A physical reference state unifies the structure‐derived potential of mean force for protein folding and binding

Extracting knowledge‐based statistical potential from known structures of proteins is proved to be a simple, effective method to obtain an approximate free‐energy function. However, the different compositions of amino acid residues at the core, the surface, and the binding interface of proteins prohibited the establishment of a unified statistical potential for folding and binding despite the fact that the physical basis of the interaction (water‐mediated interaction between amino acids) is the same. Recently, a physical state of ideal gas, rather than a statistically averaged state, has been used as the reference state for extracting the net interaction energy between amino acid residues of monomeric proteins. Here, we find that this monomer‐based potential is more accurate than an existing all‐atom knowledge‐based potential trained with interfacial structures of dimers in distinguishing native complex structures from docking decoys (100% success rate vs. 52% in 21 dimer/trimer decoy sets). It is also more accurate than a recently developed semiphysical empirical free‐energy functional enhanced by an orientation‐dependent hydrogen‐bonding potential in distinguishing native state from Rosetta docking decoys (94% success rate vs. 74% in 31 antibody–antigen and other complexes based on Z score). In addition, the monomer potential achieved a 93% success rate in distinguishing true dimeric interfaces from artificial crystal interfaces. More importantly, without additional parameters, the potential provides an accurate prediction of binding free energy of protein–peptide and protein–protein complexes (a correlation coefficient of 0.87 and a root‐mean‐square deviation of 1.76 kcal/mol with 69 experimental data points). This work marks a significant step toward a unified knowledge‐based potential that quantitatively captures the common physical principle underlying folding and binding. A Web server for academic users, established for the prediction of binding free energy and the energy evaluation of the protein–protein complexes, may be found at http://theory.med.buffalo.edu. Proteins 2004. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  P. Debye The Crystalline State , 1934, Nature.

[2]  M. Lazdunski,et al.  Trypsin-pancreatic trypsin inhibitor association. Dynamics of the interaction and role of disulfide bridges. , 1972, Biochemistry.

[3]  H. Scheraga,et al.  Medium- and long-range interaction parameters between amino acids for predicting three-dimensional structures of proteins. , 1976, Macromolecules.

[4]  M. Lazdunski,et al.  Pre‐existence of the active site in zymogens, the interaction of trypsinogen with the basic pancreatic trypsin inhibitor (Kunitz) , 1976, FEBS letters.

[5]  J. Hofrichter,et al.  Thermodynamics of gelation of sickle cell deoxyhemoglobin. , 1977, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  B. Tonomura,et al.  Direct fluorometric determination of a dissociation constant as low as 10(-10) M for the subtilisin BPN'--protein proteinase inhibitor (Streptomyces subtilisin inhibitor) complex by a single photon counting technique. , 1978, Journal of biochemistry.

[7]  R. Geiger,et al.  Inhibition of porcine glandular kallikreins by structurally homologous proteinase inhibitors of the Kunitz (Trasylol) type. Significance of the basic nature of amino acid residues in subside positions for kallikrein inhibition. , 1979, Hoppe-Seyler's Zeitschrift fur physiologische Chemie.

[8]  J. Hejgaard,et al.  Amino acid sequence homology between a serine protease inhibitor from barley and potato inhibitor I , 1980 .

[9]  M. Eulitz,et al.  [60] Eglin: Elastase—Cathepsin G inhibitor from leeches , 1981 .

[10]  K. Takano ON SOLUTION OF , 1983 .

[11]  M. Karplus,et al.  CHARMM: A program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations , 1983 .

[12]  C. Milstein,et al.  Reshaping human antibodies: grafting an antilysozyme activity. , 1988, Science.

[13]  Robert Huber,et al.  The refined 1.9 A crystal structure of human alpha‐thrombin: interaction with D‐Phe‐Pro‐Arg chloromethylketone and significance of the Tyr‐Pro‐Pro‐Trp insertion segment. , 1989 .

