The functional importance of structure in unstructured protein regions.

After two decades of research, intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) are established as a widespread phenomenon. The growing understanding of the significant functional role of IDRs has challenged the structure-function paradigm, proving irrefutably that a stably folded structure is not a strict requirement for function. Nonetheless, (un)structure-function relationships remain at the core of IDR-mediated interactions. An IDR can populate a continuously transitioning continuum of structural conformations from fully disordered to stable globular states. In these ensembles, only subsets of conformations are binding competent, with intramolecular IDR contacts serving as important intermolecular binding determinants. Here, we review our current understanding of different types of intramolecular IDR interactions, their effects on IDR complex formation and their modes of biological regulation.

[1]  K. Teilum,et al.  Behaviour of intrinsically disordered proteins in protein–protein complexes with an emphasis on fuzziness , 2017, Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences.

[2]  H. Dyson,et al.  Intrinsically disordered proteins in cellular signalling and regulation , 2014, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[3]  Adam J. Trexler,et al.  Allostery in a disordered protein: oxidative modifications to α-synuclein act distally to regulate membrane binding. , 2011, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[4]  Diana M. Mitrea,et al.  Phase separation in biology; functional organization of a higher order , 2016, Cell Communication and Signaling.

[5]  Anton Meinhart,et al.  Recognition of RNA polymerase II carboxy-terminal domain by 3′-RNA-processing factors , 2004, Nature.

[6]  P. Jemth,et al.  Helical propensity in an intrinsically disordered protein accelerates ligand binding. , 2014, Angewandte Chemie.

[7]  Michael P. Sheetz,et al.  Stretching Single Talin Rod Molecules Activates Vinculin Binding , 2009, Science.

[8]  Neil Bate,et al.  Activation of a vinculin‐binding site in the talin rod involves rearrangement of a five‐helix bundle , 2004 .

[9]  Do-Hyoung Kim,et al.  PreSMo Target-Binding Signatures in Intrinsically Disordered Proteins , 2018, Molecules and cells.

[10]  J. Clarke,et al.  Conserved Helix-Flanking Prolines Modulate Intrinsically Disordered Protein:Target Affinity by Altering the Lifetime of the Bound Complex , 2017, Biochemistry.

[11]  Monika Fuxreiter,et al.  The Structure and Dynamics of Higher-Order Assemblies: Amyloids, Signalosomes, and Granules , 2016, Cell.

[12]  Zsuzsanna Dosztányi,et al.  DIBS: a repository of disordered binding sites mediating interactions with ordered proteins , 2017, Bioinform..

[13]  R. Pappu,et al.  Collapse Transitions of Proteins and the Interplay Among Backbone, Sidechain, and Solvent Interactions. , 2018, Annual review of biophysics.

[14]  D. Licatalosi,et al.  Functional interaction of yeast pre-mRNA 3' end processing factors with RNA polymerase II. , 2002, Molecular cell.

[15]  P. Tompa On the supertertiary structure of proteins. , 2012, Nature chemical biology.

[16]  S. Alberti Phase separation in biology , 2017, Current Biology.

[17]  Toby J Gibson,et al.  Cell regulation: determined to signal discrete cooperation. , 2009, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[18]  Alex Bateman,et al.  Tissue-Specific Splicing of Disordered Segments that Embed Binding Motifs Rewires Protein Interaction Networks , 2012, Molecular cell.

[19]  D. Leung,et al.  The nucleotide switch in Cdc42 modulates coupling between the GTPase-binding and allosteric equilibria of Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  Geoffrey Woollard,et al.  Structure and intrinsic disorder in protein autoinhibition. , 2013, Structure.

[21]  Ji Yu,et al.  Fast rebinding increases dwell time of Src homology 2 (SH2)-containing proteins near the plasma membrane , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  G. Storz,et al.  Structural basis for redox regulation of Yap1 transcription factor localization , 2004, Nature.

[23]  Sheena E Radford,et al.  N‐terminal acetylation of α‐synuclein induces increased transient helical propensity and decreased aggregation rates in the intrinsically disordered monomer , 2012, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[24]  J. Forman-Kay,et al.  From sequence and forces to structure, function, and evolution of intrinsically disordered proteins. , 2013, Structure.

