the MB loop.
The use of MBs to investigate interactions of small molecules has also been attempted recently.
[76,133] A new molecular scheme was developed for the detection of small molecules, such
as nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) and ATP. For the NAD assay, MBs were used
with the DNA ligase from E. coli. The MB was designed to bridge two short oligonucleotides
with its loop sequence. Under these conditions, the DNA ligase from E. coli will only catalyze
the ligation of two short oligonucleotides in the presence of NAD. The ligation results in the
opening of the MB and the recovery of the fluorescence signal. This MB assay is faster, more
selective, and about ten times more sensitive than currently used NAD assays and can be used
conveniently to analyze for NAD in biological samples, such as cell lysates.
3.5. Biosensors and Biochips
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The use of MBs on solid surfaces as biosensors is expanding rapidly.[19,20,24,25,51,77–82]
Two important issues must be addressed in the development of such systems: 1) The
immobilization of the MBs on the surface must proceed with high efficiency and lead to stable
sensor architectures; 2) the MBs must be optimized for use at the liquid–solid interface. In
analogy with the immobilization strategies reported previously for DNA and RNA probes,
three types of interaction are employed for most applications for the immobilization of MBs:
the biotin–avidin interaction, the thiol–gold linkage, and amide bonds. Corresponding to the
various immobilization strategies, different support substrates, such as glass,[19,24] gold,
[51,84] polyacrylamide[85] and agarose,[54] are used. All of these strategies provide the highly
efficient and stable immobilization that is essential for the reproducibility, sensitivity, and
response speed of MB-based biochips and biosensors.
The immobilization of MBs on a surface often results in increased background fluorescence.
Several approaches have been developed to minimize this effect. One possibility is to add a
spacer between the MB and the surface to minimize potential MB–surface interactions.[20,
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 9
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
86] In one case, a polyT linker at one end of the MB was used as a spacer.[24] However, this
approach provides only a limited improvement in sensitivity. In another approach aimed at
providing a homogeneous local environment for immobilized MBs, MBs were attached to the
surface of a functionalized hydrophilic gel film, such as agarose or polyacrylamide.[25,85]
The MB–agarose system showed lower background fluorescence, higher sensitivity, a faster
response, and better selectivity than MBs fixed on glass. The immobilization of MBs on a gold
surface is yet another way to decrease background fluorescence, owing to the highly efficient
quenching effect of the gold surface on fluorophores in close proximity.[51,84] MB
fluorescence was enhanced more than 100-fold after hybridization with target DNA.
Novel signal-transduction strategies, such as enzymatic signal detection and electrochemical
electron transfer, have been developed as substitutes for fluorescence analysis.[87,88,131,
138] In these detection methods, the reporter is an enzyme or electrochemical agent linked to
the free end of an MB. The conformational change of the MB upon hybridization with the
target nucleic acid triggers the release of a signal by the reporter.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
MB-functionalized beads have been used for multiplexed analyte detection.[80,86] For this
application, various MB-coated microspheres are entrapped randomly within an array of wells
etched on an optical fiber of 500 µ M in diameter.[80] The high-throughput capacity and fast
response time of this array enables the accurate analysis of multiple genetic mutations. In
combination with analysis by flow cytometry, MB-functionalized microspheres have been used
to detect multiple unlabeled nucleic acid targets.[86] The signals from various MB-coated
beads were differentiated by using a classification strategy based on size and color coding.
Such assays based on MB beads are expected to enable simple, fast, and accurate genetic
analysis and genotyping for disease diagnosis and therapy.
Another class of powerful biosensors are ultrasmall optical-fiber probes, which are
characterized by their extreme sensitivity and enable spatial resolution.[89,90] By taking
advantage of immobilized MBs and evanescent wave excitation, biosensors were fabricated
from submicrometer fibers and used to detect DNA and RNA in small-volume samples with
exceptional sensitivity and selectivity. These renewable fiber probes could be applied to the
detection of specific DNA or RNA targets in living cells.
4. Real-Time Intracellular Monitoring with Molecular Beacons
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
One distinct advantage of methods based on MBs is that analytes can be detected without prior
separation of unbound probes. These methods can therefore be used for intracellular
measurements. For example, the synthesis, transport, and distribution of mRNA in living cells
can be monitored with good spatial and temporal resolution to provide important information
for functional genomics.[12,14,55] A number of probes have been developed for intracellular
mRNA detection in recent years, including linear binary FRET probes,[91] the nucleic acid
stain SYTO 14,[92] GFP-fused RNA-binding proteins,[93–96] quenched autoligation probes,
[97,98] and MBs.[12,14,99] Despite these advances, the field is in its infancy, and there is still
no single effective way to monitor intracellular events with all required parameters.
4.1. Molecular Beacons for mRNA Detection in Living Cells
As a result of their unique signaling mechanism, MBs are ideal for studying gene expression
in living cells: 1) Target RNA is detected in real time without the need to separate the bound
and unbound probes. This feature is crucial for studies on living cells, as it is impossible to
separate the MB–mRNA hybrids from an excess of the unbound MB without destroying the
cell. 2) The high sensitivity of MBs (in the nanomolar to subnanomolar range) is important for
sensing mRNA molecules with a low copy number in a single cell. 3) MBs have exceptional
selectivity and can differentiate between sequences with single-base mismatches.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 10
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
In the design of MBs for intracellular mRNA monitoring, there are two important issues to
consider: The MBs must be designed to find the target mRNA inside the cells, and an effective
method must be selected for efficient delivery into the cells. The selection of an appropriate
target region of the mRNA is perhaps the primary obstacle to sound MB design. This
complication arises from the complex secondary structure of the long mRNA sequences and
the fact that a given MB needs to have free access to its complementary sequence. Therefore,
the selection of a suitable target site usually begins with the prediction of possible mRNA
secondary structures. The target site is chosen in regions that have a high probability of
remaining single-stranded to ensure that the native mRNA structure experiences only minimal
interference from hybridization with the MB. High-affinity oligonucleotides of different
lengths that are complementary to the target sequences in the chosen regions are then used as
the loop sequences of MBs. To minimize false hybridization with nontarget mRNA molecules,
BLAST (basic local alignment search tool) analysis for selected sequences is a necessary step.
