Literature DB >> 15849756

Geometric cooperativity and anticooperativity of three-body interactions in native proteins.

Xiang Li1, Jie Liang.   

Abstract

Characterizing multibody interactions of hydrophobic, polar, and ionizable residues in protein is important for understanding the stability of protein structures. We introduce a geometric model for quantifying 3-body interactions in native proteins. With this model, empirical propensity values for many types of 3-body interactions can be reliably estimated from a database of native protein structures, despite the overwhelming presence of pairwise contacts. In addition, we define a nonadditive coefficient that characterizes cooperativity and anticooperativity of residue interactions in native proteins by measuring the deviation of 3-body interactions from 3 independent pairwise interactions. It compares the 3-body propensity value from what would be expected if only pairwise interactions were considered, and highlights the distinction of propensity and cooperativity of 3-body interaction. Based on the geometric model, and what can be inferred from statistical analysis of such a model, we find that hydrophobic interactions and hydrogen-bonding interactions make nonadditive contributions to protein stability, but the nonadditive nature depends on whether such interactions are located in the protein interior or on the protein surface. When located in the interior, many hydrophobic interactions such as those involving alkyl residues are anticooperative. Salt-bridge and regular hydrogen-bonding interactions, such as those involving ionizable residues and polar residues, are cooperative. When located on the protein surface, these salt-bridge and regular hydrogen-bonding interactions are anticooperative, and hydrophobic interactions involving alkyl residues become cooperative. We show with examples that incorporating 3-body interactions improves discrimination of protein native structures against decoy conformations. In addition, analysis of cooperative 3-body interaction may reveal spatial motifs that can suggest specific protein functions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15849756     DOI: 10.1002/prot.20438

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proteins        ISSN: 0887-3585


  14 in total

1.  GOAP: a generalized orientation-dependent, all-atom statistical potential for protein structure prediction.

Authors:  Hongyi Zhou; Jeffrey Skolnick
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Salt bridges: geometrically specific, designable interactions.

Authors:  Jason E Donald; Daniel W Kulp; William F DeGrado
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2011-01-05

3.  Hydrophobic interactions in model enclosures from small to large length scales: non-additivity in explicit and implicit solvent models.

Authors:  Lingle Wang; Richard A Friesner; B J Berne
Journal:  Faraday Discuss       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.008

4.  Effective knowledge-based potentials.

Authors:  Evandro Ferrada; Francisco Melo
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 6.725

5.  Free energies for coarse-grained proteins by integrating multibody statistical contact potentials with entropies from elastic network models.

Authors:  Michael T Zimmermann; Sumudu P Leelananda; Pawel Gniewek; Yaping Feng; Robert L Jernigan; Andrzej Kloczkowski
Journal:  J Struct Funct Genomics       Date:  2011-06-15

6.  Multibody coarse-grained potentials for native structure recognition and quality assessment of protein models.

Authors:  Pawel Gniewek; Sumudu P Leelananda; Andrzej Kolinski; Robert L Jernigan; Andrzej Kloczkowski
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2011-04-19

7.  Multiscale Modeling of Cellular Epigenetic States: Stochasticity in Molecular Networks, Chromatin Folding in Cell Nuclei, and Tissue Pattern Formation of Cells.

Authors:  Jie Liang; Youfang Cao; Gamze Gursoy; Hammad Naveed; Anna Terebus; Jieling Zhao
Journal:  Crit Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2015

8.  Specificity and cooperativity at β-lactamase position 104 in TEM-1/BLIP and SHV-1/BLIP interactions.

Authors:  Melinda S Hanes; Kimberly A Reynolds; Case McNamara; Partho Ghosh; Robert A Bonomo; Jack F Kirsch; Tracy M Handel
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2011-02-03

9.  Scoring function to predict solubility mutagenesis.

Authors:  Ye Tian; Christopher Deutsch; Bala Krishnamoorthy
Journal:  Algorithms Mol Biol       Date:  2010-10-07       Impact factor: 1.405

10.  Scoring protein interaction decoys using exposed residues (SPIDER): a novel multibody interaction scoring function based on frequent geometric patterns of interfacial residues.

Authors:  Raed Khashan; Weifan Zheng; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2012-06-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.