Artificial analogues of the natural nucleic acids have attracted interest as a diverse class of information storage molecules capable of self-replication. In this study, we use the computational potential energy landscape framework to investigate the structural and dynamical properties of xylo- and deoxyxylo-nucleic acids (XyNA and dXyNA), which are derived from their respective RNA and DNA analogues by inversion of a single chiral center in the sugar moiety of the nucleotides. For an octameric XyNA sequence and the analogue dXyNA, we observe facile conformational transitions between a left-handed helix, which is the free energy global minimum, and a ladder-type structure with approximately zero helicity. The competing ensembles are better separated in the dXyNA, making it a more suitable candidate for a molecular switch, whereas the XyNA exhibits additional flexibility. Both energy landscapes exhibit greater frustration than we observe in RNA or DNA, in agreement with the higher degree of optimization expected from the principle of minimal frustration in evolved biomolecules.
Artificial analogues of the natural nucleic acids have attracted interest as a diverse class of information storage molecules capable of self-replication. In this study, we use the computational potential energy landscape framework to investigate the structural and dynamical properties of xylo- and deoxyxylo-nucleic acids (XyNA and dXyNA), which are derived from their respective RNA and DNA analogues by inversion of a single chiral center in the sugar moiety of the nucleotides. For an octameric XyNA sequence and the analogue dXyNA, we observe facile conformational transitions between a left-handed helix, which is the free energy global minimum, and a ladder-type structure with approximately zero helicity. The competing ensembles are better separated in the dXyNA, making it a more suitable candidate for a molecular switch, whereas the XyNA exhibits additional flexibility. Both energy landscapes exhibit greater frustration than we observe in RNA or DNA, in agreement with the higher degree of optimization expected from the principle of minimal frustration in evolved biomolecules.
Xeno-nucleic acids
(XNAs) are a diverse family of nucleic acid
structures derived from DNA or RNA by chemical modification of the
sugar moiety of nucleotides.[1] Evolution
and heredity have been characterized for these molecules, with associated
specific folding and binding properties.[2] XNAs have emerged with important medical applications,[3] for example, as aptamers,[4−6] synthetic ribozymes,[7] artificial small interfering RNAs, and antisense
oligonucleotides for the targeting of microRNAs.[8,9] The
resistance of XNAs to endonucleases, a result of the inability of
natural enzymes to recognize the modified nucleic acid structures,
is a particularly valuable advantage of XNAs in replacing natural
nucleic acids for therapeutic purposes.[10] Recently, it was demonstrated that XNA aptamers are capable of recognizing
small molecules, further advancing the potential therapeutic use of
such artificial nucleic acids.[11]XNAs are also of current interest in the emergent fields of synthetic
biology,[12,13] which demands the development of chemical
information storage systems capable of self-replication in
vitro and in vivo for artificial life and
biological computation, and in systems chemistry,[14] which requires molecular switches for the control of operations
in complex chemical networks.Other potential applications of
XNAs include their use as self-assembling
nanomaterials, broadening the possible design scope in DNA nanotechnology,
chemical sensors, and catalysts.[15,16] The study
of XNAs is also motivated by the fundamental question of the origins
of life, where it is important to understand the factors that led
to evolution selecting ribofuranosyl nucleic acids as the genetic
biopolymer for the basis of life, and where it remains unknown if
an alternative nucleic acid was utilized in hypothetical organisms
preceding those based on RNA.[7] Despite
their importance, there are few reported structures of XNAs, and relatively
little is known concerning the structural and dynamical properties
of XNAs in atomistic detail.[17] Furthermore,
computational studies have been thus far largely limited to molecular
dynamics (MD) simulations, without the application of enhanced sampling
schemes, which are required to overcome broken ergodicity.[18]The present study focuses on nucleic acids
based on xylose (XyNA)
and deoxyxylose (dXyNA), referred to collectively as XyNAs, which
represent some of the simplest possible perturbations to the chemical
structure of natural nucleic acids. Xylose is derived from ribose
by the inversion of configuration at the C3′ atom of the sugar
moiety (Figure ),
and likewise deoxyxylose is derived from deoxyribose. Xylose is a
thermodynamic product of the formose reaction,[19] the most probable prebiotic route of sugar synthesis,[20] and so XyNAs represent arguably the most credible
possibility of a genetic biopolymer adopted by prebiotic organisms
that are speculative precursors to RNA-based life forms.