[100]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The most common methods for DNA delivery into living cells are microinjection,[14,101]
electroporation,[102] reversible permeabilization,[15] and peptide-assisted delivery.[103]
Microinjection has several advantages: It enables delivery into a single cell of interest, the
probe can be delivered in relatively reproducible amounts, and the response of the probe can
be observed immediately. Disadvantages of the microinjection technique are the relatively
complex instrumentation and low throughput. Electroporation and reversible permeabilization
offer a much higher throughput. Both methods produce pores in the cell membrane through
which probes enter the cell by passive diffusion.[15,102] However, intracellular molecules
may also diffuse out of the cell, and there are variations in the amount of the probe delivered
into each cell. Another approach, peptide-assisted delivery, enables probes to pass through the
cell membrane without disturbing the integrity of the cell.[103] However, this technique
requires the peptide to be conjugated to the probe, which may increase the cost and complexity
of probe synthesis. Furthermore, the delivery process requires an incubation period, which may
compromise the monitoring of hybridization dynamics. Also, the binding of the peptide-linked
MB on the cell membrane may trigger endocytosis-like processes, so that strategies to facilitate
endosomal escape may be required.
4.2. Gene-Expression Studies in Living Cells
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The increasing use of MBs for intracellular analysis has led to the development of MB methods
for the visualization of the localization, distribution, and transport of mRNAs inside living
cells. Early studies with MBs in vivo focused on the detection of hybridization to the target
RNA sequence, rather than on localization and distribution.[13,104] However, in 2003, Tyagi
and co-workers demonstrated that MBs could be used to visualize the distribution and transport
of mRNA.[12] In this study, an MB for Oskar mRNA in oocytes of Drosophila
melanogaster was investigated. To eliminate the background fluorescence of the MB, an
approach was developed with two MBs that targeted adjacent regions on the mRNA. When
both MBs were hybridized to the mRNA sequence at adjacent positions, the FRET signal would
occur and indicate the presence of the target. This method could be used not only to visualize
mRNA distribution, but also to track the migration of the mRNA through the cell and even
into adjacent cells in the oocyte. To study the behavior of a virus, viral mRNA was imaged by
using MBs inside host cells. The localization of the mRNA was examined, and diffusion of
the mRNA was monitored by fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP). Bao and
co-workers expanded on mRNA visualization by showing the colocalization of mRNA and
intracellular organelles in human dermal fibroblasts.[15] In this study, MBs were used in
conjunction with a fluorescent mitochondrial stain. Since the fluorescence of the MBs and that
of the stain could be resolved spectrally, Bao and coworkers were able to demonstrate that the
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 11
mRNA of both glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase and K-ras were localized
specifically within the mitochondria.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
It is commonly observed that MBs introduced into living cells are quickly sequestered into the
cell nucleus and then opened. The high fluorescence background that results in the intracellular
compartment and particularly in the nucleus area seriously affects the study of mRNA in the
cytoplasm. To solve this problem, tRNA translated in vitro was attached to one end of an MB
by hybridization with an extended arm of the MB.[99] The results of this study suggested that
the tRNA-coupled MBs had a longer residence time in the cytoplasm and were not concentrated
into the nucleus. In this form, they were suitable for intracellular mRNA monitoring. A similar
strategy, whereby molecular beacons are attached to macromolecules or nanoparticles, can also
help to keep the MBs out of the nucleus.[139,140]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The expression level of mRNA is also an important area of investigation in MB-based studies
of living cells. Two MB approaches have been used to determine the relative expression levels
of K-ras and surviving mRNA in human dermal fibroblasts.[15] We used MBs and a reference
probe as an internal standard for ratiometric analysis to study the stochasticity of mRNA
expression of manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD) in human breast carcinoma cells.
[105] We analyzed the MnSOD expression of three different cell groups and compared the
results with the expression of β-actin mRNA. The results for the different cells were normalized
by ratiometric analysis to compensate for many experimental and instrumental variations and
could then be in order for direct cell-to-cell comparisons. This method offers a new strategy
for the quantitative detection of mRNA in living cells.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Whereas several examples of the study of single mRNA targets inside cells have been
described, the monitoring of multiple mRNA molecules simultaneously in a single living cell
remains a challenge. Such an experiment would enable direct comparison of the expression
levels of related mRNA molecules in a single cell and would be extremely useful for the study
of certain diseases. It has been shown that MBs can be labeled with different fluorophores to
report different mRNA targets. In one study, MBs for MnSOD and β-actin mRNA, along with
an MB as a negative control, were microinjected into cells, and a confocal microscope with
multiple fluorescence-detection channels was used to monitor the relative expression levels of
MnSOD and β-actin simultaneously by ratiometric analysis (Figure 6).[14,105,146]
Ratiometric analysis enables more accurate and more reproducible measurements than direct
intensity measurements. The fluorescence of the MnSOD-specific MB in the cells increased
considerably during incubation for 4 h with lipopolysaccharide (LPS), a prototypical endotoxin
known to stimulate MnSOD expression. In control cells without LPS, the fluorescence of the
MnSOD MB remained at a low level. This study demonstrates that MBs are suitable for
effective intracellular monitoring and could potentially be used to study diseases where the
comparison of expression level of different mRNA species is important.
4.3. Neuron-Cell Genomics
Because of the extreme complexity and diversity of the nervous system, the mechanisms
underlying brain function and consciousness remain enigmatic, even after many years of
extensive research.[106] For example, the family of olfactory receptors (ORs) is one of the
largest known mammalian gene families and contains about 900 genes for humans and 1500
genes for mice.[107] Among the approximately 1000 (or even more) possibilities encoded in
the genome, every olfactory sensory neuron chooses just one OR and transcribes it from just
one allele in order to establish the correct olfactory circuitry between the nose and the brain.
Although our knowledge of the brain has been limited by an inability to identify and classify
its various cell types,[108] progress in genomics and proteomics now enables us to study the
development and operation of neurons and circuits at the molecular level. New methods in
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 12
functional genomics and proteomics, such as comparative genomic hybridization (CGH)
profiling, are being applied increasingly to gain insight into neural networks.[109]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Investigations into the function of single neurons would be enhanced by real-time monitoring
of the expression level of relevant genes in living neuron cells. We attempted to use MBs to
detect the mRNA of living neuron cells by the same approach that we used to study breast
carcinoma cells (Figure 7).[14,105] Unfortunately, the MBs produced a high fluorescence
signal soon after microinjection into the neuron cells. This result indicates that the cytoplasmic
contents of the neuron cells were very different to those of the cancer cells tested previously.
