Literature DB >> 22072519

Exploring conformational changes coupled to ionization states using a hybrid Rosetta-MCCE protocol.

Yifan Song1.   

Abstract

A hybrid protocol combining Rosetta fullatom refinement and Multi-Conformation Continuum Electrostatics (MCCE) to estimate pK(a) is applied to the blind prediction of 94 mutated residues in Staphylococcal nuclease (SNase), as part of the pK(a)-cooperative benchmark test. The standard MCCE method is limited to sidechain conformational changes. The Rosetta refinement protocol is used to add the backbone conformational changes in pK(a) calculations. The non-electrostatic energy component from Rosetta and the electrostatic energy from MCCE are combined to weight the calculated ionization states. Of 63 measured pK(a)s, the root mean squared deviation (RMSD) between the calculated pK(a)s and the measured values is 4.3, showing an improvement compared to the RMSD of 6.6 in the standard MCCE calculations, using a low protein dielectric constant of 4. The breakdown of pK(a) shift from the solution values (ΔpK(a)) shows that the desolvation energy contributes the most in the standard MCCE calculations. Lowering desolvation penalties and optimizing electrostatic interactions with the Rosetta/MCCE protocol reduces the ΔpK(a) to favor the charged states. Analysis also showed that the Rosetta/MCCE protocol samples conformations with pK(a)s close to the solution values. The question remains whether the correct conformational changes coupled to the ionization changes are found here. Nevertheless, a challenge emerges to accurately estimate the reorganization energy, which is not directly measured from the electrostatic environment of the site of interest. Possible improvements to the protocol are also discussed.
Copyright © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22072519     DOI: 10.1002/prot.23146

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


  8 in total

Review 1.  The pKa Cooperative: a collaborative effort to advance structure-based calculations of pKa values and electrostatic effects in proteins.

Authors:  Jens E Nielsen; M R Gunner; Bertrand E García-Moreno
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2011-10-15

2.  Reservoir pH replica exchange.

Authors:  Ana Damjanovic; Benjamin T Miller; Asim Okur; Bernard R Brooks
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  Structural reorganization triggered by charging of Lys residues in the hydrophobic interior of a protein.

Authors:  Michael S Chimenti; Victor S Khangulov; Aaron C Robinson; Annie Heroux; Ananya Majumdar; Jamie L Schlessman; Bertrand García-Moreno
Journal:  Structure       Date:  2012-05-25       Impact factor: 5.006

Review 4.  Continuum Electrostatics Approaches to Calculating pKas and Ems in Proteins.

Authors:  M R Gunner; N A Baker
Journal:  Methods Enzymol       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 1.600

5.  Rapid calculation of protein pKa values using Rosetta.

Authors:  Krishna Praneeth Kilambi; Jeffrey J Gray
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 4.033

6.  Bayesian model aggregation for ensemble-based estimates of protein pKa values.

Authors:  Luke J Gosink; Emilie A Hogan; Trenton C Pulsipher; Nathan A Baker
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2013-10-17

7.  Probing remote residues important for catalysis in Escherichia coli ornithine transcarbamoylase.

Authors:  Lisa Ngu; Jenifer N Winters; Kien Nguyen; Kevin E Ramos; Nicholas A DeLateur; Lee Makowski; Paul C Whitford; Mary Jo Ondrechen; Penny J Beuning
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Protein pK a Prediction with Machine Learning.

Authors:  Zhitao Cai; Fangfang Luo; Yongxian Wang; Enling Li; Yandong Huang
Journal:  ACS Omega       Date:  2021-12-07
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.