Figure 1
Comparison
of a ribonucleotide monomer unit as it appears in canonical
A-RNA (left) and a xylonucleotide monomer unit as it appears in the
ladder-type conformation of the XyNA1 sequence observed by NMR (right).[36] Xylose is derived from ribose by an inversion
of configuration at the C3′ chiral center, indicated by an
asterisk. Note that the sugar moieties in both units exist in the
C3′-endo conformation, so that the O3′
atom of XyNA units is axial, and that the glycosidic torsion angle
differs between the two units.
Comparison
of a ribonucleotide monomer unit as it appears in canonical
A-RNA (left) and a xylonucleotide monomer unit as it appears in the
ladder-type conformation of the XyNA1 sequence observed by NMR (right).[36] Xylose is derived from ribose by an inversion
of configuration at the C3′ chiral center, indicated by an
asterisk. Note that the sugar moieties in both units exist in the
C3′-endo conformation, so that the O3′
atom of XyNA units is axial, and that the glycosidic torsion angle
differs between the two units.While dXyNA-homoduplexes exhibit similar thermal stability to their
DNA equivalents,[21] thermal denaturation
studies have demonstrated that for dXyNA:DNA hybrid duplexes the thermodynamic
stability is markedly lowered.[22] In this
respect, dXyNA exhibits complementary properties to many other XNAs,
which can form a stable duplex through hybridization with DNA or RNA,
with strong discrimination against mismatches.[17] While this behavior precludes the use of XyNAs as an aptamer,
and for other applications requiring sequence-specific binding, it
is an ideal property if XyNAs are to be utilized alongside and independent
of natural nucleic acids as an orthogonal information system.Circular dichroism (CD) studies have shown that XyNA and dXyNA
oligomers may adopt a left-handed helical duplex structure, or a structure
with an apparent lack of helicity, and that the observed structure
depends on the base sequence and sequence length, as well as external
factors, including temperature and salt concentration.[21,23,24]MD simulations of XyNA
and dXyNA duplexes of length 8, 13, and
29 base pairs (bp) have revealed the existence of an intermediate
between right- and left-handed helical conformations.[25,26] The observed time scale for this transition is of the order of tens
of nanoseconds. For XyNA duplexes, it was observed that the left-handed
helical structure is not stable, but rather that the terminal regions
of the duplex undergo oscillatory movements from coiled to uncoiled
states that act to repeatedly screw and unscrew the helix, suggesting
structural competition between left-handed helical and “linear”
ladder-type structures. This competition between ensembles makes XyNAs
a potential molecular switch, and it is also a property unique to
XyNAs among the known XNAs.[17] Other recent
MD studies of XyNA duplexes in the presence of a carbon nanotube have
demonstrated fast spontaneous unzipping as a consequence of the strained
backbone, highlighting the potential of XyNAs in gene delivery for
therapeutic purposes.[27,28]Here, the computational
potential energy landscape framework[29,30] is employed
to investigate the structural and dynamical properties
of XyNA and dXyNA duplexes. Discrete path sampling (DPS)[31,32] uses geometry optimization to locate transition states and the local
minima they connect, enabling exploration of the energy landscape
independent of free energy barrier heights. From the resulting databases,
we can estimate and compare the relative thermodynamic stabilities
of the three known major conformations, namely, left-handed helical,
right-handed helical, and ladder-type structures. The free energy
barriers partitioning these major conformational ensembles determine
the applicability of XyNA and dXyNA duplexes as molecular switches,
which requires two competing funnels to be separated by a barrier
that is surmountable at ambient temperatures. Visualization of the
free energy landscapes will clearly elucidate structural differences
between XyNA and dXyNA duplexes, and between them and their naturally
evolved counterparts. This computational framework has been successfully
applied to a variety of biomolecular systems before,[30,33] including the B- to Z-DNA transition[34] and the formation of DNA mini-dumbbells.[35]
Methods
Force Field and Initial Structures
The xylo- and deoxyxylo-nucleotide
monomer units were constructed with the furanose moiety in the C3′-endo (cf. canonical A-RNA) and C2′-endo conformations, respectively, using the LEAP program of AMBER.[37] Force field parameters were taken from the parm99
force field,[38] incorporating the bsc0 correction[39] for α and γ backbone torsion angles.
