Literature DB >> 8995525

Protein binding versus protein folding: the role of hydrophilic bridges in protein associations.

D Xu1, S L Lin, R Nussinov.   

Abstract

The role of hydrophilic bridges between charged, or polar, atoms in protein associations has been examined from two perspectives. First, statistical analysis has been carried out on 21 data sets to determine the relationship between the binding free energy and the structure of the protein complexes. We find that the number of hydrophilic bridges across the binding interface shows a strong positive correlation with the free energy; second, the electrostatic contribution of salt bridges to binding has been assessed by a continuum electrostatics calculation. In contrast to protein folding, we find that salt bridges across the binding interface can significantly stabilize complexes in some cases. The different contributions of hydrophilic bridges to folding and to binding arise from the different environments to which the involved hydrophilic groups are exposed before and after the bridges are formed. These groups are more solvated in a denatured protein before folding than on the surface of the combining proteins before binding. After binding, they are buried in an environment whose residual composition can be much more hydrophilic than the one after folding. As a result, the desolvation cost of a hydrophilic pair is lower, and the favorable interactions between the hydrophilic pair and its surrounding residues are generally stronger in binding than in folding. These results complement our recent finding that while hydrophobic effect in protein-protein interfaces is significant, it is not as strong as that observed in the interior of monomers. Taken together, these studies suggest that while the types of forces in protein-protein interaction and in protein folding are similar, their relative contributions differ. Hence, association of protein monomers which do not undergo significant conformational change upon binding differs from protein folding, implying that conclusions (e.g. statistics, energetics) drawn from investigating folding may not apply directly to binding, and vice versa.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 8995525     DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.1996.0712

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mol Biol        ISSN: 0022-2836            Impact factor:   5.469


  64 in total

Review 1.  Folding funnels, binding funnels, and protein function.

Authors:  C J Tsai; S Kumar; B Ma; R Nussinov
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 6.725

2.  Electrostatic interactions in the GCN4 leucine zipper: substantial contributions arise from intramolecular interactions enhanced on binding.

Authors:  Z S Hendsch; B Tidor
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 6.725

3.  Scoring functions: a view from the bench.

Authors:  J R Tame
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  Free energy decomposition of protein-protein interactions.

Authors:  S Y Noskov; C Lim
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 4.033

5.  Structures of an unliganded neurophysin and its vasopressin complex: implications for binding and allosteric mechanisms.

Authors:  C K Wu; B Hu; J P Rose; Z J Liu; T L Nguyen; C Zheng; E Breslow; B C Wang
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 6.725

6.  Impact of domain interchange on conformational stability and equilibrium folding of chimeric class micro glutathione transferases.

Authors:  Jiann-Kae Luo; Judith A T Hornby; Louise A Wallace; Jihong Chen; Richard N Armstrong; Heini W Dirr
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 6.725

7.  Protein-protein interactions: structurally conserved residues distinguish between binding sites and exposed protein surfaces.

Authors:  Buyong Ma; Tal Elkayam; Haim Wolfson; Ruth Nussinov
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-05-01       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  TopNet: a tool for comparing biological sub-networks, correlating protein properties with topological statistics.

Authors:  Haiyuan Yu; Xiaowei Zhu; Dov Greenbaum; John Karro; Mark Gerstein
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2004-01-14       Impact factor: 16.971

9.  Coarse-grained model for colloidal protein interactions, B(22), and protein cluster formation.

Authors:  Marco A Blanco; Erinc Sahin; Anne S Robinson; Christopher J Roberts
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2013-12-10       Impact factor: 2.991

10.  Exploring the origins of binding specificity through the computational redesign of calmodulin.

Authors:  Julia M Shifman; Stephen L Mayo
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-11-03       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.