Burial Level Change Defines a High Energetic Relevance for Protein Binding Interfaces

Protein-protein interfaces defined through atomic contact or solvent accessibility change are widely adopted in structural biology studies. But, these definitions cannot precisely capture energetically important regions at protein interfaces. The burial depth of an atom in a protein is related to the atom's energy. This work investigates how closely the change in burial level of an atom/residue upon complexation is related to the binding. Burial level change is different from burial level itself. An atom deeply buried in a monomer with a high burial level may not change its burial level after an interaction and it may have little burial level change. We hypothesize that an interface is a region of residues all undergoing burial level changes after interaction. By this definition, an interface can be decomposed into an onion-like structure according to the burial level change extent. We found that our defined interfaces cover energetically important residues more precisely, and that the binding free energy of an interface is distributed progressively from the outermost layer to the core. These observations are used to predict binding hot spots. Our approach's F-measure performance on a benchmark dataset of alanine mutagenesis residues is much superior or similar to those by complicated energy modeling or machine learning approaches.

[1]  C. Dominguez,et al.  HADDOCK: a protein-protein docking approach based on biochemical or biophysical information. , 2003, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[2]  Michael Nilges,et al.  Shelling the Voronoi interface of protein–protein complexes reveals patterns of residue conservation, dynamics, and composition , 2009, Proteins.

[3]  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.

[4]  N. Ben-Tal,et al.  Residue frequencies and pairing preferences at protein–protein interfaces , 2001, Proteins.

[5]  Zhenhua Li,et al.  DBAC: A simple prediction method for protein binding hot spots based on burial levels and deeply buried atomic contacts , 2011, BMC Systems Biology.

[6]  J. Kirsch,et al.  Energetic analysis of an antigen/antibody interface: Alanine scanning mutagenesis and double mutant cycles on the hyhel‐10/lysozyme interaction , 1999, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[7]  Gerhard Hummer,et al.  Interface-Resolved Network of Protein-Protein Interactions , 2013, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[8]  Benjamin A. Shoemaker,et al.  Correlated evolution of interacting proteins: looking behind the mirrortree. , 2009, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  H. Wolfson,et al.  A dataset of protein-protein interfaces generated with a sequence-order-independent comparison technique. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  Huan‐Xiang Zhou,et al.  Prediction of protein interaction sites from sequence profile and residue neighbor list , 2001, Proteins.

[11]  T. Clackson,et al.  A hot spot of binding energy in a hormone-receptor interface , 1995, Science.

[12]  David L. Robertson,et al.  Specificity in protein interactions and its relationship with sequence diversity and coevolution , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  Z. Weng,et al.  Protein–protein docking benchmark version 3.0 , 2008, Proteins.

[14]  Haruki Nakamura,et al.  Geometric similarities of protein-protein interfaces at atomic resolution are only observed within homologous families: an exhaustive structural classification study. , 2010, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  F. Wilcoxon Individual Comparisons by Ranking Methods , 1945 .

[16]  Ozlem Keskin,et al.  Similar binding sites and different partners: implications to shared proteins in cellular pathways. , 2007, Structure.

[17]  M. Uhlén,et al.  Mutational analysis of the interaction between staphylococcal protein A and human IgG1. , 1993, Protein engineering.

[18]  J. Janin,et al.  Dissecting protein–protein recognition sites , 2002, Proteins.

[19]  B. Rost,et al.  Analysing six types of protein-protein interfaces. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[20]  Tanja Kortemme,et al.  Design of Multi-Specificity in Protein Interfaces , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[21]  A. Bogan,et al.  Anatomy of hot spots in protein interfaces. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  A. Valencia,et al.  Correlated mutations contain information about protein-protein interaction. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[23]  Huan-Xiang Zhou,et al.  Prediction of interface residues in protein–protein complexes by a consensus neural network method: Test against NMR data , 2005, Proteins.

[24]  Sarah A. Teichmann,et al.  Principles of protein-protein interactions , 2002, ECCB.

[25]  W. C. Still,et al.  Semianalytical treatment of solvation for molecular mechanics and dynamics , 1990 .

[26]  Daniel R. Caffrey,et al.  Are protein–protein interfaces more conserved in sequence than the rest of the protein surface? , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[27]  Ozlem Keskin,et al.  HotPoint: hot spot prediction server for protein interfaces , 2010, Nucleic Acids Res..

