Literature DB >> 9300480

Structural motifs at protein-protein interfaces: protein cores versus two-state and three-state model complexes.

C J Tsai1, D Xu, R Nussinov.   

Abstract

The general similarity in the forces governing protein folding and protein-protein associations has led us to examine the similarity in the architectural motifs between the interfaces and the monomers. We have carried out extensive, all-against-all structural comparisons between the single-chain protein structural dataset and the interface dataset, derived both from all protein-protein complexes in the structural database and from interfaces generated via an automated crystal symmetry operation. We show that despite the absence of chain connections, the global features of the architectural motifs, present in monomers, recur in the interfaces, a reflection of the limited set of the folding patterns. However, although similarity has been observed, the details of the architectural motifs vary. In particular, the extent of the similarity correlates with the consideration of how the interface has been formed. Interfaces derived from two-state model complexes, where the chains fold cooperatively, display a considerable similarity to architectures in protein cores, as judged by the quality of their geometric superposition. On the other hand, the three-state model interfaces, representing binding of already folded molecules, manifest a larger variability and resemble the monomer architecture only in general outline. The origin of the difference between the monomers and the three-state model interfaces can be understood in terms of the different nature of the folding and the binding that are involved. Whereas in the former all degrees of freedom are available to the backbone to maximize favorable interactions, in rigid body, three-state model binding, only six degrees of freedom are allowed. Hence, residue or atom pair-wise potentials derived from protein-protein associations are expected to be less accurate, substantially increasing the number of computationally acceptable alternate binding modes (Finkelstein et al., 1995).

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9300480      PMCID: PMC2143787          DOI: 10.1002/pro.5560060901

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


  34 in total

Review 1.  Dominant forces in protein folding.

Authors:  K A Dill
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  1990-08-07       Impact factor: 3.162

2.  The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures.

Authors:  F C Bernstein; T F Koetzle; G J Williams; E F Meyer; M D Brice; J R Rodgers; O Kennard; T Shimanouchi; M Tasumi
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1977-05-25       Impact factor: 5.469

3.  Structural patterns in globular proteins.

Authors:  M Levitt; C Chothia
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1976-06-17       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  The structure of interfaces between subunits of dimeric and tetrameric proteins.

Authors:  S Miller
Journal:  Protein Eng       Date:  1989-11

Review 5.  Why do globular proteins fit the limited set of folding patterns?

Authors:  A V Finkelstein; O B Ptitsyn
Journal:  Prog Biophys Mol Biol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 3.667

6.  Deciphering the message in protein sequences: tolerance to amino acid substitutions.

Authors:  J U Bowie; J F Reidhaar-Olson; W A Lim; R T Sauer
Journal:  Science       Date:  1990-03-16       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Interior and surface of monomeric proteins.

Authors:  S Miller; J Janin; A M Lesk; C Chothia
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1987-08-05       Impact factor: 5.469

Review 8.  beta-Sheet topology and the relatedness of proteins.

Authors:  J S Richardson
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1977-08-11       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  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

10.  How different amino acid sequences determine similar protein structures: the structure and evolutionary dynamics of the globins.

Authors:  A M Lesk; C Chothia
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1980-01-25       Impact factor: 5.469

View more
  27 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.  Point mutations and sequence variability in proteins: redistributions of preexisting populations.

Authors:  N Sinha; R Nussinov
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2001-03-13       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 3.  Quaternary structure of nucleoside diphosphate kinases.

Authors:  L Lascu; A Giartosio; S Ransac; M Erent
Journal:  J Bioenerg Biomembr       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.945

4.  Are protein-protein interfaces more conserved in sequence than the rest of the protein surface?

Authors:  Daniel R Caffrey; Shyamal Somaroo; Jason D Hughes; Julian Mintseris; Enoch S Huang
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.725

5.  Protein topology determines binding mechanism.

Authors:  Yaakov Levy; Peter G Wolynes; José N Onuchic
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-12-23       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  A new, structurally nonredundant, diverse data set of protein-protein interfaces and its implications.

Authors:  Ozlem Keskin; Chung-Jung Tsai; Haim Wolfson; Ruth Nussinov
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 6.725

7.  Computational alanine scanning with linear scaling semiempirical quantum mechanical methods.

Authors:  David J Diller; Christine Humblet; Xiaohua Zhang; Lance M Westerhoff
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2010-08-01

8.  Fast and accurate modeling of protein-protein interactions by combining template-interface-based docking with flexible refinement.

Authors:  Nurcan Tuncbag; Ozlem Keskin; Ruth Nussinov; Attila Gursoy
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2012-01-31

9.  Heterocyclic alpha-helix mimetics for targeting protein-protein interactions.

Authors:  Shannon M Biros; Lionel Moisan; Enrique Mann; Alexandre Carella; Dayong Zhai; John C Reed; Julius Rebek
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem Lett       Date:  2007-05-27       Impact factor: 2.823

10.  A survey of available tools and web servers for analysis of protein-protein interactions and interfaces.

Authors:  Nurcan Tuncbag; Gozde Kar; Ozlem Keskin; Attila Gursoy; Ruth Nussinov
Journal:  Brief Bioinform       Date:  2009-02-24       Impact factor: 11.622

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.