Hydrophobic, hydrophilic, and charged amino acid networks within protein.

The native three-dimensional structure of a single protein is determined by the physicochemical nature of its constituent amino acids. The 20 different types of amino acids, depending on their physicochemical properties, can be grouped into three major classes: hydrophobic, hydrophilic, and charged. The anatomy of the weighted and unweighted networks of hydrophobic, hydrophilic, and charged residues separately for a large number of proteins were studied. Results showed that the average degree of the hydrophobic networks has a significantly larger value than that of hydrophilic and charged networks. The average degree of the hydrophilic networks is slightly higher than that of the charged networks. The average strength of the nodes of hydrophobic networks is nearly equal to that of the charged network, whereas that of hydrophilic networks has a smaller value than that of hydrophobic and charged networks. The average strength for each of the three types of networks varies with its degree. The average strength of a node in a charged network increases more sharply than that of the hydrophobic and hydrophilic networks. Each of the three types of networks exhibits the "small-world" property. Our results further indicate that the all-amino-acids networks and hydrophobic networks are of assortative type. Although most of the hydrophilic and charged networks are of the assortative type, few others have the characteristics of disassortative mixing of the nodes. We have further observed that all-amino-acids networks and hydrophobic networks bear the signature of hierarchy, whereas the hydrophilic and charged networks do not have any hierarchical signature.

[1]  Gil Amitai,et al.  Network analysis of protein structures identifies functional residues. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  Sudip Kundu,et al.  Weighted and unweighted network of amino acids within protein , 2005, q-bio/0509025.

[3]  D. Fell,et al.  The small world of metabolism , 2000, Nature Biotechnology.

[4]  R. Tsien,et al.  Specificity and Stability in Topology of Protein Networks , 2022 .

[5]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Hierarchical Organization of Modularity in Metabolic Networks , 2002, Science.

[6]  Peter Uetz,et al.  Protein interaction maps on the fly , 2004, Nature Biotechnology.

[7]  Sudip Kundu,et al.  Amino acid network within protein , 2005 .

[8]  J. Montoya,et al.  Small world patterns in food webs. , 2002, Journal of theoretical biology.

[9]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations , 2001, cond-mat/0104162.

[10]  Victoria A. Higman,et al.  Uncovering network systems within protein structures. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[11]  K. Sneppen,et al.  Specificity and Stability in Topology of Protein Networks , 2002, Science.

[12]  S. Vishveshwara,et al.  Identification of side-chain clusters in protein structures by a graph spectral method. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[13]  M. Newman,et al.  The structure of scientific collaboration networks. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  S. Vishveshwara,et al.  A network representation of protein structures: implications for protein stability. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[15]  G J Williams,et al.  The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures. , 1978, Archives of biochemistry and biophysics.

[16]  A. Atilgan,et al.  Small-world communication of residues and significance for protein dynamics. , 2003, Biophysical journal.

[17]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[18]  Alessandro Vespignani,et al.  The Architecture of Complex Weighted Networks: Measurements and Models , 2007 .

[19]  E. Shakhnovich,et al.  Topological determinants of protein folding , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  M Karplus,et al.  Small-world view of the amino acids that play a key role in protein folding. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[21]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Residues crucial for maintaining short paths in network communication mediate signaling in proteins , 2006, Molecular systems biology.

[22]  A. Vespignani,et al.  The architecture of complex weighted networks. , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  B. Snel,et al.  The yeast coexpression network has a small‐world, scale‐free architecture and can be explained by a simple model , 2004, EMBO reports.

[24]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[25]  M E J Newman Assortative mixing in networks. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[26]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Network biology: understanding the cell's functional organization , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[27]  Neo D. Martinez,et al.  Two degrees of separation in complex food webs , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  平山 令明,et al.  PDB (Protein Data Bank)とその周辺 , 1996 .