Computational Methods for Predicting Protein-Protein Interactions

Protein-protein interactions perform an integral role in a diverse range of cellular and extracellular processes. These interactions provide a means for cells to communicate both internally and externally; they facilitate the anabolic and catabolic reactions of metabolism; they are important for transcriptional and translational control; and they are also important in maintaining cell structure. These examples are by no means exhaustive, however. Understanding these protein-protein interactions is a very important area of research in light of their global implications. Moreover, the knowledge of how to predict these interactions would be extremely useful and could be exploited to block these interactions as a therapeutic intervention, for example, and also to implicate novel functional interactions. However, prediction of these interactions is by no means trivial, as many layers of complexity must be considered, but without any definitive rules that can be applied. This chapter highlights some of these complexities, describes available databases and repositories of protein-protein interactions, and discusses some of the main methods that are currently used to predict these interactions.

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

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

[3]  M. L. Connolly.  Analytical molecular surface calculation , 1983 .

[4]  C. Chothia,et al.  The structure of protein-protein recognition sites. , 1990, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[5]  M. Lawrence,et al.  Shape complementarity at protein/protein interfaces. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  B. Tidor,et al.  Do salt bridges stabilize proteins? A continuum electrostatic analysis , 1994, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[7]  H O Villar,et al.  Amino acid preferences at protein binding sites , 1994, FEBS letters.

[8]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Shape complementarity at protein–protein interfaces , 1994, Biopolymers.

[9]  J. Thornton,et al.  Satisfying hydrogen bonding potential in proteins. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  P. Argos,et al.  Cavities and packing at protein interfaces , 1994, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[11]  T. Clackson,et al.  A hot spot of binding energy in a hormone-receptor interface , 1995, Science.

[12]  S. Anderson,et al.  Water molecules participate in proteinase‐inhibitor interactions: Crystal structures of Leu18, Ala18, and Gly18 variants of turkey ovomucoid inhibitor third domain complexed with Streptomyces griseus proteinase B , 1995, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[13]  R. Laskowski.  SURFNET: a program for visualizing molecular surfaces, cavities, and intermolecular interactions. , 1995, Journal of molecular graphics.

[14]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Molecular surface complementarity at protein-protein interfaces: the critical role played by surface normals at well placed, sparse, points in docking. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  Francis Rodier,et al.  Protein–protein interaction at crystal contacts , 1995, Proteins.

[16]  S Vajda,et al.  Flexible docking and design. , 1995, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[17]  James M. Anderson,et al.  Protein–protein interactions: PDZ domain networks , 1996, Current Biology.

[18]  S. Jones,et al.  Principles of protein-protein interactions. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  F. Cohen,et al.  An evolutionary trace method defines binding surfaces common to protein families. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[20]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Hydrogen bonds and salt bridges across protein-protein interfaces. , 1997, Protein engineering.

[21]  Ruth Nussinov,et al.  Structural motifs at protein‐protein interfaces: Protein cores versus two‐state and three‐state model complexes , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[22]  A. Valencia,et al.  Correlated mutations contain information about protein-protein interaction. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[23]  J. Janin.  The kinetics of protein‐protein recognition , 1997, Proteins.

[24]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Studies of protein‐protein interfaces: A statistical analysis of the hydrophobic effect , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[26]  M. Sternberg,et al.  Modelling protein docking using shape complementarity, electrostatics and biochemical information. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  A. McCoy,et al.  Electrostatic complementarity at protein/protein interfaces. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[28]  D. Covell,et al.  Analysis of protein-protein interactions and the effects of amino acid mutations on their energetics. The importance of water molecules in the binding epitope. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[29]  R Nussinov,et al.  Hydrophobic folding units at protein‐protein interfaces: Implications to protein folding and to protein‐protein association , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[31]  A J Olson,et al.  Morphology of protein-protein interfaces. , 1998, Structure.

[32]  A. Bogan,et al.  Anatomy of hot spots in protein interfaces. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[33]  A. Fersht,et al.  Structural response to mutation at a protein-protein interface. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[34]  R M Jackson,et al.  Comparison of protein–protein interactions in serine protease‐inhibitor and antibody‐antigen complexes: Implications for the protein docking problem , 2008, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[35]  S. Fischer,et al.  Binding of buried structural water increases the flexibility of proteins. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[36]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  Detecting protein function and protein-protein interactions from genome sequences. , 1999, Science.

[37]  J. Janin,et al.  Wet and dry interfaces: the role of solvent in protein-protein and protein-DNA recognition. , 1999, Structure.

[38]  Robert Preissner,et al.  Homonyms and synonyms in the Dictionary of Interfaces in Proteins (DIP) , 1999, Bioinform..

[39]  S Vajda,et al.  Free energy landscapes of encounter complexes in protein-protein association. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[40]  C. Chothia,et al.  The atomic structure of protein-protein recognition sites. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[41]  I. Vakser,et al.  A systematic study of low-resolution recognition in protein--protein complexes. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[42]  G. Blatch,et al.  The tetratricopeptide repeat: a structural motif mediating protein-protein interactions. , 1999, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

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

[44]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Folding funnels, binding funnels, and protein function , 1999, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[45]  M. Sternberg,et al.  An analysis of conformational changes on protein-protein association: implications for predictive docking. , 1999, Protein engineering.

