Discrimination of native loop conformations in membrane proteins: Decoy library design and evaluation of effective energy scoring functions

The recent determination of crystal structures for several important membrane proteins opens the way for comparative modeling of their membrane‐spanning regions. However, the ability to predict correctly the structures of loop regions, which may be critical, for example, in ligand binding, remains a considerable challenge. To meet this challenge, accurate scoring methods have to discriminate between candidate conformations of an unknown loop structure. Some success in loop prediction has been reported for globular proteins; however, the proximity of membrane protein loops to the lipid bilayer casts doubt on the applicability of the same scoring methods to this problem. In this work, we develop “decoy libraries” of non‐native folds generated, using the structures of two membrane proteins, with molecular dynamics and Monte Carlo techniques over a range of temperatures. We introduce a new approach for decoy library generation by constructing a flat distribution of conformations covering a wide range of Cα–root‐mean‐square deviation (RMSD) from the native structure; this removes possible bias in subsequent scoring stages. We then score these decoy conformations with effective energy functions, using increasingly more cpu‐intensive implicit solvent models, including (1) simple Coulombic electrostatics with constant or distance‐dependent dielectrics; (2) atomic solvation parameters; (3) the effective energy function (EEF1) of Lazaridis and Karplus; (4) generalized Born/Analytical Continuum Solvent; and (5) finite‐difference Poisson–Boltzmann energy functions. We show that distinction of native‐like membrane protein loops may be achieved using effective energies with the assumption of a homogenous environment; thus, the absence of the adjacent lipid bilayer does not affect the scoring ability. In particular, the Analytical Continuum Solvent and finite‐difference Poisson–Boltzmann energy functions are seen to be the most powerful scoring functions. Interestingly, the use of the uncharged states of ionizable sidechains is shown to aid prediction, particularly for the simplest energy functions. Proteins 2003;52:492–509. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  R. Friesner,et al.  Generalized Born Model Based on a Surface Integral Formulation , 1998 .

[2]  Gregory D. Hawkins,et al.  Pairwise solute descreening of solute charges from a dielectric medium , 1995 .

[3]  H. Meirovitch,et al.  Optimization of solvation models for predicting the structure of surface loops in proteins , 2001, Proteins.

[4]  R. Dutzler,et al.  X-ray structure of a ClC chloride channel at 3.0 Å reveals the molecular basis of anion selectivity , 2002, Nature.

[5]  P. Carloni,et al.  Molecular modeling of ion channels: structural predictions. , 2003, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[6]  W. C. Still,et al.  The GB/SA Continuum Model for Solvation. A Fast Analytical Method for the Calculation of Approximate Born Radii , 1997 .

[7]  M. Karplus,et al.  Proteins: A Theoretical Perspective of Dynamics, Structure, and Thermodynamics , 1988 .

[8]  M. Karplus,et al.  Solution conformations and thermodynamics of structured peptides: molecular dynamics simulation with an implicit solvation model. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  A. Sali,et al.  Evolution and physics in comparative protein structure modeling. , 2002, Accounts of chemical research.

[10]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[11]  Fabrice Leclerc,et al.  Effective atom volumes for implicit solvent models: comparison between Voronoi volumes and minimum fluctuation volumes , 2001, J. Comput. Chem..

[12]  A. Lesk,et al.  The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins. , 1986, The EMBO journal.

[13]  B. Chait,et al.  The structure of the potassium channel: molecular basis of K+ conduction and selectivity. , 1998, Science.

[14]  T. Woolf,et al.  Dipole lattice membrane model for protein calculations , 2000, Proteins.

[15]  M. Nakasako,et al.  Crystal structure of the calcium pump of sarcoplasmic reticulum at 2.6 Å resolution , 2000, Nature.

[16]  E S Huang,et al.  Factors affecting the ability of energy functions to discriminate correct from incorrect folds. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  W. Im,et al.  Ions and counterions in a biological channel: a molecular dynamics simulation of OmpF porin from Escherichia coli in an explicit membrane with 1 M KCl aqueous salt solution. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[18]  S Vajda,et al.  Discrimination of near‐native protein structures from misfolded models by empirical free energy functions , 2000, Proteins.

[19]  M. Karplus,et al.  Effective energy functions for protein structure prediction. , 2000, Current opinion in structural biology.

[20]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  Atomic solvation parameters applied to molecular dynamics of proteins in solution , 1992, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[21]  Harel Weinstein,et al.  Three-dimensional representations of G protein-coupled receptor structures and mechanisms. , 2002, Methods in enzymology.

[22]  B. Dominy,et al.  Development of a generalized Born model parameterization for proteins and nucleic acids , 1999 .

