Intramolecular surface contacts contain information about protein-protein interface regions

MOTIVATION Some amino acids clearly show preferences over others in protein-protein interfaces. These preferences, or so-called interface propensities can be used for a priori interface prediction. We investigated whether the prediction accuracy could be improved by considering not single but pairs of residues in an interface. Here we present the first systematic analysis of intramolecular surface contacts in interface prediction. RESULTS We show that preferences do exist for contacts within and around an interface region within one molecule: specific pairs of amino acids are more often occurring than others. Using intramolecular contact propensities in a blind test, higher average scores were assigned to interface residues than to non-interface residues. This effect persisted as small but significant when the contact propensities were corrected to eliminate the influence of single amino acid interface propensity. This indicates that intramolecular contact propensities may replace interface propensities in protein-protein interface prediction. AVAILABILITY The source code is available on request from the authors.

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

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

[3]  M J Sternberg,et al.  Use of pair potentials across protein interfaces in screening predicted docked complexes , 1999, Proteins.

[4]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  A protein–protein docking benchmark , 2003, Proteins.

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

[6]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Protein–protein interactions: Structurally conserved residues distinguish between binding sites and exposed protein surfaces , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[8]  A. Bonvin,et al.  WHISCY: What information does surface conservation yield? Application to data‐driven docking , 2006, Proteins.

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

[10]  Gideon Schreiber,et al.  A novel method for scoring of docked protein complexes using predicted protein-protein binding sites. , 2004, Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS.

[11]  J M Thornton,et al.  LIGPLOT: a program to generate schematic diagrams of protein-ligand interactions. , 1995, Protein engineering.

[12]  J. Janin,et al.  Dissecting subunit interfaces in homodimeric proteins , 2003, Proteins.

[13]  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.

[14]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Statistical analysis and prediction of protein–protein interfaces , 2005, Proteins.

[15]  J. Thornton,et al.  Discriminating between homodimeric and monomeric proteins in the crystalline state , 2000, Proteins.

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

[17]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  Distance‐scaled, finite ideal‐gas reference state improves structure‐derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction , 2002, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[19]  David R. Westhead,et al.  Improved prediction of protein-protein binding sites using a support vector machines approach. , 2005, Bioinformatics.

[20]  Z. Weng,et al.  Atomic contact vectors in protein‐protein recognition , 2003, Proteins.

[21]  Z. Weng,et al.  Protein–protein docking benchmark 2.0: An update , 2005, Proteins.

[22]  A. Bogan,et al.  Anatomy of hot spots in protein interfaces. , 1998, 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]  Sam Ansari,et al.  Statistical analysis of predominantly transient protein–protein interfaces , 2005, Proteins.

[25]  Yuhua Duan,et al.  Physicochemical and residue conservation calculations to improve the ranking of protein–protein docking solutions , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[26]  S. Jones,et al.  Analysis of protein-protein interaction sites using surface patches. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  Pinak Chakrabarti,et al.  Interresidue contacts in proteins and protein-protein interfaces and their use in characterizing the homodimeric interface. , 2005, Journal of proteome research.