[46]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Examination of shape complementarity in docking of Unbound proteins , 1999, Proteins.

[47]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Conservation of polar residues as hot spots at protein interfaces , 2000, Proteins.

[48]  James R. Knight,et al.  A comprehensive analysis of protein–protein interactions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2000, Nature.

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

[50]  G. Church,et al.  Predicting ligand-binding function in families of bacterial receptors. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[51]  J. Mackay,et al.  A class of zinc fingers involved in protein-protein interactions biophysical characterization of CCHC fingers from fog and U-shaped. , 2000, European journal of biochemistry.

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

[53]  S. Jones,et al.  Protein domain interfaces: characterization and comparison with oligomeric protein interfaces. , 2000, Protein engineering.

[54]  S. Gee,et al.  Single-amino acid substitutions alter the specificity and affinity of PDZ domains for their ligands. , 2000, Biochemistry.

[55]  Ioannis Xenarios,et al.  DIP: the Database of Interacting Proteins , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[56]  R. Mariuzza,et al.  Luxury accommodations: the expanding role of structural plasticity in protein-protein interactions. , 2000, Structure.

[57]  A. Valencia,et al.  Similarity of phylogenetic trees as indicator of protein-protein interaction. , 2001, Protein engineering.

[58]  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.

[59]  E. Sprinzak,et al.  Correlated sequence-signatures as markers of protein-protein interaction. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[60]  J M Thornton,et al.  Conservation helps to identify biologically relevant crystal contacts. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[61]  P Fariselli,et al.  Prediction of contact maps with neural networks and correlated mutations. , 2001, Protein engineering.

[62]  Timothy B. Stockwell,et al.  The Sequence of the Human Genome , 2001, Science.

[63]  L. Wyns,et al.  Degenerate interfaces in antigen-antibody complexes. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[64]  Bruce Tidor,et al.  Barstar is electrostatically optimized for tight binding to barnase , 2001, Nature Structural Biology.

[65]  Gary D Bader,et al.  BIND--The Biomolecular Interaction Network Database. , 2001, Nucleic acids research.

[66]  J. Thornton,et al.  Protein–protein interfaces: Analysis of amino acid conservation in homodimers , 2001, Proteins.

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

[68]  S. Noskov,et al.  Free energy decomposition of protein-protein interactions. , 2001, Biophysical journal.

[69]  A. Elcock.  Prediction of functionally important residues based solely on the computed energetics of protein structure. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[70]  Huan‐Xiang Zhou,et al.  Prediction of protein interaction sites from sequence profile and residue neighbor list , 2001, Proteins.

[71]  L. T. Ten Eyck,et al.  Protein docking using continuum electrostatics and geometric fit. , 2001, Protein engineering.

[72]  Jae Young Lee,et al.  Crystal structure and functional analysis of the SurE protein identify a novel phosphatase family , 2001, Nature Structural Biology.

[73]  Wei Zu Chen,et al.  A fast empirical approach to binding free energy calculations based on protein interface information. , 2002, Protein engineering.

[74]  D. Baker,et al.  A simple physical model for binding energy hot spots in protein–protein complexes , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[75]  J. Janin,et al.  Structural basis of macromolecular recognition. , 2002, Advances in protein chemistry.

[76]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  Docking unbound proteins using shape complementarity, desolvation, and electrostatics , 2002, Proteins.

[77]  Jia huai Wang,et al.  Protein recognition by cell surface receptors: physiological receptors versus virus interactions. , 2002, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[78]  L. Lai,et al.  CH···O Hydrogen Bonds at Protein-Protein Interfaces* 210 , 2002, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[79]  W. Delano.  Unraveling hot spots in binding interfaces: progress and challenges. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[80]  A. Valencia,et al.  Prediction of protein--protein interaction sites in heterocomplexes with neural networks. , 2002, European journal of biochemistry.

[81]  S. Teichmann.  The constraints protein-protein interactions place on sequence divergence. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[82]  W. S. Valdar,et al.  Scoring residue conservation , 2002, Proteins.

[83]  Ruth Nussinov,et al.  Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions , 2002, Proteins.

[84]  J. Janin,et al.  Dissecting protein–protein recognition sites , 2002, Proteins.

[85]  Chern-Sing Goh,et al.  Co-evolutionary analysis reveals insights into protein-protein interactions. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[86]  Barry Honig,et al.  On the role of electrostatic interactions in the design of protein-protein interfaces. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[87]  L. Hood,et al.  The digital code of DNA , 2003, Nature.

[88]  J. Thornton,et al.  Structural characterisation and functional significance of transient protein-protein interactions. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[89]  Martin Vingron,et al.  IntAct: an open source molecular interaction database , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[90]  Gabriele Ausiello,et al.  MINT: the Molecular INTeraction database , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..