Intramolecular interactions in pancreatic ribonucleases.

A detailed analysis of the composition and properties of hydrophobic nuclei and microclusters in pancreatic ribonuclease A (RNase A) has been carried out. Distance calculations for all noncovalently bonded atoms revealed that the average number of nonpolar contacts between a side chain of an amino acid and its neighbors is substantially larger if it involves hydrophobic residues rather than nonhydrophobic ones. However, the difference decreased when the number of contacts per nonpolar group and/or atom were calculated. Three main nuclei and five microclusters were identified, and their quantitative parameters were calculated. These nuclei include hydrophobic residues with a substantial number of nonpolar contacts with the environment (Phe 8, Phe 120, Phe 46, Tyr 25, Tyr 97, Ile 107, Leu 35, Ile 81, Val 54, Val 108, Met 29, Met 30). Hydrophobic nuclei of RNase A differ in shape and in composition, in the number of intranuclear contacts and of associated residues, as well as in their internal mobility. All eight cysteine residues are involved in nonpolar interactions with amino acid residues of hydrophobic nuclei. Active site amino acid residues of RNase A form a noncovalent contact network comprised of themselves, as well as of many conserved residues from hydrophobic nuclei. Sequence alignment with some other members of the RNase A family of proteins shows remarkable similarity in positions and in conservation of the main nonpolar residues, comprising cores of two (out of three) hydrophobic nuclei. A correlation was shown to exist between the average density of contacts for side-chain atoms and the number of amino acids to be found in the appropriate positions in the sequences of related mammalian ribonucleases. However, there are certain amino acid positions in the third, smaller nucleus, which are highly variable within the family. Taking into account that this nucleus is composed of residues belonging to different elements of the secondary structure, it is likely that the mutual orientation of these elements can be somehow different for these proteins.