[14]  R. Huber,et al.  The refined 1.9 A crystal structure of human alpha‐thrombin: interaction with D‐Phe‐Pro‐Arg chloromethylketone and significance of the Tyr‐Pro‐Pro‐Trp insertion segment. , 1989, The EMBO journal.

[15]  G. Cohen,et al.  Structure of an antibody-antigen complex: crystal structure of the HyHEL-10 Fab-lysozyme complex. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  M. Sippl Calculation of conformational ensembles from potentials of mean force. An approach to the knowledge-based prediction of local structures in globular proteins. , 1990, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  G. Mclendon,et al.  Effects of surface amino acid replacements in cytochrome c peroxidase on complex formation with cytochrome c. , 1991, Biochemistry.

[18]  The antigenic surface of staphylococcal nuclease. II. Analysis of the N-1 epitope by site-directed mutagenesis. , 1991, Journal of immunology.

[19]  R. Arnon Synthetic peptides as the basis for vaccine design. , 1991, Molecular immunology.

[20]  L. Björck,et al.  Streptococcal protein G. Gene structure and protein binding properties. , 1991, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[21]  M. Lewis,et al.  Calculation of the free energy of association for protein complexes , 1992, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[22]  M. Ultsch,et al.  Human growth hormone and extracellular domain of its receptor: crystal structure of the complex. , 1992, Science.

[23]  A. Tulinsky,et al.  Structure of the hirulog 3-thrombin complex and nature of the S' subsites of substrates and inhibitors. , 1994, Biochemistry.

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

[25]  R. Hartley,et al.  Directed mutagenesis and barnase-barstar recognition. , 1993, Biochemistry.

[26]  T. Bigler,et al.  Binding of amino acid side chains to preformed cavities: Interaction of serine proteinases with turkey ovomucoid third domains with coded and noncoded P1 residues , 1993, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[27]  T. Stouch,et al.  Affinity and specificity of serine endopeptidase-protein inhibitor interactions. Empirical free energy calculations based on X-ray crystallographic structures. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[28]  T. Bhat,et al.  Three-dimensional structure of a heteroclitic antigen-antibody cross-reaction complex. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  S Vajda,et al.  Effect of conformational flexibility and solvation on receptor-ligand binding free energies. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[30]  C. Esmon,et al.  Glu192-->Gln substitution in thrombin yields an enzyme that is effectively inhibited by bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor and tissue factor pathway inhibitor. , 1994, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[31]  R. Webster,et al.  N9 neuraminidase complexes with antibodies NC41 and NC10: empirical free energy calculations capture specificity trends observed with mutant binding data. , 1994, Biochemistry.

[32]  J. Deisenhofer,et al.  A structural basis of the interactions between leucine-rich repeats and protein ligands , 1995, Nature.

[33]  W. Bode,et al.  Two heads are better than one: crystal structure of the insect derived double domain Kazal inhibitor rhodniin in complex with thrombin. , 1995, The EMBO journal.

[34]  R L Jernigan,et al.  A preference‐based free‐energy parameterization of enzyme‐inhibitor binding. Applications to HIV‐1‐protease inhibitor design , 1995, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[35]  B. Chait,et al.  Crystal Structure of the Conserved Core of HIV-1 Nef Complexed with a Src Family SH3 Domain , 1996, Cell.

[36]  N. Pavletich,et al.  Structure of the p53 Tumor Suppressor Bound to the Ankyrin and SH3 Domains of 53BP2 , 1996, Science.

[37]  K. Dill,et al.  Statistical potentials extracted from protein structures: how accurate are they? , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[38]  W. Sundquist,et al.  Crystal Structure of Human Cyclophilin A Bound to the Amino-Terminal Domain of HIV-1 Capsid , 1996, Cell.

[39]  Ralf Janknecht,et al.  Ras/Rap effector specificity determined by charge reversal , 1996, Nature Structural Biology.

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

[41]  M. Qasim,et al.  Interscaffolding additivity. Association of P1 variants of eglin c and of turkey ovomucoid third domain with serine proteinases. , 1997, Biochemistry.

