Computational design of a PAK1 binding protein.

We describe a computational protocol, called DDMI, for redesigning scaffold proteins to bind to a specified region on a target protein. The DDMI protocol is implemented within the Rosetta molecular modeling program and uses rigid-body docking, sequence design, and gradient-based minimization of backbone and side-chain torsion angles to design low-energy interfaces between the scaffold and target protein. Iterative rounds of sequence design and conformational optimization were needed to produce models that have calculated binding energies that are similar to binding energies calculated for native complexes. We also show that additional conformation sampling with molecular dynamics can be iterated with sequence design to further lower the computed energy of the designed complexes. To experimentally test the DDMI protocol, we redesigned the human hyperplastic discs protein to bind to the kinase domain of p21-activated kinase 1 (PAK1). Six designs were experimentally characterized. Two of the designs aggregated and were not characterized further. Of the remaining four designs, three bound to the PAK1 with affinities tighter than 350 muM. The tightest binding design, named Spider Roll, bound with an affinity of 100 muM. NMR-based structure prediction of Spider Roll based on backbone and (13)C(beta) chemical shifts using the program CS-ROSETTA indicated that the architecture of human hyperplastic discs protein is preserved. Mutagenesis studies confirmed that Spider Roll binds the target patch on PAK1. Additionally, Spider Roll binds to full-length PAK1 in its activated state but does not bind PAK1 when it forms an auto-inhibited conformation that blocks the Spider Roll target site. Subsequent NMR characterization of the binding of Spider Roll to PAK1 revealed a comparably small binding 'on-rate' constant (<<10(5) M(-1) s(-1)). The ability to rationally design the site of novel protein-protein interactions is an important step towards creating new proteins that are useful as therapeutics or molecular probes.

[1]  D. Baker,et al.  An orientation-dependent hydrogen bonding potential improves prediction of specificity and structure for proteins and protein-protein complexes. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  Jack Snoeyink,et al.  On-the-Fly Rotamer Pair Energy Evaluation in Protein Design , 2008, ISBRA.

[3]  Stephen L Mayo,et al.  A de novo designed protein–protein interface , 2007, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[4]  David Baker,et al.  Protein Structure Prediction Using Rosetta , 2004, Numerical Computer Methods, Part D.

[5]  S. Ho,et al.  Site-directed mutagenesis by overlap extension using the polymerase chain reaction. , 1989, Gene.

[6]  Brian Kuhlman,et al.  E2 conjugating enzymes must disengage from their E1 enzymes before E3-dependent ubiquitin and ubiquitin-like transfer , 2005, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[7]  B. Kuhlman,et al.  Computational design of affinity and specificity at protein-protein interfaces. , 2009, Current opinion in structural biology.

[8]  N. Sonenberg,et al.  X-ray structure of the human hyperplastic discs protein: An ortholog of the C-terminal domain of poly(A)-binding protein , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  F. Ding,et al.  Ab initio folding of proteins with all-atom discrete molecular dynamics. , 2008, Structure.

[10]  Huan‐Xiang Zhou,et al.  Electrostatic rate enhancement and transient complex of protein–protein association , 2008, Proteins.

[11]  Tanja Kortemme,et al.  Computer-aided design of functional protein interactions. , 2009, Nature chemical biology.

[12]  S. Grzesiek,et al.  NMRPipe: A multidimensional spectral processing system based on UNIX pipes , 1995, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[13]  Simon J. Hubbard,et al.  Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology , 2006 .

[14]  Tanja Kortemme,et al.  Computational design of protein-protein interactions. , 2004, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[15]  P. S. Kim,et al.  High-resolution protein design with backbone freedom. , 1998, Science.

[16]  David Baker,et al.  Protein-protein docking with backbone flexibility. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  Po-Ssu Huang,et al.  Adaptation of a fast Fourier transform‐based docking algorithm for protein design , 2005, J. Comput. Chem..

[18]  Oliver F. Lange,et al.  Consistent blind protein structure generation from NMR chemical shift data , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  D. Baker,et al.  Design of a Novel Globular Protein Fold with Atomic-Level Accuracy , 2003, Science.

[20]  Rebecca C Wade,et al.  Biomolecular diffusional association. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[21]  Jack Snoeyink,et al.  Maintaining solvent accessible surface area under rotamer substitution for protein design , 2007, J. Comput. Chem..

[22]  D. Baker,et al.  De novo protein structure determination using sparse NMR data , 2000, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[23]  Jeffrey J. Gray,et al.  Protein-protein docking with simultaneous optimization of rigid-body displacement and side-chain conformations. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[24]  David Baker,et al.  Macromolecular modeling with rosetta. , 2008, Annual review of biochemistry.

[25]  Feng Ding,et al.  Simple but predictive protein models. , 2005, Trends in biotechnology.

[26]  A. Plückthun,et al.  High-affinity binders selected from designed ankyrin repeat protein libraries , 2004, Nature Biotechnology.

[27]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  Bayesian statistical analysis of protein side‐chain rotamer preferences , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[28]  Gevorg Grigoryan,et al.  Design of protein-interaction specificity affords selective bZIP-binding peptides , 2009, Nature.

[29]  K Wüthrich,et al.  The program XEASY for computer-supported NMR spectral analysis of biological macromolecules , 1995, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[30]  E. Grishin,et al.  Three-dimensional structure of ectatomin from Ectatomma tuberculatum ant venom , 1995, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[31]  D. Baker,et al.  Native protein sequences are close to optimal for their structures. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[32]  W. Stemmer,et al.  Single-step assembly of a gene and entire plasmid from large numbers of oligodeoxyribonucleotides. , 1995, Gene.

[33]  P. Harbury,et al.  Automated design of specificity in molecular recognition , 2003, Nature Structural Biology.

[34]  Miron Livny,et al.  BioMagResBank , 2007, Nucleic Acids Res..

[35]  H. Stanley,et al.  Discrete molecular dynamics studies of the folding of a protein-like model. , 1998, Folding & design.

[36]  Wange Lu,et al.  Structure of PAK1 in an Autoinhibited Conformation Reveals a Multistage Activation Switch , 2000, Cell.

[37]  D. Baker,et al.  Improved recognition of native‐like protein structures using a combination of sequence‐dependent and sequence‐independent features of proteins , 1999, Proteins.

[38]  Tatyana Polenova,et al.  Protein NMR spectroscopy: spinning into focus. , 2011, Nature chemistry.

[39]  Eric A. Althoff,et al.  Kemp elimination catalysts by computational enzyme design , 2008, Nature.

[40]  Andreas Plückthun,et al.  Allosteric inhibition of aminoglycoside phosphotransferase by a designed ankyrin repeat protein. , 2005, Structure.

[41]  M. Karplus,et al.  Effective energy function for proteins in solution , 1999, Proteins.

[42]  Q. Teng Structural Biology: Practical NMR Applications , 2005 .