Coordination geometry of nonbonded residues in globular proteins

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Proteins Tertiary Protein Structure of Enzyme Lactasevideo Video 2.
Advertisements

Arginine, who are you? Why so important?. Release 2015_01 of 07-Jan-15 of UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot contains sequence entries, comprising
Structure of the Rho Family GTP-Binding Protein Cdc42 in Complex with the Multifunctional Regulator RhoGDI  Gregory R. Hoffman, Nicolas Nassar, Richard.
Cathode (attracts (+) amino acids)
High-Resolution Model of the Microtubule
Biology of Amyloid: Structure, Function, and Regulation
Figure 3.14A–D Protein structure (layer 1)
A Gate in the Selectivity Filter of Potassium Channels
Haixu Tang School of Inforamtics
Volume 8, Issue 7, Pages (July 2000)
Volume 11, Issue 10, Pages (October 2004)
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages (February 2006)
Amino Acids Amine group -NH2 Carboxylic group -COOH
Volume 83, Issue 3, Pages (September 2002)
Volume 15, Issue 8, Pages (August 2007)
Volume 83, Issue 5, Pages (November 2002)
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages (January 1997)
AnchorDock: Blind and Flexible Anchor-Driven Peptide Docking
Chaperone-Assisted Crystallography with DARPins
Near-Atomic Resolution for One State of F-Actin
Crystal Structure of a Vertebrate Smooth Muscle Myosin Motor Domain and Its Complex with the Essential Light Chain  Roberto Dominguez, Yelena Freyzon,
How to Test an Assertion
Ching-Ling Teng, Robert G. Bryant  Biophysical Journal 
How Does a Voltage Sensor Interact with a Lipid Bilayer
Damped-Dynamics Flexible Fitting
Volume 9, Issue 6, Pages (June 2001)
Clare-Louise Towse, Steven J. Rysavy, Ivan M. Vulovic, Valerie Daggett 
Crystal Structure of an Inactive Akt2 Kinase Domain
Crystal Structure of the MHC Class I Homolog MIC-A, a γδ T Cell Ligand
Volume 98, Issue 8, Pages (April 2010)
Volume 21, Issue 10, Pages (October 2013)
Volume 3, Issue 2, Pages (February 1995)
The Signaling Pathway of Rhodopsin
Chapter 18 Naturally Occurring Nitrogen-Containing Compounds
Volume 15, Issue 11, Pages (November 2007)
Binding Dynamics of Isolated Nucleoporin Repeat Regions to Importin-β
Specificity in Trk Receptor:Neurotrophin Interactions
Qian Steven Xu, Rebecca B. Kucera, Richard J. Roberts, Hwai-Chen Guo 
Volume 14, Issue 5, Pages (May 2006)
Functional Plasticity in the Substrate Binding Site of β-Secretase
Moon K. Kim, Robert L. Jernigan, Gregory S. Chirikjian 
Comparative Studies of Microtubule Mechanics with Two Competing Models Suggest Functional Roles of Alternative Tubulin Lateral Interactions  Zhanghan.
Crystal Structure of the p53 Core Domain Bound to a Full Consensus Site as a Self- Assembled Tetramer  Yongheng Chen, Raja Dey, Lin Chen  Structure  Volume.
E. coli Dihydroorotate Dehydrogenase Reveals Structural and Functional Distinctions between Different Classes of Dihydroorotate Dehydrogenases  Sofie.
Unfolding Barriers in Bacteriorhodopsin Probed from the Cytoplasmic and the Extracellular Side by AFM  Max Kessler, Hermann E. Gaub  Structure  Volume.
Alemayehu A. Gorfe, Barry J. Grant, J. Andrew McCammon  Structure 
Activation of the Edema Factor of Bacillus anthracis by Calmodulin: Evidence of an Interplay between the EF-Calmodulin Interaction and Calcium Binding 
Volume 103, Issue 5, Pages (September 2012)
Structure of the Rho Family GTP-Binding Protein Cdc42 in Complex with the Multifunctional Regulator RhoGDI  Gregory R. Hoffman, Nicolas Nassar, Richard.