[25]  G. Goobes,et al.  A J-modulated protonless NMR experiment characterizes the conformational ensemble of the intrinsically disordered protein WIP , 2016, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

[26]  Norman E. Davey,et al.  Motif switches: decision-making in cell regulation. , 2012, Current opinion in structural biology.

[27]  Philipp Selenko,et al.  Structural disorder of monomeric α-synuclein persists in mammalian cells , 2016, Nature.

[28]  Monika Fuxreiter,et al.  Fold or not to fold upon binding - does it really matter? , 2019, Current opinion in structural biology.

[29]  Katrine Bugge,et al.  Extreme disorder in an ultrahigh-affinity protein complex , 2018, Nature.

[30]  P. Bernadó,et al.  The Unique Domain Forms a Fuzzy Intramolecular Complex in Src Family Kinases. , 2017, Structure.

[31]  M. Madan Babu,et al.  A million peptide motifs for the molecular biologist. , 2014, Molecular cell.

[32]  V. Hilser,et al.  The ensemble nature of allostery , 2014, Nature.

[33]  E. Lemke,et al.  Floppy but not sloppy: Interaction mechanism of FG-nucleoporins and nuclear transport receptors , 2017, Seminars in cell & developmental biology.

[34]  M. Lewitzky,et al.  Beyond ‘furballs’ and ‘dumpling soups’ – towards a molecular architecture of signaling complexes and networks , 2012, FEBS letters.

[35]  Hao Wu,et al.  Structural Insights into the Assembly of Large Oligomeric Signalosomes in the Toll-Like Receptor–Interleukin-1 Receptor Superfamily , 2012, Science Signaling.

[36]  M. Rapé,et al.  Multisite dependency of an E3 ligase controls monoubiquitylation-dependent cell fate decisions , 2018, eLife.

[37]  Diana M. Mitrea,et al.  Regulated unfolding of proteins in signaling , 2013, FEBS letters.

[38]  T. Alber,et al.  High-affinity interactions of tumor necrosis factor receptor-associated factors (TRAFs) and CD40 require TRAF trimerization and CD40 multimerization. , 1999, Biochemistry.

[39]  B. Schuler,et al.  Single-molecule spectroscopy reveals polymer effects of disordered proteins in crowded environments , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[40]  A. Panchenko,et al.  Evolutionary, physicochemical, and functional mechanisms of protein homooligomerization. , 2013, Progress in molecular biology and translational science.

[41]  T. Pawson,et al.  Cell Signaling in Space and Time: Where Proteins Come Together and When They’re Apart , 2009, Science.

[42]  Amit Kumar,et al.  Phosphorylation-induced unfolding regulates p19INK4d during the human cell cycle , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[43]  P. Simister,et al.  Self-Organization and Regulation of Intrinsically Disordered Proteins with Folded N-Termini , 2011, PLoS biology.

[44]  C. Macdonald,et al.  The Two-State Prehensile Tail of the Antibacterial Toxin Colicin N , 2017, Biophysical journal.

[45]  D. Morrison,et al.  Unlocking the code of 14-3-3 , 2004, Journal of Cell Science.

[46]  Zhenbao Yu,et al.  Solution structure and backbone dynamics of the functional cytoplasmic subdomain of human ephrin B2, a cell-surface ligand with bidirectional signaling properties. , 2002, Biochemistry.

[47]  C. Dieterich,et al.  Disorder and residual helicity alter p53-Mdm2 binding affinity and signaling in cells. , 2014, Nature chemical biology.

[48]  R. Riek,et al.  Structure and dynamics conspire in the evolution of affinity between intrinsically disordered proteins , 2018, Science Advances.

[49]  Y. Ivarsson,et al.  High-throughput methods for identification of protein-protein interactions involving short linear motifs , 2015, Cell Communication and Signaling.

[50]  L. Kay,et al.  Folding of an intrinsically disordered protein by phosphorylation as a regulatory switch , 2014, Nature.

[51]  Aidan Budd,et al.  Short linear motifs: ubiquitous and functionally diverse protein interaction modules directing cell regulation. , 2014, Chemical reviews.

[52]  H. Dyson,et al.  Intrinsically unstructured proteins: re-assessing the protein structure-function paradigm. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[53]  Philipp Selenko,et al.  Structural Biology outside the box-inside the cell. , 2017, Current opinion in structural biology.

[54]  Geoff Kelly,et al.  Phosphorylation-mediated unfolding of a KH domain regulates KSRP localization via 14-3-3 binding , 2009, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[55]  J. Warwicker,et al.  Effect of phosphorylation on α-helix stability as a function of position , 2002 .

