Shahee Islam1, Chaitali Mukhopadhyay1. 1. Department of Chemistry, University of Calcutta, 92, A. P. C. Road, Kolkata 700009, India.
Abstract
Understanding the molecular mechanisms by which amyloidogenic proteins interact with membranes is a challenging task. Amyloid accumulates from many human diseases have been observed to contain membrane lipids. In this work, coarse-grained molecular dynamics simulations have been used to inspect hen egg white lysozyme (HEWL) aggregation and membrane association in the presence of a pure POPC (1-palmitoyl-2-oleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine) bilayer and a POPC and POPG (1-palmitoyl-2-oleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphatidylglycerol) mixed bilayer. It was observed that, in both cases, two HEWLs formed aggregates. In the presence of a mixed bilayer, after aggregation, the aggregated system started to interact with the membrane. It has been found that one of the lysozymes which came closer to the mixed bilayer unfolded more. The process of the initial insertion of an aggregated system in the mixed bilayer has been analyzed. The structural rearrangements of the protein and lipids were analyzed as well along the course of the simulation. Although with a pure POPC bilayer, aggregation was observed, the aggregated system moved away from the membrane. We believe that our study will provide considerable insights into lysozyme aggregation in the presence of a membrane environment.
Understanding the molecular mechanisms by which amyloidogenic proteins interact with membranes is a challenging task. Amyloid accumulates from many human diseases have been observed to contain membrane lipids. In this work, coarse-grained molecular dynamics simulations have been used to inspect hen egg white lysozyme (HEWL) aggregation and membrane association in the presence of a pure POPC (1-palmitoyl-2-oleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine) bilayer and a POPC and POPG (1-palmitoyl-2-oleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphatidylglycerol) mixed bilayer. It was observed that, in both cases, two HEWLs formed aggregates. In the presence of a mixed bilayer, after aggregation, the aggregated system started to interact with the membrane. It has been found that one of the lysozymes which came closer to the mixed bilayer unfolded more. The process of the initial insertion of an aggregated system in the mixed bilayer has been analyzed. The structural rearrangements of the protein and lipids were analyzed as well along the course of the simulation. Although with a pure POPC bilayer, aggregation was observed, the aggregated system moved away from the membrane. We believe that our study will provide considerable insights into lysozyme aggregation in the presence of a membrane environment.
Biological membranes
have a miraculous ability to regulate a wide
range of physiological and pathological processes,[1,2] including
signal transduction and cellular trafficking.[3] These processes involve diverse lipid–protein interactions.[4,5] Membranes interact not only with native proteins but also with aggregated
and denatured proteins. Protein aggregation[6] has attracted significant scientific attention over the last few
decades, as a number of fatal diseases, including neurological diseases,[7] type-II diabetes,[8] spongiform encephalopathy,[9] and so forth,
have been shown to be involved in the formation of amyloidogenic aggregates.