This high background fluorescence might also be caused by nuclease digestion or protein
binding, which are two major concerns regarding the use of MBs in living systems. To increase
the stability of MBs in neurons, we designed and synthesized new MBs from LNA (locked
nucleic acid) bases.[54,55] The preliminary results suggest that LNA-MBs are much more
stable in the cell cytoplasm than conventional MBs because of the rigid structure of the LNA
bases (see Table 1 in Section 2.1).
4.4. Optimization of DNA Probes by Molecular Engineering
Much optimization is necessary before MBs can be used to monitor mRNA expression in living
cells, in particular in terms of the sensitivity of the probes and the prevention of nonspecific
protein binding and nuclease digestion.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
4.4.1. Increasing the Sensitivity of Molecular Beacons—The generation of MB
probes with high sensitivity is a complex problem. For target sequences with a very low copy
number in single living cells, the sensitivity of conventional MBs is often inadequate.
Therefore, most applications are limited to the reporting of abundant or stimulated gene
products.[12,14,99] As a basic principle, the sensitivity of MBs can be improved by either
increasing the fluorescence intensity of the fluorophore or enhancing the quenching efficiency
of the quencher. However, the latter solution is confounded by the fact that there is always a
certain background signal from the cellular compartment and the environment, regardless of
the extent to which the fluorescence of the donor can be quenched. Accordingly, most strategies
for improving the sensitivity of MBs have focused on increasing fluorescence intensity.
As mentioned in Section 2.1, the typical efficiency of static or contact quenching observed is
85–97%.[26,42] Theoretically, higher quenching efficiencies would lead to a higher signal-tobackground ratio and thus better sensitivity and a greater dynamic range for target detection.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
A novel strategy for highly enhanced quenching, termed superquenching, involves a molecular
assembly of multiple quenchers.[43] For example, with a FAM as the fluorophore, quenching
efficiency was improved from 92.9 to 99.7% when an assembly of three dabcyl molecules was
used instead of just one dabcyl molecule. Furthermore, the signal-to-background ratio
increased significantly from 14 to 320; thus, the potential for detecting trace amounts of a target
was improved considerably (Figure 8). The increased hydrophobic interaction between the
fluorophore and multiple quenchers resulted in an increase of 5 °C in the melting temperature
of the MB. The higher melting temperature could possibly improve the capacity of the MB to
distinguish single-base mismatches. However, the method of reducing probe background by
superquenching cannot reach its full potential unless the cellular background is greatly
minimized by other strategies such as time-resolved measurement or wavelength shifting.
[124]
4.4.2. Increasing the Sensitivity of Molecular Beacons with Conjugated
Polymers—Another strategy for the improvement of MB sensitivity is the use of fluorescent
dyes. Poly(phenylene ethynylene) (PPE)[44] is a water-soluble polyelectrolyte with a high
quantum yield.[45] A single PPE chain can generate a fluorescence signal of much higher
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 13
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
intensity than that of a single fluorophore in a conventional MB. In a novel synthetic method
for coupling PPE to oligonucleotides, the polymerization reaction is carried out directly on the
oligonucleotides, which are linked to a glass support with pores of controlled size. It was found
that the PPE interfered with neither the hairpin structure of the MB nor its hybridization rate.
We compared the brightness generated by PPE with the fluorescence intensity of different
common fluorophores at their optimal excitation and emission wavelengths. The concentration
of these fluorophores was kept constant at 10 nM. The data obtained show clearly that PPE is
much brighter than regular organic dyes, such as Cy3, tetramethylrhodamine (TMR), FAM,
and Alexa Fluor 488 (ALX488; Figure 9). Under our experimental conditions, PPE is about
20 times brighter than Cy3 and more than six times brighter than Alexa Fluor 488 (Figure 9).
Moreover, the fluorescence intensity of a single PPE chain is about 75% that of a quantum dot
(QD); in other words, its brightness is comparable to that of a nanoparticle.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The quencher dabcyl showed high quenching efficiency in combination with PPE. An
experiment was performed to determine whether the superquenching of PPE by dabcyl was
possible. PPE (2 µ M: concentration of the repeat unit) was quenched very efficiently by dabcyl
at increasing concentrations (Figure 10). The Stern–Volmer quenching constant at lower
quencher concentrations (< 0.4 µ M) was approximately 4 × 106M−1. At higher concentrations
of the quencher, an upward curve was observed in the Stern–Volmer plot, and a much higher
quenching constant of approximately 1.4 × 107M−1 was found. Upward curvature in the Stern–
Volmer plot is typical for conjugated polyelectrolytes with oppositely charged quenchers. The
mechanism for this behavior has been discussed previously. In our experiment, the MB
conjugated with PPE generated a strong fluorescence signal upon binding to the target. This
result is promising for bioanalytical applications.
New strategies of this type, which improve quenching capability and strengthen overall signal
intensity, offer a potential solution to the difficulty of detecting targets of low abundance in
living cells. These strategies can also be transferred readily to the design of other DNA and
RNA probes for bioassays that require high sensitivity.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
4.4.3. Increasing the Stability of Molecular Beacons with Modified DNA Bases—
A general problem associated with the use of MBs is their cleavage by nuclease digestion, a
mechanism by which cells protect themselves from invasion by heterogeneous genes. MBs
have been shown to degrade inside cells within about 45 min, after which time MB fluorescence
increases significantly.[14,55] To improve the cytoplasmic stability of MBs, modified DNA
bases, including 2′-OMe derivatives,[110–112] phosphorthioate derivatives,[113,114] and
peptide nucleic acid (PNA) bases,[115,116,141] have been incorporated into their structure.
The 2′-OMe-modified MBs offer good nuclease resistance against intracellular digestion and
are not subject to cleavage by RNase H.[12] However, they exhibit high background
fluorescence in living cells, possibly as a result of nonspecific protein binding.[21,22,138]
PNA-MBs resist nuclease degradation and have a good affinity for DNA and RNA targets;
however, their low solubility and occasional aggregation have limited the scope of their
application.