[56]  H. Wu,et al.  Thermodynamic characterization of the interaction between TRAF2 and tumor necrosis factor receptor peptides by isothermal titration calorimetry. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[57]  Ylva Ivarsson,et al.  Affinity and specificity of motif-based protein-protein interactions. , 2019, Current opinion in structural biology.

[58]  P. Tompa The interplay between structure and function in intrinsically unstructured proteins , 2005, FEBS letters.

[59]  Sarah A. Clark,et al.  Multivalent IDP assemblies: Unique properties of LC8‐associated, IDP duplex scaffolds , 2015, FEBS letters.

[60]  A. Dunker,et al.  Orderly order in protein intrinsic disorder distribution: disorder in 3500 proteomes from viruses and the three domains of life , 2012, Journal of biomolecular structure & dynamics.

[61]  G. Pielak,et al.  A cell is more than the sum of its (dilute) parts: A brief history of quinary structure , 2017, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[62]  V. Corces,et al.  Organizational principles of 3D genome architecture , 2018, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[63]  Julie D Forman-Kay,et al.  Modulation of Intrinsically Disordered Protein Function by Post-translational Modifications , 2016, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[64]  Sonia Longhi,et al.  DisProt 7.0: a major update of the database of disordered proteins , 2016, Nucleic Acids Res..

[65]  Norman E. Davey,et al.  The switches.ELM Resource: A Compendium of Conditional Regulatory Interaction Interfaces , 2013, Science Signaling.

[66]  V. Hilser,et al.  Intrinsic disorder as a mechanism to optimize allosteric coupling in proteins , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[67]  Christopher J. Oldfield,et al.  Classification of Intrinsically Disordered Regions and Proteins , 2014, Chemical reviews.

[68]  Norman E. Davey,et al.  Attributes of short linear motifs. , 2012, Molecular bioSystems.

[69]  A. Hausrath,et al.  Conditionally disordered proteins: bringing the environment back into the fold , 2017, Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences.

[70]  Veronika Csizmok,et al.  Complex regulatory mechanisms mediated by the interplay of multiple post-translational modifications. , 2018, Current opinion in structural biology.

[71]  Toby J. Gibson,et al.  The eukaryotic linear motif resource – 2018 update , 2017, Nucleic Acids Res..

[72]  J. Clarke,et al.  Folding and binding pathways of BH3-only proteins are encoded within their intrinsically disordered sequence, not templated by partner proteins , 2018, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[73]  M. Brunori,et al.  How Robust Is the Mechanism of Folding-Upon-Binding for an Intrinsically Disordered Protein? , 2018, Biophysical journal.

[74]  Martin Blackledge,et al.  Characterization of intrinsically disordered proteins and their dynamic complexes: From in vitro to cell-like environments. , 2018, Progress in nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

[75]  Alan M. Moses,et al.  Short linear motifs – ex nihilo evolution of protein regulation , 2015, Cell Communication and Signaling.

[76]  Norman E. Davey,et al.  Building a Regulatory Network with Short Linear Sequence Motifs: Lessons from the Degrons of the Anaphase-Promoting Complex. , 2016, Molecular cell.

[77]  M. Blackledge,et al.  Structural Impact of Tau Phosphorylation at Threonine 231. , 2015, Structure.

[78]  A. Fersht,et al.  Long-Range Modulation of Chain Motions within the Intrinsically Disordered Transactivation Domain of Tumor Suppressor p53 , 2011, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[79]  K. Lindorff-Larsen,et al.  A phosphorylation-motif for tuneable helix stabilisation in intrinsically disordered proteins - Lessons from the sodium proton exchanger 1 (NHE1). , 2017, Cellular signalling.

[80]  P. Tompa,et al.  Structural Disorder in Eukaryotes , 2012, PloS one.

[81]  J. Qin,et al.  Concerted dephosphorylation of the transcription factor NFAT1 induces a conformational switch that regulates transcriptional activity. , 2000, Molecular cell.

[82]  H. Dyson,et al.  Intrinsically unstructured proteins and their functions , 2005, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[83]  Norman E. Davey,et al.  The Mitotic Checkpoint Complex Requires an Evolutionary Conserved Cassette to Bind and Inhibit Active APC/C , 2016, Molecular cell.