[23]  Charles L. Brooks,et al.  Identifying native‐like protein structures using physics‐based potentials , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[24]  A. H. Juffer,et al.  Comparison of atomic solvation parametric sets: Applicability and limitations in protein folding and binding , 1995, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[25]  D. Beglov,et al.  Atomic Radii for Continuum Electrostatics Calculations Based on Molecular Dynamics Free Energy Simulations , 1997 .

[26]  B. Honig,et al.  Evaluation of the conformational free energies of loops in proteins , 1994, Proteins.

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

[28]  L. Kelley,et al.  An automated approach for clustering an ensemble of NMR-derived protein structures into conformationally related subfamilies. , 1996, Protein engineering.

[29]  M. Karplus,et al.  Discrimination of the native from misfolded protein models with an energy function including implicit solvation. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[30]  B. Honig,et al.  Free energy determinants of tertiary structure and the evaluation of protein models , 2000, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[31]  Pavel Hobza,et al.  2 Theoretical studies of hydrogen bonding , 2004 .

[32]  M. Levitt,et al.  Using a hydrophobic contact potential to evaluate native and near-native folds generated by molecular dynamics simulations. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[33]  A Kolinski,et al.  Correlation between knowledge‐based and detailed atomic potentials: Application to the unfolding of the GCN4 leucine zipper , 1999, Proteins.

[34]  R Leplae,et al.  Analysis and assessment of comparative modeling predictions in CASP4 , 2001, Proteins.

[35]  R. A. Scott,et al.  Discriminating compact nonnative structures from the native structure of globular proteins. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[36]  A. D. McLachlan,et al.  Solvation energy in protein folding and binding , 1986, Nature.

[37]  Michael Feig,et al.  Evaluating CASP4 predictions with physical energy functions , 2002, Proteins.

[38]  P. Beroza,et al.  Application of a pairwise generalized Born model to proteins and nucleic acids: inclusion of salt effects , 1999 .

[39]  K Tappura.  Influence of rotational energy barriers to the conformational search of protein loops in molecular dynamics and ranking the conformations , 2001, Proteins.

[40]  A. Sali,et al.  Modeling of loops in protein structures , 2000, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[41]  Velin Z. Spassov,et al.  Introducing an Implicit Membrane in Generalized Born/Solvent Accessibility Continuum Solvent Models , 2002 .

[42]  Richard A. Friesner,et al.  Solvation Free Energies of Peptides: Comparison of Approximate Continuum Solvation Models with Accurate Solution of the Poisson−Boltzmann Equation , 1997 .

[43]  Andrej Sali,et al.  Comparative Protein Structure Modeling in Genomics , 1999 .

[44]  J. Ballesteros,et al.  Structural mimicry in G protein-coupled receptors: implications of the high-resolution structure of rhodopsin for structure-function analysis of rhodopsin-like receptors. , 2001, Molecular pharmacology.

[45]  K. Palczewski,et al.  Crystal Structure of Rhodopsin: A G‐Protein‐Coupled Receptor , 2002, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[46]  B Rost,et al.  Bridging the protein sequence-structure gap by structure predictions. , 1996, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[47]  M. Karplus,et al.  A Comprehensive Analytical Treatment of Continuum Electrostatics , 1996 .

[48]  Hui Zhang,et al.  A new computational model for protein folding based on atomic solvation , 1995, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[49]  S. Hassan,et al.  A critical analysis of continuum electrostatics: The screened Coulomb potential–implicit solvent model and the study of the alanine dipeptide and discrimination of misfolded structures of proteins , 2002, Proteins.

[50]  Thomas Simonson,et al.  Implicit solvent models: Combining an analytical formulation of continuum electrostatics with simple models of the hydrophobic effect , 1999, J. Comput. Chem..

[51]  R Samudrala,et al.  Decoys ‘R’ Us: A database of incorrect conformations to improve protein structure prediction , 2000, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[53]  Cinque S. Soto,et al.  Evaluating conformational free energies: The colony energy and its application to the problem of loop prediction , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[54]  D. Schomburg,et al.  Positioning of anchor groups in protein loop prediction: The importance of solvent accessibility and secondary structure elements , 2002, Proteins.

[55]  J. Baldwin.  The probable arrangement of the helices in G protein‐coupled receptors. , 1993, The EMBO journal.

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

[57]  M. Karplus,et al.  PDB-based protein loop prediction: parameters for selection and methods for optimization. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[58]  D. Case,et al.  Generalized born models of macromolecular solvation effects. , 2000, Annual review of physical chemistry.

[59]  S Vajda,et al.  Selecting near‐native conformations in homology modeling: The role of molecular mechanics and solvation terms , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[60]  R A Friesner,et al.  Prediction of loop geometries using a generalized born model of solvation effects , 1999, Proteins.

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

[62]  C. Higgins,et al.  ABC transporters: physiology, structure and mechanism--an overview. , 2001, Research in microbiology.