This choice of parameters was used in previous MD studies of XyNAs[25,26] and has been employed in a number of studies of other artificial
nucleic acid systems.[40−42] The bsc0 correction is acknowledged to yield a general
improvement in the description of the behavior of both DNA and RNA,
including noncanonical structures, and we therefore chose to use it
in the present work. As it was previously shown that different parameterizations
for the glycosidic torsion angle χ have little effect on the
MD trajectories of XyNA sequences,[26] no
such reparameterization was used here. Partial charges were obtained
by the two-stage RESP fitting procedure[43] at the HF/6-31G* level of theory using ANTECHAMBER.[44] The potential function was correctly symmetrized.[45,46] To represent an aqueous solution environment, we used a generalized
Born implicit solvent model with a surface area term[47,48] and an effective monovalent salt concentration of 0.1 M maintained
using the Debye–Hückel approximation.[49]The complete right-handed duplexes of the octameric
sequence (5′–3′) [xG–xU–xG–xU–xA–xC–xA–xC–T]
(XyNA1) and its deoxyxylose analogue (dXyNA1) were constructed based
on a template of canonical B-DNA produced with NAB.[50] Ladder-type structures were obtained from the NMR solution
structure of the XyNA oligomer (PDB: 2N4J).[36] From this
conformation, a left-handed helical structure was obtained from a
short-timescale explicit solvent MD simulation.
Exploration
of the Energy Landscapes
The three distinct
initial structures were used to initiate basin-hopping (BH) global
optimization[51−53] runs to obtain the lowest-energy structures of the
right-handed helical, left-handed helical, and ladder-type conformations.
We employed group rotation moves[54,55] and simple
atomic displacements, discarding all structures with inverted chirality
at any center.The potential energy landscapes were explored
using discrete path sampling (DPS)[31,32] to create
kinetic transition networks (KTNs),[56,57] using the
low-energy structures found in the BH runs as starting points. Transition
states were located with the doubly nudged[58,59] elastic band[60,61] algorithm and converged with
hybrid eigenvector-following.[62−64] Local minima were then characterized
by approximate steepest-descent paths, using a modified version of
the L-BFGS algorithm.[65,66] More details of these methods
can be found in various reviews.[29,30,33]After the initial pathways were obtained, we
continued the sampling
to improve the connectivity of the landscape,[67] remove artificial kinetic traps and high energy barriers,[68] and shorten path lengths.[69] Free energy landscapes at 298 K were calculated using the
harmonic superposition approximation.[70] A self-consistent recursive regrouping scheme based on a specified
free energy barrier threshold was used to lump minima into free energy
macrostates.[71]
Analysis of the Energy
Landscapes
We visualize the
free energy landscapes using disconnectivity graphs,[72,73] where each leaf corresponds to a free energy group and is colored
according to the value of an appropriate order parameter for a representative
potential energy minimum of that group. The chosen order parameter
is the helical handedness H,[74] in the form originally proposed for describing the B to Z transition
in DNA duplexes.[75] The magnitude of H is a measure of the number of turns associated with a
helix. Values H > 0 and H <
0
correspond to right- and left-handed double-helical turns, respectively,
while values H ≈ 0 indicate approximately
zero helicity.Processing of the data in the KTN was achieved
with the CPPTRAJ module[76] of AMBER. The
CURVES+ program[77] was used to extract bp-axis,
inter-bp, and intra-bp geometric parameters.[78] All analyses exclude the terminal base pairs to reduce the influence
of terminal effects. Molecular graphics images were produced using
VMD[79] and UCSF Chimera.[80]
Results
Free Energy Landscapes
The free energy disconnectivity
graphs at 298 K for XyNA1 and dXyNA1 are shown in Figure a,b, respectively. For both
duplexes, the right-handed helical structures correspond to regions
of the landscape with high free energy, so that the occupation probability
for right-handed helices is very low. The inversion of chirality in
the nucleotide units, with respect to natural nucleic acids, seeds
an inversion of the preferred helical sense to favor a stable left-handed
helix, and XyNAs can be thought of as effective two-state systems,
with a dynamic equilibrium between left-handed helical and ladder-type
structures.