Reduced Curvature of Ligand-Binding Domain Free-Energy Surface Underlies Partial Agonism at NMDA Receptors  Jian Dai, Huan-Xiang Zhou  Structure  Volume.
Timothy A. Isgro, Klaus Schulten  Structure 
The structure of the complex of plastocyanin and cytochrome f, determined by paramagnetic NMR and restrained rigid-body molecular dynamics  Marcellus.
Volume 80, Issue 1, Pages (January 2001)
Volume 110, Issue 9, Pages (May 2016)
Feng Ding, Douglas Tsao, Huifen Nie, Nikolay V. Dokholyan  Structure 
The 2.0 å structure of a cross-linked complex between snowdrop lectin and a branched mannopentaose: evidence for two unique binding modes  Christine Schubert.
Volume 1, Issue 5, Pages R95-R106 (October 1996)
Two Pathways Mediate Interdomain Allosteric Regulation in Pin1
Pingwei Li, Gerry McDermott, Roland K. Strong  Immunity 
Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages (January 2014)
Structure of an IκBα/NF-κB Complex
Volume 13, Issue 5, Pages (May 2005)
Affinity maturation of high-affinity human PfCSP NANP antibodies
A Rapid Coarse Residue-Based Computational Method for X-Ray Solution Scattering Characterization of Protein Folds and Multiple Conformational States of.
Hydrophobic Core Formation and Dehydration in Protein Folding Studied by Generalized-Ensemble Simulations  Takao Yoda, Yuji Sugita, Yuko Okamoto  Biophysical.
Christian X. Weichenberger, Manfred J. Sippl  Structure 
Structural Basis for Activation of ARF GTPase
Fig. 3 Organization of the active site of DHHC20.
Unfolding Barriers in Bacteriorhodopsin Probed from the Cytoplasmic and the Extracellular Side by AFM  Max Kessler, Hermann E. Gaub  Structure  Volume.
The Structure of the MAP2K MEK6 Reveals an Autoinhibitory Dimer
Presentation transcript:

Coordination geometry of nonbonded residues in globular proteins Ivet Bahar, Robert L. Jernigan  Folding and Design  Volume 1, Issue 5, Pages 357-370 (October 1996) DOI: 10.1016/S1359-0278(96)00051-X Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Illustration of the coordination of a given sidechain Si by nonbonded neighbors Sj, j ≥ i+3. The sidechain of the central residue (alanine), shown in yellow, is in close contact with six neighbors, shown by the yellow dotted lines, located in the first coordination shell (r ≤ 6.8 å). The portion of the protein shown in red refers to the nearest neighbors (up to i ± 2) along the backbone. Here the central sidechain (Ala112 in the N-terminal domain of T4 lysozyme) is being coordinated by residues Lys83, Leu84, Asn81, Thr109, Glu108 and Leu118, the relative distances from the Ala112 Cβ being 4.17 å, 4.38 å, 4.41 å, 5.85 å, 6.05 å and 6.47 å, respectively. We note that residues Lys83, Leu84, Asn81 (shown in the lower part) and Leu118 (upper part, left, shown in gray) are not sequentially near neighbors, while Thr109 and Glu108 are the third and fourth neighbors along the backbone. Such close neighbors have not been included in the distributions, their loci being predominantly determined by local constraints, rather than nonbonded preferences. We note that the near neighbors Phe114 and Thr115 are located at r ≥ 8.0 å. Folding and Design 1996 1, 357-370DOI: (10.1016/S1359-0278(96)00051-X) Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Schematic representation of the coordination between sidechain units Si and Sj attached to the ith and jth Cαs respectively. rij, shown as a dashed line with an arrow at the end, is the separation vector pointing from Si to Sj. The polar angle ϑij represents the angle between rij and the extension of the sidechain bond vector lsi between Cαi and Si. φij is the rotational angle about bond lsi defined by the relative positions of the four points Cαi−1, Cαi, Si and Sj, assuming the value φij = 180° for the trans position. The three geometric variables rij, ϑij and φij characterize the coordination of Si by Sj. The azimuthal angle space is divided into six