A geometric construction determines all permissible strand arrangements of sandwich proteins.

For a large class of proteins called sandwich-like proteins (SPs), the secondary structures consist of two beta-sheets packed face-to-face, with each beta-sheet consisting typically of three to five beta-strands. An important step in the prediction of the three-dimensional structure of a SP is the prediction of its supersecondary structure, namely the prediction of the arrangement of the beta-strands in the two beta-sheets. Recently, significant progress in this direction was made, where it was shown that 91% of observed SPs form what we here call "canonical motifs." Here, we show that all canonical motifs can be constructed in a simple manner that is based on thermodynamic considerations and uses certain geometric structures. The number of these structures is much smaller than the number of possible strand arrangements. For instance, whereas for SPs consisting of six strands there exist a priori 900 possible strand arrangements, there exist only five geometric structures. Furthermore, the few motifs that are noncanonial can be constructed from canonical motifs by a simple procedure.

[1]  B. Rost.  Review: protein secondary structure prediction continues to rise. , 2001, Journal of structural biology.

[2]  M. Sternberg,et al.  On the conformation of proteins: The handedness of the β-strand-α-helix-β-strand unit , 1976 .

[3]  A. Fersht.  Structure and mechanism in protein science , 1998 .

[4]  William R. Taylor,et al.  A ‘periodic table’ for protein structures , 2002, Nature.

[5]  D Xu,et al.  Prediction of protein supersecondary structures based on the artificial neural network method. , 1997, Protein engineering.

[6]  O. Lund,et al.  Prediction of protein secondary structure at 80% accuracy , 2000, Proteins.

[7]  K Yue,et al.  Constraint-based assembly of tertiary protein structures from secondary structure elements. , 2000, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[8]  J. Richardson,et al.  β-Sheet topology and the relatedness of proteins , 1977, Nature.

[9]  P. Wittung-Stafshede,et al.  Role of structural determinants in folding of the sandwich-like protein Pseudomonas aeruginosa azurin. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Y. Chirgadze,et al.  Deduction and systematic classification of spatial motifs of the antiparallel β structure in globular proteins , 1987 .

[11]  G J Barton,et al.  Application of multiple sequence alignment profiles to improve protein secondary structure prediction , 2000, Proteins.

[12]  A G Murzin,et al.  SCOP: a structural classification of proteins database for the investigation of sequences and structures. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[13]  Lorna J. Smith,et al.  Understanding protein folding via free-energy surfaces from theory and experiment. , 2000, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[14]  S H Kim,et al.  The anatomy of protein beta-sheet topology. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  C. Chothia.  Principles that determine the structure of proteins. , 1984, Annual review of biochemistry.

[16]  I M Gelfand,et al.  Prediction of the structural motifs of sandwich proteins. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  Flavio Seno,et al.  Assembly of protein tertiary structures from secondary structures using optimized potentials , 2003, Proteins.

[18]  J M Chandonia,et al.  New methods for accurate prediction of protein secondary structure , 1999, Proteins.

[19]  A. Efimov.  A structural tree for proteins containing S‐like β‐sheets , 1998 .

[20]  C. Chothia,et al.  Protein folds in the all-beta and all-alpha classes. , 1997, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.