It has been perceived that cell membranes might be targeted by protein
aggregates to cause physical changes in the membrane, leading to dysfunction
and cell death.[10] It has been conjectured
that given the marginal stability of the native proteins, the surroundings
may influence the progression from a monomeric to an aggregated state.[11,12]The formation of amyloidogenic aggregates involves not only
the
association of monomers but also denaturation.[13] Membranes have been suggested to have a compelling role
in protein aggregation.[14] The composition
of membranes also plays a crucial part in determining the nature of
the protein–membrane interaction.[15] In the present study, we have used hen egg white lysozyme (HEWL)
as a model protein to study the effect of membranes on its dimerization
and the subsequent interaction with the bilayer. Lysozyme is an essential
enzyme of the innate immune system with antimicrobial, antitumor,
and immuno-modulatory activities that play a major role in lipid-binding
properties.[16,17] It has also been reported that
the binding of the lysozyme to the phospholipid bilayer can modulate
the aggregation behavior of the lysozyme.[18] Due to its tendency to form aggregates in the presence of lipid
membranes, HEWL has been used as a model to study the effect of membranes
on the unfolding and aggregation of pathologically important peptides/proteins.[19] Apart from that, HEWL has a well-defined three-dimensional
structure[20] and a relatively small size,
which makes it a good candidate for computer simulations.[21] It is also homologous with the human lysozyme[22] and has been studied extensively for mechanisms
of its folding.[23,24]CG MD simulations[25,26] have been used to explore the
aggregation pathway of HEWL in the presence of a pure POPC layer and
a mixed POPC/POPG (7:3)[27] bilayer. The
mixture of POPC to POPG lipids in a molar ratio of 7:3 mimics the
bacterial inner membrane.[28] Our main objective
was to explore the effect of a specific bilayer mixture of lipids
in protein aggregation followed by the initial insertion of the aggregated
system in the bilayer along with monitoring the conformation of proteins
and the changes in the structure and dynamics of the lipid bilayer
due to protein aggregation. The present simulation study focuses on
the nature of the interactions of HEWL and membranes along with the
mutual effects they have on each other’s structure and dynamics.
We have also looked into the effects of the mixed bilayer on the protein
aggregation.
Methods
The Martini model[29] has been used in this work because this can provide the needed reduced
set of interactions while still providing the necessary chemistry
of the entire system. The Martini model has been widely used for the
past few years to provide a representation of force-field parameters
in the case of proteins/lipid systems.[25,30]
System Setup
The system was prepared with the help
of insane.py script.[31] A mixed bilayer
was constructed using POPC and POPG molecules. The ratio of POPC and
POPG was 7:3 in both upper and lower leaflets.[27] The input geometry for the heterogeneous membrane system
was specified with lipid moieties as per the membrane system ratio
in both upper and lower leaflets. The number of POPC was 252 per leaflet.
The number of POPG was 108 per leaflet. The area per molecule of the
membrane is as follows: for the first 1 μs, it was 0.620 ±
0.004, and for the last 1 μs, it was 0.621 ± 0.004 (Figure S1, Supporting Information). Two lysozymes
were placed 60 Å away from the center of the mixed bilayer (shown
by the solid red line in Figure ). The distance between the centers of mass of two
lysozymes was 50 Å (shown by the solid black line in Figure ). A coarse-grained
(CG) water bead model was used.[26] System
neutralization was achieved with the addition of 0.15 mM NaCl salt.[32] The simulation box size was 114 Å ×
114 Å × 114 Å.
Figure 1
Molecular details of the membrane.
Molecular details of the membrane.Figure represents
the molecular details of the membrane. Protein1, protein2, POPC, POPG,
water, and ions were represented in orange, green, purple, cyan, blue,
and red beads, respectively.