To take full advantage of LNA-MBs (mentioned in Sections 2.3 and 4.3) for a variety of
applications, including the analysis of complex samples and intracellular monitoring, Yang et
al. synthesized a series of chimeric DNA/LNA MBs systematically and studied the effect of
the DNA/LNA ratio in MBs on their thermodynamics, hybridization kinetics, protein-binding
affinity, and enzymatic resistance.[132] The LNA bases in the stem sequence of the MB had
a significant effect on the stability of the hairpin structure. The hybridization rates of LNAMBs were improved significantly by lowering the DNA/LNA ratio in the probe. Furthermore,
a shared-stem design was important; that is, the stem region of the LNA-MB should also
hybridize to the target sequence to prevent sticky-end. Only MB sequences with alternating
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 14
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
DNA and LNA bases or entirely composed of LNA bases were found to resist nonspecific
protein binding and digestion by DNase I. Additional results showed that a sequence consisting
of a DNA stretch of less than three bases between LNA bases was able to block RNase H
function.
Overall, the study suggested that a shared-stem MB with a 4 base-pair stem and alternating
DNA/LNA bases is desirable for intracellular applications as this configuration ensures
reasonable hybridization rates, reduces protein binding, and resists nuclease degradation for
both target and probes. These findings have enormous implications for the design of molecular
LNA probes for intracellular monitoring, disease diagnosis, and fundamental biological
studies. Further modifications provided LNA-MBs that were suitable for long-term (from a
few hours to days) intracellular monitoring in real time with high sensitivity and selectivity.
[142] The LNA-MBs composed of a mixture of LNA and DNA bases showed extremely high
biostability. They were tested with MDA-MB-231 cancer cells to monitor mRNA expression
levels in real time for 5–24 h. The LNA-MBs were still functional after 24 h inside living cells
and thus enable the measurement of intracellular gene expression over an extended period of
time.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
To address the problem of stem invasion in hairpin probes, we recently created a modified MB
in which non-natural enantiomeric DNA (L-DNA) is incorporated in the stem and natural DDNA in the loop.[134] Since L-DNA is the mirror-image form of naturally occurring D-DNA,
it forms duplexes with the same physical characteristics in terms of solubility and stability as
those of D-DNA hybrids. With the exception of forming a left-handed double helix, however,
L-DNA cannot form stable duplexes with D-DNA. By incorporating L-DNA into the stem region
of an MB, intra- and intermolecular stem invasions are reduced, melting temperature is
increased, and selectivity for the target is improved; all these factors lead to enhanced
biostability. Our results suggest that the incorporation of L-DNA is a useful strategy for the
design of functional nucleic acid probes.
5. Outlook
Since the introduction of molecular beacons in 1996,[6] many efforts have been made to
improve their design and extend their scope of application, which has led to the creation of a
large family of efficient MB probes. The advantages of MBs include their highly efficient
signal-transduction mechanism through energy transfer, the flexibility of their chemical
modification, and their cost-effectiveness and have led to the development of a broad spectrum
of applications in biology, chemistry, biomedicine, and biotechnology. Efforts to improve MBs
will continue to focus on the optimization of signaling transduction, the use of modified bases,
and the development of new biochemical and biomedical applications.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
An important approach to improve the performance of MBs is the development of a more
efficient signal-transduction strategy. A wealth of new signaling strategies, such as FRET,
[11] wavelength shifting,[9] quenching at metal surfaces,[51,84,118] enzymatic amplification
[87,119,120] and electrochemical signal transduction,[88] have been developed and applied
to MB design. Novel fluorophores and quenchers, such as gold nanoparticles,[118]
superquenchers,[43] pyrene derivatives,[121,135] conjugated polymers,[44] gold surfaces,
[51,84] and ferrocene derivatives,[88] are also becoming increasingly attractive for various
applications.
A further advantage of MBs is that chemical modification of the structures is relatively
straightforward, which enables the use of highly flexible synthetic approaches. Several base
modifications have been developed for MBs, such as the incorporation of 2′-OMe[110–112]
and phosphorthioate derivatives,[113,114] as well as PNA,[115,116] LNA,[54,55] and L-DNA
bases[134] (see Table 1). MBs with these modifications have additional useful properties,
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 15
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
including resistance to nuclease digestion, a higher hybridization affinity, and minimized
nonspecific protein binding. MBs can also be linked to carbon nanotubes to generate molecular
sensors for studying molecular interactions.[147]
The scope of application of MBs, which were originally used in PCR monitoring and allele
analysis, has been extended enormously in the past few years. In combination with other
platforms and technologies, MBs are now used for protein assays,[21,22] enzyme monitoring,
[16–18] mRNA tracing in living cells,[12,14,99] biosensors,[19,20,80,82] and molecular
computing.[119,122] MB aptamers,[123–127] for example, are protein probes that combine
the advantages of the signal-transduction mechanism of MBs and the specificity of molecular
recognition by aptamers.[128,129,136,137] They can be used for the highly sensitive and
selective detection of proteins and cells.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 16
Biographies
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Kemin Wang is Professor of Biomedical Engineering and Chemistry at Hunan University in
China. He obtained his PhD from Hunan University in 1987 and undertook post-doctoral
studies with Professor Wilhelm Simon at the ETH Zurich in Switzerland from 1989 to 1991.
He has been a professor at Hunan University since 1992. His research is mainly focused on
bioanalytical chemistry on the nanometer scale and single-molecule level for applications in
nanobiotechnology, nanobiomedical devices, and chemical and biological sensing technology.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 17
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Weihong Tan is V. T. and Louis Jackson Professor of Chemistry at the University of Florida.
He obtained his BS from Hunan Normal University, his MS from the Chinese Academy of
Sciences, and his PhD in physical chemistry in 1993 from the University of Michigan. His
research interests are in chemical biology and bioanalyis, nanotechnology, and the generation
of aptamers for the elucidation of biological processes and a molecular foundation of various
diseases.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 18
Acknowledgments
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
We acknowledge many of our co-workers, whose research is described in this Minireview. Our research on molecular
beacons was inspired by Dr. Fred Kramer and Dr. Sanjay Tyagi and has been supported over the years by the NIH
(NIGMS GM 66137, NIH U54NS058185) and the NSF grants. This work is also supported by the NSFC project Major
International (Regional) Joint Research Program of Natural Science Foundation of China (20620120107).
