Analysis of forces that determine helix formation in α‐proteins

A model for prediction of α‐helical regions in amino acid sequences has been tested on the mainly‐α protein structure class. The modeling represents the construction of a continuous hypothetical α‐helical conformation for the whole protein chain, and was performed using molecular mechanics tools. The positive prediction of α‐helical and non‐α‐helical pentapeptide fragments of the proteins is 79%. The model considers only local interactions in the polypeptide chain without the influence of the tertiary structure. It was shown that the local interaction defines the α‐helical conformation for 85% of the native α‐helical regions. The relative energy contributions to the energy of the model were analyzed with the finding that the van der Waals component determines the formation of α‐helices. Hydrogen bonds remain at constant energy independently whether α‐helix or non‐α‐helix occurs in the native protein, and do not determine the location of helical regions. In contrast to existing methods, this approach additionally permits the prediction of conformations of side chains. The model suggests the correct values for ∼60% of all χ‐angles of α‐helical residues.

[1]  H. Scheraga,et al.  Energy parameters in polypeptides. 10. Improved geometrical parameters and nonbonded interactions for use in the ECEPP/3 algorithm, with application to proline-containing peptides , 1994 .

[2]  L. Pauling,et al.  The structure of proteins; two hydrogen-bonded helical configurations of the polypeptide chain. , 1951, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  G. Rose,et al.  Side-chain entropy opposes alpha-helix formation but rationalizes experimentally determined helix-forming propensities. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  C. Pace,et al.  Forces contributing to the conformational stability of proteins , 1996, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[5]  Luis Serrano,et al.  Computational estimation of specific side chain interaction energies in α helices , 2001 .

[6]  Roland L. Dunbrack Rotamer libraries in the 21st century. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[7]  Georg E. Schulz,et al.  Principles of Protein Structure , 1979 .

[8]  R. Sauer,et al.  Understanding protein hydrogen bond formation with kinetic H/D amide isotope effects , 2002, Nature Structural Biology.

[9]  Use of molecular mechanics for secondary structure prediction. Is it possible to reveal α‐helix? , 2002 .

[10]  S. Hitchcock-DeGregori,et al.  Importance of internal regions and the overall length of tropomyosin for actin binding and regulatory function. , 2001, Biochemistry.

[11]  W. Kabsch,et al.  Dictionary of protein secondary structure: Pattern recognition of hydrogen‐bonded and geometrical features , 1983, Biopolymers.

[12]  David C. Jones,et al.  CATH--a hierarchic classification of protein domain structures. , 1997, Structure.

[13]  W. DeGrado,et al.  Helix formation via conformation diffusion search , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  ICM—A new method for protein modeling and design: Applications to docking and structure prediction from the distorted native conformation , 1994, J. Comput. Chem..

[15]  Andrew D. Robertson,et al.  Protein Structure and the Energetics of Protein Stability. , 1997, Chemical reviews.

[16]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Ab InitioFolding of Peptides by the Optimal-Bias Monte Carlo Minimization Procedure , 1999 .

[17]  Sandeep Kumar,et al.  Dissecting α‐helices: Position‐specific analysis of α‐helices in globular proteins , 1998, Proteins.

[18]  B. Rost Review: protein secondary structure prediction continues to rise. , 2001, Journal of structural biology.

[19]  Harold A. Scheraga,et al.  Energy minimization of rigid-geometry polypeptides with exactly closed disulfide loops , 1997, J. Comput. Chem..