Simulation Parameters
The simulations
described in
this paper were performed with the GROMACS simulation package, version
5.0.7.[33] Simulations were performed using
the Martini2.2 force field under isothermal isobaric conditions. The
system temperature was maintained at 300 K.[34] The temperature was kept constant using the Berendsen temperature
coupling algorithm with a time constant of 1 ps.[35] Semi-isotropic pressure coupling was applied using the
Berendsen algorithm, with a pressure of 1 bar, independently in the
plane of the membrane and perpendicular to the membrane.[17] A time constant of 1.0 ps and a compressibility
of 3.0 × 10–4 bar–1 were
used. The relative dielectric constant εr was set
to 15 in water[36] due to the absence of
partial charges in the standard Martini water model.[37] The system was equilibrated before the production run (equilibration
curve of the system is shown in the Supporting Information, Figure S2). The system was simulated with an
integration time step of 20 fs.[38] The trajectory
analysis was performed with GROMACS,[33] and
the snapshots were generated by VMD.[39]
Results and Discussion
Aggregated System in a Membrane Environment
Three independent
simulations were run for 10 μs each at 300 K. A 7:3 POPC/POPG
mixed bilayer was chosen as a mimic of the bacterial inner membrane.[28] It has been reported earlier that in the presence
of liposomes of different molar ratios of the zwitterionic POPC and
the negatively charged POPG, the native structure of HEWL got modified
leading to elongated aggregates above a charge-density threshold.[15] It has been reported that by taking an appropriate
ratio of phosphatidylserine and phosphatidylcholine, the significance
of the negatively charged lipid toward the aggregation of the lysozyme
was explained.[19] In our study, we have
observed that the two lysozymes formed an aggregate in the presence
of both the bilayers. While in the presence of the mixed bilayer,
the aggregate of the proteins had shown membrane insertion, in the
control run with only the pure POPC bilayer, we did not observe any
initiation of insertion of the aggregated protein in the bilayer,
which is in agreement with the past experimental results.[15] It was observed that the two proteins formed
an adduct but drifted away from the POPC membrane (Figure S3 of the Supporting Information). For the mixed bilayer,
two independent simulations were executed with different starting
velocities. Figure shows the snapshots of the system at different time intervals. Similar
observations were obtained for both simulations, and analysis was
done for both independent simulations. These observations are in agreement
with the experimental observations.[15] Here,
the results of one of the trajectories (simulation 1) were reported.
Some of the analysis of simulation 2 is given in the Supporting Information. During simulation, the following steps
were observed.
Figure 2
Snapshots showing the
aggregated system with respect to time. Protein1,
protein2, POPC, and POPG are presented as orange, green, purple, and
cyan van der Waals spheres, respectively. Image rendering was done
with VMD.
Interaction of two lysozymes with
the membrane independently:Snapshots showing the
aggregated system with respect to time. Protein1,
protein2, POPC, and POPG are presented as orange, green, purple, and
cyan van der Waals spheres, respectively. Image rendering was done
with VMD.At the beginning of the simulation,
the two proteins were 60 Å
away from the center of the mixed bilayer along the z axis. It was observed that after equilibration, the two proteins
tried to come close to the membrane surface. Within 50 ns of simulation,
both proteins reached the surface of the bilayer and started to interact
with the membrane (second snapshot in Figure ).two lysozymes:After nearly 80 ns, an interesting observation was noticed,
that
is, both the proteins leaving the membrane surface. Again, the two
proteins tried to come close to each other to form an aggregate.The whole
aggregated system again
started to interact with the membrane:When the two proteins assembled, the whole aggregated system again
tried to come close to the surface of the membrane to interact with
the mixed bilayer.
Lipid–Protein Interaction
Analysis of the distance
between the center of mass of two proteins (Figure S4, Supporting Information) and the number of contacts between
them with simulation time (Figure a) was done. It was found that, after 2 μs, the
number of contacts and the distance between the center of mass of
the two proteins became almost constant. As lipid–protein interactions
are crucial for many cellular processes,[4,5] the interaction
energies of individual proteins with lipids were determined and the
partition of the total interaction energy in terms of electrostatic
and van der Waals was done.[40] From the
graph in Figure b,
it can be noticed that within 1 μs, there was a significant
interaction (both van der Waals and electrostatic interactions combined)
between protein2 and lipid. It is also observed that the interaction
between protein1 and protein2 stabilized significantly after 1 μs.
Similarly, to calculate the contribution of the interaction energies
of individual lipids POPC and POPG, the individual interaction energies
of POPC and POPG with proteins were calculated (Figure S6, Supporting Information). It was observed that POPG
interacted more strongly with proteins than that of POPC, which is
also similar to the previous experimental results.[15] This graph even showed a significant change in the interaction
energy after 1 μs for both lipids. Simulation 2 also provided
the same results (Figure S6, Supporting
Information).
Figure 3
Determination of the lipid–protein interaction:
(a) number
of contacts between two proteins and (b) interaction energy vs time.
