Specific interactions for ab initio folding of protein terminal regions with secondary structures

Proteins fold into unique three‐dimensional structures by specific, orientation‐dependent interactions between amino acid residues. Here, we extract orientation‐dependent interactions from protein structures by treating each polar atom as a dipole with a direction. The resulting statistical energy function successfully refolds 13 out of 16 fully unfolded secondary‐structure terminal regions of 10–23 amino acid residues in 15 small proteins. Dissecting the orientation‐dependent energy function reveals that the orientation preference between hydrogen‐bonded atoms is not enough to account for the structural specificity of proteins. The result has significant implications on the theoretical and experimental searches for specific interactions involved in protein folding and molecular recognition between proteins and other biologically active molecules. Proteins 2008. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  C. Anfinsen,et al.  Regeneration of enzyme activity by air oxidation of reduced subtilisin-modified ribonuclease. , 1961, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[2]  D. A. Dunnett.  Classical Electrodynamics , 2020, Nature.

[3]  M. Brereton.  Classical Electrodynamics (2nd edn) , 1976 .

[4]  P. Kollman,et al.  An all atom force field for simulations of proteins and nucleic acids , 1986, Journal of computational chemistry.

[5]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Nonstationary Function Optimization Using Genetic Algorithms with Dominance and Diploidy , 1987, ICGA.

[6]  U. Hobohm,et al.  Selection of representative protein data sets , 1992, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[7]  Jan B. F. N. Engberts,et al.  Hydrophobic Effects. Opinions and Facts , 1993 .

[8]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  Backbone-dependent rotamer library for proteins. Application to side-chain prediction. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  E. Milner-White,et al.  Coulombic interactions between partially charged main-chain atoms not hydrogen-bonded to each other influence the conformations of alpha-helices and antiparallel beta-sheet. A new method for analysing the forces between hydrogen bonding groups in proteins includes all the Coulombic interactions. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  M. Karplus,et al.  Simulation of activation free energies in molecular systems , 1996 .

[11]  W. L. Jorgensen,et al.  Development and Testing of the OPLS All-Atom Force Field on Conformational Energetics and Properties of Organic Liquids , 1996 .

[12]  R. Samudrala,et al.  An all-atom distance-dependent conditional probability discriminatory function for protein structure prediction. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[13]  S. Marqusee,et al.  Subdomain interactions as a determinant in the folding and stability of T4 lysozyme , 1998, Protein Science.

[14]  C. Deane,et al.  Carbonyl-carbonyl interactions stabilize the partially allowed Ramachandran conformations of asparagine and aspartic acid. , 1999, Protein engineering.

[15]  S. Atwell,et al.  Selection for improved subtiligases by phage display. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Eugene I. Shakhnovich,et al.  Development of a Knowledge-Based Potential for Crystals of Small Organic Molecules: Calculation of Energy Surfaces for C)0‚‚‚H-N Hydrogen Bonds , 2000 .

[17]  G. Klebe,et al.  Statistical potentials and scoring functions applied to protein-ligand binding. , 2001, Current opinion in structural biology.

[18]  Richard Bonneau,et al.  De novo prediction of three-dimensional structures for major protein families. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[19]  Richard Bertram,et al.  An improved hydrogen bond potential: Impact on medium resolution protein structures , 2002, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[20]  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.

[21]  D. Baker,et al.  An orientation-dependent hydrogen bonding potential improves prediction of specificity and structure for proteins and protein-protein complexes. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  A. Liwo,et al.  The protein folding problem: global optimization of the force fields. , 2004, Frontiers in bioscience : a journal and virtual library.

[23]  J. Skolnick,et al.  Automated structure prediction of weakly homologous proteins on a genomic scale. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  An accurate, residue‐level, pair potential of mean force for folding and binding based on the distance‐scaled, ideal‐gas reference state , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[25]  J. Straub,et al.  Orientational potentials extracted from protein structures improve native fold recognition , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[26]  Yaoqi Zhou,et al.  Protein flexibility prediction by an all‐atom mean‐field statistical theory , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[27]  Emil Alexov,et al.  Comparative study of generalized born models: Born radii and peptide folding. , 2005, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[28]  P. Bradley,et al.  Toward High-Resolution de Novo Structure Prediction for Small Proteins , 2005, Science.

[29]  Dietmar Schomburg,et al.  Prediction of protein thermostability with a direction‐ and distance‐dependent knowledge‐based potential , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[31]  Yawen Bai,et al.  Detection of a hidden folding intermediate of the third domain of PDZ. , 2005, Journal of molecular biology.

[32]  Robert L Jernigan,et al.  How effective for fold recognition is a potential of mean force that includes relative orientations between contacting residues in proteins? , 2005, The Journal of chemical physics.

[33]  François Diederich,et al.  Orthogonal multipolar interactions in structural chemistry and biology. , 2005, Angewandte Chemie.

[34]  A. Sali,et al.  Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[35]  Janusz M Bujnicki,et al.  Protein‐Structure Prediction by Recombination of Fragments , 2006, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[36]  David de Sancho,et al.  Assessment of protein folding potentials with an evolutionary method. , 2006, The Journal of chemical physics.

[37]  J. Skolnick.  In quest of an empirical potential for protein structure prediction. , 2006, Current opinion in structural biology.

[38]  Haiyan Liu,et al.  Genetic algorithms for protein conformation sampling and optimization in a discrete backbone dihedral angle space , 2006, J. Comput. Chem..

[39]  Li Xie,et al.  Structural refinement of protein segments containing secondary structure elements: Local sampling, knowledge‐based potentials, and clustering , 2006, Proteins.

[40]  I. Yamashita,et al.  Rounding up: Engineering 12-membered rings from the cyclic 11-mer TRAP. , 2006, Structure.

[41]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  What is a desirable statistical energy functions for proteins and how can it be obtained? , 2007, Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics.

[42]  Ron Unger,et al.  A tale of two tails: why are terminal residues of proteins exposed? , 2007, Bioinform..