Conformational energies and entropies of peptides, and the peptide–protein binding problem

A novel statistical thermodynamic approach is applied to free-peptide segments in order to classify them according to their conformational energies, entropies and heat capacities. Our approach employs the rotational isomeric state (RIS) model in which the states are described by the Ramachandran map of backbone torsion angles. The statistical weight matrices for the pairwise-dependent states are derived from the torsion angle probabilities of the consecutive dipeptides in a coil library. The partition function is determined for a given sequence via RIS multiplication of the pre-determined matrices. The conformational partition function, Helmholtz free energy, energy, entropy and heat capacity are obtained. The model is applied to randomly produced peptides and also to known peptide inhibitors to analyze their thermodynamic properties. Peptides with low energy, low entropy and low-heat capacity are determined to be essential for a peptide to be a good candidate inhibitor. Free energy changes in peptide binding are also discussed.

[1]  P. Privalov,et al.  On the entropy of protein folding , 1996, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[2]  L. Serrano.  Comparison between the phi distribution of the amino acids in the protein database and NMR data indicates that amino acids have various phi propensities in the random coil conformation. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  M. Swindells,et al.  Intrinsic φ,ψ propensities of amino acids, derived from the coil regions of known structures , 1995, Nature Structural Biology.

[4]  P. Christen,et al.  Empirical calculation of the relative free energies of peptide binding to the molecular chaperone DnaK , 2000, Proteins.

[5]  Jan Engberg,et al.  Modeling the interactions of a peptide-major histocompatibility class I ligand with its receptors. I. Recognition by two αβ T cell receptors , 2000, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[6]  A. Wand,et al.  Conformational entropy in molecular recognition by proteins , 2007, Nature.

[7]  William A. McLaughlin,et al.  Entropic contributions and the influence of the hydrophobic environment in promiscuous protein–protein association , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Michael Nilges,et al.  Flexibility and conformational entropy in protein-protein binding. , 2006, Structure.

[9]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  Converging free energy estimates: MM‐PB(GB)SA studies on the protein–protein complex Ras–Raf , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[10]  C. Tanford,et al.  Empirical correlation between hydrophobic free energy and aqueous cavity surface area. , 1974, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  D Rognan,et al.  Molecular dynamics simulation of MHC-peptide complexes as a tool for predicting potential T cell epitopes. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[12]  J. Hermans,et al.  Comparison of a QM/MM force field and molecular mechanics force fields in simulations of alanine and glycine “dipeptides” (Ace‐Ala‐Nme and Ace‐Gly‐Nme) in water in relation to the problem of modeling the unfolded peptide backbone in solution , 2003, Proteins.

[13]  Gregory A Caputo,et al.  Supporting Online Material for Computational Design of Peptides That Target Transmembrane Helices , 2007 .

[14]  Deutsch,et al.  New algorithm for protein design. , 1995, Physical review letters.

[15]  Eduardo Garcia Urdiales,et al.  Accurate Prediction of Peptide Binding Sites on Protein Surfaces , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[16]  K. Dill,et al.  Denatured states of proteins. , 1991, Annual review of biochemistry.

[17]  J. Tame,et al.  Crystallographic and calorimetric analysis of peptide binding to OppA protein. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[18]  M. Gilson,et al.  The statistical-thermodynamic basis for computation of binding affinities: a critical review. , 1997, Biophysical journal.

[19]  L M Amzel,et al.  Loss of translational entropy in binding, folding, and catalysis , 1997, Proteins.

[20]  Robert B. Hermann,et al.  Theory of hydrophobic bonding. II. Correlation of hydrocarbon solubility in water with solvent cavity surface area , 1972 .

[21]  C. Chothia,et al.  Hydrophobic bonding and accessible surface area in proteins , 1974, Nature.

[22]  J Novotny,et al.  Empirical free energy calculations: a blind test and further improvements to the method. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[23]  G. Klebe,et al.  Approaches to the description and prediction of the binding affinity of small-molecule ligands to macromolecular receptors. , 2002, Angewandte Chemie.

[24]  R. Callen,et al.  Thermodynamics and an Introduction to Thermostatistics, 2nd Edition , 1985 .

[25]  C. Brooks,et al.  First-principles calculation of the folding free energy of a three-helix bundle protein. , 1995, Science.

