» Articles » PMID: 31303974

Interfaces Between Alpha-helical Integral Membrane Proteins: Characterization, Prediction, and Docking

Overview
Specialty Biotechnology
Date 2019 Jul 16
PMID 31303974
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Protein-protein interaction (PPI) is an essential mechanism by which proteins perform their biological functions. For globular proteins, the molecular characteristics of such interactions have been well analyzed, and many computational tools are available for predicting PPI sites and constructing structural models of the complex. In contrast, little is known about the molecular features of the interaction between integral membrane proteins (IMPs) and few methods exist for constructing structural models of their complexes. Here, we analyze the interfaces from a non-redundant set of complexes of α-helical IMPs whose structures have been determined to a high resolution. We find that the interface is not significantly different from the rest of the surface in terms of average hydrophobicity. However, the interface is significantly better conserved and, on average, inter-subunit contacting residue pairs correlate more strongly than non-contacting pairs, especially in obligate complexes. We also develop a neural network-based method, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75 and a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.70, for predicting interface residues and their weighted contact numbers (WCNs). We further show that predicted interface residues and their WCNs can be used as restraints to reconstruct the structure α-helical IMP dimers through docking for fourteen out of a benchmark set of sixteen complexes. The RMSD100 values of the best-docked ligand subunit to its native structure are <2.5 Å for these fourteen cases. The structural analysis conducted in this work provides molecular details about the interface between α-helical IMPs and the WCN restraints represent an efficient means to score α-helical IMP docking candidates.

Citing Articles

The 3D mutational constraint on amino acid sites in the human proteome.

Li B, Roden D, Capra J Nat Commun. 2022; 13(1):3273.

PMID: 35672414 PMC: 9174330. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-30936-x.


Getting to know each other: PPIMem, a novel approach for predicting transmembrane protein-protein complexes.

Khazen G, Gyulkhandanian A, Issa T, Maroun R Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2021; 19:5184-5197.

PMID: 34630938 PMC: 8476896. DOI: 10.1016/j.csbj.2021.09.013.


MENSAdb: a thorough structural analysis of membrane protein dimers.

Matos-Filipe P, Preto A, Koukos P, Mourao J, Bonvin A, Moreira I Database (Oxford). 2021; 2021.

PMID: 33822911 PMC: 8023553. DOI: 10.1093/database/baab013.

References
1.
Eicher T, Cha H, Seeger M, Brandstatter L, El-Delik J, Bohnert J . Transport of drugs by the multidrug transporter AcrB involves an access and a deep binding pocket that are separated by a switch-loop. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012; 109(15):5687-92. PMC: 3326505. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1114944109. View

2.
Jones S, Thornton J . Principles of protein-protein interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996; 93(1):13-20. PMC: 40170. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.93.1.13. View

3.
Hansen S, Tao X, MacKinnon R . Structural basis of PIP2 activation of the classical inward rectifier K+ channel Kir2.2. Nature. 2011; 477(7365):495-8. PMC: 3324908. DOI: 10.1038/nature10370. View

4.
Murzin A, Brenner S, Hubbard T, Chothia C . SCOP: a structural classification of proteins database for the investigation of sequences and structures. J Mol Biol. 1995; 247(4):536-40. DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.1995.0159. View

5.
Pupko T, Bell R, Mayrose I, Glaser F, Ben-Tal N . Rate4Site: an algorithmic tool for the identification of functional regions in proteins by surface mapping of evolutionary determinants within their homologues. Bioinformatics. 2002; 18 Suppl 1:S71-7. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/18.suppl_1.s71. View