References
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
1. Watson JD, Crick FH. Nature 1953;171:737. [PubMed: 13054692]
2. Watson JD, Crick FH. Nature 1953;171:964. [PubMed: 13063483]
3. Hall BD, Spiegelman S. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1961;47:137. [PubMed: 13710749]
4. Bolton ET, McCarthy BJ. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1962;48:1390. [PubMed: 13870855]
5. Nygaard AP, Hall BD. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1963;12:98. [PubMed: 13939298]
6. Tyagi S, Kramer FR. Nat. Biotechnol. 1996;14:303. [PubMed: 9630890]
7. Fang XH, Li JWJ, Perlette J, Tan WH, Wang KM. Anal. Chem 2000;72:747A. [PubMed: 10701259]
8. Tan WH, Wang KM, Drake TJ. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2004;8:547. [PubMed: 15450499]
9. Tyagi S, Marras SAE, Kramer FR. Nat. Biotechnol. 2000;18:1191. [PubMed: 11062440]
10. Tyagi, S.; Bratu, DP.; Kramer, FR. Nat. Biotechnol.. 1998. p.
49http://www.molecular-beacons.org/Introduction.html
11. Zhang P, Beck T, Tan WH. Angew. Chem. 2001;113:416.Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.2000, 40, 402.
12. Bratu DP, Cha BJ, Mhlanga MM, Kramer FR, Tyagi S. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003;100:13308.
[PubMed: 14583593]
13. Perlette J, Tan WH. Anal. Chem. 2001;73:5544. [PubMed: 11816586]
14. Medley CD, Drake TJ, Tomasini JM, Rogers RJ, Tan WH. Anal. Chem. 2005;77:4713. [PubMed:
16053280]
15. Santangelo PJ, Nix B, Tsourkas A, Bao G. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:e57. [PubMed: 15084672]
16. Li JJ, Geyer R, Tan W. Nucleic Acids Res 2000;28:E52. [PubMed: 10871351]
17. Tang ZW, Wang KM, Tan WH, Ma CB, Li J, Liu LF, Guo QP, Meng XX. Nucleic Acids Res 2005:33.
18. Tang ZW, Wang KM, Tan WH, Li J, Liu LF, Guo QP, Meng XX, Ma CB, Huang SS. Nucleic Acids
Res 2003:31.
19. Fang XH, Liu XJ, Schuster S, Tan WH. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999;121:2921.
20. Li J, Tan W, Wang K, Xiao D, Yang X, He X, Tang Z. Anal. Sci. 2001;17:1149. [PubMed: 11990586]
21. Fang XH, Li JJ, Tan WH. Anal. Chem. 2000;72:3280. [PubMed: 10939400]
22. Li JWJ, Fang XH, Schuster SM, Tan WH. Angew. Chem. 2000;112:1091.Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.
2000, 39, 1049.
23. Tan WH, Fang XH, Li J, Liu XJ. Chem. Eur. J. 2000;6:1107.
24. Yao G, Tan WH. Anal. Biochem. 2004;331:216. [PubMed: 15265725]
25. Wang H, Li J, Liu H, Liu Q, Mei Q, Wang Y, Zhu J, He N, Lu Z. Nucleic Acids Res 2002;30:e61.
[PubMed: 12060699]
26. Tsourkas A, Behlke MA, Bao G. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:4208. [PubMed: 12364599]
27. Biggins JB, Prudent JR, Marshall DJ, Ruppen M, Thorson JS. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
2000;97:13537. [PubMed: 11095715]
28. Cardullo RA, Agrawal S, Flores C, Zamecnik PC, Wolf DE. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1988;85:8790.
[PubMed: 3194390]
29. Immink RGH, Gadella TWJ, Ferrario S, Busscher M, Angenent GC. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
2002;99:2416. [PubMed: 11854533]
30. Witherow DS, Tovey SC, Wang Q, Willars GB, Slepak VZ. J. Biol. Chem. 2003;278:21307.
[PubMed: 12670932]
31. Larson DR, Ma YM, Vogt VM, Webb WW. J. Cell Biol. 2003;162:1233. [PubMed: 14517204]
32. Stuhmeier F, Hillisch A, Clegg RM, Diekman S. J. Mol. Biol 2000;302:1081. [PubMed: 11183776]
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 19
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
33. Zheng L, Hoeflich KP, Elsby LM, Ghosh M, Roberts SG, Ikura M. Eur. J. Biochem. 2004;271:792.
[PubMed: 14764096]
34. Heyduk T, Heyduk E. Nat. Biotechnol. 2002;20:171. [PubMed: 11821863]
35. Gohlke C, Murchie AI, Lilley DM, Clegg RM. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1994;91:11660. [PubMed:
7526401]
36. Okamura Y, Kondo S, Sase I, Suga T, Mise K, Furusawa I, Kawakami S, Watanabe Y. Nucleic Acids
Res 2000;28:E107. [PubMed: 11121494]
37. Greulich KO. ChemPhysChem 2005;6:2458. [PubMed: 16331734]
38. Stryer L. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1978;47:819. [PubMed: 354506]
39. Haugland RP, Yguerabi J, Stryer L. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1969;63:23. [PubMed: 16591747]
40. Holland PM, Abramson RD, Watson R, Gelfand DH. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1991;88:7276.
[PubMed: 1871133]
41. Livak KJ, Flood SJA, Marmaro J, Giusti W, Deetz K. PCR Methods Appl 1995;4:357. [PubMed:
7580930]
42. Lakowicz, JR. Principles of Fluorescence Spectroscopy. Kluwer, Dordrecht; 1999.
43. Yang CYJ, Lin H, Tan WH. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005;127:12772. [PubMed: 16159250]
44. Yang CYJ, Pinto M, Schanze K, Tan WH. Angew. Chem. 2005;117:2628.Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.
2005, 44, 2572.
45. Huang HM, Wang K, Tan WH, An D, Yang XH, Huang SS, Zhai Q, Zhou L, Jin Y. Angew.
Chem. 2004;116:5753.Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.2004, 43, 5635.
