Experimental assessment of differences between related protein crystal structures.

Prior to attaching any biological significance to differences between two related protein crystal structures, it must be established that such differences are genuine, rather than artefacts of the structure-determination protocol. This will be all the more important as more and more related protein structures are solved and comparative structural biology attempts to correlate structural differences with variations in biological function, activity or affinity. A method has been developed which enables unbiased assessment of differences between the structures of related biomacromolecules using experimental crystallographic information alone. It is based on the use of local density-correlation maps, which contain information regarding the similarity of the experimental electron density for corresponding parts of different copies of a molecule. The method can be used to assess a priori which parts of two or more molecules are likely to be structurally similar; this information can then be employed during structure refinement. Alternatively, the method can be used a posteriori to verify that differences observed in two or more models are supported by the experimental information. Several examples are discussed which validate the notion that local conformational variability is highly correlated to differences in the local experimental electron density.

[1]  F M Vellieux,et al.  Noncrystallographic symmetry averaging in phase refinement and extension. , 1997, Methods in enzymology.

[2]  G J Williams,et al.  The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures. , 1977, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  Randy J. Read,et al.  DEMON/ANGEL - A SUITE OF PROGRAMS TO CARRY OUT DENSITY MODIFICATION , 1995 .

[4]  A. Brunger Free R value: a novel statistical quantity for assessing the accuracy of crystal structures. , 1992 .

[5]  A T Brünger,et al.  Direct Observation of Protein Solvation and Discrete Disorder with Experimental Crystallographic Phases , 1996, Science.

[6]  Axel T. Brunger,et al.  Model bias in macromolecular crystal structures , 1992 .

[7]  G J Kleywegt,et al.  Model building and refinement practice. , 1997, Methods in enzymology.

[8]  R. Read Improved Fourier Coefficients for Maps Using Phases from Partial Structures with Errors , 1986 .

[9]  T A Jones,et al.  Crystallographic studies on a family of cellular lipophilic transport proteins. Refinement of P2 myelin protein and the structure determination and refinement of cellular retinol-binding protein in complex with all-trans-retinol. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  J. Zou,et al.  Improved methods for building protein models in electron density maps and the location of errors in these models. , 1991, Acta crystallographica. Section A, Foundations of crystallography.

[11]  G J Kleywegt,et al.  Crystallographic and molecular-modeling studies of lipase B from Candida antarctica reveal a stereospecificity pocket for secondary alcohols. , 1995, Biochemistry.

[12]  G. Bricogne Geometric sources of redundancy in intensity data and their use for phase determination , 1974 .

[13]  M. Totrov,et al.  Contact area difference (CAD): a robust measure to evaluate accuracy of protein models. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[14]  Zbyszek Otwinowski,et al.  The crystal structure of the bacterial chaperonln GroEL at 2.8 Å , 1994, Nature.