Figure 2
Free energy landscape for the duplex octamers for (a) XyNA and
(b) dXyNA at a temperature of 298 K, calculated using a regrouping
threshold of 4 kcal mol–1 and an energy increment
of 2 kcal mol–1. The branches are colored according
to the helical handedness (H) of a single potential
energy minimum representative of each free energy group. Some important
representative structures from the different conformational ensembles
are shown. The four different nucleotides are colored as follows:
XA and dXA in yellow, XC and dXC in orange, XG and dXG in magenta,
and XU and dXT in green. The structural representations were created
with UCSF Chimera.[80]
Free energy landscape for the duplex octamers for (a) XyNA and
(b) dXyNA at a temperature of 298 K, calculated using a regrouping
threshold of 4 kcal mol–1 and an energy increment
of 2 kcal mol–1. The branches are colored according
to the helical handedness (H) of a single potential
energy minimum representative of each free energy group. Some important
representative structures from the different conformational ensembles
are shown. The four different nucleotides are colored as follows:
XA and dXA in yellow, XC and dXC in orange, XG and dXG in magenta,
and XU and dXT in green. The structural representations were created
with UCSF Chimera.[80]There are striking differences between the free energy landscapes
for XyNA and dXyNA duplexes. In particular, the ideal left-handed
helical state of the dXyNA1 duplex is a relatively well-defined global
free energy minimum on the landscape, around 5 kcal mol–1 more stable than the next lowest minimum, which is the most stable
ladder-type structure. The free energy barrier for the conversion
of the left-handed helical to the ladder-type structure is around
20 kcal mol–1, and for the reverse transition it
is around 15 kcal mol–1. In
contrast, the free energy barriers separating the two corresponding
states of the XyNA1 duplex are around 10 kcal mol–1 in
both directions, and the free
energy difference is less than 2 kcal mol–1.Another immediately apparent difference between the free energy
landscapes of the two systems is in the distribution of values for
the helical handedness order parameter. For the XyNA duplex, a much
broader range of values for H is observed, from H ≈ 0 to −3.0 in the low-energy region of
the landscape. In contrast, the low free energy region of the landscape
for the dXyNA duplex is dominated by left-handed helical structures,
with handedness in a narrower range around H ≈
−3.0. Thus, XyNA duplexes are more flexible than their dXyNA
analogues.The ideal ladder-type structure of the XyNA1 duplex
compares favorably
with the NMR solution structure.[36] As noted
by Maiti et al.,[24] the ladder-type structures
of the XyNA and dXyNA duplexes are stabilized by the interstrand stacking
of adjacent bases, which arises due to the strong inclination of bases
with respect to the helical axis (Figure ). However, the ladder-type structure is
predicted to have a marginal left-handed helicity, as opposed to the
marginal right-handed helicity in the observed structure. The overstabilization
of left-handed helical states of XyNA within the force field parameterization
implemented in this work is also evidenced by the fact that the left-handed
helical structure is erroneously predicted to be the global free energy
minimum, although it is not far below the idealized ladder-type structure.
The force field is apparently more accurate in reproducing the behavior
of dXyNA duplexes, where there appears to be no such bias, and the
ladder-type structures are correctly predicted to have a marginal
right-handed helicity.
