Literature DB >> 33166001

Structural motifs in protein cores and at protein-protein interfaces are different.

Anna Hadarovich1,2, Devlina Chakravarty1,3, Alexander V Tuzikov2, Nir Ben-Tal4, Petras J Kundrotas1, Ilya A Vakser1,5.   

Abstract

Structures of proteins and protein-protein complexes are determined by the same physical principles and thus share a number of similarities. At the same time, there could be differences because in order to function, proteins interact with other molecules, undergo conformations changes, and so forth, which might impose different restraints on the tertiary versus quaternary structures. This study focuses on structural properties of protein-protein interfaces in comparison with the protein core, based on the wealth of currently available structural data and new structure-based approaches. The results showed that physicochemical characteristics, such as amino acid composition, residue-residue contact preferences, and hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity distributions, are similar in protein core and protein-protein interfaces. On the other hand, characteristics that reflect the evolutionary pressure, such as structural composition and packing, are largely different. The results provide important insight into fundamental properties of protein structure and function. At the same time, the results contribute to better understanding of the ways to dock proteins. Recent progress in predicting structures of individual proteins follows the advancement of deep learning techniques and new approaches to residue coevolution data. Protein core could potentially provide large amounts of data for application of the deep learning to docking. However, our results showed that the core motifs are significantly different from those at protein-protein interfaces, and thus may not be directly useful for docking. At the same time, such difference may help to overcome a major obstacle in application of the coevolutionary data to docking-discrimination of the intramolecular information not directly relevant to docking.
© 2020 The Protein Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  protein docking; protein modeling; protein recognition; structure prediction

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33166001      PMCID: PMC7784743          DOI: 10.1002/pro.3996

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Protein Sci        ISSN: 0961-8368            Impact factor:   6.993


  27 in total

1.  Analysing six types of protein-protein interfaces.

Authors:  Yanay Ofran; Burkhard Rost
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2003-01-10       Impact factor: 5.469

2.  How significant is a protein structure similarity with TM-score = 0.5?

Authors:  Jinrui Xu; Yang Zhang
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 6.937

3.  The size of the intermolecular energy funnel in protein-protein interactions.

Authors:  Jagtar Hunjan; Andrey Tovchigrechko; Ying Gao; Ilya A Vakser
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2008-07

4.  Origins of coevolution between residues distant in protein 3D structures.

Authors:  Ivan Anishchenko; Sergey Ovchinnikov; Hetunandan Kamisetty; David Baker
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Improved protein structure prediction using potentials from deep learning.

Authors:  Andrew W Senior; Richard Evans; John Jumper; James Kirkpatrick; Laurent Sifre; Tim Green; Chongli Qin; Augustin Žídek; Alexander W R Nelson; Alex Bridgland; Hugo Penedones; Stig Petersen; Karen Simonyan; Steve Crossan; Pushmeet Kohli; David T Jones; David Silver; Koray Kavukcuoglu; Demis Hassabis
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-01-15       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features.

Authors:  W Kabsch; C Sander
Journal:  Biopolymers       Date:  1983-12       Impact factor: 2.505

7.  Docking by structural similarity at protein-protein interfaces.

Authors:  Rohita Sinha; Petras J Kundrotas; Ilya A Vakser
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2010-11-15

8.  Structural templates for comparative protein docking.

Authors:  Ivan Anishchenko; Petras J Kundrotas; Alexander V Tuzikov; Ilya A Vakser
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2015-06-13

9.  Protein structure determination using metagenome sequence data.

Authors:  Sergey Ovchinnikov; Hahnbeom Park; Neha Varghese; Po-Ssu Huang; Georgios A Pavlopoulos; David E Kim; Hetunandan Kamisetty; Nikos C Kyrpides; David Baker
Journal:  Science       Date:  2017-01-20       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Comprehensive, atomic-level characterization of structurally characterized protein-protein interactions: the PICCOLO database.

Authors:  George R Bickerton; Alicia P Higueruelo; Tom L Blundell
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  2 in total

1.  Tertiary motifs as building blocks for the design of protein-binding peptides.

Authors:  Sebastian Swanson; Venkatesh Sivaraman; Gevorg Grigoryan; Amy E Keating
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2022-06       Impact factor: 6.993

2.  Structural motifs in protein cores and at protein-protein interfaces are different.

Authors:  Anna Hadarovich; Devlina Chakravarty; Alexander V Tuzikov; Nir Ben-Tal; Petras J Kundrotas; Ilya A Vakser
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 6.993

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.