Mechanisms of amphipathic helical peptide denaturation by guanidinium chloride and urea: a molecular dynamics simulation study

Urea and GdmCl are widely used to denature proteins at high concentrations. Here, we used MD simulations to study the denaturation mechanisms of helical peptide in different concentrations of GdmCl and urea. It was found that the helical structure of the peptide in water simulation is disappeared after 5 ns while the helicity of the peptide is disappeared after 70 ns in 2 M urea and 25 ns in 1 M GdmCl. Surprisingly, this result shows that the helical structure in low concentration of denaturants is remained more with respect to that solvated in water. The present work strongly suggests that urea interact more preferentially to non-polar and aromatic side chains in 2 M urea; therefore, hydrophobic residues are in more favorable environment in 2 M urea. Our results also reveal that the hydrogen bonds between urea and the backbone is the dominant mechanism by which the peptide is destabilized in high concentration of urea. In 1 M and 2 M GdmCl, GdmCl molecules tend to engage in transient stacking interactions with aromatics and hydrophobic planar side chains that lead to displacement of water from the hydration surface, providing more favorable environment for them. This shows that accumulation of GdmCl around hydrophobic surfaces in 1 M and 2 M GdmCl solutions prevents proper solvation of the peptide at the beginning. In high GdmCl concentrations, water solvate the peptide better than 1 M and 2 M GdmCl. Therefore, our results strongly suggest that hydrogen bonds between water and the peptide are important factors in the destabilization of peptide in GdmCl solutions.

[1]  Anders Wallqvist,et al.  HYDROPHOBIC INTERACTIONS IN AQUEOUS UREA SOLUTIONS WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR THE MECHANISM OF PROTEIN DENATURATION , 1998 .

[2]  J. Brady,et al.  The interaction of guanidinium ions with a model peptide. , 2007, Biophysical journal.

[3]  H. Berendsen,et al.  Molecular dynamics with coupling to an external bath , 1984 .

[4]  R. Larson,et al.  Binding and insertion of alpha-helical anti-microbial peptides in POPC bilayers studied by molecular dynamics simulations. , 2004, Chemistry and physics of lipids.

[5]  J. T. Gerig,et al.  Interactions of hexafluoro-2-propanol with the Trp-cage peptide. , 2006 .

[6]  M. Zacharias,et al.  Effect of hexafluoroisopropanol alcohol on the structure of melittin: A molecular dynamics simulation study , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[7]  T. Arakawa,et al.  Protein stabilization and destabilization by guanidinium salts. , 1984, Biochemistry.

[8]  Kristofer Modig,et al.  Trifluoroethanol-induced beta --> alpha transition in beta-lactoglobulin: hydration and cosolvent binding studied by 2H, 17O, and 19F magnetic relaxation dispersion. , 2003, Biochemistry.

[9]  Smith Js,et al.  Guanidine Hydrochloride Unfolding of Peptide Helices: Separation of Denaturant and Salt Effects† , 1996 .

[10]  Felix Franks,et al.  Structural Approach to the Solvent Power of Water for Hydrocarbons; Urea as a Structure Breaker , 1968 .

[11]  Nader Chaparzadeh,et al.  Structural and Dynamical Studies of Humanin in Water and TFE/Water Mixture: A Molecular Dynamics Simulation , 2008, Journal of biomolecular structure & dynamics.

[12]  T. Darden,et al.  Particle mesh Ewald: An N⋅log(N) method for Ewald sums in large systems , 1993 .

[13]  A. Soper,et al.  Impact of urea on water structure: a clue to its properties as a denaturant? , 2003, Biophysical chemistry.

[14]  Kristofer Modig,et al.  Water and urea interactions with the native and unfolded forms of a β‐barrel protein , 2003, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[15]  T. Straatsma,et al.  THE MISSING TERM IN EFFECTIVE PAIR POTENTIALS , 1987 .

[16]  T. Kiefhaber,et al.  Molecular basis for the effect of urea and guanidinium chloride on the dynamics of unfolded polypeptide chains. , 2005, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  W. Kabsch,et al.  Dictionary of protein secondary structure: Pattern recognition of hydrogen‐bonded and geometrical features , 1983, Biopolymers.

[18]  Jan Sykora,et al.  Bilayer localization of membrane-active peptides studied in biomimetic vesicles by visible and fluorescence spectroscopies. , 2003, European journal of biochemistry.

[19]  S Lapanje,et al.  Proteins in 6-M guanidine hydrochloride. Demonstration of random coil behavior. , 1966, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[20]  S. N. Timasheff,et al.  Preferential interactions of urea with lysozyme and their linkage to protein denaturation. , 2003, Biophysical chemistry.

[21]  Ron Elber,et al.  The dominant interaction between peptide and urea is electrostatic in nature: A molecular dynamics simulation study , 2003, Biopolymers.