Determination of the lipid–protein interaction:
(a) number
of contacts between two proteins and (b) interaction energy vs time.The role of the lipid type (bilayer mixture of
POPC and POPG) was
examined in HEWL aggregation followed by the initial insertion of
the aggregated system in the mixed bilayer. In an earlier report,
the role of the bilayer mixture of POPC and POPG in the transition
of HEWL into the aggregation-component conformation was explained
by analyzing the change in the secondary structure of HEWL along with
the interaction with the membrane.[17]Figure describes the stages
of protein aggregation in the presence of a membrane. It has been
reported earlier that membranes may help in the process of aggregation.[41,42] The increase in the protein–protein contact with the simulation
time indicated the formation and stability of the aggregated system
(Figure a). Figure b, shows that initially
the lysozyme–lysozyme interaction energy was much more stabilizing
than the lysozyme–membrane interaction energy. It was noticed
that the lysozyme2–membrane interaction energy became more
favorable after 1 μs. It is also seen from Figure b that negatively charged POPG
has a stronger interaction than that of POPC. From the lipid–protein
interaction energies, it can be concluded that both electrostatic
and van der Waals interactions are crucial for the lipid–protein
interaction, in agreement with previous reports.[11,18] It may be said that the lipid composition of the membrane, particularly
its anionic phospholipid content, seems to play an important role
in this process: the establishment of electrostatic interactions with
acidic lipids favors membrane-induced protein misfolding and the subsequent
aggregate nucleation.[17]
Protein Structure
Conformational analysis of the proteins
is necessary to estimate the influence of the mixed bilayer on the
structure and dynamics of proteins. This type of analysis has been
done experimentally as well as theoretically.[15,17] In the present simulation, the changes in conformations of lysozymes
were estimated by rmsd (root-mean-square deviation),[17]Rg (radius of gyration),[17,43] and SASA (solvent accessible surface area)[17,44] analyses. The details of the conformational drift were obtained
by computing the rmsd for backbone beads of the proteins relative
to the starting conformation.[45] For each
protein, the rmsd increased initially and closely approached convergence
within 1 μs (Figure a). It was noticed that, after 1 μs, the rmsd value
of protein2, which was closer to the membrane (Figure ), had a higher rmsd than that of protein1.
Protein2 showed an increase in Rg and
SASA values after 1 μs (Figure b,c), compared to those of protein1. Rg (Table S1) and SASA (Table S2) values of the two proteins were calculated
for the first and last 0.1 μs. It was found that averaged over
the last 0.1 μs of CG simulations, the rmsd values of protein1
and protein2 were 0.71 ± 0.02 and 0.84 ± 0.03 nm, respectively,
where it was observed that for the last 0.1 μs of the CG simulations,
the average Rg values of protein1 and
protein2 became 1.41 ± 0.01 and 1.43 ± 0.01 nm, respectively.
For proteins in the pure POPC system, it was noticed that, for both
proteins, the changes in rmsd, Rg, and
SASA were almost the same (Figure S7).
We have recently shown that, at 300 K, lysozymes can form aggregates,
even in the absence of membranes.[46] When
compared with the free simulations, it was observed that for protein2,
which came closer to the mixed bilayer, the fluctuations in Rg and SASA were more than in the other systems.
For example, the fluctuation in Rg for
protein2 is in the range of ±0.35 nm compared to ∼±0.02
nm for the free system[46] and in the presence
of the POPC bilayer. For SASA, the observed fluctuation for protein2
is ±3.19 nm2 in the mixed bilayer system and ±2.5
to 2.7 nm2 in the free system[46] and in the presence the POPC bilayer system.
Figure 4
Determination of the
protein structure: (a) rmsd, (b) Rg, (c)
SASA vs time, and (d) RMSF of the backbone bead
of the protein.
Determination of the
protein structure: (a) rmsd, (b) Rg, (c)
SASA vs time, and (d) RMSF of the backbone bead
of the protein.The analysis of RMSF (root mean
square fluctuation) of backbone
beads of both proteins[47] (Figure d) was done. For both proteins,
maximum fluctuations were observed for the beads from ∼90 to
∼110 and from ∼150 to ∼170, which were a part
of the flexible loop. Even for simulation 2, we got similar observations
(Figure S8, Supporting Information).The higher values of rmsd, Rg, and
SASA of lysozyme2 than those of lysozyme1 indicate the influence of
the membrane on conformational changes in the lysozyme.[17] Up to 1 μs, the values of Rg, SASA, and rmsd of both lysozymes were the same, but
after 1 μs, these value were higher for lysozyme2 because it
was closer to the membrane (Figure ). The higher rmsd, Rg,
and SASA values in the presence of membrane (Figure ) in comparison to the values of rmsd, Rg, and SASA in the absence of membrane (our
previously published work) indicate the role of membranes in inducing
conformational changes in proteins.[46] Similar
to the experimental results, as in the POPC membrane, the aggregated
system drifted away from the membrane and there was no initiation
of insertion of the aggregated protein in the membrane;[15] for this reason, in this case, the changes in
the values of rmsd, Rg, and SASA for both
proteins were almost similar. This implies the importance of a specific
type of bilayer in the case of protein aggregation in a membrane environment.
The RMSF plot clearly gives information about the influence of the
membrane on unfolding of both lysozymes.[48] It has been generally accepted that the main driving force for protein
aggregation is the partial unfolding of the native state of the polypeptide
chain into an aggregation-prone conformation with exposed hydrophobic
regions.[49,50] Ample evidence from both theoretical and
experimental studies suggests that the protein aggregation potential
is substantially enhanced in a membrane environment.[11] The present simulation results have demonstrated that the
aggregate–membrane association was accompanied by the destabilization
of the lysozyme structure and exposure of the flexible part of the
protein chain.
Effect of the Aggregated Protein on the Membrane
Structure and
Dynamics
A detailed understanding of changes in each lipid
of the mixed bilayer is necessary to gain an insight into the influence
of the proteins on the membrane due to the aggregation and insertion
of proteins in the mixed bilayer, as no such simulation has been done
previously by using the CG molecular dynamics (MD) simulation method.
An earlier MD simulation method reported about the role of the POPC/POPG
mixture in the transition of HEWL into the aggregation-component conformation
for a short time scale only.[17] The bilayer
structural properties (conformational ordering, head-group orientation,
and lipid in-plane distribution), as well as the dynamic changes in
the local lipids (if the phosphorus bead of the lipid was within 10
Å of the protein, it was referred as the local lipid and the
rest were referred to as bulk lipids) have been highlighted.To better understand the effect of protein aggregation on the lipid
structure, changes in the number of local lipids (Figure ) and bulk lipids with simulation
time (Figure S9, Supporting Information)
was first examined. A striking feature was found that the number of
local lipids for both POPG and POPC increased up to 1 μs, and
after 1 μs, the values became constant for both POPC and POPG.
Similarly, it was noticed that the numbers of bulk lipids decreased
up to 1 μs, and after 1 μs, these values became almost
constant (Figure S9). It is also to be
noted that initially the ratio of local POPC to local POPG was 7:3,
but at 10 μs this ratio became 1:1 (the ratio of the PO4 beads of POPC and POPG), indicating the accumulation of more
POPG near the protein, whereas, for simulation 2, we obtained a ratio
of 1:1.17.
Figure 5
Number of local lipids vs time.
Number of local lipids vs time.To analyze the effect of the aggregated protein on bilayer properties,
two-dimensional plots for bilayer thickness and lipid-order parameters
(Figure S10, Supporting Information) over
the entire simulation time period were generated. The bilayer thickness
was estimated as the average distance between the PO4 beads
of the two leaflets using previously developed analytical tools.[51] The obtained value was ∼4.23 ± 0.14
nm. The one-dimensional lipid-order parameter (P)
for POPC and POPG in the bilayer systems for the first and last 100
ns was determined from the equation: P = 0.5 (3⟨cos2(θ)⟩ – 1). It was calculated for each
consecutive bond in the CG lipids,[52] where
θ denotes the angle between the bond vector connecting the consecutive
beads and the bilayer normal. P values of 1, −0.5,
and 0 indicate the perfect alignment, perfect anti-alignment, and
random orientation, respectively. However, from this analysis, no
significant changes were found, rather a stable conformation was observed.The lateral mobility of the lipid molecules can be obtained with
the help of their translational diffusion coefficients.[53] The diffusion coefficients of the upper leaflet
lipids were estimated for the first and last 100 ns of simulation
for both local and bulk POPG, and POPC lipids are given in Table . It was observed
that the change in the lateral diffusion coefficient was significantly
more for the local lipids than that of the bulk lipids. For simulation
2, we get a similar range of values (Table S3, Supporting Information). This is in agreement with the analysis
of the density map[54] of local and bulk
POPG and POPC for the first and last 100 ns of simulation, as given
in Figure . The density
map for the bulk lipid is given in the Supporting Information, Figure S11. To calculate the density map, first,
local lipids were considered which were within 10 Å of the protein
and the rest were considered to be bulk lipids. To see the changes
in density, the densities of the local and bulk lipids for the first
100 ns and the last 100 ns of the trajectory for both POPG and POPC
were calculated. Moreover, when the diffusion coefficients and densities
of local POPG and POPC were compared, it was noticed that, in the
case of POPG, the change in the values for the first and last 100
ns was more.
Table 1
Diffusion
Coefficient (10–5 cm2/s)
lipid (upper
leaflet)
first 100 ns
last 100 ns
POPG (local)
0.027 ± 0.011
0.003 ± 0.007
POPC
(local)
0.046 ± 0.008
0.014 ± 0.004
POPG (bulk)
0.037 ± 0.002
0.037 ± 0.003
POPC (bulk)
0.038 ± 0.005
0.041 ± 0.006
Figure 6
Density map: (a) POPG (local) for first 100 ns, (b) POPG
(local)
for last 100 ns, (c) POPC (local) for first 100 ns, and (d) POPC (local)
for last 100 ns.
Density map: (a) POPG (local) for first 100 ns, (b) POPG
(local)
for last 100 ns, (c) POPC (local) for first 100 ns, and (d) POPC (local)
for last 100 ns.One can calculate the radial distribution function
(RDF), g, describing
the probability
of finding a particle of one type i, at a distance
from another type j. RDFs of PO4 beads[55] of local POPG and POPC (Figure a,b) were calculated. Simulation 2 also provided
a similar observation (Figure S12, Supporting
Information). It can be seen from the figures that the local POPG
lipids have aggregated more than that of local POPC. This indicates
that the binding of the aggregated protein caused the disruption of
the host POPG/POPC bilayer, as also has been reported earlier about
the disarrangement of the phospholipid bilayer by the aggregated protein.[18]
Figure 7
RDF: (a) POPG local and (b) POPC local.
RDF: (a) POPG local and (b) POPC local.Through the analysis of bilayer thickness, the order parameter
suggested that the structural properties of the mixed bilayer did
not change to a large extent, and the number of local lipids with
the simulation time plot (Figure ) suggested that the lysozyme pair had induced the
local accumulation of lipids. Further analysis of the diffusion coefficient
of both lipids (Table ) and density maps (Figure ) revealed that the interaction of the aggregated protein
with local POPG was more than the others because for local POPG, we
get more changes in the diffusion coefficient as well as in the density
map.[4,56] Another interesting observation was the
increase of the RDF of PO4[57] of local POPC and POPG of the mixed bilayer (Figure ), where it was observed that the close proximity
was more for the last 1 μs than for the first 1 μs, which
was also supported by the initiation of protein insertion. It provided
a reliable insight about the aggregated protein and more probability
distribution of PO4 beads of POPG than that of POPC around
the protein and confirmed the higher affinity of POPG to the aggregated
protein.
