Knowledge-Based versus experimentally Acquired Distance and Angle Constraints for NMR Structure Refinement

Nuclear Overhauser effects (NOE) distance constraints and torsion angle constraints are major conformational constraints for nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) structure refinement. In particular, the number of NOE constraints has been considered as an important determinant for the quality of NMR structures. Of course, the availability of torsion angle constraints is also critical for the formation of correct local conformations. In our recent work, we have shown how a set of knowledge-based short-range distance constraints can also be utilized for NMR structure refinement, as a complementary set of conformational constraints to the NOE and torsion angle constraints. In this paper, we show the results from a series of structure refinement experiments by using different types of conformational constraints--NOE, torsion angle, or knowledge-based constraints--or their combinations, and make a quantitative assessment on how the experimentally acquired constraints contribute to the quality of structural models and whether or not they can be combined with or substituted by the knowledge-based constraints. We have carried out the experiments on a small set of NMR structures. Our preliminary calculations have revealed that the torsion angle constraints contribute substantially to the quality of the structures, but require to be combined with the NOE constraints to be fully effective. The knowledge-based constraints can be functionally as crucial as the torsion angle constraints, although they are statistical constraints after all and are not meant to be able to replace the latter.

[1]  C. Sander,et al.  Errors in protein structures , 1996, Nature.

[2]  K. Wüthrich NMR of proteins and nucleic acids , 1988 .

[3]  A. Gronenborn,et al.  Improving the quality of NMR and crystallographic protein structures by means of a conformational database potential derived from structure databases , 1996, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[4]  G. Marius Clore,et al.  Use of dipolar 1H–15N and 1H–13C couplings in the structure determination of magnetically oriented macromolecules in solution , 1997, Nature Structural Biology.

[5]  Gert Vriend,et al.  The precision of NMR structure ensembles revisited , 2003, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[6]  Ad Bax,et al.  An empirical backbone-backbone hydrogen-bonding potential in proteins and its applications to NMR structure refinement and validation. , 2004, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[7]  R J Read,et al.  Crystallography & NMR system: A new software suite for macromolecular structure determination. , 1998, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[8]  D. Richardson,et al.  Exploring steric constraints on protein mutations using MAGE/PROBE , 2000, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[9]  J. Thornton,et al.  PROCHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures , 1993 .

[10]  Oleg Jardetzky,et al.  A systematic comparison of three structure determination methods from NMR data: Dependence upon quality and quantity of data , 1992, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[11]  J. Thornton,et al.  Stereochemical quality of protein structure coordinates , 1992, Proteins.

[12]  P. Kraulis,et al.  Solution structure and dynamics of ras p21.GDP determined by heteronuclear three- and four-dimensional NMR spectroscopy. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[13]  Zhijun Wu,et al.  Refinement of NMR‐determined protein structures with database derived mean‐force potentials , 2007, Proteins.

[14]  C. Dobson,et al.  A refined solution structure of hen lysozyme determined using residual dipolar coupling data , 2001, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[15]  Gaetano T Montelione,et al.  Clustering algorithms for identifying core atom sets and for assessing the precision of protein structure ensembles , 2005, Proteins.

[16]  Robert L. Jernigan,et al.  Refinement of Nmr-determined Protein Structures with Database Derived Distance Constraints , 2005, J. Bioinform. Comput. Biol..

[17]  D. Kohda,et al.  Three-dimensional nuclear magnetic resonance structures of mouse epidermal growth factor in acidic and physiological pH solutions. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[18]  G M Clore,et al.  Exploring the limits of precision and accuracy of protein structures determined by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[19]  Shankar Subramaniam,et al.  Protein structure determination using a database of interatomic distance probabilities , 1999, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[20]  Robert Powers,et al.  Protein NMR recall, precision, and F-measure scores (RPF scores): structure quality assessment measures based on information retrieval statistics. , 2005, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[21]  D. Eisenberg Proteins. Structures and molecular properties, T.E. Creighton. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York (1984), 515, $36.95 , 1985 .

[22]  Ton Rullmann,et al.  Completeness of NOEs in protein structures: A statistical analysis of NMR data , 1999 .

[23]  J. Thornton,et al.  AQUA and PROCHECK-NMR: Programs for checking the quality of protein structures solved by NMR , 1996, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[24]  A. Gronenborn,et al.  A novel, highly stable fold of the immunoglobulin binding domain of streptococcal protein G. , 1993, Science.

[25]  W. Gronwald,et al.  RFAC, a program for automated NMR R-factor estimation , 2000, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[26]  Gaetano T Montelione,et al.  Assessing precision and accuracy of protein structures derived from NMR data , 2005, Proteins.

[27]  M. Zalis,et al.  Visualizing and quantifying molecular goodness-of-fit: small-probe contact dots with explicit hydrogen atoms. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[28]  R Kaptein,et al.  Completeness of NOEs in protein structure: a statistical analysis of NMR. , 1999, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[29]  J. Rullmann,et al.  Quality assessment of NMR structures: a statistical survey. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[30]  A M Gronenborn,et al.  Direct structure refinement against residual dipolar couplings in the presence of rhombicity of unknown magnitude. , 1998, Journal of magnetic resonance.

[31]  T. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank and the challenge of structural genomics , 2000, Nature Structural Biology.

[32]  I R Vetter,et al.  Dynamic properties of the Ras switch I region and its importance for binding to effectors , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  M. Sutcliffe,et al.  Determination of the solution structures of domains II and III of protein G from Streptococcus by 1H nuclear magnetic resonance. , 1992, Journal of Molecular Biology.

[34]  Jun Zhu,et al.  BioMagResBank database with sets of experimental NMR constraints corresponding to the structures of over 1400 biomolecules deposited in the Protein Data Bank , 2003, Journal of biomolecular NMR.