Literature DB >> 11286560

Evolution of function in protein superfamilies, from a structural perspective.

A E Todd1, C A Orengo, J M Thornton.   

Abstract

The recent growth in protein databases has revealed the functional diversity of many protein superfamilies. We have assessed the functional variation of homologous enzyme superfamilies containing two or more enzymes, as defined by the CATH protein structure classification, by way of the Enzyme Commission (EC) scheme. Combining sequence and structure information to identify relatives, the majority of superfamilies display variation in enzyme function, with 25 % of superfamilies in the PDB having members of different enzyme types. We determined the extent of functional similarity at different levels of sequence identity for 486,000 homologous pairs (enzyme/enzyme and enzyme/non-enzyme), with structural and sequence relatives included. For single and multi-domain proteins, variation in EC number is rare above 40 % sequence identity, and above 30 %, the first three digits may be predicted with an accuracy of at least 90 %. For more distantly related proteins sharing less than 30 % sequence identity, functional variation is significant, and below this threshold, structural data are essential for understanding the molecular basis of observed functional differences. To explore the mechanisms for generating functional diversity during evolution, we have studied in detail 31 diverse structural enzyme superfamilies for which structural data are available. A large number of variations and peculiarities are observed, at the atomic level through to gross structural rearrangements. Almost all superfamilies exhibit functional diversity generated by local sequence variation and domain shuffling. Commonly, substrate specificity is diverse across a superfamily, whilst the reaction chemistry is maintained. In many superfamilies, the position of catalytic residues may vary despite playing equivalent functional roles in related proteins. The implications of functional diversity within supefamilies for the structural genomics projects are discussed. More detailed information on these superfamilies is available at http://www.biochem.ucl.ac.uk/bsm/FAM-EC/. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11286560     DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.2001.4513

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mol Biol        ISSN: 0022-2836            Impact factor:   5.469


  245 in total

1.  The CATH extended protein-family database: providing structural annotations for genome sequences.

Authors:  Frances M G Pearl; David Lee; James E Bray; Daniel W A Buchan; Adrian J Shepherd; Christine A Orengo
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 6.725

2.  Gene3D: structural assignment for whole genes and genomes using the CATH domain structure database.

Authors:  Daniel W A Buchan; Adrian J Shepherd; David Lee; Frances M G Pearl; Stuart C G Rison; Janet M Thornton; Christine A Orengo
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 9.043

3.  Annotation transfer for genomics: measuring functional divergence in multi-domain proteins.

Authors:  H Hegyi; M Gerstein
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 9.043

4.  Structural similarity to link sequence space: new potential superfamilies and implications for structural genomics.

Authors:  Patrick Aloy; Baldomero Oliva; Enrique Querol; Francesc X Aviles; Robert B Russell
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 6.725

5.  Structural characterization of the human proteome.

Authors:  Arne Müller; Robert M MacCallum; Michael J E Sternberg
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 9.043

6.  Expanding protein universe and its origin from the biological Big Bang.

Authors:  Nikolay V Dokholyan; Boris Shakhnovich; Eugene I Shakhnovich
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-10-16       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Placement of the structural proteins in Sindbis virus.

Authors:  Wei Zhang; Suchetana Mukhopadhyay; Sergei V Pletnev; Timothy S Baker; Richard J Kuhn; Michael G Rossmann
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 5.103

8.  Analysis of protein sequence/structure similarity relationships.

Authors:  Hin Hark Gan; Rebecca A Perlow; Sharmili Roy; Joy Ko; Min Wu; Jing Huang; Shixiang Yan; Angelo Nicoletta; Jonathan Vafai; Ding Sun; Lihua Wang; Joyce E Noah; Samuela Pasquali; Tamar Schlick
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.033

9.  From protein structure to biochemical function?

Authors:  Roman A Laskowski; James D Watson; Janet M Thornton
Journal:  J Struct Funct Genomics       Date:  2003

10.  Reconstructed ancestral enzymes reveal that negative selection drove the evolution of substrate specificity in ADP-dependent kinases.

Authors:  Víctor Castro-Fernandez; Alejandra Herrera-Morande; Ricardo Zamora; Felipe Merino; Felipe Gonzalez-Ordenes; Felipe Padilla-Salinas; Humberto M Pereira; Jose Brandão-Neto; Richard C Garratt; Victoria Guixe
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 5.157

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.