Figure 3
Dinucleotide step in a structure that is part of the lowest
free
energy group in the conformational ensemble of ladder-type structures
for XyNA1. The favorable interstrand stacking of adjacent bases is
apparent.
Dinucleotide step in a structure that is part of the lowest
free
energy group in the conformational ensemble of ladder-type structures
for XyNA1. The favorable interstrand stacking of adjacent bases is
apparent.The landscapes of both XyNA1 and
dXyNA1 duplexes are significantly
frustrated,[81,82] with a number of low-energy minima
separated by high barriers. This result contrasts with the free energy
landscape reported in a study of the analogous B to Z transition in
CG-rich DNA sequences, where there is strong funneling to the native
B-DNA state. Frustration in the free energy landscapes of XyNAs is
probably attributable to the geometrical frustration of base pairs
that prevents the formation of a properly extended linear duplex.
Instead, it necessitates that the ladder-type conformation of XyNA
duplexes partly bends inwards on itself to maintain an optimal Watson–Crick
base pairing of all base pairs, which drives unwinding and rewinding
of the left-handed helix. This geometric frustration may be relieved
by the adoption of noncanonical base pairings at one or both of the
duplex termini, which then allows the linear structures to form a
properly extended conformation.Evolved biomolecules often appear
to follow the principle of minimal
frustration.[81−83] The evolutionary process favors energy landscapes
with a distinct bias toward a well-defined native state and promotes
the elimination of kinetic traps on the pathways to this state. This
principle, originally formulated for proteins, may also apply to nucleic
acids[84,85] and can be extended to multistate systems.[86] The fact that the energy landscapes of XyNAs
are significantly more frustrated than the landscapes of DNA and RNA
represents an evolutionary argument for the adoption of DNA and RNA
over XyNAs.
Pathways for Helix Transformation
Free energy pathways
for helical inversion are shown in Figure a,b for the XyNA1 and dXyNA1 sequences, respectively,
from a representative right-handed helical structure to a left-handed
helix representing the global free energy minimum. For both duplexes,
the pathways are overall downhill in energy, and the mechanism features
only low barriers, leading to fast kinetics. Furthermore, the interconversion
of ladder-type and left-handed helical states occurs by helix winding
(unwinding) in the left (right)-handed directions, respectively, propagated
inwards from one terminus, rather than from both termini simultaneously.
Figure 4
Free energy
pathways for the right- to left-handed helical transitions
in XyNA and dXyNA duplexes that make the single largest contribution
to the steady-state rate constants. Some representative structures
that are key intermediates or transition states are included. (a)
Fastest pathway energy profile for the helical inversion transition
of the XyNA1 duplex. The steps correspond to stationary points, i.e.
minimum-transition state–minimum-transition state-···-minimum.
(b) Fastest pathway energy profile for the helical inversion transition
of the dXyNA1 duplex.
Free energy
pathways for the right- to left-handed helical transitions
in XyNA and dXyNA duplexes that make the single largest contribution
to the steady-state rate constants. Some representative structures
that are key intermediates or transition states are included. (a)
Fastest pathway energy profile for the helical inversion transition
of the XyNA1 duplex. The steps correspond to stationary points, i.e.
minimum-transition state–minimum-transition state-···-minimum.
(b) Fastest pathway energy profile for the helical inversion transition
of the dXyNA1 duplex.For the XyNA1 duplex,
the helical inversion proceeds via a low-energy
ladder-type structure, which subsequently evolves to the left-handed
helical state via a transition state ensemble of “kinked”
structures. The corresponding pathway for the dXyNA1 duplex is significantly
different. In particular, structures with approximately zero helicity
represent a high-energy transient state in the early stages of the
pathway, and so the mechanism is not mediated by a ladder-type intermediate
state, in contrast to the XyNA1 duplex. This result again reflects
the greater bias toward the left-handed helical over ladder-type structures
in dXyNA compared to that in XyNA duplexes. The transition then continues
to progress smoothly with respect to handedness, that is, via a more
regular helical structure with a partial left-handed helicity.
