Modeling protein loops using a ϕi+1, Ψi dimer database

We present an automated method for modeling backbones of protein loops. The method samples a database of ϕi+1 and Ψi angles constructed from a nonredundant version of the Protein Data Bank (PDB). The dihedral angles ϕi+1 and Ψi completely define the backbone conformation of a dimer when standard bond lengths, bond angles, and a trans planar peptide configuration are used. For the 400 possible dimers resulting from 20 natural amino acids, a list of allowed ϕi+1, Ψi pairs for each dimer is created by pooling all such pairs from the loop segments of each protein in the nonredundant version of the PDB. Starting from the N‐terminus of the loop sequence, conformations are generated by assigning randomly selected pairs of ϕi+1, Ψi for each dimer from the respective pool using standard bond lengths, bond angles, and a trans peptide configuration. We use this database to simulate protein loops of lengths varying from 5 to 11 amino acids in five proteins of known three‐dimensional structures. Typically, 10,000–50,000 models are simulated for each protein loop and are evaluated for stereochemical consistency. Depending on the length and sequence of a given loop, 50–80% of the models generated have no stereochemical strain in the backbone atoms. We demonstrate that, when simulated loops are extended to include flanking residues from homologous segments, only very few loops from an ensemble of sterically allowed conformations orient the flanking segments consistent with the protein topology. The presence of near‐native backbone conformations for loops from five different proteins suggests the completeness of the dimeric database for use in modeling loops of homologous proteins. Here, we take advantage of this observation to design a method that filters near‐native loop conformations from an ensemble of sterically allowed conformations. We demonstrate that our method eliminates the need for a loop‐closure algorithm and hence allows for the use of topological constraints of the homologous proteins or disulfide constraints to filter near‐native loop conformations.

[1]  G. N. Ramachandran,et al.  Stereochemistry of polypeptide chain configurations. , 1963, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  N. Go,et al.  Ring Closure and Local Conformational Deformations of Chain Molecules , 1970 .

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

[4]  J. Greer Comparative model-building of the mammalian serine proteases. , 1981, Journal of molecular biology.

[5]  Multistep modeling of protein structure: application to bungarotoxin. , 2009, International journal of quantum chemistry. Quantum biology symposium : proceedings of the International Symposium on Quantum Biology and Quantum Pharmacology. International Symposium on Quantum Biology and Quantum Pharmacology.

[6]  L M Amzel,et al.  Calculating three‐dimensional changes in protein structure due to amino‐acid substitutions: The variable region of immunoglobulins , 1986, Proteins.

[7]  J. Moult,et al.  An algorithm for determining the conformation of polypeptide segments in proteins by systematic search , 1986, Proteins.

[8]  C. Levinthal,et al.  Predicting antibody hypervariable loop conformations II: Minimization and molecular dynamics studies of MCPC603 from many randomly generated loop conformations , 1986, Proteins.

[9]  C. Levinthal,et al.  Predicting antibody hypervariable loop conformation. I. Ensembles of random conformations for ringlike structures , 1987, Biopolymers.

[10]  M. Karplus,et al.  Prediction of the folding of short polypeptide segments by uniform conformational sampling , 1987, Biopolymers.

[11]  Jiří Novotný,et al.  Structure of antibody hypervariable loops reproduced by a conformational search algorithm , 1988, Nature.

[12]  J. E. Glynn,et al.  Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing , 1989 .

[13]  N Srinivasan,et al.  Stereochemical modeling of disulfide bridges. Criteria for introduction into proteins by site-directed mutagenesis. , 1989, Protein engineering.

[14]  A C Martin,et al.  Modeling antibody hypervariable loops: a combined algorithm. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  S. Wodak,et al.  Modelling the polypeptide backbone with 'spare parts' from known protein structures. , 1989, Protein engineering.

[16]  A. Lesk,et al.  Conformations of immunoglobulin hypervariable regions , 1989, Nature.

[17]  Timothy F. Havel,et al.  A new method for building protein conformations from sequence alignments with homologues of known structure. , 1991, Journal of molecular biology.

[18]  A. Lesk,et al.  Common features of the conformations of antigen‐binding loops in immunoglobulins and application to modeling loop conformations , 1992, Proteins.

[19]  S. Sudarsanam,et al.  An automated method for modeling proteins on known templates using distance geometry , 1993, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[20]  R. Sowdhamini,et al.  Modelling multiple disulphide loop containing polypeptides by random conformation generation. The test cases of alpha-conotoxin GI and endothelin I. , 1993, Protein engineering.

[21]  J. Garnier,et al.  Modeling of protein loops by simulated annealing , 1993, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[22]  K. Fidelis,et al.  Comparison of systematic search and database methods for constructing segments of protein structure. , 1994, Protein engineering.

[23]  S. Sudarsanam,et al.  Homology modeling of divergent proteins. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[24]  A C May,et al.  Improved genetic algorithm-based protein structure comparisons: pairwise and multiple superpositions. , 1995, Protein engineering.