Literature DB >> 20961427

Analysis of binding properties and specificity through identification of the interface forming residues (IFR) for serine proteases in silico docked to different inhibitors.

Cristina Ribeiro1, Roberto C Togawa, Izabella A P Neshich, Ivan Mazoni, Adauto L Mancini, Raquel C de Melo Minardi, Carlos H da Silveira, José G Jardine, Marcelo M Santoro, Goran Neshich.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Enzymes belonging to the same super family of proteins in general operate on variety of substrates and are inhibited by wide selection of inhibitors. In this work our main objective was to expand the scope of studies that consider only the catalytic and binding pocket amino acids while analyzing enzyme specificity and instead, include a wider category which we have named the Interface Forming Residues (IFR). We were motivated to identify those amino acids with decreased accessibility to solvent after docking of different types of inhibitors to sub classes of serine proteases and then create a table (matrix) of all amino acid positions at the interface as well as their respective occupancies. Our goal is to establish a platform for analysis of the relationship between IFR characteristics and binding properties/specificity for bi-molecular complexes.
RESULTS: We propose a novel method for describing binding properties and delineating serine proteases specificity by compiling an exhaustive table of interface forming residues (IFR) for serine proteases and their inhibitors. Currently, the Protein Data Bank (PDB) does not contain all the data that our analysis would require. Therefore, an in silico approach was designed for building corresponding complexes. The IFRs are obtained by "rigid body docking" among 70 structurally aligned, sequence wise non-redundant, serine protease structures with 3 inhibitors: bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor (BPTI), ecotine and ovomucoid third domain inhibitor. The table (matrix) of all amino acid positions at the interface and their respective occupancy is created. We also developed a new computational protocol for predicting IFRs for those complexes which were not deciphered experimentally so far, achieving accuracy of at least 0.97.
CONCLUSIONS: The serine proteases interfaces prefer polar (including glycine) residues (with some exceptions). Charged residues were found to be uniquely prevalent at the interfaces between the "miscellaneous-virus" subfamily and the three inhibitors. This prompts speculation about how important this difference in IFR characteristics is for maintaining virulence of those organisms.Our work here provides a unique tool for both structure/function relationship analysis as well as a compilation of indicators detailing how the specificity of various serine proteases may have been achieved and/or could be altered. It also indicates that the interface forming residues which also determine specificity of serine protease subfamily can not be presented in a canonical way but rather as a matrix of alternative populations of amino acids occupying variety of IFR positions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20961427      PMCID: PMC2974730          DOI: 10.1186/1472-6807-10-36

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Struct Biol        ISSN: 1472-6807


  34 in total

1.  Sequence to structure alignment in comparative modeling using PrISM.

Authors:  A S Yang; B Honig
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  1999

2.  The Protein Data Bank.

Authors:  H M Berman; J Westbrook; Z Feng; G Gilliland; T N Bhat; H Weissig; I N Shindyalov; P E Bourne
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2000-01-01       Impact factor: 16.971

3.  Stereochemistry of polypeptide chain configurations.

Authors:  G N RAMACHANDRAN; C RAMAKRISHNAN; V SASISEKHARAN
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1963-07       Impact factor: 5.469

Review 4.  What can the structures of enzyme-inhibitor complexes tell us about the structures of enzyme substrate complexes?

Authors:  M Laskowski; M A Qasim
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2000-03-07

5.  Residual colours: a proposal for aminochromography.

Authors:  W R Taylor
Journal:  Protein Eng       Date:  1997-07

Review 6.  Structural basis of substrate specificity in the serine proteases.

Authors:  J J Perona; C S Craik
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 6.725

7.  Alteration of the specificity of ecotin, an E. coli serine proteinase inhibitor, by site directed mutagenesis.

Authors:  G Pál; G Sprengel; A Patthy; L Gráf
Journal:  FEBS Lett       Date:  1994-03-28       Impact factor: 4.124

8.  Protein cutoff scanning: A comparative analysis of cutoff dependent and cutoff free methods for prospecting contacts in proteins.

Authors:  Carlos H da Silveira; Douglas E V Pires; Raquel C Minardi; Cristina Ribeiro; Caio J M Veloso; Julio C D Lopes; Wagner Meira; Goran Neshich; Carlos H I Ramos; Raul Habesch; Marcelo M Santoro
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2009-02-15

9.  The refined 1.9 A crystal structure of human alpha-thrombin: interaction with D-Phe-Pro-Arg chloromethylketone and significance of the Tyr-Pro-Pro-Trp insertion segment.

Authors:  W Bode; I Mayr; U Baumann; R Huber; S R Stone; J Hofsteenge
Journal:  EMBO J       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 11.598

10.  PDBsum more: new summaries and analyses of the known 3D structures of proteins and nucleic acids.

Authors:  Roman A Laskowski; Victor V Chistyakov; Janet M Thornton
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2005-01-01       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  What in silico molecular docking can do for the 'bench-working biologists'.

Authors:  Marius Mihăşan
Journal:  J Biosci       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.826

2.  Identification of new sphingomyelinases D in pathogenic fungi and other pathogenic organisms.

Authors:  Camila Dias-Lopes; Izabella A P Neshich; Goran Neshich; José Miguel Ortega; Claude Granier; Carlos Chávez-Olortegui; Franck Molina; Liza Felicori
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.