Literature DB >> 15491623

Genomic determinants of protein folding thermodynamics in prokaryotic organisms.

Ugo Bastolla1, Andrés Moya, Enrique Viguera, Roeland C H J van Ham.   

Abstract

Here we investigate how thermodynamic properties of orthologous proteins are influenced by the genomic environment in which they evolve. We performed a comparative computational study of 21 protein families in 73 prokaryotic species and obtained the following main results. (i) Protein stability with respect to the unfolded state and with respect to misfolding are anticorrelated. There appears to be a trade-off between these two properties, which cannot be optimized simultaneously. (ii) Folding thermodynamic parameters are strongly correlated with two genomic features, genome size and G+C composition. In particular, the normalized energy gap, an indicator of folding efficiency in statistical mechanical models of protein folding, is smaller in proteins of organisms with a small genome size and a compositional bias towards A+T. Such genomic features are characteristic for bacteria with an intracellular lifestyle. We interpret these correlations in light of mutation pressure and natural selection. A mutational bias toward A+T at the DNA level translates into a mutational bias toward more hydrophobic (and in general more interactive) proteins, a consequence of the structure of the genetic code. Increased hydrophobicity renders proteins more stable against unfolding but less stable against misfolding. Proteins with high hydrophobicity and low stability against misfolding occur in organisms with reduced genomes, like obligate intracellular bacteria. We argue that they are fixed because these organisms experience weaker purifying selection due to their small effective population sizes. This interpretation is supported by the observation of a high expression level of chaperones in these bacteria. Our results indicate that the mutational spectrum of a genome and the strength of selection significantly influence protein folding thermodynamics.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15491623     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2004.08.086

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


  24 in total

1.  The evolution of multimeric protein assemblages.

Authors:  Michael Lynch
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 16.240

Review 2.  The interface of protein structure, protein biophysics, and molecular evolution.

Authors:  David A Liberles; Sarah A Teichmann; Ivet Bahar; Ugo Bastolla; Jesse Bloom; Erich Bornberg-Bauer; Lucy J Colwell; A P Jason de Koning; Nikolay V Dokholyan; Julian Echave; Arne Elofsson; Dietlind L Gerloff; Richard A Goldstein; Johan A Grahnen; Mark T Holder; Clemens Lakner; Nicholas Lartillot; Simon C Lovell; Gavin Naylor; Tina Perica; David D Pollock; Tal Pupko; Lynne Regan; Andrew Roger; Nimrod Rubinstein; Eugene Shakhnovich; Kimmen Sjölander; Shamil Sunyaev; Ashley I Teufel; Jeffrey L Thorne; Joseph W Thornton; Daniel M Weinreich; Simon Whelan
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2012-04-23       Impact factor: 6.725

Review 3.  Prevention of amyloid-like aggregation as a driving force of protein evolution.

Authors:  Elodie Monsellier; Fabrizio Chiti
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 8.807

4.  The distribution of residues in a polypeptide sequence is a determinant of aggregation optimized by evolution.

Authors:  Elodie Monsellier; Matteo Ramazzotti; Patrizia Polverino de Laureto; Gian-Gaetano Tartaglia; Niccolò Taddei; Angelo Fontana; Michele Vendruscolo; Fabrizio Chiti
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2007-08-31       Impact factor: 4.033

5.  A reexamination of the propensities of amino acids towards a particular secondary structure: classification of amino acids based on their chemical structure.

Authors:  Sasa N Malkov; Miodrag V Zivković; Milos V Beljanski; Michael B Hall; Snezana D Zarić
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2008-05-27       Impact factor: 1.810

6.  Natural selection against protein aggregation on self-interacting and essential proteins in yeast, fly, and worm.

Authors:  Yiwen Chen; Nikolay V Dokholyan
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2008-05-23       Impact factor: 16.240

7.  Maximum-Likelihood Phylogenetic Inference with Selection on Protein Folding Stability.

Authors:  Miguel Arenas; Agustin Sánchez-Cobos; Ugo Bastolla
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 16.240

8.  Mutation bias favors protein folding stability in the evolution of small populations.

Authors:  Raul Mendez; Miriam Fritsche; Markus Porto; Ugo Bastolla
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-05-06       Impact factor: 4.475

9.  GroEL dependency affects codon usage--support for a critical role of misfolding in gene evolution.

Authors:  Tobias Warnecke; Laurence D Hurst
Journal:  Mol Syst Biol       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 11.429

10.  A universal trend among proteomes indicates an oily last common ancestor.

Authors:  Ranjan V Mannige; Charles L Brooks; Eugene I Shakhnovich
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 4.475

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.