Folding funnels, binding funnels, and protein function

Folding funnels have been the focus of considerable attention during the last few years. These have mostly been discussed in the general context of the theory of protein folding. Here we extend the utility of the concept of folding funnels, relating them to biological mechanisms and function. In particular, here we describe the shape of the funnels in light of protein synthesis and folding; flexibility, conformational diversity, and binding mechanisms; and the associated binding funnels, illustrating the multiple routes and the range of complexed conformers. Specifically, the walls of the folding funnels, their crevices, and bumps are related to the complexity of protein folding, and hence to sequential vs. nonsequential folding. Whereas the former is more frequently observed in eukaryotic proteins, where the rate of protein synthesis is slower, the latter is more frequent in prokaryotes, with faster translation rates. The bottoms of the funnels reflect the extent of the flexibility of the proteins. Rugged floors imply a range of conformational isomers, which may be close on the energy landscape. Rather than undergoing an induced fit binding mechanism, the conformational ensembles around the rugged bottoms argue that the conformers, which are most complementary to the ligand, will bind to it with the equilibrium shifting in their favor. Furthermore, depending on the extent of the ruggedness, or of the smoothness with only a few minima, we may infer nonspecific, broad range vs. specific binding. In particular, folding and binding are similar processes, with similar underlying principles. Hence, the shape of the folding funnel of the monomer enables making reasonable guesses regarding the shape of the corresponding binding funnel. Proteins having a broad range of binding, such as proteolytic enzymes or relatively nonspecific endonucleases, may be expected to have not only rugged floors in their folding funnels, but their binding funnels will also behave similarly, with a range of complexed conformations. Hence, knowledge of the shape of the folding funnels is biologically very useful. The converse also holds: If kinetic and thermodynamic data are available, hints regarding the role of the protein and its binding selectivity may be obtained. Thus, the utility of the concept of the funnel carries over to the origin of the protein and to its function.

[1]  E. Fischer Einfluss der Configuration auf die Wirkung der Enzyme , 1894 .

[2]  D. Koshland Application of a Theory of Enzyme Specificity to Protein Synthesis. , 1958, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  T. Creighton Proteins: Structures and Molecular Properties , 1986 .

[4]  P. Wolynes,et al.  Intermediates and barrier crossing in a random energy model , 1989 .

[5]  S. Prusiner,et al.  Molecular biology of prion diseases , 1991, Science.

[6]  P. Wolynes,et al.  The energy landscapes and motions of proteins. , 1991, Science.

[7]  H. Erickson,et al.  Kinetics of protein-protein association explained by Brownian dynamics computer simulation. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  A. Parente,et al.  The dual-mode quaternary structure of seminal RNase. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  E. Katchalski‐Katzir,et al.  Molecular surface recognition: determination of geometric fit between proteins and their ligands by correlation techniques. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  J. Janin,et al.  Protein docking algorithms: simulating molecular recognition , 1993 .

[11]  P. Lansbury,et al.  Seeding “one-dimensional crystallization” of amyloid: A pathogenic mechanism in Alzheimer's disease and scrapie? , 1993, Cell.

[12]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  Domain swapping: entangling alliances between proteins. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  D A Agard,et al.  Kinetics versus thermodynamics in protein folding. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[14]  C. Milstein,et al.  Conformational isomerism and the diversity of antibodies. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Shape complementarity at protein–protein interfaces , 1994, Biopolymers.

[16]  K. Dill,et al.  Transition states and folding dynamics of proteins and heteropolymers , 1994 .

[17]  R. Baldwin Matching speed and stability , 1994, Nature.

[18]  C. Craik,et al.  Structural basis of substrate specificity in the serine proteases , 1995, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[19]  J. Onuchic,et al.  Navigating the folding routes , 1995, Science.

[20]  M. Karplus,et al.  Kinetics of protein folding , 1995, Nature.

[21]  R. Nussinov,et al.  A geometry-based suite of molecular docking processes. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Molecular surface complementarity at protein-protein interfaces: the critical role played by surface normals at well placed, sparse, points in docking. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[23]  H. Chan Kinetics of protein folding , 1995, Nature.

[24]  G. D'alessio Oligomer evolution in action? , 1995, Nature Structural Biology.

[25]  K Yue,et al.  Forces of tertiary structural organization in globular proteins. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  R. L. Baldwin The nature of protein folding pathways: The classical versus the new view , 1995, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[27]  M. L. Tasayco,et al.  NMR study of the reconstitution of the β‐sheet of thioredoxin by fragment complementation , 1995 .