states, trans (t), skew+ (s+), gauche+ (g+), cis (c), gauche– (g−), and skew− (s−), corresponding to successive intervals of width 60° in the range 0° ≤ φij ≤ 360°. The polar angles are divided into three successive intervals of width 60° in the full range 0° ≤ ϑij ≤ 180°; these are referred to as the front (f), lateral (l), and back (b) positions. Folding and Design 1996 1, 357-370DOI: (10.1016/S1359-0278(96)00051-X) Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Distribution of azimuthal angles N(φi) for the coordination of any type of sidechain near (2.0 ≤ r ≤ 6.8 å) a given sidechain Si. Results are obtained at 30° intervals for (a) Gly, Phe and Tyr, (b) Ala and Pro, (c) Val, Ile, Glu and Gln, (d) Trp, Ser and Thr, (e) Leu, Met, Asp and Asn, (f) Cys, His, Lys and Arg. The biases arising from the differences in the natural occurrence of residues of different types are removed by expressing the results on the basis of 100 central residues of each type. The overall height of a given distribution curve thus reflects the number of internal contacts, or the extent of burial of the corresponding residue. Folding and Design 1996 1, 357-370DOI: (10.1016/S1359-0278(96)00051-X) Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Probability distribution P(φi) of azimuthal angles for two groups of residues. The group ‘long and aromatic’ refers to sidechains Arg, Lys, Glu, Gln, Trp, Tyr, His, Phe and Met. The group ‘small’ includes all the remaining residue types. Folding and Design 1996 1, 357-370DOI: (10.1016/S1359-0278(96)00051-X) Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Probability distributions of coordination angles ϑ and φ in the neighborhood of sidechains of different types. Contour maps (a) and (a′) represent the average behavior of all sidechains obtained for the respective distance ranges of 2.0 ≤ r ≤ 6.8 å and 2.0 ≤ r ≤ 4.4 å. Innermost contours refer to highest density regions and define the most stable coordination states. The peaks in the probability distributions are indicated by the symbol ‘x’. Two maxima are observed in part (a) at ls− and lg+ states. At the close distance range (a′), the former is hardly distinguishable, while the latter is shifted to an ls+ state. The range of accessible polar angles becomes narrower and shifts toward front positions in the close distance range. (b–d) Represent the same type of diagram obtained for Ala, Gly and Gln, respectively, in the broad distance range 2.0 ≤ r ≤ 6.8 å. Their close distance counterparts are presented in the maps (b′–d′). See Table 3 for the list of the most probable residue-specific coordination loci for each type of sidechain, for the two distance ranges. Folding and Design 1996 1, 357-370DOI: (10.1016/S1359-0278(96)00051-X) Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 Probability distributions of the coordination angles P(ϑij, φij) for some specific pairs Si–Sj of sidechains. (a) Lys–Glu, (b) Leu–Leu, (c) Lys–Phe, (d) Glu–Met, (e) Thr–Thr, and (f) Thr–Val. Distributions in parts (a–d) are obtained for the broad distance range 2.0 ≤ r ≤ 6.8 å; parts (e) and (f) refer to the close distance association for the pairs Thr–Thr and Thr–Val. Folding and Design 1996 1, 357-370DOI: (10.1016/S1359-0278(96)00051-X) Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 7 Probability space covered by the most probable coordination states shown against the fraction of the conformational space for (a) random association of sidechains, (b) association of all sidechains with Si = Gly in the distance range 2.0 ≤ r ≤ 6.8 å, (c) association of all sidechains with Si = Gln, for the same distances, and (d) Thr–Thr pairs in the close distance range 2.0 ≤ r ≤ 4.4 å. Departure from the dashed line (a) gives a direct measure of the specificity of interactions. Folding and Design 1996 1, 357-370DOI: (10.1016/S1359-0278(96)00051-X) Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions