Literature DB >> 7703840

Different protein sequences can give rise to highly similar folds through different stabilizing interactions.

D V Laurents1, S Subbiah, M Levitt.   

Abstract

We report an interesting case of structural similarity between 2 small, nonhomologous proteins, the third domain of ovomucoid (ovomucoid) and the C-terminal fragment of ribosomal L7/L12 protein (CTF). The region of similarity consists of a 3-stranded beta-sheet and an alpha-helix. This region is highly similar; the corresponding elements of secondary structure share a common topology, and the RMS difference for "equivalent" C alpha atoms is 1.6 A. Surprisingly, this common structure arises from completely different sequences. For the common core, the sequence identity is less than 3%, and there is neither significant sequence similarity nor similarity in the position or orientation of conserved hydrophobic residues. This superposition raises the question of how 2 entirely different sequences can produce an identical structure. Analyzing this common region in ovomucoid revealed that it is stabilized by disulfide bonds. In contrast, the corresponding structure in CTF is stabilized in the alpha-helix by a composition of residues with high helix-forming propensities. This result suggests that different sequences and different stabilizing interactions can produce an identical structure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7703840      PMCID: PMC2142644          DOI: 10.1002/pro.5560031105

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Protein Sci        ISSN: 0961-8368            Impact factor:   6.725


  27 in total

1.  Ribosomal proteins L7/L12 of Escherichia coli. Localization and possible molecular mechanism in translation.

Authors:  W Möller; P I Schrier; J A Maassen; A Zantema; E Schop; H Reinalda; A F Cremers; J E Mellema
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1983-02-05       Impact factor: 5.469

2.  Thermodynamics of unfolding for turkey ovomucoid third domain: thermal and chemical denaturation.

Authors:  L Swint; A D Robertson
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 6.725

3.  Comparison of conformational characteristics in structurally similar protein pairs.

Authors:  T P Flores; C A Orengo; D S Moss; J M Thornton
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 6.725

Review 4.  Why are the same protein folds used to perform different functions?

Authors:  A V Finkelstein; A M Gutun
Journal:  FEBS Lett       Date:  1993-06-28       Impact factor: 4.124

5.  Determination of free energies of N-capping in alpha-helices by modification of the Lifson-Roig helix-coil therapy to include N- and C-capping.

Authors:  A J Doig; A Chakrabartty; T M Klingler; R L Baldwin
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  1994-03-22       Impact factor: 3.162

Review 6.  Protein inhibitors of proteinases.

Authors:  M Laskowski; I Kato
Journal:  Annu Rev Biochem       Date:  1980       Impact factor: 23.643

7.  Ovomucoid third domains from 100 avian species: isolation, sequences, and hypervariability of enzyme-inhibitor contact residues.

Authors:  M Laskowski; I Kato; W Ardelt; J Cook; A Denton; M W Empie; W J Kohr; S J Park; K Parks; B L Schatzley
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  1987-01-13       Impact factor: 3.162

8.  Conformational stability and activity of ribonuclease T1 with zero, one, and two intact disulfide bonds.

Authors:  C N Pace; G R Grimsley; J A Thomson; B J Barnett
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1988-08-25       Impact factor: 5.157

9.  Helix propensities of the amino acids measured in alanine-based peptides without helix-stabilizing side-chain interactions.

Authors:  A Chakrabartty; T Kortemme; R L Baldwin
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 6.725

Review 10.  The structure and dynamics of ribosomal protein L12.

Authors:  A Liljas; A T Gudkov
Journal:  Biochimie       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 4.079

View more
  7 in total

1.  Stabilizing the subtilisin BPN' pro-domain by phage display selection: how restrictive is the amino acid code for maximum protein stability?

Authors:  B Ruan; J Hoskins; L Wang; P N Bryan
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 6.725

2.  Comprehensive assessment of automatic structural alignment against a manual standard, the scop classification of proteins.

Authors:  M Gerstein; M Levitt
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 6.725

3.  A unified statistical framework for sequence comparison and structure comparison.

Authors:  M Levitt; M Gerstein
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1998-05-26       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Alignment of 700 globin sequences: extent of amino acid substitution and its correlation with variation in volume.

Authors:  O H Kapp; L Moens; J Vanfleteren; C N Trotman; T Suzuki; S N Vinogradov
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 6.725

5.  Optimal network alignment with graphlet degree vectors.

Authors:  Tijana Milenković; Weng Leong Ng; Wayne Hayes; Natasa Przulj
Journal:  Cancer Inform       Date:  2010-06-30

6.  Predicting binding sites of hydrolase-inhibitor complexes by combining several methods.

Authors:  Taner Z Sen; Andrzej Kloczkowski; Robert L Jernigan; Changhui Yan; Vasant Honavar; Kai-Ming Ho; Cai-Zhuang Wang; Yungok Ihm; Haibo Cao; Xun Gu; Drena Dobbs
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2004-12-17       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  The amino acid alphabet and the architecture of the protein sequence-structure map. I. Binary alphabets.

Authors:  Evandro Ferrada
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 4.475

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.