46. Jin Y, Wang K, Tan W, Wu P, Wang Q, Huang H, Huang S, Tang Z, Guo Q. Anal. Chem.
2004;76:5721. [PubMed: 15456291]
47. Tan L, Li Y, Drake TJ, Moroz L, Wang KM, Li J, Munteanu A, Yang CYJ, Martinez K, Tan WH.
Analyst 2005;130:1002. [PubMed: 15965520]
48. Bonnet G, Tyagi S, Libchaber A, Kramer FR. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1999;96:6171. [PubMed:
10339560]
49. Tsourkas A, Behlke MA, Rose SD, Bao G. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003;31:1319. [PubMed: 12582252]
50. Tsourkas A, Behlke MA, Bao G. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:4208. [PubMed: 12364599]
51. Du H, Disney MD, Miller BL, Krauss TD. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003;125:4012. [PubMed: 12670198]
52. Yao G, Fang X, Yokota H, Yanagida T, Tan W. Chemistry 2003;9:5686. [PubMed: 14639652]
53. Goel G, Kumar A, Puniya AK, Chen W, Singh K. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2005;99:435. [PubMed:
16108784]
54. Wang L, Yang CJ, Medley CD, Benner SA, Tan W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005;127:15664. [PubMed:
16277483]
55. Yang CYJ, Medley CD, Tan WH. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2005;6:445. [PubMed: 16375729]
56. Koshkin AA, Nielsen P, Meldgaard M, Rajwanshi VK, Singh SK, Wengel J. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1998;120:13252.
57. Koshkin AA, Singh SK, Nielsen P, Rajwanshi VK, Kumar R, Meldgaard M, Olsen CE, Wengel J.
Tetrahedron 1998;54:3607.
58. Wengel J. Acc. Chem. Res. 1999;32:301.
59. Zuker M. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003;31:3406. [PubMed: 12824337]
60. Marras SAE, Tyagi S, Kramer FR. Clin. Chim. Acta 2006;363:48. [PubMed: 16111667]
61. Leone G, van Schijndel H, van Gemen B, Kramer FR, Schoen CD. Nucleic Acids Res. 1998;26:2150.
[PubMed: 9547273]
62. Nilsson M, Gullberg M, Dahl F, Szuhai K, Raap AK. Nucleic Acids Res 2002:30.
63. Ayele W, de Baar MP, Goudsmit J, Kliphuis A, Tilahun T, Dorigo-Zetsma W, Wolday D, Abebe A,
Mengistu Y, Pollakis G. J. Virol. Methods 2005;130:22. [PubMed: 16040135]
64. Antony T, Thomas T, Sigal LH, Shirahata A, Thomas TJ. Biochemistry 2001;40:9387. [PubMed:
11478908]
65. Darby RAJ, Sollogoub M, McKeen C, Brown L, Risitano A, Brown N, Barton C, Brown T, Fox KR.
Nucleic Acids Res 2002:30.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 20
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
66. Kwok PY. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 2001;2:235. [PubMed: 11701650]
67. Johnson GC, Todd JA. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 2000;10:330. [PubMed: 10826983]
68. Risch NJ. Nature 2000;405:847. [PubMed: 10866211]
69. Gut IG. Hum. Mutat. 2001;17:475. [PubMed: 11385706]
70. Gabriel SB, Schaffner SF, Nguyen H, Moore JM, Roy J, Blumenstiel B, Higgins J, DeFelice M,
Lochner A, Faggart M, Liu-Cordero SN, Rotimi C, Adeyemo A, Cooper R, Ward R, Lander ES,
Daly MJ, Altshuler D. Science 2002;296:2225. [PubMed: 12029063]
71. Mhlanga MM, Malmberg L. Methods 2001;25:463. [PubMed: 11846616]
72. Piatek AS, Tyagi S, Pol AC, Telenti A, Miller LP, Kramer FR, Alland D. Nat. Biotechnol.
1998;16:359. [PubMed: 9555727]
73. Kostrikis LG, Tyagi S, Mhlanga MM, Ho DD, Kramer FR. Science 1998;279:1228. [PubMed:
9508692]
74. Sobrino B, Brion M, Carracedo A. Forensic Sci. Int. 2005;154:181. [PubMed: 16182964]
75. Tang ZW, Wang KM, Tan WH, Li J, Liu LF, Guo QP, Meng XX, Huang SS, Li D, Luo WF. Chin.
Sci. Bull 2003;48:1215.
76. Liu LF, Tang ZW, Wang KM, Tan WH, Li J, Guo QP, Meng XX, Ma CB. Analyst 2005;130:350.
[PubMed: 15724164]
77. Broude NE. Trends Biotechnol. 2002;20:249. [PubMed: 12007493]
78. Lou HJ, Tan WH. Instrum. Sci. Technol. 2002;30:465.
79. Epstein JR, Leung APK, Lee KH, Walt DR. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2003;18:541. [PubMed: 12706560]
80. Steemers FJ, Ferguson JA, Walt DR. Nat. Biotechnol 2000;18:91. [PubMed: 10625399]
81. Liu XJ, Farmerie W, Schuster S, Tan WH. Anal. Biochem. 2000;283:56. [PubMed: 10929808]
82. Liu XJ, Tan WH. Anal. Chem. 1999;71:5054. [PubMed: 10575961]
83. Kohli P, Harrell CC, Cao ZH, Gasparac R, Tan WH, Martin CR. Science 2004;305:984. [PubMed:
15310896]
84. Du H, Strohsahl CM, Camera J, Miller BL, Krauss TD. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005;127:7932. [PubMed:
15913384]
85. Wang YJ, Wang H, Gao L, Liu HP, Lu ZH, He NY. J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 2005;5:653. [PubMed:
16004134]
86. Horejsh D, Martini F, Poccia F, Ippolito G, Di Caro A, Capobianchi MR. Nucleic Acids Res 2005:33.
87. Bockisch B, Grunwald T, Spillner E, Bredehorst R. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33:e101. [PubMed:
15987786]
88. Fan CH, Plaxco KW, Heeger AJ. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003;100:9134. [PubMed: 12867594]
89. Kopelman R, Tan WH. Science 1993;262:1382. [PubMed: 17736816]
90. Tan WH, Shi ZY, Smith S, Birnbaum D, Kopelman R. Science 1992;258:778. [PubMed: 1439785]
91. Tsuji A, Koshimoto H, Sato Y, Hirano M, Sei-Iida Y, Kondo S, Ishibashi K. Biophys. J 2000;78:3260.
[PubMed: 10828002]
92. Knowles RB, Sabry JH, Martone ME, Deerinck TJ, Ellisman MH, Bassell GJ, Kosik KS. J. Neurosci
1996;16:7812. [PubMed: 8987809]
