Insights into protein folding mechanisms from large scale analysis of mutational effects

Protein folding mechanisms are probed experimentally using single-point mutant perturbations. The relative effects on the folding (ϕ-values) and unfolding (1 - ϕ) rates are used to infer the detailed structure of the transition-state ensemble (TSE). Here we analyze kinetic data on > 800 mutations carried out for 24 proteins with simple kinetic behavior. We find two surprising results: (i) all mutant effects are described by the equation: . Therefore all data are consistent with a single ϕ-value (0.24) with accuracy comparable to experimental precision, suggesting that the structural information in conventional ϕ-values is low. (ii) ϕ-values change with stability, increasing in mean value and spread from native to unfolding conditions, and thus cannot be interpreted without proper normalization. We eliminate stability effects calculating the ϕ-values at the mutant denaturation midpoints; i.e., conditions of zero stability (ϕ0). We then show that the intrinsic variability is ϕ0 = 0.36 ± 0.11, being somewhat larger for β-sheet-rich proteins than for α-helical proteins. Importantly, we discover that ϕ0-values are proportional to how many of the residues surrounding the mutated site are local in sequence. High ϕ0-values correspond to protein surface sites, which have few nonlocal neighbors, whereas core residues with many tertiary interactions produce the lowest ϕ0-values. These results suggest a general mechanism in which the TSE at zero stability is a broad conformational ensemble stabilized by local interactions and without specific tertiary interactions, reconciling ϕ-values with many other empirical observations.

[1]  A. Fersht,et al.  The structure of the transition state for folding of chymotrypsin inhibitor 2 analysed by protein engineering methods: evidence for a nucleation-condensation mechanism for protein folding. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  M. Akke,et al.  From snapshot to movie: phi analysis of protein folding transition states taken one step further. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  A. Fersht,et al.  Phi-value analysis and the nature of protein-folding transition states. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  Jason C. Crane,et al.  The folding mechanism of a -sheet: the WW domain1 , 2001 .

[5]  T. Kiefhaber,et al.  Origin of unusual phi-values in protein folding: evidence against specific nucleation sites. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  V. Muñoz,et al.  A simple model for calculating the kinetics of protein folding from three-dimensional structures. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  Tongye Shen,et al.  φ-Value Analysis of Apo-Azurin Folding: Comparison between Experiment and Theory† , 2006 .

[8]  S. Jackson,et al.  Context-dependent nature of destabilizing mutations on the stability of FKBP12. , 1998, Biochemistry.

[9]  D. Raleigh,et al.  Denatured state effects and the origin of nonclassical phi values in protein folding. , 2006, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[10]  Shoji Takada,et al.  Variational Theory for Site Resolved Protein Folding Free Energy Surfaces , 1998, cond-mat/9805366.

[11]  Kevin W Plaxco,et al.  On the precision of experimentally determined protein folding rates and ϕ‐values , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[12]  P. Wolynes,et al.  The experimental survey of protein-folding energy landscapes , 2005, Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics.

[13]  C. Tanford,et al.  Thermodynamics of the denaturation of lysozyme by guanidine hydrochloride. II. Dependence on denaturant concentration at 25 degrees. , 1969, Biochemistry.

[14]  E. Henry,et al.  Relaxation rate for an ultrafast folding protein is independent of chemical denaturant concentration. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[15]  O. Ptitsyn,et al.  Molten globule and protein folding. , 1995, Advances in protein chemistry.

[16]  A. Fersht,et al.  Protein Folding and Unfolding at Atomic Resolution , 2002, Cell.

[17]  V. Muñoz,et al.  The nature of the free energy barriers to two‐state folding , 2004, Proteins.

[18]  M. Karplus,et al.  Three key residues form a critical contact network in a protein folding transition state , 2001, Nature.

[19]  A. Fersht,et al.  The changing nature of the protein folding transition state: implications for the shape of the free-energy profile for folding. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[21]  A. Finkelstein,et al.  Outlining folding nuclei in globular proteins. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  P. Wolynes,et al.  Folding funnels and energy landscapes of larger proteins within the capillarity approximation. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  T. Kiefhaber,et al.  Hammond behavior versus ground state effects in protein folding: evidence for narrow free energy barriers and residual structure in unfolded states. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[24]  E I Shakhnovich,et al.  Specific nucleus as the transition state for protein folding: evidence from the lattice model. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[25]  Athi N. Naganathan,et al.  Exploiting the downhill folding regime via experiment , 2008, HFSP journal.

[26]  A. Fersht,et al.  The folding of an enzyme. I. Theory of protein engineering analysis of stability and pathway of protein folding. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  K. Dill,et al.  Folding rates and low-entropy-loss routes of two-state proteins. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[28]  Scattered Hammond plots reveal second level of site-specific information in protein folding: phi' (beta++). , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  E. Alm,et al.  Prediction of protein-folding mechanisms from free-energy landscapes derived from native structures. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[30]  Athi N. Naganathan,et al.  Protein folding kinetics: barrier effects in chemical and thermal denaturation experiments. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[31]  Victor Muñoz,et al.  Atom-by-atom analysis of global downhill protein folding , 2006, Nature.

[32]  A. Zarrine-Afsar,et al.  Protein folding kinetics provides a context-independent assessment of beta-strand propensity in the Fyn SH3 domain. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[33]  Benjamin A. Shoemaker,et al.  Exploring structures in protein folding funnels with free energy functionals: the transition state ensemble. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[34]  M. Gruebele,et al.  The folding mechanism of a beta-sheet: the WW domain. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[35]  D. Raleigh,et al.  The protein folding transition state: what are Phi-values really telling us? , 2005, Protein and peptide letters.

[36]  Peter G Wolynes,et al.  Quantitative criteria for native energetic heterogeneity influences in the prediction of protein folding kinetics , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[37]  J. Onuchic,et al.  Investigation of routes and funnels in protein folding by free energy functional methods. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[38]  E. Henry,et al.  Chemical, physical, and theoretical kinetics of an ultrafast folding protein , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[39]  J. Onuchic,et al.  Topological and energetic factors: what determines the structural details of the transition state ensemble and "en-route" intermediates for protein folding? An investigation for small globular proteins. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[40]  Valerie Daggett,et al.  The present view of the mechanism of protein folding , 2003, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.