Comparison of sequence-based and structure-based energy functions for the reversible folding of a peptide.

We used computer simulations to compare the reversible folding of a 20-residue peptide, as described by sequence-based and structure-based energy functions. Sequence-based energy functions are transferable and can be used to describe the behavior of different proteins, since interactions are defined between atomic species. Conversely, structure-based energy functions are not transferable, since the interactions are defined relative to the native conformation, which is assumed to correspond to the global minimum of the energy. Our results indicate that the sequence-based and the structure-based descriptions are in qualitative agreement in characterizing the two-state behavior of the peptide that we studied. We also found, however, that several equilibrium properties, including the free-energy landscape, can be significantly different in the various models. These results suggest that the fact that a model describes the native state of a polypeptide chain does not necessarily imply that the thermodynamic and kinetic properties will also be reproduced correctly.

[1]  Flavio Seno,et al.  Protein Structures and Optimal Folding from a Geometrical Variational Principle , 1998, cond-mat/9811246.

[2]  A. Cavalli,et al.  Fast protein folding on downhill energy landscape , 2003, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[3]  Dmitri K. Klimov,et al.  Insights into Specific Problems in Protein Folding Using Simple Concepts , 2002 .

[4]  A. Fersht,et al.  Protein Folding and Unfolding at Atomic Resolution , 2002, Cell.

[5]  M. Jiménez,et al.  De novo design of a monomeric three‐stranded antiparallel β‐sheet , 2008, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[6]  M. Karplus,et al.  How does a protein fold? , 1994, Nature.

[7]  H. Scheraga,et al.  An atomically detailed study of the folding pathways of protein A with the stochastic difference equation , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  M. Karplus,et al.  Interpreting the folding kinetics of helical proteins , 1999, Nature.

[9]  A. Caflisch,et al.  Folding simulations of a three-stranded antiparallel β-sheet peptide , 2000 .

[10]  Yaoqi Zhou,et al.  Role of hydrophilic and hydrophobic contacts in folding of the second β‐hairpin fragment of protein G: Molecular dynamics simulation studies of an all‐atom model , 2002, Proteins.

[11]  Amedeo Caflisch,et al.  Free Energy Surface of the Helical Peptide Y(MEARA)6 , 2000 .

[12]  J. Onuchic,et al.  Theory of protein folding: the energy landscape perspective. , 1997, Annual review of physical chemistry.

[13]  Lorna J. Smith,et al.  Understanding protein folding via free-energy surfaces from theory and experiment. , 2000, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[14]  Ferrenberg,et al.  Statistical errors in histogram reweighting. , 1995, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.

[15]  Hue Sun Chan,et al.  Towards a consistent modeling of protein thermodynamic and kinetic cooperativity: how applicable is the transition state picture to folding and unfolding? , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[16]  G. Favrin,et al.  Monte Carlo update for chain molecules: Biased Gaussian steps in torsional space , 2001, cond-mat/0103580.

[17]  J. Apostolakis,et al.  Evaluation of a fast implicit solvent model for molecular dynamics simulations , 2002, Proteins.

[18]  Vijay S. Pande,et al.  Heteropolymer freezing and design: Towards physical models of protein folding , 2000 .

[19]  H. Stanley,et al.  Direct molecular dynamics observation of protein folding transition state ensemble. , 2002, Biophysical journal.

[20]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  Folding rate prediction using total contact distance. , 2002, Biophysical journal.

[21]  John Karanicolas,et al.  Improved Gō-like models demonstrate the robustness of protein folding mechanisms towards non-native interactions. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  John Karanicolas,et al.  The origins of asymmetry in the folding transition states of protein L and protein G , 2002, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[23]  J. Onuchic,et al.  Interplay among tertiary contacts, secondary structure formation and side-chain packing in the protein folding mechanism: all-atom representation study of protein L. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[24]  M. Karplus,et al.  CHARMM: A program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations , 1983 .

[25]  A. Fersht,et al.  Testing protein-folding simulations by experiment: B domain of protein A. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  M Karplus,et al.  Factors that affect the folding ability of proteins , 1998, Proteins.

[27]  C. Brooks,et al.  Comparative Study of the Folding Free Energy Landscape of a Three-Stranded β-Sheet Protein with Explicit and Implicit Solvent Models , 2000 .

[28]  Joan-Emma Shea,et al.  Probing the folding free energy landscape of the src-SH3 protein domain , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  D. Landau,et al.  Efficient, multiple-range random walk algorithm to calculate the density of states. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[30]  N. Go,et al.  Studies on protein folding, unfolding and fluctuations by computer simulation. I. The effect of specific amino acid sequence represented by specific inter-unit interactions. , 2009 .

[31]  A. Cavalli,et al.  Analysis of the distributed computing approach applied to the folding of a small β peptide , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[32]  D. Landau,et al.  Determining the density of states for classical statistical models: a random walk algorithm to produce a flat histogram. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[33]  H. Stanley,et al.  Molecular dynamics simulation of the SH3 domain aggregation suggests a generic amyloidogenesis mechanism. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[34]  E. Shakhnovich,et al.  The folding thermodynamics and kinetics of crambin using an all-atom Monte Carlo simulation. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[35]  Yaoqi Zhou,et al.  Temperature dependence of the distribution of the first passage time: results from discontinuous molecular dynamics simulations of an all-atom model of the second beta-hairpin fragment of protein G. , 2003, Journal of the American Chemical Society.