93. Bertrand E, Chartrand P, Schaefer M, Shenoy SM, Singer RH, Long RM. Mol. Cell 1998;2:437.
[PubMed: 9809065]
94. Fusco D, Accornero N, Lavoie B, Shenoy SM, Blanchard JM, Singer RH, Bertrand E. Curr. Biol.
2003;13:161. [PubMed: 12546792]
95. Forrest KM, Gavis ER. Curr. Biol. 2003;13:1159. [PubMed: 12867026]
96. McDonald D, Vodicka MA, Lucero G, Svitkina TM, Borisy GG, Emerman M, Hope TJ. J. Cell
Biol. 2002;159:441. [PubMed: 12417576]
97. Xu YZ, Karalkar NB, Kool ET. Nat. Biotechnol. 2001;19:148. [PubMed: 11175729]
98. Sando S, Kool ET. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002;124:9686. [PubMed: 12175209]
99. Mhlanga MM, Vargas DY, Fung CW, Kramer FR, Tyagi S. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33:1902.
[PubMed: 15809226]
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 21
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
100. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. J. Mol. Biol 1990;215:403. [PubMed:
2231712]
101. Dirks RW, Molenaar C, Tanke HJ. Methods 2003;29:51. [PubMed: 12543071]
102. Golzio M, Rols MP, Teissie J. Methods 2004;33:126. [PubMed: 15121167]
103. Nitin N, Santangelo PJ, Kim G, Nie SM, Bao G. Nucleic Acids Res 2004:32.
104. Sokol DL, Zhang XL, Lu PZ, Gewitz AM. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1998;95:11538. [PubMed:
9751701]
105. Drake TJ, Medley CD, Sen A, Rogers RJ, Tan WH. ChemBioChem 2005;6:2041. [PubMed:
16206227]
106. Glimcher PW, Rustichini A. Science 2004;306:447. [PubMed: 15486291]
107. Shykind BM. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2005;14:1903.
108. Young JM, Trask BJ. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2002;11:1153. [PubMed: 12015274]
109. Oostlander AE, Meijer GA, Ylstra B. Clin. Genet. 2004;66:488. [PubMed: 15521975]
110. Kehlenbach RH. Nucleic Acids Res 2003:31.
111. Tsourkas A, Behlke MA, Bao G. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:5168. [PubMed: 12466541]
112. Molenaar C, Marras SA, Slats JCM, Truffert JC, Lemaitre M, Raap AK, Dirks RW, Tanke HJ.
Nucleic Acids Res 2001;29:e89. [PubMed: 11522845]
113. Shah R, El-Deiry WS. Cancer Biol. Ther 2004;3:871. [PubMed: 15254427]
114. Vijayanathan V, Thomas T, Sigal LH, Thomas TJ. Antisense Nucleic Acid Drug Dev. 2002;12:225.
[PubMed: 12238811]
115. Petersen K, Vogel U, Rockenbauer E, Nielsen KV, Kolvraa S, Bolund L, Nexo B. Mol. Cell.
Probes 2004;18:117. [PubMed: 15051121]
116. Kuhn H, Demidov VV, Gildea BD, Fiandaca MJ, Coull JC, Frank-Kamenetskii MD. Antisense
Nucleic Acid Drug Dev. 2001;11:265. [PubMed: 11572603]
117. Vester B, Wengel J. Biochemistry 2004;43:13233. [PubMed: 15491130]
118. Dubertret B, Calame M, Libchaber AJ. Nat. Biotechnol. 2001;19:365. [PubMed: 11283596]
119. Stojanovic MN, Mitchell TE, Stefanovic D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002;124:3555. [PubMed:
11929243]
120. Stojanovic MN, de Prada P, Landry DW. ChemBioChem 2001;2:411. [PubMed: 11828471]
121. Fujimoto K, Shimizu H, Inouye M. J. Org. Chem. 2004;69:3271. [PubMed: 15132531]
122. Liu WB, Shi XH, Zhang SM, Liu XR, Xu J. Biosystems 2004;77:87. [PubMed: 15527948]
123. Li JWJ, Fang XH, Tan WH. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2002;292:31. [PubMed: 11890667]
124. Yang CJ, Jockusch S, Vicens M, Turro NJ, Tan WH. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2005;102:17278.
[PubMed: 16301535]
125. Fang XH, Cao ZH, Beck T, Tan WH. Anal. Chem. 2001;73:5752. [PubMed: 11774917]
126. Vicens MC, Sen A, Vanderlaan A, Drake TJ, Tan WH. ChemBioChem 2005;6:900. [PubMed:
15812865]
127. Cao ZH, Tan WH. Chem. Eur. J. 2005;11:4502.
128. Tuerk C, Gold L. Science 1990;249:505. [PubMed: 2200121]
129. Ellington AD, Szostak JW. Nature 1990;346:818. [PubMed: 1697402]
130. Li J, Tan W. Anal. Biochem. 2003;312:251–254. [PubMed: 12531213]
131. Graf N, Kramer R. Chem. Commun. 2006:4375.
132. Yang CJ, Wang L, Wu Y, Kim Y, Medley CD, Lin H, Tan W. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35:4030.
[PubMed: 17557813]
133. Ma C, Yang X, Wang K, Tang Z, Li W, Tan W, Lv X. Anal. Biochem. 2008;372:131. [PubMed:
17889821]
134. Kim Y, Yang CJ, Tan W. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35:7279. [PubMed: 17959649]
135. Conlon P, Yang CJ, Wu Y, Chen Y, Martinez K, Kim Y, Stevens N, Marti AA, Jockusch S, Turro
NJ, Tan W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008;130:336. [PubMed: 18078339]
136. Shangguan D, Li Y, Tang ZW, Cao ZHC, Chen HW, Mallikaratchy P, Sefah K, Yang CYJ, Tan
WH. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2006;103:11838. [PubMed: 16873550]
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 22
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
137. Mallikaratchy P, Tang Z, Kwame S, Meng L, Shangguan D, Tan W. Mol. Cell. Proteomics
2007;6:2230. [PubMed: 17875608]
138. Graf N, Göritz M, Krämer R. Angew. Chem. 2006;118:4117.Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.2006, 45, 4013.