Initiation of the Insertion of Aggregated Proteins
The initiation of insertion is certainly an interesting topic to
study with the help of MD as experimental tools to study the detailed
motion and insertion of large biological molecules along with the
aggregation phenomenon within the mixed bilayer interior are not readily
available. Therefore, to get a clear description of the initiation
of insertion of lysozymes along with the aggregation of lysozymes,
one should consider about the interaction of the protein and the membrane
across the whole bilayer. It was observed that the two lysozymes individually
did not try to get inserted into the membrane, rather the whole system
tried to interact with the membrane. During the initiation of insertion,
the phospholipid group and the basic part of proteins came close to
each other, which are also clearly observed from the VMD snapshots
(Figure ).
Figure 8
Snapshot showing
the electrostatic interaction and the initiation
of insertion of the aggregated system with respect to time. Protein1,
protein2, POPC, POPG, phosphate bead of lipids, and basic and acidic
beads of the protein are presented as orange, green, purple, cyan,
ocher, red, and blue van der Waals spheres, respectively. Image rendering
was done with VMD.
Snapshot showing
the electrostatic interaction and the initiation
of insertion of the aggregated system with respect to time. Protein1,
protein2, POPC, POPG, phosphate bead of lipids, and basic and acidic
beads of the protein are presented as orange, green, purple, cyan,
ocher, red, and blue van der Waals spheres, respectively. Image rendering
was done with VMD.From the information
about the initiation of insertion of aggregated
proteins, it may be concluded that there was a strong electrostatic
interaction between the aggregated protein and the membrane. Figure also shows that
at the interface of the mixed bilayer and the aggregated system, the
basic residues of the protein and phosphate groups of the lipid were
more close to each other than the acidic residues of the protein.
This interaction helped the whole aggregated system for permeation
in the mixed bilayer. This part may also be supported by another observation
that, at the beginning of simulation, the lipid ratio of POPC and
POPG was 7:3 (through the mixed bilayer) but, at 10 μs, the
ratio became 1:1 (ratio of PO4 beads of POPC and POPG,
which were within 10 Å of protein).
Conclusions
In
this paper, we have used CG MD simulations to investigate the
pathway of lysozyme aggregation in the presence of membrane and to
monitor the changes in the properties of the mixed bilayer and lysozyme
due to the interaction between them. Two simulations of 10 μs
each have shown that the lysozymes first formed a pair and then approached
the membrane as an aggregated entity. Though the length of the simulation
is limited, it can provide a possible mechanism of membrane-induced
denaturation-aggregation of lysozymes and the initiation of the process
of membrane type binding by the aggregated system. The higher values
of rmsd, Rg, and SASA of lysozyme2 than
those of lysozyme1 indicate the significance of membrane on unfolding
of proteins.The structural/dynamic changes of the bilayer were
recognized by
analyzing different properties of the membrane, counting the number
of local and bulk lipids, determining the diffusion coefficients of
the local and upper leaflets of bulk lipids, plotting a density map
of local and bulk lipids, and from the radial distribution of the
phosphate group of the upper leaflet of local and bulk lipids. Moreover,
initially, the ratio of local POPC and local POPG was 7:3 but, at
10 μs, this ratio became 1:1 (Figure ); all these observations indicated that
POPG had a strong influence on lysozyme aggregation. At the same time,
the initiation of lysozyme insertion into the mixed bilayer affected
lipid ordering by generating a structural rearrangement of the bilayer.
The combined results provide new biophysical insights into lysozyme
aggregation in the presence of a mixed bilayer along with the effect
of binding of the aggregated protein on the membrane structure and
dynamics.