A simple physical model for binding energy hot spots in protein–protein complexes

Protein–protein recognition plays a central role in most biological processes. Although the structures of many protein–protein complexes have been solved in molecular detail, general rules describing affinity and selectivity of protein–protein interactions do not accurately account for the extremely diverse nature of the interfaces. We investigate the extent to which a simple physical model can account for the wide range of experimentally measured free energy changes brought about by alanine mutation at protein–protein interfaces. The model successfully predicts the results of alanine scanning experiments on globular proteins (743 mutations) and 19 protein–protein interfaces (233 mutations) with average unsigned errors of 0.81 kcal/mol and 1.06 kcal/mol, respectively. The results test our understanding of the dominant contributions to the free energy of protein–protein interactions, can guide experiments aimed at the design of protein interaction inhibitors, and provide a stepping-stone to important applications such as interface redesign.

[1]  A. Fersht,et al.  Hydrogen bonding and biological specificity analysed by protein engineering , 1985, Nature.

[2]  B. Tidor,et al.  Do salt bridges stabilize proteins? A continuum electrostatic analysis , 1994, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[4]  A. Levine,et al.  Structure of the MDM2 Oncoprotein Bound to the p53 Tumor Suppressor Transactivation Domain , 1996, Science.

[5]  M. Karplus,et al.  Simulation of activation free energies in molecular systems , 1996 .

[6]  S. Atwell,et al.  Structural plasticity in a remodeled protein-protein interface. , 1997, Science.

[7]  S. L. Mayo,et al.  De novo protein design: fully automated sequence selection. , 1997, Science.

[8]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  Bayesian statistical analysis of protein side‐chain rotamer preferences , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[9]  S F Howard,et al.  Molecular characterization of the hdm2-p53 interaction. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  D. Covell,et al.  Analysis of protein-protein interactions and the effects of amino acid mutations on their energetics. The importance of water molecules in the binding epitope. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[11]  T. Clackson,et al.  Structural and functional analysis of the 1:1 growth hormone:receptor complex reveals the molecular basis for receptor affinity. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[12]  K. Sharp,et al.  Calculation of HyHel10‐lysozyme binding free energy changes: Effect of ten point mutations , 1998, Proteins.

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

[14]  J. Janin,et al.  Wet and dry interfaces: the role of solvent in protein-protein and protein-DNA recognition. , 1999, Structure.

[15]  M. Karplus,et al.  Effective energy function for proteins in solution , 1999, Proteins.

[16]  C. Chothia,et al.  The atomic structure of protein-protein recognition sites. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  H W Hellinga,et al.  Dissection of the protein G B1 domain binding site for human IgG Fc fragment , 1999, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[18]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Conservation of polar residues as hot spots at protein interfaces , 2000, Proteins.

[19]  김삼묘,et al.  “Bioinformatics” 특집을 내면서 , 2000 .

[20]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  Protein function in the post-genomic era , 2000, Nature.

[21]  D. Baker,et al.  Native protein sequences are close to optimal for their structures. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  P. Kollman,et al.  Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. , 2000, Accounts of chemical research.

[23]  S. Henikoff,et al.  Predicting deleterious amino acid substitutions. , 2001, Genome research.

[24]  T M Handel,et al.  Review: protein design--where we were, where we are, where we're going. , 2001, Journal of structural biology.

[25]  Kurt S. Thorn,et al.  ASEdb: a database of alanine mutations and their effects on the free energy of binding in protein interactions , 2001, Bioinform..

[26]  Akinori Sarai,et al.  ProTherm, Thermodynamic Database for Proteins and Mutants: developments in version 3.0 , 2002, Nucleic Acids Res..

[27]  W. Delano Unraveling hot spots in binding interfaces: progress and challenges. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[28]  S. A. Marshall,et al.  Electrostatics significantly affect the stability of designed homeodomain variants. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[29]  L. Serrano,et al.  Predicting changes in the stability of proteins and protein complexes: a study of more than 1000 mutations. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[30]  M. Snyder,et al.  "Omic" approaches for unraveling signaling networks. , 2002, Current opinion in cell biology.