Markov propagation of allosteric effects in biomolecular systems: application to GroEL–GroES

We introduce a novel approach for elucidating the potential pathways of allosteric communication in biomolecular systems. The methodology, based on Markov propagation of ‘information’ across the structure, permits us to partition the network of interactions into soft clusters distinguished by their coherent stochastics. Probabilistic participation of residues in these clusters defines the communication patterns inherent to the network architecture. Application to bacterial chaperonin complex GroEL–GroES, an allostery‐driven structure, identifies residues engaged in intra‐ and inter‐subunit communication, including those acting as hubs and messengers. A number of residues are distinguished by their high potentials to transmit allosteric signals, including Pro33 and Thr90 at the nucleotide‐binding site and Glu461 and Arg197 mediating inter‐ and intra‐ring communication, respectively. We propose two most likely pathways of signal transmission, between nucleotide‐ and GroES‐binding sites across the cis and trans rings, which involve several conserved residues. A striking observation is the opposite direction of information flow within cis and trans rings, consistent with negative inter‐ring cooperativity. Comparison with collective modes deduced from normal mode analysis reveals the propensity of global hinge regions to act as messengers in the transmission of allosteric signals.

[1]  Solomon Kullback,et al.  Information Theory and Statistics , 1960 .

[2]  J. Changeux,et al.  Allosteric proteins and cellular control systems. , 1963, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  J. Changeux,et al.  ON THE NATURE OF ALLOSTERIC TRANSITIONS: A PLAUSIBLE MODEL. , 1965, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  D. Koshland,et al.  Comparison of experimental binding data and theoretical models in proteins containing subunits. , 1966, Biochemistry.

[5]  P. Flory,et al.  Statistical thermodynamics of random networks , 1976, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences.

[6]  Geoffrey J. McLachlan,et al.  Mixture models : inference and applications to clustering , 1989 .

[7]  Lila M. Gierasch,et al.  Characterization of a functionally important mobile domain of GroES , 1993, Nature.

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

[9]  F. Hartl,et al.  Role of the chaperonin cofactor Hsp10 in protein folding and sorting in yeast mitochondria , 1994, The Journal of cell biology.

[10]  I. Bahar,et al.  Effect of Molecular Structure on Local Chain Dynamics: Analytical Approaches and Computational Methods , 1994 .

[11]  Y. Kashi,et al.  Residues in chaperonin GroEL required for polypeptide binding and release , 1994, Nature.

[12]  A. Horovitz,et al.  Residue lysine-34 in GroES modulates allosteric transitions in GroEL. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[13]  A. Horovitz,et al.  Nested cooperativity in the ATPase activity of the oligomeric chaperonin GroEL. , 1995, Biochemistry.

[14]  A. Horovitz,et al.  Inter-ring communication is disrupted in the GroEL mutant Arg13 --> Gly; Ala126 --> Val with known crystal structure. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  A. Horovitz,et al.  Structural basis of allosteric changes in the GroEL mutant Arg197→Ala , 1997, Nature Structural Biology.

[16]  A. Horwich,et al.  The crystal structure of the asymmetric GroEL–GroES–(ADP)7 chaperonin complex , 1997, Nature.

[17]  A. Horovitz,et al.  Detection of changes in pairwise interactions during allosteric transitions: coupling between local and global conformational changes in GroEL. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  I. Bahar,et al.  Gaussian Dynamics of Folded Proteins , 1997 .

[19]  A. Atilgan,et al.  Direct evaluation of thermal fluctuations in proteins using a single-parameter harmonic potential. , 1997, Folding & design.

[20]  Amnon Horovitz,et al.  Mapping the Transition State of the Allosteric Pathway of GroEL by Protein Engineering , 1998 .

[21]  K. Hinsen Analysis of domain motions by approximate normal mode calculations , 1998, Proteins.

[22]  A. Horwich,et al.  Structure and function in GroEL-mediated protein folding. , 1998, Annual review of biochemistry.

[23]  M Karplus,et al.  The allosteric mechanism of the chaperonin GroEL: a dynamic analysis. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  C. Georgopoulos,et al.  Genetic analysis of the bacteriophage T4-encoded cochaperonin Gp31. , 1999, Genetics.

