A Quantitative Analysis of Interfacial Amino Acid Conservation in Protein-protein Hetero Complexes

A long-standing question in molecular biology is whether interfaces of protein-protein complexes are more conserved than the rest of the protein surfaces. Although it has been reported that conservation can be used as an indicator for predicting interaction sites on proteins, there are recent reports stating that the interface regions are only slightly more conserved than the rest of the protein surfaces, with conservation signals not being statistically significant enough for predicting protein-protein binding sites. In order to properly address these controversial reports we have studied a set of 28 well resolved hetero complex structures of proteins that consists of transient and non-transient complexes. The surface positions were classified into four conservation classes and the conservation index of the surface positions was quantitatively analyzed. The results indicate that the surface density of highly conserved positions is significantly higher in the protein-protein interface regions compared with the other regions of the protein surface. However, the average conservation index of the patches in the interface region is not significantly higher compared with other surface regions of the protein structures. This finding demonstrates that the number of conserved residue positions is a more appropriate indicator for predicting protein-protein binding sites than the average conservation index in the interacting region. We have further validated our findings on a set of 59 benchmark complex structures. Furthermore, an analysis of 19 complexes of antigen-antibody interactions shows that there is no conservation of amino acid positions in the interacting regions of these complexes, as expected, with the variable region of the immunoglobulins interacting mostly with the antigens. Interestingly, antigen interacting regions also have a higher number of non-conserved residue positions in the interacting region than the rest of the protein surface.

[1]  D. Covell,et al.  A role for surface hydrophobicity in protein‐protein recognition , 1994, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[2]  Alex Bateman,et al.  The InterPro database, an integrated documentation resource for protein families, domains and functional sites , 2001, Nucleic Acids Res..

[3]  F M Richards,et al.  Packing of alpha-helices: geometrical constraints and contact areas. , 1978, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  S. Jones,et al.  Prediction of protein-protein interaction sites using patch analysis. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[5]  F. Cohen,et al.  An evolutionary trace method defines binding surfaces common to protein families. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  S. Jones,et al.  Analysis of protein-protein interaction sites using surface patches. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[7]  P Argos,et al.  Hydrophobic patches on protein subunit interfaces: Characteristics and prediction , 1997, Proteins.

[8]  G. Gonnet,et al.  Exhaustive matching of the entire protein sequence database. , 1992, Science.

[9]  N. Grishin,et al.  The subunit interfaces of oligomeric enzymes are conserved to a similar extent to the overall protein sequences , 1994, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[10]  T. Blundell,et al.  Definition of general topological equivalence in protein structures. A procedure involving comparison of properties and relationships through simulated annealing and dynamic programming. , 1990, Journal of molecular biology.

[11]  Yuhua Duan,et al.  Physicochemical and residue conservation calculations to improve the ranking of protein–protein docking solutions , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[12]  O. Lichtarge,et al.  Evolutionary predictions of binding surfaces and interactions. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[13]  G J Williams,et al.  The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures. , 1978, Archives of biochemistry and biophysics.

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

[15]  P E Bourne,et al.  Conserved key amino acid positions (CKAAPs) derived from the analysis of common substructures in proteins , 2001, Proteins.

[16]  Tal Pupko,et al.  Structural Genomics , 2005 .

[17]  Sarah A. Teichmann,et al.  Principles of protein-protein interactions , 2002, ECCB.

[18]  J M Thornton,et al.  Protein-protein interactions: a review of protein dimer structures. , 1995, Progress in biophysics and molecular biology.

[19]  E. Shakhnovich,et al.  Conserved residues and the mechanism of protein folding , 1996, Nature.

[20]  M. Sternberg,et al.  Prediction of protein secondary structure and active sites using the alignment of homologous sequences. , 1987, Journal of molecular biology.

[21]  Daniel R. Caffrey,et al.  Are protein–protein interfaces more conserved in sequence than the rest of the protein surface? , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[22]  C. Chothia,et al.  The structure of protein-protein recognition sites. , 1990, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[23]  Vadim M Govorun,et al.  Protein‐protein interactions as a target for drugs in proteomics , 2003, Proteomics.

[24]  A. Bogan,et al.  Anatomy of hot spots in protein interfaces. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[25]  O. Lichtarge,et al.  A family of evolution-entropy hybrid methods for ranking protein residues by importance. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  Frederic M. Richards,et al.  Packing of α-helices: Geometrical constraints and contact areas☆ , 1978 .

[27]  C. Chothia,et al.  Principles of protein–protein recognition , 1975, Nature.

[28]  P. Argos.  An investigation of protein subunit and domain interfaces. , 1988, Protein engineering.

[29]  J. Thornton,et al.  Protein–protein interfaces: Analysis of amino acid conservation in homodimers , 2001, Proteins.

[30]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  A protein–protein docking benchmark , 2003, Proteins.

[31]  B. Rost,et al.  Analysing six types of protein-protein interfaces. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[32]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[33]  Geoffrey J. Barton,et al.  Protein sequence alignments: a strategy for the hierarchical analysis of residue conservation , 1993, Comput. Appl. Biosci..

[34]  C. Sander,et al.  Database of homology‐derived protein structures and the structural meaning of sequence alignment , 1991, Proteins.