Observed
Backbone Torsional Angles
The δ dihedral,
with a characteristic value of around −40°, which effectively
defines XyNA and dXyNA duplexes with respect to their natural analogues,
remains relatively stable throughout the pathways. The α, β,
and γ backbone dihedrals for the right-handed helical states
of XyNA1 and dXyNA1 adopt values similar to those observed in canonical
A-RNA and B-DNA and undergo sign inversion in the course of the transition
to left-handed helical states, seeded by the sign inversion of the
δ dihedral with respect to the natural nucleic acid analogues.
For the α and β dihedrals, the values in the left- and
right-handed helical states are of approximately equal magnitude but
opposite sign, in both XyNA and dXyNA. The behavior of the ϵ
and ζ dihedrals exhibits less variance along the pathways, although
these angles likewise adopt values of opposite sign to the corresponding
angles in canonical A-RNA and B-DNA. The glycosidic torsion angle
χ takes one of two predominant values in XyNAs, around −160°
(anti) or −80° (syn),
and plays an important role in driving the transition.The evolution
of inter-bp, intra-bp, and bp-axis geometrical parameters[78] along the fastest potential energy pathway for
the helical transition of XyNA1 exhibits large-scale changes in the
bp-axis inclination angle and in the communicative parameters of the
inter-bp twist angle, roll angle, and slide distance. Values of the
helical rise and helical twist are also diagnostic of each of the
three major conformations. Plots for the described properties are
provided in the Supporting Information (Figures S1 and S2).
Conclusions
For XyNA and dXyNA duplexes,
we observe an equilibrium between
the left-handed helical and ladder-type structures. For dXyNA compared
to XyNA, the global free energy minimum, a left-handed helical structure,
is stabilized with respect to the ladder-type structures. One possible
explanation for this effect is the increased solvation of the C2′
hydroxyl group, present only in XyNAs, in the ladder type compared
to the helical state. The separation between the two ensembles is
better defined for dXyNA than for XyNA, both with respect to the magnitude
of the free energy barrier separating the basins and with respect
to the helical handedness order parameter. Hence, the XyNA duplexes
are more flexible than dXyNA duplexes, and the latter appear to be
more promising candidates for use as a molecular switch, or as chemical
information storage molecules capable of self-replication, where facile
unwinding of a helical structure is undesirable.The free energy
landscapes of both XyNA and dXyNA duplexes are
significantly frustrated, highlighting an important factor that may
have led evolution to select ribofuranosyl nucleic acids, and not
the xylose-based analogues, as the genetic basis for life. The origin
of the structural competition evident in these systems is the geometrical
frustration that prevents Watson–Crick base pairing without
inducing strain in the nucleic acid backbone that must be relieved
by bending, or else by the adoption of noncanonical base-pairing modes
at one or both of the duplex termini.Free energy pathways from
a disfavored right-handed helical state
to a left-handed helical state, which is the global free energy minimum,
also differ significantly between XyNA and dXyNA duplexes. For dXyNA,
extended linear structures represent an early and high free energy
transition state along the pathway, which then proceeds via helical
structures with a smooth change in the handedness order parameter.
For XyNA, the transition is mediated by low-energy ladder-type structures,
which transform to left-handed helical structures via a transition
state ensemble of kinked structures. Left-handed helix winding and
unwinding transitions of XyNA and dXyNA duplexes are driven by the
highly flexible terminal base pairs. The inversion of the δ
dihedral angle in XyNAs with respect to their natural nucleic acid
analogues seeds a direct inversion, not only in the overall helical
sense but also in the backbone dihedral angles. The glycosidic torsion
angle also undergoes large-scale changes in the course of the transition,
as do certain key geometric parameters, most notably the bp-axis inclination
angle.Future work could address the design and application
of XyNA and
dXyNA duplexes for molecular devices, for example, by investigating
the sequence and length dependence of the propensity for helicity
and how the equilibrium responds to environmental conditions.
Authors: Mahmoud Moradi; Volodymyr Babin; Christopher Roland; Thomas A Darden; Celeste Sagui Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2009-11-18 Impact factor: 11.205