Hydrophobicity and residue-residue contacts in globular proteins

A comprehensive statistical analysis of residue-residue contacts and residue environment in protein 3-D structures is presented. In the present work the range of interresidue interactions (effective radius of influence) in tertiary structures of proteins is examined and found to be 10 A. This result is obtained by correlating the average number of residues within a spherical volume of different radii (contact numbers) with hydrophobicity. Best correlations are obtained with a radius of 10 A. The same result is obtained when (i) only long-range interactions are considered and (ii) representative side chain atoms are used to indicate the tertiary structure instead of the usual representation of Cα atoms. Residue environment has been investigated using similar methods. Environmental hydrophobicity varies within only a small range of all residue types. Other physicochemical properties also exhibit similar trends of variation, and only five hydrophobic residues (Leu, Val, Met, Phe and Ile) produce a decrement of around 10% from the expected mean of the physicochemical distance between a residue type and its average environment. An information theory approach is proposed to compare domains, which takes into account the effective radius of influence of residues and sequence similarity.

[1]  C. Tanford,et al.  The solubility of amino acids and two glycine peptides in aqueous ethanol and dioxane solutions. Establishment of a hydrophobicity scale. , 1971, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[2]  R. Wolfenden,et al.  Water, protein folding, and the genetic code. , 1979, Science.

[3]  V. Viswanadhan,et al.  Specificity of spatial clustering of amino acid residues as an evolutionary trend in proteins. , 2009, International journal of peptide and protein research.

[4]  P. K. Warme,et al.  A survey of amino acid side-chain interactions in 21 proteins. , 1978, Journal of molecular biology.

[5]  P K Ponnuswamy,et al.  A study of the preferred environment of amino acid residues in globular proteins. , 1977, Archives of biochemistry and biophysics.

[6]  V N Viswanadhan,et al.  Sidechain and backbone potential function for conformational analysis of proteins. , 1985, International journal of peptide and protein research.

[7]  J. Janin,et al.  Surface and inside volumes in globular proteins , 1979, Nature.

[8]  M. Takeyama,et al.  Studies on peptides. LXXXVII. Synthesis of an octacosapeptide amide corresponding to the entire amino acid sequence of chicken vasoactive intestinal polypeptide (VIP). , 1979, International journal of peptide and protein research.

[9]  Gordon M. Crippen,et al.  Residue-residue potential function for conformational analysis of proteins , 1981 .

[10]  G. Crippen,et al.  Correlation of sequence and tertiary structure in globular proteins , 1977, Biopolymers.

[11]  G J Williams,et al.  The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures. , 1977, Journal of molecular biology.

[12]  V. Viswanadhan,et al.  Structural conservation in globular proteins. , 2009, International journal of peptide & protein research.

[13]  L. Sieker,et al.  Structure of a bacterial ferredoxin. , 1973, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[14]  C. Chothia The nature of the accessible and buried surfaces in proteins. , 1976, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  R. Grantham Amino Acid Difference Formula to Help Explain Protein Evolution , 1974, Science.

[16]  P. Ponnuswamy,et al.  Hydrophobic character of amino acid residues in globular proteins , 1978, Nature.

[17]  A potential function for conformational analysis of proteins. , 2009, International journal of peptide and protein research.

[18]  G. Rose,et al.  Hydrophobicity of amino acid residues in globular proteins. , 1985, Science.

[19]  P. Ponnuswamy,et al.  Spatial assignment of amino acid residues in globular proteins: an approach from information theory. , 1980, Journal of theoretical biology.