| Literature DB >> 21980515 |
Kuo Hao Lee1, Craig R Miller, Anna C Nagel, Holly A Wichman, Paul Joyce, F Marty Ytreberg.
Abstract
The relationship between mutation, protein stability and protein function plays a central role in molecular evolution. Mutations tend to be destabilizing, including those that would confer novel functions such as host-switching or antibiotic resistance. Elevated temperature may play an important role in preadapting a protein for such novel functions by selecting for stabilizing mutations. In this study, we test the stability change conferred by single mutations that arise in a G4-like bacteriophage adapting to elevated temperature. The vast majority of these mutations map to interfaces between viral coat proteins, suggesting they affect protein-protein interactions. We assess their effects by estimating thermodynamic stability using molecular dynamic simulations and measuring kinetic stability using experimental decay assays. The results indicate that most, though not all, of the observed mutations are stabilizing.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21980515 PMCID: PMC3183071 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025640
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Mutational pathways to a novel function when function and stability trade-off.
(A) Dashed line: mutation 1 on the ancestral background confers increase in novel function, but stability is decreased. If trade-off is severe, fitness may decline. Mutation 2 is compensatory and increases both stability and fitness. Solid line: mutation 2 on the ancestor does not affect function or fitness and is, thus, neutral, but pre-adapts the protein by increasing stability. Mutation 1 on the background of 2 then increases function and fitness. (B) Elevated temperature selects for increased stability in the absence of selection for a novel function. The protein is now pre-adapted should selection for a novel function arise later.
Figure 2Interface mutations on the ID11 viral structure and design of the thermodynamic simulation model
. (A) The mature virus capsid composed of 12 pentameric units. Each pentameric unit contains five identical copies of protein F (purple), and protein G (pink). (B) The simulation system containing three pentameric units. For each mutation a 35 Å radius sphere is defined to be centered on the mutation and is surrounded by water molecules and ions (red sphere). (C) Detailed view of one F protein and an example mutation (F314). (D) Representation of the left vertical path in thermodynamic cycle. A single protein in water is simulated. (E) Thermodynamic cycle. The horizontal paths are binding affinities that can be measured experimentally. In this study, the vertical paths are computed by thermodynamic integration. Because the binding affinity is a state function, the two vertical paths can be used to determine the relative binding affinity, i.e., ΔΔG = ΔG - ΔG. (F) Representation of the right vertical path in thermodynamic cycle.
Figure 3Location of observed mutations.
Observed mutations (yellow spheres) are close to protein-protein interfaces. Solid lines are within pentamer protein-protein interfaces. Dashed lines are between pentamer protein-protein interfaces. Most mutations are located in the two corners of the F protein where interactions may occur both within and between pentamers.
Figure 4Example decay assay showing reduction in phage survival with time at 37°C for wildtype and two mutations.
Decay rates in Table 1 and Figure 5were calculated by: (i) obtaining decay rate for each day from the slope of the log-transformed data in a linear regression as illustrated in the figure, (ii) dividing each mutant decay-rate by the ancestor rate for that day, and (iii) averaging across days.
Fitness, stability, and conformational entropy of single amino acid mutations.
| Nucleotide substitution | Amino acid substitution | Fitness | Thermal decay rate | ΔΔG rate | ΔS |
| Wildtype | 14.3 | ||||
| g 2534 t | Val J20 Leu | 18.7 | 0.47 (0.36, 0.58) | -2.94 (-3.28, -2.60) | 5.56 |
| g 3850 a | Met F416 Ile | 18.2 | 0.99 (0.73, 1.25) | -0.71 (-1.31, -0.11) | 4.20 |
| c 2520 t | Ala J15 Val | 17.9 | 0.61 (0.48, 0.74) | -1.19 (-1.71, -0.67) | 5.68 |
| a 3857 g | Thr F419 Ala | 17.6 | 0.87 (0.62, 1.12) | -1.35 (-1.95, -0.75) | 5.03 |
| a 3147 g | Asn F182 Ser | 17.4 | 1.13 (1.01, 1.25) | 1.56 (0.83, 2.29) | 5.86 |
| c 3543 t | Ala F314 Val | 16.9 | 1.02 (0.74, 1.30) | -2.13 (-2.62, -1.64) | 5.32 |
| c 3134 t | Arg F178 Cys | 16.8 | 0.91 (0.70, 1.12) | -4.57 (-6.97, -2.17) | 6.01 |
| a 3567 g | Asn F322 Ser | 14.8 | 0.99 (0.81, 1.17) | -1.94 (-3.84, -0.04) | 4.84 |
| c 3282 t | Ser F227 Phe | 14.5 | 0.48 (0.34, 0.62) | -0.94 (-1.87, -0.01) | 6.00 |
| a 3876 g | Thr F425 Ile | 13.7 | 0.72 (0.63, 0.81) | 0.94 (0.04, 1.84) | 5.91 |
Below wildtype, the mutations are ordered by descending fitness.
Substitutions come from Rokyta et al. [14] and Miller et al. [15].
Fitness is defined as population doublings per hour.
Thermal decay rate is a proportion of the ancestral decay rate; values less than 1.0 are more stable than ancestor.
ΔΔG in units of kcal/mol is estimated protein-protein interaction via molecular dynamics simulation; values less than 0.0 indicate more stable than ancestor.
Conformational entropy, ΔS, in units of kcal/mol K is estimated via molecular dynamics simulation.
*Estimates are median values of individual data points.
**95% confidence intervals are based on +/- 3.2 absolute errors (see Appendix S1).
***95% confidence intervals based on +/- 2.5 absolute errors. The difference in number of absolute errors used reflects differences in sample size.
Figure 5Plot of relative binding affinity (ΔΔG) against relative decay rate for high-temperature mutations.
Increased stability is associated with relative binding affinities less than zero and decay rates less than one. Error bars show the 95% confidence interval obtained by performing multiple independent experiments and simulations. Most data points lie in the lower left quadrant or on its boundary suggesting qualitative agreement that most mutations are stabilizing. Both methods also concur that F182 is an outlier that destabilizes the capsid.
Figure 6Distances from F and J residues to nearest adjacent F protein.
For each residue in F (light grey) and J (dark grey), the distance between its alpha carbon and the alpha carbon of every residue in all adjacent F proteins was calculated. Distributions were calculated using the minimum distances to adjacent F proteins (A) in any pentamer, (B) in the same pentamer, or (C) in a different pentamer. Observed mutations are shown as triangles. P-values were calculated by simulating 10,000 datasets (each containing 8 random F and 2 random J mutations), taking the mean of their minimum distances as defined in each panel, and asking what proportion of random datasets had smaller means than the mean of the observed dataset. Note that J mutations are excluded from the distance calculations for (A) any pentamer and (B) the same pentamer because J is not present during intra-pentamer assembly.