Folding protein models with a simple hydrophobic energy function: The fundamental importance of monomer inside/outside segregation

The present study explores a “hydrophobic” energy function for folding simulations of the protein lattice model. The contribution of each monomer to conformational energy is the product of its “hydrophobicity” and the number of contacts it makes, i.e., E(h, c) = −Σi=1N cihi = −(h.c) is the negative scalar product between two vectors in N-dimensional cartesian space: h = (h1, … , hN), which represents monomer hydrophobicities and is sequence-dependent; and c = (c1, … , cN), which represents the number of contacts made by each monomer and is conformation-dependent. A simple theoretical analysis shows that restrictions are imposed concomitantly on both sequences and native structures if the stability criterion for protein-like behavior is to be satisfied. Given a conformation with vector c, the best sequence is a vector h on the direction upon which the projection of c − c is maximal, where c is the diagonal vector with components equal to c, the average number of contacts per monomer in the unfolded state. Best native conformations are suggested to be not maximally compact, as assumed in many studies, but the ones with largest variance of contacts among its monomers, i.e., with monomers tending to occupy completely buried or completely exposed positions. This inside/outside segregation is reflected on an apolar/polar distribution on the corresponding sequence. Monte Carlo simulations in two dimensions corroborate this general scheme. Sequences targeted to conformations with large contact variances folded cooperatively with thermodynamics of a two-state transition. Sequences targeted to maximally compact conformations, which have lower contact variance, were either found to have degenerate ground state or to fold with much lower cooperativity.

[1]  E. Shakhnovich,et al.  Engineering of stable and fast-folding sequences of model proteins. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  N S Wingreen,et al.  Are protein folds atypical? , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  B. Joughin,et al.  Thermodynamics of interactions between amino acid side chains: experimental differentiation of aromatic-aromatic, aromatic-aliphatic, and aliphatic-aliphatic side-chain interactions in water. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[4]  K A Dill,et al.  Solvation: how to obtain microscopic energies from partitioning and solvation experiments. , 1997, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[5]  R. Jernigan,et al.  Estimation of effective interresidue contact energies from protein crystal structures: quasi-chemical approximation , 1985 .

[6]  P. Wolynes,et al.  Optimal protein-folding codes from spin-glass theory. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  K. P. Murphy,et al.  Molecular basis of co-operativity in protein folding. III. Structural identification of cooperative folding units and folding intermediates. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[8]  J. Onuchic,et al.  Folding kinetics of proteinlike heteropolymers , 1994, cond-mat/9404001.

[9]  N. Metropolis,et al.  Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines , 1953, Resonance.

[10]  E I Shakhnovich,et al.  A test of lattice protein folding algorithms. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  P. Wolynes,et al.  Spin glasses and the statistical mechanics of protein folding. , 1987, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  B. Derrida Random-energy model: An exactly solvable model of disordered systems , 1981 .

[13]  T. Pochapsky,et al.  A chromatographic approach to the determination of relative free energies of interaction between hydrophobic and amphiphilic amino acid side chains , 1992, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[14]  D. Yee,et al.  Principles of protein folding — A perspective from simple exact models , 1995, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[15]  V S Pande,et al.  Statistical mechanics of simple models of protein folding and design. , 1997, Biophysical journal.

[16]  E I Shakhnovich,et al.  Impact of local and non-local interactions on thermodynamics and kinetics of protein folding. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  N. Wingreen,et al.  NATURE OF DRIVING FORCE FOR PROTEIN FOLDING : A RESULT FROM ANALYZING THE STATISTICAL POTENTIAL , 1995, cond-mat/9512111.

[18]  J. Onuchic,et al.  KINETICS OF PROTEINLIKE MODELS : THE ENERGY LANDSCAPE FACTORS THAT DETERMINE FOLDING , 1995 .

[19]  A. F. Pereira De Araújo,et al.  Monte Carlo simulations of protein folding using inexact potentials: how accurate must parameters be in order to preserve the essential features of the energy landscape? , 1996, Folding & design.

[20]  N. Wingreen,et al.  Emergence of Preferred Structures in a Simple Model of Protein Folding , 1996, Science.

[21]  P. Privalov,et al.  Contribution of hydration to protein folding thermodynamics. I. The enthalpy of hydration. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  E. Shakhnovich,et al.  Proteins with selected sequences fold into unique native conformation. , 1994, Physical review letters.

[23]  Eugene I. Shakhnovich,et al.  Free energy landscape for protein folding kinetics: Intermediates, traps, and multiple pathways in theory and lattice model simulations , 1994 .

[24]  J. Onuchic,et al.  Funnels, pathways, and the energy landscape of protein folding: A synthesis , 1994, Proteins.

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

[26]  E. Shakhnovich,et al.  Formation of unique structure in polypeptide chains. Theoretical investigation with the aid of a replica approach. , 1989, Biophysical chemistry.

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

[28]  P. Privalov,et al.  Contribution of hydration to protein folding thermodynamics. II. The entropy and Gibbs energy of hydration. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[29]  Kinetic and thermodynamic analysis of proteinlike heteropolymers: Monte Carlo histogram technique , 1995, chem-ph/9507003.

[30]  E. Shakhnovich Theoretical studies of protein-folding thermodynamics and kinetics. , 1997, Current opinion in structural biology.