[22]  S. Englander,et al.  Urea, but not guanidinium, destabilizes proteins by forming hydrogen bonds to the peptide group , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  C. Pace,et al.  Urea and Guanidine Hydrochloride Denaturation of Ribonuclease , Lysozyme , & Zhymotrypsin , and @ Lactoglobulin * , 2003 .

[24]  Valerie Daggett,et al.  The molecular basis for the chemical denaturation of proteins by urea , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  J Tirado-Rives,et al.  Molecular dynamics simulations of the unfolding of barnase in water and 8 M aqueous urea. , 1997, Biochemistry.

[26]  Chaitali Mukhopadhyay,et al.  Atomistic mechanism of protein denaturation by urea. , 2008, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[27]  Helmut Grubmüller,et al.  Polar or Apolar—The Role of Polarity for Urea-Induced Protein Denaturation , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[28]  A. Mark,et al.  Mechanism by which 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol/water mixtures stabilize secondary-structure formation in peptides: A molecular dynamics study , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  Valerie Daggett,et al.  The molecular mechanism of stabilization of proteins by TMAO and its ability to counteract the effects of urea. , 2002, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[30]  J. Gesell,et al.  Two-dimensional 1H NMR experiments show that the 23-residue magainin antibiotic peptide is an α-helix in dodecylphosphocholine micelles, sodium dodecylsulfate micelles, and trifluoroethanol/water solution , 1997, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[31]  K. Dill.  Dominant forces in protein folding. , 1990, Biochemistry.

[32]  K. P. Murphy,et al.  Urea effects on protein stability: Hydrogen bonding and the hydrophobic effect , 1998, Proteins.

[33]  Berk Hess,et al.  GROMACS 3.0: a package for molecular simulation and trajectory analysis , 2001 .

[34]  Harold A. Scheraga,et al.  The Temperature Dependence of the Enthalpy of Formation of the Amide Hydrogen Bond; the Urea Model1 , 1965 .

[35]  K. Gable,et al.  Mechanism of magainin 2a induced permeabilization of phospholipid vesicles. , 1992, Biochemistry.

[36]  Hossein Naderi-Manesh,et al.  The structural properties of magainin in water, TFE/water, and aqueous urea solutions: Molecular dynamics simulations , 2007, Proteins.

[37]  Ruhong Zhou,et al.  Urea denaturation by stronger dispersion interactions with proteins than water implies a 2-stage unfolding , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[38]  W. Jencks,et al.  THE EFFECT OF COMPOUNDS OF THE UREA-GUANIDINIUM CLASS ON THE ACTIVITY COEFFICIENT OF ACETYLTETRAGLYCINE ETHYL ESTER AND RELATED COMPOUNDS. , 1965, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[39]  Mark Gerstein,et al.  Keeping the shape but changing the charges: A simulation study of urea and its iso-steric analogs , 1996 .

[40]  J. T. Gerig,et al.  Structure and solvation of melittin in 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-2-propanol/water. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[41]  Helmut Grubmüller,et al.  Interaction of urea with amino acids: implications for urea-induced protein denaturation. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[42]  M. Record,et al.  Thermodynamic analysis of interactions between denaturants and protein surface exposed on unfolding: Interpretation of urea and guanidinium chloride m‐values and their correlation with changes in accessible surface area (ASA) using preferential interaction coefficients and the local‐bulk domain mode , 2000, Proteins.

[43]  J. Schellman.  Protein stability in mixed solvents: a balance of contact interaction and excluded volume. , 2003, Biophysical journal.

[44]  Charles Tanford,et al.  Isothermal Unfolding of Globular Proteins in Aqueous Urea Solutions , 1964 .

[45]  Berk Hess,et al.  LINCS: A linear constraint solver for molecular simulations , 1997 .

[46]  Lorna J. Smith,et al.  Computer Simulation of Urea−Water Mixtures: A Test of Force Field Parameters for Use in Biomolecular Simulation , 2004 .

[47]  R. L. Baldwin,et al.  Urea unfolding of peptide helices as a model for interpreting protein unfolding. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[48]  B. Brooks,et al.  Interactions between hydrophobic and ionic solutes in aqueous guanidinium chloride and urea solutions: lessons for protein denaturation mechanism. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[49]  R. Broglia,et al.  Urea and guanidinium chloride denature protein L in different ways in molecular dynamics simulations. , 2008, Biophysical journal.

[50]  D. van der Spoel,et al.  GROMACS: A message-passing parallel molecular dynamics implementation , 1995 .

[51]  Alan E. Mark,et al.  A new 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol model for molecular dynamics simulations , 2000 .

[52]  F. Young.  Biochemistry , 1955, The Indian Medical Gazette.