139. Chen AK, Behlke MA, Tsourkas A. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35:e105. [PubMed: 17702767]
140. Tyagi S, Alsmadi O. Biophys. J. 2004;87:4153. [PubMed: 15377515]
141. Seitz O. Angew. Chem. 2000;112:3389.Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2000, 39, 3249.
142. Wu Y, Yang CJ, Moroz LL, Tan W. Anal. Chem. 2008;80:3025. [PubMed: 18321137]
143. Crey-Desbiolles C, Ahn DR, Leumann CJ. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33:e77. [PubMed: 15879349]
144. Grossmann TN, Röglin L, Seitz O. Angew. Chem. 2007;119:5315.Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.2007, 46,
5223.
145. Bourdoncle A, Torres AE, Gosse C, Lacroix L, Vekhoff P, Le Saux T, Jullien L, Mergny JL. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2006;128:11094. [PubMed: 16925427]
146. Medley CD, Lin H, Mullins H, Rogers RJ, Tan WH. Analyst 2007;132:885. [PubMed: 17710263]
147. Yang RH, Jin JY, Chen Y, Shao N, Kang HZ, Xiao ZY, Tang ZW, Wu YR, Zhu Z, Tan WH. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2008;130:8351. [PubMed: 18528999]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 23
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 1.
Working mechanism of a molecular beacon. The MB adopts a stem–loop structure and thus
holds the fluorophore (orange) and quencher (blue) in close proximity. As a result, the
fluorescence emission of the fluorophore is strongly suppressed (in the absence of a target).
The target sequence hybridizes with the loop domain of the MB and forces the stem helix to
open, whereupon fluorescence is restored because of the spatial separation of the fluorophore
from the quencher.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 24
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 2.
Composition of an LNA-MB. The sugar backbone of the LNA forms a rigid C3′ conformation
owing to a 2′-O, 4′-C methylene bridge.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 25
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 3.
Sticky-end pairing of MBs. Two complementary sticky ends from two MB hybrids can pair to
form a short double helix, so that two hybrids are associated at one end. These two MB hybrids
can form a closed structure, [MB]2, through pairing of the other two sticky ends, or polymerize
into a larger structure, [MB]n (n > 3), by pairing with more hybrids. Sticky-end pairing draws
the fluorophore and quencher together again and thus causes fluorescence quenching.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 26
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 4.
Application of MBs in enzymatic studies. a) Real-time monitoring of SSB–DNA binding: The
MB binds to the SSB protein whereby its structure is disrupted and its fluorescence is restored.
b) Detection of the enzymatic digestion of DNA: The enzyme cleaves the MB and destroys
the hairpin structure to restore fluorescence. c) Detection of LDH–DNA interactions: LDH
binds the MB and disturbs its structure, whereby fluorescence is enhanced.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 27
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 5.
Application of MBs in phosphorylation and ligation studies. a) Real-time monitoring of nucleic
acid ligation: Two oligonucleotides that are complementary to opposite halves of the MB loop
hybridize with the MB, whereby a nick is formed, and the stem may be opened slightly. The
DNA ligase binds to the nick and catalyzes the ligation of the two short oligonucleotides to
form a longer oligonucleotide. The ligation product hybridizes with the MB to restore
fluorescence. b) Monitoring of nucleic acid phosphorylation: Oligonucleotide A is first
phosphorylated at the 5′-hydroxy group by the polynucleotide kinase. The nick formed upon
the hybridization of oligonucleotide B and phosphorylated oligonucleotide A with MB can be
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 28
sealed by the DNA ligase, whereupon the stem helix of the MB is opened, and fluorescence is
restored.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 29
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 6.
Simultaneous detection of multiple mRNAs inside a living cell. Time-lapsed fluorescence
images of MBs inside a single MDA-MB-231 cell are shown. A: MB for β-actin (green); B:
control MB (red); C: MB for MnSOD (blue); D: tris(2,2′-bipyridyl)ruthenium(II) (RuBpy)
reference probe (orange).
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 30
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 7.
Living neuron into which MBs with polyU sequences were injected. The green fluorescence
is caused by opening of the MBs during neuronal processes.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 31
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 8.
Superquencher MBs. Signal-to-background ratio of the MBs with one (1-Q-MB), two (2-QMB), or three (3-Q-MB) quenchers The MBs have the same sequence and are labeled at the 3′
end with fluorescein as the fluorophore. One, two, or three dabcyl molecules were attached to
the 5′ end of the oligonucleotide. The MB containing three quenchers produced a more than
320-fold signal enhancement upon hybridization; a 14-fold signal enhancement was observed
with the single-quencher MB.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 32
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 9.
PPE-MBs Top: Working principle behind. a) a conventional MB and b) a conjugated-polymerlabeled MB. In the conventional MB, only one fluorophore is used to report a target-binding
event, whereas in the conjugated-polymer-labeled MB, a fluorescent polymer chain is used.
Bottom: Comparison of the fluorescence intensity of different fluorophores. The excitation/
emission wavelengths for Cy3, TMR, FAM, ALX488, PPE, and quantum dots are 543/560,
557/581, 488/514, 488/515, 440/520, and 400/520 nm, respectively. The concentration of all
dyes is 10 nM
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 33
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Figure 10.
Stern–Volmer plot of the fluorescence quenching of PPE by dabcyl in glycine–HCl buffer (40
mm, pH 2.3). The buffer was used to protonate dabcyl as a counterion to the polymer PPE.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.
Wang et al.
Page 34
Table 1
Classes and properties of molecular beacons.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
MB class
Properties
2-OMe-modified MBs
resistant to nuclease digestion;
high affinity for the target;
not substrates for RNase H;
not resistant to single-strand-binding proteins (SSBs)
resistant to nuclease digestion;
high affinity for the target;
low solubility in aqueous media
resistant to nuclease digestion;
higher affinity than most other MBs for the target;
excellent structural stability;
not substrates for RNase H;
low background fluorescence in a living cell;
depending on MB design, resistant to SSBs
bright signal upon hybridization;
excitation of multiple QDs with a single wavelength for multiplex analysis
bright signal upon hybridization;
can be quenched with a single quencher
excellent quenching efficiency;
very good selectivity
remarkable signal enhancement (320-fold with a triple-quencher assembly);
simple purification
PNA-MBs
LNA-MBs
QD-labeled MBs
CP-linked MBs
gold-NP MBs
SQ MBs
PNA=peptide nucleic acid, LNA=locked nucleic acid, QD=quantum dot, CP=conjugated polymer, NP=nanoparticle, SQ=superquencher.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 November 3.