[28]  T. Clackson,et al.  Structural and functional analysis of the 1:1 growth hormone:receptor complex reveals the molecular basis for receptor affinity. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[29]  Jinyan Li,et al.  Geometrically centered region: A “wet” model of protein binding hot spots not excluding water molecules , 2010, Proteins.

[30]  H. Wolfson,et al.  A new, structurally nonredundant, diverse data set of protein–protein interfaces and its implications , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[31]  David E. Kim,et al.  Computational Alanine Scanning of Protein-Protein Interfaces , 2004, Science's STKE.

[32]  B. L. de Groot,et al.  Predicting free energy changes using structural ensembles. , 2009, Nature methods.

[33]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Hot regions in protein--protein interactions: the organization and contribution of structurally conserved hot spot residues. , 2005, Journal of molecular biology.

[34]  Oliviero Carugo,et al.  Atom depth as a descriptor of the protein interior. , 2003, Biophysical journal.

[35]  P. Bourne,et al.  Exploiting sequence and structure homologs to identify protein–protein binding sites , 2005, Proteins.

[36]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[37]  Kurt S. Thorn,et al.  ASEdb: a database of alanine mutations and their effects on the free energy of binding in protein interactions , 2001, Bioinform..

[38]  Zoran Obradovic,et al.  Statistical analysis of interface similarity in crystals of homologous proteins. , 2008, Journal of molecular biology.

[39]  Doheon Lee,et al.  A feature-based approach to modeling protein–protein interaction hot spots , 2009, Nucleic acids research.

[40]  Michael Schroeder,et al.  The Many Faces of Protein–Protein Interactions: A Compendium of Interface Geometry , 2006, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[41]  GusfieldDan Introduction to the IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics , 2004 .

[42]  E. Levy A simple definition of structural regions in proteins and its use in analyzing interface evolution. , 2010, Journal of molecular biology.

[43]  J. Wells,et al.  Comparison of a structural and a functional epitope. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[44]  R. Raz,et al.  ProMate: a structure based prediction program to identify the location of protein-protein binding sites. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[45]  Carles Pons,et al.  pyDockWEB: a web server for rigid-body protein-protein docking using electrostatics and desolvation scoring , 2013, Bioinform..

[46]  Stefan Günther,et al.  Structural features and evolution of protein-protein interactions. , 2010, Genome informatics. International Conference on Genome Informatics.

[47]  Alexandre M J J Bonvin,et al.  Flexible protein-protein docking. , 2006, Current opinion in structural biology.

[48]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  Protein–protein docking benchmark version 4.0 , 2010, Proteins.

[49]  Julie C. Mitchell,et al.  KFC2: A knowledge‐based hot spot prediction method based on interface solvation, atomic density, and plasticity features , 2011, Proteins.

[50]  Kei Yura,et al.  The interwinding nature of protein–protein interfaces and its implication for protein complex formation , 2009, Bioinform..

[51]  C. Chothia,et al.  The atomic structure of protein-protein recognition sites. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[52]  G Schreiber,et al.  Energetics of protein-protein interactions: analysis of the barnase-barstar interface by single mutations and double mutant cycles. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[53]  A. Kortt,et al.  Effects of substitutions in the binding surface of an antibody on antigen affinity. , 1998, Protein engineering.

[54]  Xing-Ming Zhao,et al.  APIS: accurate prediction of hot spots in protein interfaces by combining protrusion index with solvent accessibility , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[55]  Iain H. Moal,et al.  Protein-protein binding affinity prediction on a diverse set of structures , 2011, Bioinform..

[56]  Z. Weng,et al.  Structure, function, and evolution of transient and obligate protein-protein interactions. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[57]  H W Hellinga,et al.  Dissection of the protein G B1 domain binding site for human IgG Fc fragment , 1999, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[58]  Huan-Xiang Zhou,et al.  Interaction-site prediction for protein complexes: a critical assessment , 2007, Bioinform..

[59]  Julie C. Mitchell,et al.  An automated decision‐tree approach to predicting protein interaction hot spots , 2007, Proteins.

[60]  D. Baker,et al.  A simple physical model for binding energy hot spots in protein–protein complexes , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[61]  Oliviero Carugo,et al.  DPX: for the analysis of the protein core , 2003, Bioinform..

[62]  Ozlem Keskin,et al.  Identification of computational hot spots in protein interfaces: combining solvent accessibility and inter-residue potentials improves the accuracy , 2009, Bioinform..