Role of Resultant Dipole Moment in Mechanical Dissociation of Biological Complexes

Protein-peptide interactions play essential roles in many cellular processes and their structural characterization is the major focus of current experimental and theoretical research. Two decades ago, it was proposed to employ the steered molecular dynamics (SMD) to assess the strength of protein-peptide interactions. The idea behind using SMD simulations is that the mechanical stability can be used as a promising and an efficient alternative to computationally highly demanding estimation of binding affinity. However, mechanical stability defined as a peak in force-extension profile depends on the choice of the pulling direction. Here we propose an uncommon choice of the pulling direction along resultant dipole moment (RDM) vector, which has not been explored in SMD simulations so far. Using explicit solvent all-atom MD simulations, we apply SMD technique to probe mechanical resistance of ligand-receptor system pulled along two different vectors. A novel pulling direction—when ligand unbinds along the RDM vector—results in stronger forces compared to commonly used ligand unbinding along center of masses vector. Our observation that RDM is one of the factors influencing the mechanical stability of protein-peptide complex can be used to improve the ranking of binding affinities by using mechanical stability as an effective scoring function.

[1]  Marek Cieplak,et al.  Molecular jamming--the cystine slipknot mechanical clamp in all-atom simulations. , 2011, The Journal of chemical physics.

[2]  Jane Clarke,et al.  Mechanical unfolding of a titin Ig domain: structure of unfolding intermediate revealed by combining AFM, molecular dynamics simulations, NMR and protein engineering. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  D Thirumalai,et al.  Stretching single-domain proteins: phase diagram and kinetics of force-induced unfolding. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  M. Rief,et al.  Reversible unfolding of individual titin immunoglobulin domains by AFM. , 1997, Science.

[5]  D. Sacks,et al.  Structural Basis for Ca2+-induced Activation and Dimerization of Estrogen Receptor α by Calmodulin*♦ , 2012, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[6]  P. Kollman,et al.  A Second Generation Force Field for the Simulation of Proteins, Nucleic Acids, and Organic Molecules , 1995 .

[7]  Klaus Schulten,et al.  Steered molecular dynamics simulation of conformational changes of immunoglobulin domain I27 interprete atomic force microscopy observations , 1999 .

[8]  O. Galzitskaya,et al.  Right‐ and left‐handed three‐helix proteins. II. Similarity and differences in mechanical unfolding of proteins , 2014, Proteins.

[9]  Klaus Schulten,et al.  Mechanical unfolding intermediates in titin modules , 1999, Nature.

[10]  P. Kollman,et al.  A Second Generation Force Field for the Simulation of Proteins, Nucleic Acids, and Organic Molecules J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 5179−5197 , 1996 .

[11]  Y. Hiroaki,et al.  Crystal structure of the Homer 1 family conserved region reveals the interaction between the EVH1 domain and own proline-rich motif. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[12]  Dima Kozakov,et al.  The ClusPro web server for protein–protein docking , 2017, Nature Protocols.

[13]  G. I. Bell.  Models for the specific adhesion of cells to cells. , 1978, Science.

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

[15]  Mai Suan Li,et al.  Biomolecules under mechanical force , 2010 .

[16]  P. Tavan,et al.  Ligand Binding: Molecular Mechanics Calculation of the Streptavidin-Biotin Rupture Force , 1996, Science.

[17]  W. Nowak,et al.  Ligand diffusion in proteins via enhanced sampling in molecular dynamics. , 2017, Physics of life reviews.

[18]  Mateusz Kurcinski,et al.  Modeling of protein-peptide interactions using the CABS-dock web server for binding site search and flexible docking. , 2015, Methods.

[19]  K Schulten,et al.  VMD: visual molecular dynamics. , 1996, Journal of molecular graphics.

[20]  Klaus Schulten,et al.  Discovery through the computational microscope. , 2009, Structure.

[21]  Justin A. Lemkul,et al.  Assessing the stability of Alzheimer's amyloid protofibrils using molecular dynamics. , 2010, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[22]  Andrzej Kolinski,et al.  Preformed template fluctuations promote fibril formation: insights from lattice and all-atom models. , 2015, The Journal of chemical physics.

[23]  Ulrich H E Hansmann,et al.  Velocity scaling for optimizing replica exchange molecular dynamics. , 2011, The Journal of chemical physics.

[24]  H. Berendsen,et al.  Interaction Models for Water in Relation to Protein Hydration , 1981 .

[25]  Xueyu Song,et al.  An Inhomogeneous Model of Protein Dielectric Properties: Intrinsic Polarizabilities of Amino Acids , 2002 .

[26]  A. Kolinski,et al.  A structure-based model fails to probe the mechanical unfolding pathways of the titin I27 domain. , 2013, The Journal of chemical physics.