[28]  J. Onuchic,et al.  Toward an outline of the topography of a realistic protein-folding funnel. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  D Eisenberg,et al.  3D domain swapping: A mechanism for oligomer assembly , 1995, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[30]  D. Shortle,et al.  A dynamic bundle of four adjacent hydrophobic segments in the denatured state of staphylococcal nuclease , 1996, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[31]  M. Gruebele,et al.  Direct observation of fast protein folding: the initial collapse of apomyoglobin. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[32]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Protein-protein interfaces: architectures and interactions in protein-protein interfaces and in protein cores. Their similarities and differences. , 1996, Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology.

[33]  J A Wells,et al.  Binding in the growth hormone receptor complex. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[34]  Gennady M Verkhivker,et al.  Exploring the energy landscapes of molecular recognition by a genetic algorithm: analysis of the requirements for robust docking of HIV-1 protease and FKBP-12 complexes. , 1996, Proteins.

[35]  M Karplus,et al.  "New view" of protein folding reconciled with the old through multiple unfolding simulations. , 1997, Science.

[36]  Ruth Nussinov,et al.  Structural motifs at protein‐protein interfaces: Protein cores versus two‐state and three‐state model complexes , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[37]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Studies of protein‐protein interfaces: A statistical analysis of the hydrophobic effect , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[38]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Hydrophobic folding units derived from dissimilar monomer structures and their interactions , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[39]  K A Dill,et al.  Ligand binding to proteins: The binding landscape model , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[40]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Protein binding versus protein folding: the role of hydrophilic bridges in protein associations. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[41]  R C Stevens,et al.  Structural insights into the evolution of an antibody combining site. , 1997, Science.

[42]  M. Karplus,et al.  The topology of multidimensional potential energy surfaces: Theory and application to peptide structure and kinetics , 1997 .

[43]  V. Muñoz,et al.  Submillisecond kinetics of protein folding. , 1997, Current opinion in structural biology.

[44]  F. Hartl,et al.  Recombination of protein domains facilitated by co-translational folding in eukaryotes , 1997, Nature.

[45]  J. Ben Rosen,et al.  Protein Structure and Energy Landscape Dependence on Sequence Using a Continuous Energy Function , 1997, J. Comput. Biol..

[46]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  Meeting review: the Second meeting on the Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction (CASP2), Asilomar, California, December 13-16, 1996. , 1997, Folding & design.

[47]  M Karplus,et al.  The Levinthal paradox: yesterday and today. , 1997, Folding & design.

[48]  K. Dill,et al.  From Levinthal to pathways to funnels , 1997, Nature Structural Biology.

[49]  A. Fersht,et al.  Complementation of peptide fragments of the single domain protein chymotrypsin inhibitor 2. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[50]  Recognition between disordered states: kinetics of the self-assembly of thioredoxin fragments. , 1997, Biochemistry.

[51]  A. Fersht Nucleation mechanisms in protein folding. , 1997, Current opinion in structural biology.

[52]  R. Kelley,et al.  Hinge bending within the cytokine receptor superfamily revealed by the 2.4 Å crystal structure of the extracellular domain of rabbit tissue factor , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[53]  John W. Erickson,et al.  Conformational switching in an aspartic proteinase , 1998, Nature Structural Biology.

[54]  H. Frauenfelder,et al.  The energy landscape in non-biological and biological molecules , 1998, Nature Structural Biology.

[55]  Neil D. Rawlings,et al.  Handbook of proteolytic enzymes , 1998 .

[56]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Mechanism and evolution of protein dimerization , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[57]  P. Wolynes,et al.  Satisfying turns in folding transitions , 1998, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[58]  R Nussinov,et al.  Protein folding via binding and vice versa. , 1998, Folding & design.

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

[60]  Mark A. Miller,et al.  Archetypal energy landscapes , 1998, Nature.

[61]  K. Dill,et al.  Protein folding in the landscape perspective: Chevron plots and non‐arrhenius kinetics , 1998, Proteins.

[62]  K. Dill Polymer principles and protein folding , 1999, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[63]  G. Rose,et al.  Is protein folding hierarchic? I. Local structure and peptide folding. , 1999, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[64]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Distinguishing between sequential and nonsequentially folded proteins: Implications for folding and misfolding , 1999, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[65]  Charles DeLisi,et al.  Protein‐protein recognition: exploring the energy funnels near the binding sites , 1999, Proteins.