[42]  M. Qasim,et al.  Probing intermolecular main chain hydrogen bonding in serine proteinase-protein inhibitor complexes: chemical synthesis of backbone-engineered turkey ovomucoid third domain. , 1997, Biochemistry.

[43]  J Kuriyan,et al.  Crystal structure of the nucleotide exchange factor GrpE bound to the ATPase domain of the molecular chaperone DnaK. , 1997, Science.

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

[45]  J. Janin,et al.  A soft, mean-field potential derived from crystal contacts for predicting protein-protein interactions. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[47]  E. Waygood,et al.  Determination of the binding constants for three HPr-specific monoclonal antibodies and their Fab fragments. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[48]  R Abagyan,et al.  How and why phosphotyrosine-containing peptides bind to the SH2 and PTB domains. , 1998, Folding & design.

[49]  T. Clackson,et al.  Structural and functional analysis of the 1:1 growth hormone:receptor complex reveals the molecular basis for receptor affinity. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[50]  B Tidor,et al.  Computation of electrostatic complements to proteins: A case of charge stabilized binding , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[51]  M. Karplus,et al.  Effective energy function for proteins in solution , 1999, Proteins.

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

[53]  Janet M. Thornton,et al.  BLEEP - potential of mean force describing protein-ligand interactions: I. Generating potential , 1999, J. Comput. Chem..

[54]  Janet M. Thornton,et al.  BLEEP - potential of mean force describing protein-ligand interactions: II. Calculation of binding energies and comparison with experimental data , 1999, J. Comput. Chem..

[55]  R. Norel,et al.  Electrostatic aspects of protein-protein interactions. , 2000, Current opinion in structural biology.

[56]  S. Vajda,et al.  Scoring docked conformations generated by rigid‐body protein‐protein docking , 2000, Proteins.

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

[58]  P A Kollman,et al.  Free energy calculations on dimer stability of the HIV protease using molecular dynamics and a continuum solvent model. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[59]  A. Elcock,et al.  Identification of protein oligomerization states by analysis of interface conservation , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[60]  J. Skolnick,et al.  A distance‐dependent atomic knowledge‐based potential for improved protein structure selection , 2001, Proteins.

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

[62]  K. Sharp,et al.  On the calculation of absolute macromolecular binding free energies , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[63]  Harry A. Stern,et al.  Development of a polarizable force field for proteins via ab initio quantum chemistry: First generation model and gas phase tests , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[64]  Fenglou Mao,et al.  Potential of mean force for protein–protein interaction studies , 2002, Proteins.

[65]  M. Sternberg,et al.  Prediction of protein-protein interactions by docking methods. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[66]  Ting Wang,et al.  Comparative binding energy (COMBINE) analysis of OppA-peptide complexes to relate structure to binding thermodynamics. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[67]  Hui Lu,et al.  MULTIPROSPECTOR: An algorithm for the prediction of protein–protein interactions by multimeric threading , 2002, Proteins.

[68]  R. Elber,et al.  Protein Recognition by Sequence‐to‐Structure Fitness: Bridging Efficiency and Capacity of Threading Models , 2002 .

[69]  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.

[70]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  Stability scale and atomic solvation parameters extracted from 1023 mutation experiments , 2002, Proteins.

[71]  Irwin D Kuntz,et al.  Stability of macromolecular complexes , 2002, Proteins.

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

[73]  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.

[74]  John B. O. Mitchell,et al.  Protein Ligand Database (PLD): additional understanding of the nature and specificity of protein-ligand complexes , 2003, Bioinform..

[75]  Hui Lu,et al.  Development of unified statistical potentials describing protein-protein interactions. , 2003, Biophysical journal.

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

[77]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  Single‐body residue‐level knowledge‐based energy score combined with sequence‐profile and secondary structure information for fold recognition , 2004, Proteins.

[78]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  Quantifying the effect of burial of amino acid residues on protein stability , 2003, Proteins.