The spatial architecture of protein function and adaptation

Statistical analysis of protein evolution suggests a design for natural proteins in which sparse networks of coevolving amino acids (termed sectors) comprise the essence of three-dimensional structure and function. However, proteins are also subject to pressures deriving from the dynamics of the evolutionary process itself—the ability to tolerate mutation and to be adaptive to changing selection pressures. To understand the relationship of the sector architecture to these properties, we developed a high-throughput quantitative method for a comprehensive single-mutation study in which every position is substituted individually to every other amino acid. Using a PDZ domain (PSD95pdz3) model system, we show that sector positions are functionally sensitive to mutation, whereas non-sector positions are more tolerant to substitution. In addition, we find that adaptation to a new binding specificity initiates exclusively through variation within sector residues. A combination of just two sector mutations located near and away from the ligand-binding site suffices to switch the binding specificity of PSD95pdz3 quantitatively towards a class-switching ligand. The localization of functional constraint and adaptive variation within the sector has important implications for understanding and engineering proteins.

[1]  C. Anfinsen Principles that govern the folding of protein chains. , 1973, Science.

[2]  F. Bushman,et al.  A single glutamic acid residue plays a key role in the transcriptional activation function of lambda repressor , 1989, Cell.

[3]  T. Clackson,et al.  A hot spot of binding energy in a hormone-receptor interface , 1995, Science.

[4]  J. Keith Joung,et al.  Activation of prokaryotic transcription through arbitrary protein–protein contacts , 1997, Nature.

[5]  H. Bujard,et al.  Independent and tight regulation of transcriptional units in Escherichia coli via the LacR/O, the TetR/O and AraC/I1-I2 regulatory elements. , 1997, Nucleic acids research.

[6]  The activation defect of a lambda cI positive control mutant. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[7]  L. Cantley,et al.  Recognition of Unique Carboxyl-Terminal Motifs by Distinct PDZ Domains , 1997, Science.

[8]  Ann Marie Craig,et al.  CRIPT, a Novel Postsynaptic Protein that Binds to the Third PDZ Domain of PSD-95/SAP90 , 1998, Neuron.

[9]  R. Ranganathan,et al.  Evolutionarily conserved pathways of energetic connectivity in protein families. , 1999, Science.

[10]  M. Elowitz,et al.  A synthetic oscillatory network of transcriptional regulators , 2000, Nature.

[11]  C. Voigt,et al.  Rational evolutionary design: the theory of in vitro protein evolution. , 2000, Advances in protein chemistry.

[12]  Rama Ranganathan,et al.  Allosteric determinants in guanine nucleotide-binding proteins , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  Gürol M. Süel,et al.  Evolutionarily conserved networks of residues mediate allosteric communication in proteins , 2003, Nature Structural Biology.

[14]  D. Baker,et al.  Design of a Novel Globular Protein Fold with Atomic-Level Accuracy , 2003, Science.

[15]  B. Volkman,et al.  Cdc42 regulates the Par-6 PDZ domain through an allosteric CRIB-PDZ transition. , 2004, Molecular cell.

[16]  Guido Tiana,et al.  Imprint of evolution on protein structures. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  Rama Ranganathan,et al.  Structural Determinants of Allosteric Ligand Activation in RXR Heterodimers , 2004, Cell.

[18]  D. Jain,et al.  Structure of a ternary transcription activation complex. , 2004, Molecular cell.

[19]  P. Bradley,et al.  Toward High-Resolution de Novo Structure Prediction for Small Proteins , 2005, Science.

[20]  F. Studier,et al.  Protein production by auto-induction in high density shaking cultures. , 2005, Protein expression and purification.

[21]  W. P. Russ,et al.  Natural-like function in artificial WW domains , 2005, Nature.

[22]  S. Leibler,et al.  Phenotypic Diversity, Population Growth, and Information in Fluctuating Environments , 2005, Science.

[23]  W. P. Russ,et al.  Evolutionary information for specifying a protein fold , 2005, Nature.

[24]  Dan S. Tawfik,et al.  Robustness–epistasis link shapes the fitness landscape of a randomly drifting protein , 2006, Nature.

[25]  F. Arnold,et al.  Protein stability promotes evolvability. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  V. Hilser,et al.  Intrinsic disorder as a mechanism to optimize allosteric coupling in proteins , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[27]  Tord Snäll,et al.  Reassessing a sparse energetic network within a single protein domain , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  A. Camilli,et al.  Tn-seq; high-throughput parallel sequencing for fitness and genetic interaction studies in microorganisms , 2009, Nature Methods.

[29]  Najeeb M. Halabi,et al.  Protein Sectors: Evolutionary Units of Three-Dimensional Structure , 2009, Cell.

[30]  Stanislas Leibler,et al.  An interdomain sector mediating allostery in Hsp70 molecular chaperones , 2010, Molecular systems biology.

[31]  D. Baker,et al.  High Resolution Mapping of Protein Sequence–Function Relationships , 2010, Nature Methods.

[32]  G. Wagner,et al.  Mutational robustness can facilitate adaptation , 2010, Nature.

[33]  J. Kinney,et al.  Using deep sequencing to characterize the biophysical mechanism of a transcriptional regulatory sequence , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[34]  Kimberly A. Reynolds,et al.  Hot Spots for Allosteric Regulation on Protein Surfaces , 2011, Cell.

[35]  Raghavan Varadarajan,et al.  Protein model discrimination using mutational sensitivity derived from deep sequencing. , 2012, Structure.