[25]  G Vriend,et al.  Conformational changes in the chaperonin GroEL: new insights into the allosteric mechanism. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  C. Georgopoulos,et al.  Compensatory Changes in GroEL/Gp31 Affinity as a Mechanism for Allele-specific Genetic Interaction* , 1999, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[27]  R. Ranganathan,et al.  Evolutionarily conserved pathways of energetic connectivity in protein families. , 1999, Science.

[28]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[29]  M Karplus,et al.  A Dynamic Model for the Allosteric Mechanism of GroEL , 2000 .

[30]  Ivet Bahar,et al.  Dynamics of proteins predicted by molecular dynamics simulations and analytical approaches: Application to α‐amylase inhibitor , 2000, Proteins.

[31]  C. Georgopoulos,et al.  The Importance of a Mobile Loop in Regulating Chaperonin/ Co-chaperonin Interaction , 2001, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[32]  R. Jernigan,et al.  Anisotropy of fluctuation dynamics of proteins with an elastic network model. , 2001, Biophysical journal.

[33]  F. Shewmaker,et al.  The Disordered Mobile Loop of GroES Folds into a Defined β-Hairpin upon Binding GroEL* , 2001, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[34]  A. Horovitz,et al.  φ value analysis of heterogeneity in pathways of allosteric transitions: Evidence for parallel pathways of ATP-induced conformational changes in a GroEL ring , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  Neil A Ranson,et al.  The chaperonin folding machine. , 2002, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[36]  A. Horovitz,et al.  Mapping pathways of allosteric communication in GroEL by analysis of correlated mutations , 2002, Proteins.

[37]  R L Jernigan,et al.  Molecular mechanisms of chaperonin GroEL-GroES function. , 2002, Biochemistry.

[38]  Dror Tobi,et al.  Allosteric changes in protein structure computed by a simple mechanical model: hemoglobin T<-->R2 transition. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[39]  D. Thirumalai,et al.  Annealing function of GroEL: structural and bioinformatic analysis. , 2002, Biophysical chemistry.

[40]  Gürol M. Süel,et al.  Evolutionarily conserved networks of residues mediate allosteric communication in proteins , 2003, Nature Structural Biology.

[41]  A. Horovitz,et al.  Conversion of the allosteric transition of GroEL from concerted to sequential by the single mutation Asp-155 → Ala , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[42]  C. Georgopoulos,et al.  A mobile loop order–disorder transition modulates the speed of chaperonin cycling , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[43]  Allan D. Jepson,et al.  Hierarchical Eigensolver for Transition Matrices in Spectral Methods , 2004, NIPS.

[44]  Robert B Best,et al.  A mutant chaperonin with rearranged inter-ring electrostatic contacts and temperature-sensitive dissociation , 2004, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[45]  Ann B. Lee,et al.  Geometric diffusions as a tool for harmonic analysis and structure definition of data: diffusion maps. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[46]  J. Changeux,et al.  Allosteric Mechanisms of Signal Transduction , 2005, Science.

[47]  I. Bahar,et al.  Structural changes involved in protein binding correlate with intrinsic motions of proteins in the unbound state. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[48]  I. Bahar,et al.  Coarse-grained normal mode analysis in structural biology. , 2005, Current opinion in structural biology.

[49]  Jianpeng Ma,et al.  Usefulness and limitations of normal mode analysis in modeling dynamics of biomolecular complexes. , 2005, Structure.

[50]  Ivet Bahar,et al.  Elastic network models for understanding biomolecular machinery: from enzymes to supramolecular assemblies , 2005, Physical biology.

[51]  I. Bahar,et al.  Coupling between catalytic site and collective dynamics: a requirement for mechanochemical activity of enzymes. , 2005, Structure.

[52]  B. Nadler,et al.  Diffusion maps, spectral clustering and reaction coordinates of dynamical systems , 2005, math/0503445.

[53]  M. Wall,et al.  Quantifying allosteric effects in proteins , 2005, Proteins.

[54]  Amnon Horovitz,et al.  Allosteric regulation of chaperonins. , 2005, Current opinion in structural biology.

[55]  Gideon Schreiber,et al.  Folding and binding: an extended family business , 2005 .

[56]  Chakra Chennubhotla,et al.  Markov Methods for Hierarchical Coarse-Graining of Large Protein Dynamics , 2006, RECOMB.