Shaping Up the Protein Folding Funnel by Local Interaction: Lesson from a Structure Prediction Study

Overview

Journal Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A

Specialty Science

Date 2006 Feb 21

PMID 16488978

Citations 25

Authors

George Chikenji

Yoshimi Fujitsuka

Shoji Takada

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Predicting protein tertiary structure by folding-like simulations is one of the most stringent tests of how much we understand the principle of protein folding. Currently, the most successful method for folding-based structure prediction is the fragment assembly (FA) method. Here, we address why the FA method is so successful and its lesson for the folding problem. To do so, using the FA method, we designed a structure prediction test of "chimera proteins." In the chimera proteins, local structural preference is specific to the target sequences, whereas nonlocal interactions are only sequence-independent compaction forces. We find that these chimera proteins can find the native folds of the intact sequences with high probability indicating dominant roles of the local interactions. We further explore roles of local structural preference by exact calculation of the HP lattice model of proteins. From these results, we suggest principles of protein folding: For small proteins, compact structures that are fully compatible with local structural preference are few, one of which is the native fold. These local biases shape up the funnel-like energy landscape.

Citing Articles

Protein superfolds are characterised as frustration-free topologies: A case study of pure parallel β-sheet topologies.

Murata H, Toko K, Chikenji G PLoS Comput Biol. 2024; 20(8):e1012282.

PMID: 39110764 PMC: 11333010. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012282.

A Perspective on Protein Structure Prediction Using Quantum Computers.

Doga H, Raubenolt B, Cumbo F, Joshi J, DiFilippo F, Qin J J Chem Theory Comput. 2024; 20(9):3359-3378.

PMID: 38703105 PMC: 11099973. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.4c00067.

A Method for Assessing the Robustness of Protein Structures by Randomizing Packing Interactions.

Yadahalli S, Jayanthi L, Gosavi S Front Mol Biosci. 2022; 9:849272.

PMID: 35832734 PMC: 9271847. DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2022.849272.

Robust folding of a de novo designed ideal protein even with most of the core mutated to valine.

Koga R, Yamamoto M, Kosugi T, Kobayashi N, Sugiki T, Fujiwara T Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020; 117(49):31149-31156.

PMID: 33229587 PMC: 7739874. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2002120117.

Consistency principle for protein design.

Koga R, Koga N Biophys Physicobiol. 2020; 16:304-309.

PMID: 31984185 PMC: 6975900. DOI: 10.2142/biophysico.16.0_304.

References

Onuchic J, Wolynes P . Theory of protein folding. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2004; 14(1):70-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbi.2004.01.009. View

Rohl C, Strauss C, Misura K, Baker D . Protein structure prediction using Rosetta. Methods Enzymol. 2004; 383:66-93. DOI: 10.1016/S0076-6879(04)83004-0. View

Shortle D, Ackerman M . Persistence of native-like topology in a denatured protein in 8 M urea. Science. 2001; 293(5529):487-9. DOI: 10.1126/science.1060438. View

Clementi C, Nymeyer H, Onuchic J . Topological and energetic factors: what determines the structural details of the transition state ensemble and "en-route" intermediates for protein folding? An investigation for small globular proteins. J Mol Biol. 2000; 298(5):937-53. DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.2000.3693. View

Honda S, Yamasaki K, Sawada Y, Morii H . 10 residue folded peptide designed by segment statistics. Structure. 2004; 12(8):1507-18. DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2004.05.022. View

Levitt M . Accurate modeling of protein conformation by automatic segment matching. J Mol Biol. 1992; 226(2):507-33. DOI: 10.1016/0022-2836(92)90964-l. View

Zhou X, Alber F, Folkers G, Gonnet G, Chelvanayagam G . An analysis of the helix-to-strand transition between peptides with identical sequence. Proteins. 2000; 41(2):248-56. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0134(20001101)41:2<248::aid-prot90>3.0.co;2-j. View

Wolynes P . As simple as can be?. Nat Struct Biol. 1997; 4(11):871-4. DOI: 10.1038/nsb1197-871. View

Jin W, Kambara O, Sasakawa H, Tamura A, Takada S . De novo design of foldable proteins with smooth folding funnel: automated negative design and experimental verification. Structure. 2003; 11(5):581-90. DOI: 10.1016/s0969-2126(03)00075-3. View

10.

Smith L, Fiebig K, Schwalbe H, Dobson C . The concept of a random coil. Residual structure in peptides and denatured proteins. Fold Des. 1996; 1(5):R95-106. DOI: 10.1016/S1359-0278(96)00046-6. View

11.

Wang Y, Shortle D . Residual helical and turn structure in the denatured state of staphylococcal nuclease: analysis of peptide fragments. Fold Des. 1997; 2(2):93-100. DOI: 10.1016/S1359-0278(97)00013-8. View

12.

Altschul S, Madden T, Schaffer A, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W . Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997; 25(17):3389-402. PMC: 146917. DOI: 10.1093/nar/25.17.3389. View

13.

Galzitskaya O, Finkelstein A . A theoretical search for folding/unfolding nuclei in three-dimensional protein structures. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999; 96(20):11299-304. PMC: 18028. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.96.20.11299. View

14.

Higo J, Ito N, Kuroda M, Ono S, Nakajima N, Nakamura H . Energy landscape of a peptide consisting of alpha-helix, 3(10)-helix, beta-turn, beta-hairpin, and other disordered conformations. Protein Sci. 2001; 10(6):1160-71. PMC: 2374007. DOI: 10.1110/ps.44901. View

15.

Nakajima N, Higo J, Kidera A, Nakamura H . Free energy landscapes of peptides by enhanced conformational sampling. J Mol Biol. 2000; 296(1):197-216. DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.1999.3440. View

16.

Alm E, Baker D . Prediction of protein-folding mechanisms from free-energy landscapes derived from native structures. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999; 96(20):11305-10. PMC: 18029. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.96.20.11305. View

17.

Li H, Helling R, Tang C, Wingreen N . Emergence of preferred structures in a simple model of protein folding. Science. 1996; 273(5275):666-9. DOI: 10.1126/science.273.5275.666. View

18.

Hammarstrom P, Carlsson U . Is the unfolded state the Rosetta Stone of the protein folding problem?. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2000; 276(2):393-8. DOI: 10.1006/bbrc.2000.3360. View

19.

Dill K . Dominant forces in protein folding. Biochemistry. 1990; 29(31):7133-55. DOI: 10.1021/bi00483a001. View

20.

Go N . Theoretical studies of protein folding. Annu Rev Biophys Bioeng. 1983; 12:183-210. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.bb.12.060183.001151. View