Characterization of sequence variability in nucleosome core histone folds

The three‐helix, ∼65‐residue histone fold domain is the most structurally conserved part of the core histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4. However, it evinces a notable degree of sequence variation within and between histone classes. We used two approaches to characterize sequence variation in these histone folds, toward elucidating their structure/function relationships and evolution. On the one hand we asked how much of the sequence variation seen in structure‐based alignments of the folds maintains physicochemical properties at a position, and on the other, whether conservation correlates to structural importance, as measured by the number of residue‐to‐residue contacts a position makes. Strong physicochemical conservation or correlation of conservation to contacts would support the idea that functional constraints, rather than genetic drift, determines the observed range of variants at a given position. We used an 11‐state table of physicochemical properties to classify each position in the core histone fold (CHF) alignments, and a public website (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/thornton‐srv/databases/cgi‐bin/valdar/scorecons_server.pl) to score conservation. We found that, depending on histone class, from 38 to 77% of CHF positions are maximally conserved physicochemically, and that for H2B, H3, and H4 the degree to which a position is conserved correlates positively to the number of contacts made by the residue at that position in the crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle. We also examined the correlation between conservation and the type of contact (e.g., inter‐ or intrachain, histone‐histone, or histone‐DNA, etc.). For H2B, H3, and H4 we found a positive correlation between conservation and number of interchain protein contacts. No such correlation or statistical significance was found for DNA or intrachain contacts. This suggests that variations in the CHF sequences could be functionally constrained by requirements to make sufficient interchain histone contacts. We also suggest that inventory of histone residue variants can augment functional studies of histones. An example is presented for histone H3. Proteins 2003;52:454–465. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  W. S. Valdar,et al.  Scoring residue conservation , 2002, Proteins.

[2]  Kevin Struhl,et al.  Lysine methylation within the globular domain of histone H3 by Dot1 is important for telomeric silencing and Sir protein association. , 2002, Genes & development.

[3]  S. Henikoff,et al.  The histone variant H3.3 marks active chromatin by replication-independent nucleosome assembly. , 2002, Molecular cell.

[4]  C. A. Andersen,et al.  Continuum secondary structure captures protein flexibility. , 2002, Structure.

[5]  David Landsman,et al.  The Histone Database , 2002, Nucleic Acids Res..

[6]  G. P. S. Raghava,et al.  A Graphical Web Server for the Analysis of Protein Sequences and Alignment , 2001 .

[7]  Karolin Luger,et al.  Structure of the yeast nucleosome core particle reveals fundamental changes in internucleosome interactions , 2001, The EMBO journal.

[8]  Leo Goodstadt,et al.  CHROMA: consensus-based colouring of multiple alignments for publication , 2001, Bioinform..

[9]  C. Allis,et al.  Translating the Histone Code , 2001, Science.

[10]  David T. Brown Histone variants: are they functionally heterogeneous? , 2001, Genome Biology.

[11]  J. Thornton,et al.  Protein–protein interfaces: Analysis of amino acid conservation in homodimers , 2001, Proteins.

[12]  D. W. Abbott,et al.  Histone variants and histone modifications: a structural perspective. , 2001, Biochemistry and cell biology = Biochimie et biologie cellulaire.

[13]  D. Timm,et al.  Asymmetries in the nucleosome core particle at 2.5 A resolution. , 2000, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[14]  J. Reeve,et al.  Histones and nucleosomes in Archaea and Eukarya: a comparative analysis , 1998, Extremophiles.

[15]  J. Thompson,et al.  The CLUSTAL_X windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. , 1997, Nucleic acids research.

[16]  T. Richmond,et al.  Crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle at 2.8 Å resolution , 1997, Nature.

[17]  Eugene V. Koonin,et al.  SEALS: A System for Easy Analysis of Lots of Sequences , 1997, ISMB.

[18]  S. Karlin,et al.  Evolutionary conservation of RecA genes in relation to protein structure and function , 1996, Journal of bacteriology.

[19]  G J Barton,et al.  Identification of functional residues and secondary structure from protein multiple sequence alignment. , 1996, Methods in enzymology.

[20]  P. E. Bourne,et al.  WPDB– PC Windows‐based interrogation of macromolecular structure , 1995 .

[21]  B. Rost,et al.  Conservation and prediction of solvent accessibility in protein families , 1994, Proteins.

[22]  Geoffrey J. Barton,et al.  Protein sequence alignments: a strategy for the hierarchical analysis of residue conservation , 1993, Comput. Appl. Biosci..

[23]  S. Henikoff,et al.  Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  William R. Taylor,et al.  The rapid generation of mutation data matrices from protein sequences , 1992, Comput. Appl. Biosci..

[25]  B. Wang,et al.  The nucleosomal core histone octamer at 3.1 A resolution: a tripartite protein assembly and a left-handed superhelix. , 1991, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  M. Sternberg,et al.  Prediction of protein secondary structure and active sites using the alignment of homologous sequences. , 1987, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  W. Taylor,et al.  The classification of amino acid conservation. , 1986, Journal of theoretical biology.

[28]  W. N. Strickland,et al.  More histone structures , 1979, FEBS letters.

[29]  T. Eickbush,et al.  The histone core complex: an octamer assembled by two sets of protein-protein interactions. , 1978, Biochemistry.

[30]  M. Wong,et al.  Assembly of newly replicated chromatin , 1978, Cell.

[31]  A. Friday,et al.  On the evolution of myoglobin. , 1978, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[32]  M. O. Dayhoff A model of evolutionary change in protein , 1978 .

[33]  R. Kornberg,et al.  Cleavable cross‐links in the analysis of histone—histone associations , 1975, FEBS letters.