[27]  Andrzej Kolinski,et al.  Switch from thermal to force-driven pathways of protein refolding. , 2017, The Journal of chemical physics.

[28]  Dominik Gront,et al.  Combining Coarse-Grained Protein Models with Replica-Exchange All-Atom Molecular Dynamics , 2013, International journal of molecular sciences.

[29]  Neil J. Bruce,et al.  New approaches for computing ligand-receptor binding kinetics. , 2018, Current opinion in structural biology.

[30]  Sri Rama Koti Ainavarapu,et al.  Single-molecule studies on PolySUMO proteins reveal their mechanical flexibility. , 2013, Biophysical journal.

[31]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins. , 1998, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[32]  K. Schulten,et al.  Unfolding of titin immunoglobulin domains by steered molecular dynamics simulation. , 1998, Biophysical journal.

[33]  Mai Suan Li,et al.  A New Method for Navigating Optimal Direction for Pulling Ligand from Binding Pocket: Application to Ranking Binding Affinity by Steered Molecular Dynamics , 2015, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[34]  Arthur J. Olson,et al.  AutoDock Vina: Improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[35]  A. Cavalli,et al.  Protein-ligand (un)binding kinetics as a new paradigm for drug discovery at the crossroad between experiments and modelling. , 2017, MedChemComm.

[36]  Jonathan C. Fuller,et al.  Protein Binding Pocket Dynamics. , 2016, Accounts of chemical research.

[37]  Gerhard Hummer,et al.  Pulling direction as a reaction coordinate for the mechanical unfolding of single molecules. , 2008, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[38]  Carsten Kutzner,et al.  GROMACS 4:  Algorithms for Highly Efficient, Load-Balanced, and Scalable Molecular Simulation. , 2008, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[39]  Junfeng Gu,et al.  A Self-Adaptive Steered Molecular Dynamics Method Based on Minimization of Stretching Force Reveals the Binding Affinity of Protein–Ligand Complexes , 2015, Molecules.

[40]  Andrew E. Torda,et al.  The GROMOS biomolecular simulation program package , 1999 .

[41]  P. Kollman,et al.  Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. , 2000, Accounts of chemical research.

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

[43]  Emanuele Paci,et al.  Pulling geometry defines the mechanical resistance of a beta-sheet protein. , 2003, Nature structural biology.

[44]  Emanuele Paci,et al.  Pulling geometry defines the mechanical resistance of a β-sheet protein , 2003, Nature Structural Biology.

[45]  Ora Schueler-Furman,et al.  Rosetta FlexPepDock web server—high resolution modeling of peptide–protein interactions , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

[46]  Mai Suan Li,et al.  Mechanical unfolding of acylphosphatase studied by single-molecule force spectroscopy and MD simulations. , 2010, Biophysical journal.

[47]  Mai Mai,et al.  Steered Molecular Dynamics-A Promising Tool for Drug Design , 2012 .

[48]  Yigong Shi,et al.  Structural analysis of a functional DIAP1 fragment bound to grim and hid peptides. , 2001, Molecular cell.

[49]  Jennifer L. Knight,et al.  Accurate and reliable prediction of relative ligand binding potency in prospective drug discovery by way of a modern free-energy calculation protocol and force field. , 2015, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[50]  A Kolinski,et al.  Oligomerization of FVFLM peptides and their ability to inhibit beta amyloid peptides aggregation: consideration as a possible model. , 2017, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[51]  Mateusz Kurcinski,et al.  CABS-dock web server for the flexible docking of peptides to proteins without prior knowledge of the binding site , 2015, Nucleic Acids Res..

[52]  Ashlie Martini,et al.  Protein High-Force Pulling Simulations Yield Low-Force Results , 2012, PloS one.

[53]  A. Cavalli,et al.  Single-molecule pulling simulations can discern active from inactive enzyme inhibitors. , 2010, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[54]  Chin-Kun Hu,et al.  Protein mechanical unfolding: Importance of non-native interactions. , 2009, The Journal of chemical physics.

[55]  Andrzej Kloczkowski,et al.  Kinetics and mechanical stability of the fibril state control fibril formation time of polypeptide chains: A computational study. , 2018, The Journal of chemical physics.

[56]  D. Sacks,et al.  Structural Basis for Ca 2+-Induced Activation and Dimerization of Estrogen Receptor Alpha by Calmodulin , 2019 .

[57]  M. Li.  Ligand migration and steered molecular dynamics in drug discovery: Comment on "Ligand diffusion in proteins via enhanced sampling in molecular dynamics" by Jakub Rydzewski and Wieslaw Nowak. , 2017, Physics of life reviews.