Deciphering the deformation modes associated with function retention and specialization in members of the Ras superfamily.

The evolutionary and physical deformability patterns of members of the Ras GTPase superfamily were investigated by Principal Component and Elastic Network-Normal Mode analyses. The study helped to decipher the dynamics information encrypted into the conserved core and to separate the trans-family intrinsic flexibility associated with a common function from the protein motions related to functional specialization of selected families or family members. The conserved core is dynamically divided into two lobes. The deformation modes, which allow the Ras GTPases to accomplish their switching function, are conserved along evolution and are localized in lobe 1 portions close to the nucleotide. These modes lead to functional specialization when associated with evolution-driven deformations of protein portions essentially located in lobe 2, distal from the nucleotide, and involved in peculiar interactions with membrane, guanine nucleotide exchange factors, or effectors. Overall, a complete picture of the functional and evolutionary dynamics of the Ras superfamily emerges.

[1]  Sebastian Doniach,et al.  Toward the mechanism of dynamical couplings and translocation in hepatitis C virus NS3 helicase using elastic network model , 2007, Proteins.

[2]  H. Weinstein,et al.  Molecular dynamics simulations of transducin: interdomain and front to back communication in activation and nucleotide exchange. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  J. Echave,et al.  Evolutionary conservation of protein vibrational dynamics. , 2008, Gene.

[4]  Modesto Orozco,et al.  Theoretical study of large conformational transitions in DNA: the B↔A conformational change in water and ethanol/water , 2007, Nucleic acids research.

[5]  P. Biggin,et al.  Comparative molecular dynamics—Similar folds and similar motions? , 2005, Proteins.

[6]  N. Go,et al.  Studies on protein folding, unfolding and fluctuations by computer simulation. I. The effect of specific amino acid sequence represented by specific inter-unit interactions. , 2009 .

[7]  Modesto Orozco,et al.  Comparison of molecular dynamics and superfamily spaces of protein domain deformation , 2009, BMC Structural Biology.

[8]  Ruth Nussinov,et al.  A method for simultaneous alignment of multiple protein structures , 2004, Proteins.

[9]  Klaus Schulten,et al.  Mechanical force generation by G proteins , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  J. Onuchic,et al.  How native-state topology affects the folding of dihydrofolate reductase and interleukin-1beta. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  I. Vetter,et al.  The Guanine Nucleotide-Binding Switch in Three Dimensions , 2001, Science.

[12]  Louis Renault,et al.  Arf, Arl, Arp and Sar proteins: a family of GTP‐binding proteins with a structural device for ‘front–back’ communication , 2002, EMBO reports.

[13]  Tirion,et al.  Large Amplitude Elastic Motions in Proteins from a Single-Parameter, Atomic Analysis. , 1996, Physical review letters.

[14]  Sophie Sacquin-Mora,et al.  Investigating the local flexibility of functional residues in hemoproteins. , 2006, Biophysical journal.

[15]  P. Chacón,et al.  Thorough validation of protein normal mode analysis: a comparative study with essential dynamics. , 2007, Structure.

[16]  Andrew F. Neuwald,et al.  Gα–Gβγ dissociation may be due to retraction of a buried lysine and disruption of an aromatic cluster by a GTP‐sensing Arg–Trp pair , 2007 .

[17]  James Andrew McCammon,et al.  Ras Conformational Switching: Simulating Nucleotide-Dependent Conformational Transitions with Accelerated Molecular Dynamics , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[18]  J. Colicelli,et al.  Human RAS Superfamily Proteins and Related GTPases , 2004, Science's STKE.

[19]  M Karplus,et al.  Molecular switch in signal transduction: reaction paths of the conformational changes in ras p21. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  N. Go,et al.  Studies on protein folding, unfolding, and fluctuations by computer simulation. II. A. Three‐dimensional lattice model of lysozyme , 1978 .

[21]  Liisa Holm,et al.  DaliLite workbench for protein structure comparison , 2000, Bioinform..

[22]  M Karplus,et al.  Ligand-induced conformational changes in ras p21: a normal mode and energy minimization analysis. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[23]  Amedeo Caflisch,et al.  Wordom: a program for efficient analysis of molecular dynamics simulations , 2007, Bioinform..

[24]  David C. Jones,et al.  CATH--a hierarchic classification of protein domain structures. , 1997, Structure.

[25]  J Andrew McCammon,et al.  A novel switch region regulates H‐ras membrane orientation and signal output , 2008, The EMBO journal.

[26]  J Andrew McCammon,et al.  Mapping the nucleotide and isoform-dependent structural and dynamical features of Ras proteins. , 2008, Structure.

[27]  A. Amadei,et al.  On the convergence of the conformational coordinates basis set obtained by the essential dynamics analysis of proteins' molecular dynamics simulations , 1999, Proteins.

[28]  Modesto Orozco,et al.  Exploring the suitability of coarse-grained techniques for the representation of protein dynamics. , 2008, Biophysical journal.

[29]  Modesto Orozco,et al.  FlexServ: an integrated tool for the analysis of protein flexibility , 2009, Bioinform..

[30]  D. Zerbino,et al.  An analysis of core deformations in protein superfamilies. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[31]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Predictions of protein flexibility: First‐order measures , 2004, Proteins.

[32]  Charles A Laughton,et al.  Essential Dynamics:  A Tool for Efficient Trajectory Compression and Management. , 2006, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[33]  N. Futatsugi,et al.  Molecular dynamics simulations of Gly-12-->Val mutant of p21(ras): dynamic inhibition mechanism. , 2001, Biophysical journal.