Surface, subunit interfaces and interior of oligomeric proteins.

The solvent-accessible surface area (As) of 23 oligomeric proteins is calculated using atomic co-ordinates from high-resolution and well-refined crystal structures. As is correlated with the protein molecular weight, and a power law predicts its value to within 5% on average. The accessible surface of the average oligomer is similar to that of monomeric proteins in its hydropathy and amino acid composition. The distribution of the 20 amino acid types between the protein surface and its interior is also the same as in monomers. Interfaces, i.e. surfaces involved in subunit contacts, differ from the rest of the subunit surface. They are enriched in hydrophobic side-chains, yet they contain a number of charged groups, especially from Arg residues, which are the most abundant residues at interfaces except for Leu. Buried Arg residues are involved in H-bonds between subunits. We counted H-bonds at interfaces and found that several have none, others have one H-bond per 200 A2 of interface area on average (1 A = 0.1 nm). A majority of interface H-bonds involve charged donor or acceptor groups, which should make their contribution to the free energy of dissociation significant, even when they are few. The smaller interfaces cover about 700 A2 of the subunit surface. The larger ones cover 3000 to 10,000 A2, up to 40% of the subunit surface area in catalase. The lower value corresponds to an estimate of the accessible surface area loss required for stabilizing subunit association through the hydrophobic effect alone. Oligomers with small interfaces have globular subunits with accessible surface areas similar to those of monomeric proteins. We suggest that these oligomers assemble from preformed monomers with little change in conformation. In oligomers with large interfaces, isolated subunits should be unstable given their excessively large accessible surface, and assembly is expected to require major structural changes.

[1]  R. Huber,et al.  Crystal structure analysis and refinement at 2.5 A of hexameric C-phycocyanin from the cyanobacterium Agmenellum quadruplicatum. The molecular model and its implications for light-harvesting. , 1986, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  R. Jaenicke,et al.  [12]Refolding and association of oligomeric proteins , 1986 .

[3]  R. Huber,et al.  Refined three-dimensional structures of two cyanobacterial C-phycocyanins at 2.1 and 2.5 A resolution. A common principle of phycobilin-protein interaction. , 1987, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  Protein Folding and Protein Association , 1984 .

[5]  P C Moody,et al.  Structure of holo-glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase from Bacillus stearothermophilus at 1.8 A resolution. , 1987, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  J Deisenhofer,et al.  Crystallographic refinement and atomic models of the intact immunoglobulin molecule Kol and its antigen-binding fragment at 3.0 A and 1.0 A resolution. , 1980, Journal of molecular biology.

[7]  J Deisenhofer,et al.  Structure of the complex formed by bovine trypsin and bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor. II. Crystallographic refinement at 1.9 A resolution. , 1974, Journal of molecular biology.

[8]  S J Oatley,et al.  Structure of prealbumin: secondary, tertiary and quaternary interactions determined by Fourier refinement at 1.8 A. , 1977, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  G M Edelman,et al.  The covalent and three-dimensional structure of concanavalin A. IV. Atomic coordinates, hydrogen bonding, and quaternary structure. , 1977, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[10]  John A. Tainer,et al.  Structure and mechanism of copper, zinc superoxide dismutase , 1983, Nature.

[11]  S. Sprang,et al.  The structure of glycogen phosphorylase a at 2.5 Å resolution , 1979 .

[12]  I Morize,et al.  Refinement of the C222(1) crystal form of oxidized uteroglobin at 1.34 A resolution. , 1987, Journal of molecular biology.

[13]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  The structure of melittin. I. Structure determination and partial refinement. , 1981, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[14]  C. Chothia,et al.  Role of hydrophobicity in the binding of coenzymes. Appendix. Translational and rotational contribution to the free energy of dissociation. , 1978, Biochemistry.

[15]  G J Williams,et al.  The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures. , 1977, Journal of molecular biology.

[16]  G. Petsko,et al.  Structure of chicken muscle triose phosphate isomerase determined crystallographically at 2.5Å resolution: using amino acid sequence data , 1975, Nature.

[17]  M. Perutz,et al.  The crystal structure of human deoxyhaemoglobin at 1.74 A resolution. , 1984, Journal of molecular biology.

[18]  S. Hirono,et al.  Crystal structure at 2.6 A resolution of the complex of subtilisin BPN' with streptomyces subtilisin inhibitor. , 1984, Journal of molecular biology.

[19]  J. Janin,et al.  Surface and inside volumes in globular proteins , 1979, Nature.

[20]  R. Huber,et al.  Crystallographic refinement and atomic models of two different forms of citrate synthase at 2.7 and 1.7 A resolution. , 1984, Journal of molecular biology.

[21]  Cyrus Chothia,et al.  The accessible surface area and stability of oligomeric proteins , 1987, Nature.

[22]  C. Chothia The nature of the accessible and buried surfaces in proteins. , 1976, Journal of molecular biology.

[23]  C Chothia,et al.  Stability and specificity of protein-protein interactions: the case of the trypsin-trypsin inhibitor complexes. , 1976, Journal of molecular biology.

[24]  P. Evans,et al.  Structure and control of phosphofructokinase from Bacillus stearothermophilus , 1979, Nature.

[25]  B. Lee,et al.  The interpretation of protein structures: estimation of static accessibility. , 1971, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  A. Shrake,et al.  Environment and exposure to solvent of protein atoms. Lysozyme and insulin. , 1973, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  Catherine L. Lawson,et al.  The three-dimensional structure of trp repressor , 1985, Nature.

[28]  T. A. Jones,et al.  Structure of a triclinic ternary complex of horse liver alcohol dehydrogenase at 2.9 A resolution. , 1981, Journal of molecular biology.

[29]  D Eisenberg,et al.  The structure of melittin. II. Interpretation of the structure. , 1982, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[30]  Tom L. Blundell,et al.  Insulin: The Structure in the Crystal and its Reflection in Chemistry and Biology by , 1972 .

[31]  Y. Satow,et al.  Crystal structure of a bacterial protein proteinase inhibitor (Streptomyces subtilisin inhibitor) at 2.6 A resolution. , 1979, Journal of molecular biology.

[32]  L. Sieker,et al.  Adjustment of restraints in the refinement of methemerythrin and azidomethemerythrin at 2.0 Å resolution , 1983 .

[33]  A. Fersht The hydrogen bond in molecular recognition , 1987 .

[34]  C. Chothia,et al.  Principles of protein–protein recognition , 1975, Nature.

[35]  W. Kauzmann Some factors in the interpretation of protein denaturation. , 1959, Advances in protein chemistry.

[36]  B. Finzel,et al.  Structure of ferricytochrome c' from Rhodospirillum molischianum at 1.67 A resolution. , 1985, Journal of molecular biology.

[37]  C. Chothia Structural invariants in protein folding , 1975, Nature.

[38]  R. Poljak,et al.  Three-dimensional structure of an antigen-antibody complex at 2.8 A resolution , 1986, Science.

[39]  A M Lesk,et al.  Interior and surface of monomeric proteins. , 1987, Journal of molecular biology.

[40]  A Wendel,et al.  The refined structure of the selenoenzyme glutathione peroxidase at 0.2-nm resolution. , 1983, European journal of biochemistry.

[41]  M G Rossmann,et al.  A comparison of the structures of apo dogfish M4 lactate dehydrogenase and its ternary complexes. , 1977, Journal of molecular biology.

[42]  T. J. Reid,et al.  Structure of beef liver catalase. , 1981, Journal of molecular biology.