Literature DB >> 18708527

Evaluating and optimizing computational protein design force fields using fixed composition-based negative design.

Oscar Alvizo1, Stephen L Mayo.   

Abstract

An accurate force field is essential to computational protein design and protein fold prediction studies. Proper force field tuning is problematic, however, due in part to the incomplete modeling of the unfolded state. Here, we evaluate and optimize a protein design force field by constraining the amino acid composition of the designed sequences to that of a well behaved model protein. According to the random energy model, unfolded state energies are dependent only on amino acid composition and not the specific arrangement of amino acids. Therefore, energy discrepancies between computational predictions and experimental results, for sequences of identical composition, can be directly attributed to flaws in the force field's ability to properly account for folded state sequence energies. This aspect of fixed composition design allows for force field optimization by focusing solely on the interactions in the folded state. Several rounds of fixed composition optimization of the 56-residue beta1 domain of protein G yielded force field parameters with significantly greater predictive power: Optimized sequences exhibited higher wild-type sequence identity in critical regions of the structure, and the wild-type sequence showed an improved Z-score. Experimental studies revealed a designed 24-fold mutant to be stably folded with a melting temperature similar to that of the wild-type protein. Sequence designs using engrailed homeodomain as a scaffold produced similar results, suggesting the tuned force field parameters were not specific to protein G.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18708527      PMCID: PMC2516967          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0805858105

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  36 in total

1.  Achieving stability and conformational specificity in designed proteins via binary patterning.

Authors:  S A Marshall; S L Mayo
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2001-01-19       Impact factor: 5.469

2.  De novo protein design. I. In search of stability and specificity.

Authors:  P Koehl; M Levitt
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1999-11-12       Impact factor: 5.469

3.  Automatic protein design with all atom force-fields by exact and heuristic optimization.

Authors:  L Wernisch; S Hery; S J Wodak
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2000-08-18       Impact factor: 5.469

4.  Designing protein beta-sheet surfaces by Z-score optimization.

Authors:  A G Street; D Datta; D B Gordon; S L Mayo
Journal:  Phys Rev Lett       Date:  2000-05-22       Impact factor: 9.161

5.  Native protein sequences are close to optimal for their structures.

Authors:  B Kuhlman; D Baker
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-09-12       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Advantages of fine-grained side chain conformer libraries.

Authors:  Reshma P Shetty; Paul I W De Bakker; Mark A DePristo; Tom L Blundell
Journal:  Protein Eng       Date:  2003-12

7.  Single-site mutations in a hyperthermophilic variant of the B1 domain of protein G result in self-assembled oligomers.

Authors:  Scott C Meyer; Carmen Huerta; Indraneel Ghosh
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  2005-02-22       Impact factor: 3.162

8.  Formation of unique structure in polypeptide chains. Theoretical investigation with the aid of a replica approach.

Authors:  E I Shakhnovich; A M Gutin
Journal:  Biophys Chem       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 2.352

9.  Conformational parameters for amino acids in helical, beta-sheet, and random coil regions calculated from proteins.

Authors:  P Y Chou; G D Fasman
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  1974-01-15       Impact factor: 3.162

10.  Spin glasses and the statistical mechanics of protein folding.

Authors:  J D Bryngelson; P G Wolynes
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 11.205

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Designing specific protein-protein interactions using computation, experimental library screening, or integrated methods.

Authors:  T Scott Chen; Amy E Keating
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2012-06-08       Impact factor: 6.725

2.  Computational protein design with explicit consideration of surface hydrophobic patches.

Authors:  Ron Jacak; Andrew Leaver-Fay; Brian Kuhlman
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2011-12-16

Review 3.  Recent progress in protein drug design and discovery with a focus on novel approaches to the development of anti-cocaine medications.

Authors:  Fang Zheng; Chang-Guo Zhan
Journal:  Future Med Chem       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.808

Review 4.  Computational design of affinity and specificity at protein-protein interfaces.

Authors:  John Karanicolas; Brian Kuhlman
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2009-07-29       Impact factor: 6.809

5.  Fast search algorithms for computational protein design.

Authors:  Seydou Traoré; Kyle E Roberts; David Allouche; Bruce R Donald; Isabelle André; Thomas Schiex; Sophie Barbe
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 3.376

6.  Biophysical and structural considerations for protein sequence evolution.

Authors:  Johan A Grahnen; Priyanka Nandakumar; Jan Kubelka; David A Liberles
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2011-12-16       Impact factor: 3.260

7.  The evolution of protein structures and structural ensembles under functional constraint.

Authors:  Jessica Siltberg-Liberles; Johan A Grahnen; David A Liberles
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2011-10-28       Impact factor: 4.096

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.