[26]  Abhishek K. Jha,et al.  Statistical coil model of the unfolded state: resolving the reconciliation problem. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  Kalle Gehring,et al.  Comparative Peptide Binding Studies of the PABC Domains from the Ubiquitin-protein Isopeptide Ligase HYD and Poly(A)-binding Protein , 2006, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[28]  Z Reich,et al.  Thermodynamics of T cell receptor binding to peptide-MHC: evidence for a general mechanism of molecular scanning. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  J. Janin.  The kinetics of protein‐protein recognition , 1997, Proteins.

[30]  A V Finkelstein,et al.  The price of lost freedom: entropy of bimolecular complex formation. , 1989, Protein engineering.

[31]  P. Flory,et al.  The Configuration of Random Polypeptide Chains. II. Theory , 1965 .

[32]  K. Sharp,et al.  Entropy in protein folding and in protein-protein interactions. , 1997, Current opinion in structural biology.

[33]  P. Harbury,et al.  Automated design of specificity in molecular recognition , 2003, Nature Structural Biology.

[34]  K. Sharp,et al.  Heat capacity in proteins. , 2005, Annual review of physical chemistry.

[35]  T. Baker,et al.  Specificity versus stability in computational protein design. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[36]  J. Massagué.  TGF-beta signal transduction. , 1998, Annual review of biochemistry.

[37]  Abhishek K. Jha,et al.  Helix, sheet, and polyproline II frequencies and strong nearest neighbor effects in a restricted coil library. , 2005, Biochemistry.

[38]  James R. Apgar,et al.  Modeling backbone flexibility to achieve sequence diversity: the design of novel alpha-helical ligands for Bcl-xL. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[39]  J. Chaires,et al.  Calorimetry and thermodynamics in drug design. , 2008, Annual review of biophysics.

[40]  Deniz Yuret,et al.  Relationships between amino acid sequence and backbone torsion angle preferences , 2004, Proteins.

[41]  S. Griffiths-Jones,et al.  Modulation of intrinsic phi,psi propensities of amino acids by neighbouring residues in the coil regions of protein structures: NMR analysis and dissection of a beta-hairpin peptide. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[42]  H. Davis,et al.  Carbon-14 Tracer Study of the High Temperature Oxidation of Propylene , 1965 .

[43]  P. Andrew Karplus,et al.  Hydrophobicity regained: Hydrophobicity regained , 1997 .

[44]  Milos V. Novotny,et al.  Increased protein backbone conformational entropy upon hydrophobic ligand binding , 1999, Nature Structural Biology.

[45]  D Rognan,et al.  Molecular dynamics study of a complex between the human histocompatibility antigen HLA-A2 and the IMP58-66 nonapeptide from influenza virus matrix protein. , 1992, European journal of biochemistry.

[46]  K. P. Murphy,et al.  Energetics of hydrogen bonding in proteins: A model compound study , 1996, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[47]  G Klebe,et al.  Energetic and entropic factors determining binding affinity in protein-ligand complexes. , 1997, Journal of receptor and signal transduction research.

[48]  P. Karplus.  Experimentally observed conformation‐dependent geometry and hidden strain in proteins , 1996, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[49]  M J Sternberg,et al.  Side‐chain conformational entropy in protein folding , 1995, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[50]  D. Rognan,et al.  Predicting binding affinities of protein ligands from three-dimensional models: application to peptide binding to class I major histocompatibility proteins. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[51]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[52]  B. Erman,et al.  The introduction of hydrogen bond and hydrophobicity effects into the rotational isomeric states model for conformational analysis of unfolded peptides , 2009, Physical biology.

[53]  Gevorg Grigoryan,et al.  Design of protein-interaction specificity affords selective bZIP-binding peptides , 2009, Nature.

[54]  M Karplus,et al.  Configurational entropy of native proteins. , 1987, Biophysical journal.

[55]  C. Springer,et al.  PostDOCK: a structural, empirical approach to scoring protein ligand complexes. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[56]  V. Muñoz,et al.  Intrinsic secondary structure propensities of the amino acids, using statistical ϕ–ψ matrices: Comparison with experimental scales , 1994 .

[57]  Eiichiro Ichiishi,et al.  Docking unbound proteins with MIAX: a novel algorithm for protein-protein soft docking. , 2003, Genome informatics. International Conference on Genome Informatics.