Computational modeling of protein mutant stability: analysis and optimization of statistical potentials and structural features reveal insights into prediction model development

BackgroundUnderstanding and predicting protein stability upon point mutations has wide-spread importance in molecular biology. Several prediction models have been developed in the past with various algorithms. Statistical potentials are one of the widely used algorithms for the prediction of changes in stability upon point mutations. Although the methods provide flexibility and the capability to develop an accurate and reliable prediction model, it can be achieved only by the right selection of the structural factors and optimization of their parameters for the statistical potentials. In this work, we have selected five atom classification systems and compared their efficiency for the development of amino acid atom potentials. Additionally, torsion angle potentials have been optimized to include the orientation of amino acids in such a way that altered backbone conformation in different secondary structural regions can be included for the prediction model. This study also elaborates the importance of classifying the mutations according to their solvent accessibility and secondary structure specificity. The prediction efficiency has been calculated individually for the mutations in different secondary structural regions and compared.ResultsResults show that, in addition to using an advanced atom description, stepwise regression and selection of atoms are necessary to avoid the redundancy in atom distribution and improve the reliability of the prediction model validation. Comparing to other atom classification models, Melo-Feytmans model shows better prediction efficiency by giving a high correlation of 0.85 between experimental and theoretical ΔΔG with 84.06% of the mutations correctly predicted out of 1538 mutations. The theoretical ΔΔG values for the mutations in partially buried β-strands generated by the structural training dataset from PISCES gave a correlation of 0.84 without performing the Gaussian apodization of the torsion angle distribution. After the Gaussian apodization, the correlation increased to 0.92 and prediction accuracy increased from 80% to 88.89% respectively.ConclusionThese findings were useful for the optimization of the Melo-Feytmans atom classification system and implementing them to develop the statistical potentials. It was also significant that the prediction efficiency of mutations in the partially buried β-strands improves with the help of Gaussian apodization of the torsion angle distribution. All these comparisons and optimization techniques demonstrate their advantages as well as the restrictions for the development of the prediction model. These findings will be quite helpful not only for the protein stability prediction, but also for various structure solutions in future.

[1]  M. Gromiha,et al.  ProTherm, Thermodynamic database for proteins and mutants. , 1999 .

[2]  Piero Fariselli,et al.  I-Mutant2.0: predicting stability changes upon mutation from the protein sequence or structure , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[3]  D Gilis,et al.  PoPMuSiC, an algorithm for predicting protein mutant stability changes: application to prion proteins. , 2000, Protein engineering.

[4]  Z. Weng,et al.  Optimizing protein representations with information theory. , 2004, Genome informatics. International Conference on Genome Informatics.

[5]  Dietmar Schomburg,et al.  Structural analysis and prediction of protein mutant stability using distance and torsion potentials: Role of secondary structure and solvent accessibility , 2006, Proteins.

[6]  M. Karplus,et al.  Effective energy functions for protein structure prediction. , 2000, Current opinion in structural biology.

[7]  Beth M Beadle,et al.  Structural bases of stability-function tradeoffs in enzymes. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[8]  M. Michael Gromiha,et al.  CUPSAT: prediction of protein stability upon point mutations , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[9]  Arlo Z. Randall,et al.  Prediction of protein stability changes for single‐site mutations using support vector machines , 2005, Proteins.

[10]  Nikolay V Dokholyan,et al.  Can contact potentials reliably predict stability of proteins? , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[11]  Guoli Wang,et al.  PISCES: a protein sequence culling server , 2003, Bioinform..

[12]  Piero Fariselli,et al.  A neural-network-based method for predicting protein stability changes upon single point mutations , 2004, ISMB/ECCB.

[13]  M Michael Gromiha,et al.  Inter-residue interactions in protein folding and stability. , 2004, Progress in biophysics and molecular biology.

[14]  Dietmar Schomburg,et al.  Prediction of protein thermostability with a direction‐ and distance‐dependent knowledge‐based potential , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[15]  M. Zalis,et al.  Visualizing and quantifying molecular goodness-of-fit: small-probe contact dots with explicit hydrogen atoms. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[16]  L. Serrano,et al.  Predicting changes in the stability of proteins and protein complexes: a study of more than 1000 mutations. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  Song Liu,et al.  Accurate and efficient loop selections by the DFIRE‐based all‐atom statistical potential , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[18]  R Nussinov,et al.  A set of van der Waals and coulombic radii of protein atoms for molecular and solvent‐accessible surface calculation, packing evaluation, and docking , 1998, Proteins.

[19]  F. Melo,et al.  Novel knowledge-based mean force potential at atomic level. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[20]  L. Serrano,et al.  Obligatory steps in protein folding and the conformational diversity of the transition state , 1998, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[21]  Patrice Koehl,et al.  The ASTRAL Compendium in 2004 , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[22]  Piero Fariselli,et al.  Predicting protein stability changes from sequences using support vector machines , 2005, ECCB/JBI.

[23]  John B. O. Mitchell,et al.  SATIS: Atom Typing from Chemical Connectivity , 1999, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[24]  A. Fersht,et al.  Characterizing transition states in protein folding: an essential step in the puzzle. , 1995, Current opinion in structural biology.

[25]  F. Melo,et al.  Assessing protein structures with a non-local atomic interaction energy. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  R. Samudrala,et al.  An all-atom distance-dependent conditional probability discriminatory function for protein structure prediction. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  Akinori Sarai,et al.  ProTherm: Thermodynamic Database for Proteins and Mutants , 1999, Nucleic Acids Res..

[28]  Song Liu,et al.  A knowledge-based energy function for protein-ligand, protein-protein, and protein-DNA complexes. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.