Using flexible loop mimetics to extend Φ-value analysis to secondary structure interactions

The positions of transition states along reaction coordinates ( r ‡ ) for simple chemical reactions are often estimated from Leffler α values, the slope of plots of Δ G ‡ (activation energy) versus Δ G 0 (equilibrium free energy) for a series of structural variants. Protein folding is more complex than simple chemical reactions and has a multitude of reaction coordinates. Φ-Value analysis measures degree of structure formation at individual residues in folding transition states from the ratio ΔΔ G ‡ /ΔΔ G 0 for mutations. α values are now being used to analyze protein folding by lumping series of Φ values into single plots. But, there are discrepancies in the values of α for folding with more classical measures of the extent of structure formation, which I rationalize here. I show for chemical reactions with just a single reaction coordinate that α = r ‡ only for limiting cases, such as for reactants and products being in parabolic energy wells of identical curvature. Otherwise, α can differ radically from r ‡ , with α being determined just by the angles of intersection of reactant and product energy surfaces. Φ is an index of the progress of a local, energy-based reaction coordinate at the global transition state: Φ <0.5 corresponds to <50% progress of the local coordinate at the global transition state and Φ >0.5 means >50%. Protein Leffler plots can force different local indexes to a single fit and give skewed underestimates of the extent of global structure formation in transition states that differ from other measures of structure formation.

Section: ⌽ As An Index Of Local Reaction Coordinatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship of Leffler (Brønsted) α values and protein folding Φ values to position of transition-state structures on reaction coordinates

Fersht

2004

“…WW domains have been used extensively in experimental and theoretical folding studies (1)(2)(3)(4)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19). Traditional side-chain and amide-to-ester mutagenesis of Pin WW in conjunction with laser temperature-jump (T-jump) relaxation studies revealed that the folding rate was limited by nucleation at the loop 1 substructure (1)(2)(3)16), similar to the situation observed in SH3 domains (20,21).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Structure–function–folding relationship in a WW domain

Jäger

Zhang

Bieschke

et al. 2006

211

308

Protein folding barriers result from a combination of factors including unavoidable energetic frustration from nonnative interactions, natural variation and selection of the amino acid sequence for function, and͞or selection pressure against aggregation. The rate-limiting step for human Pin1 WW domain folding is the formation of the loop 1 substructure. The native conformation of this six-residue loop positions side chains that are important for mediating protein-protein interactions through the binding of Pro-rich sequences. Replacement of the wild-type loop 1 primary structure by shorter sequences with a high propensity to fold into a type-I ␤-turn conformation or the statistically preferred type-I G1 bulge conformation accelerates WW domain folding by almost an order of magnitude and increases thermodynamic stability. However, loop engineering to optimize folding energetics has a significant downside: it effectively eliminates WW domain function according to ligand-binding studies. The energetic contribution of loop 1 to ligand binding appears to have evolved at the expense of fast folding and additional protein stability. Thus, the two-state barrier exhibited by the wild-type human Pin1 WW domain principally results from functional requirements, rather than from physical constraints inherent to even the most efficient loop formation process.␤-turn ͉ ligand binding ͉ protein folding ͉ ␤-sheet ͉ protein function G lobular proteins evolve by mutation and selection. Selection criteria include function, and sufficient thermodynamic stability and folding rate to avoid sustained chaperone binding and proteasome degradation. The selection criteria cannot always be optimized independently over the entire sequence of a protein. For the human Pin1 (hPin1) WW domain (Pin WW hereafter), we have shown that residues important for stability and folding rate are segregated in the sequence (1-4). It is likely that functional selection criteria are predominant once minimal energetic criteria are met. Therefore, sequence evolution to enhance function may lead to a decrease in protein stability and folding rate compared with a sequence optimized for folding energetics.The hPin1 cell cycle regulatory proline (Pro) cis͞trans-isomerase is a two-domain protein (5). In its physiological role, the N-terminal WW domain binds Pro-rich ligands of the consensus sequence (pS͞pT)P, whereas the C-terminal domain catalyzes the Pro cis͞ trans-isomerization at the pS͞pT-P peptide bond. NMR solution studies show that the two domains, which are connected by a flexible solvated linker, interact only weakly before ligand binding (6, 7). The structure of the isolated Pin WW domain is virtually superimposable on that of the WW domain in the two-domain hPin1 protein (8). Moreover, Pin WW exhibits sufficient thermodynamic stability for biophysical analysis, folds rapidly, and retains its ligand-binding function (3, 9). These attributes, combined with sequence information on Ͼ150 WW domain family members (10, 11), makes Pin WW an excellent small model p...

“…1N), has been shown to fold with biphasic kinetics exhibiting intermediates during folding (3,5,6,(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16). We address this problem here with the design of new FBP28 WW domain mutants and by examining their structural properties and folding kinetics.Because of the small size, fast folding kinetics, and biological importance, the formation of intermolecular β-sheets is thought to be a crucial event in the initiation and propagation of amyloid diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, and spongiform encephalopathy, FBP28, and other WW domain proteins (e.g., Pin1 and FiP35) have been the subjects of extensive experimental (4,11,(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23) and theoretical (3,5,6,(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(24)(25)(26)(27) studies. However, a folding mechanism of the FBP28 was debatable for a long time because of its complexity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Preventing fibril formation of a protein by selective mutation

Maisuradze

Medina

Kachlishvili

et al. 2015

The origins of formation of an intermediate state involved in amyloid formation and ways to prevent it are illustrated with the example of the Formin binding protein 28 (FBP28) WW domain, which folds with biphasic kinetics. Molecular dynamics of protein folding trajectories are used to examine local and global motions and the time dependence of formation of contacts between C α s and C β s of selected pairs of residues. Focus is placed on the WT FBP28 WW domain and its six mutants (L26D, L26E, L26W, E27Y, T29D, and T29Y), which have structures that are determined by high-resolution NMR spectroscopy. The origins of formation of an intermediate state are elucidated, viz. as formation of hairpin 1 by a hydrophobic collapse mechanism causing significant delay of formation of both hairpins, especially hairpin 2, which facilitates the emergence of an intermediate state. It seems that three-state folding is a major folding scenario for all six mutants and WT. Additionally, two-state and downhill folding scenarios were identified in ∼15% of the folding trajectories for L26D and L26W, in which both hairpins are formed by the Matheson-Scheraga mechanism much faster than in three-state folding. These results indicate that formation of hairpins connecting two antiparallel β-strands determines overall folding. The correlations between the local and global motions identified for all folding trajectories lead to the identification of the residues making the main contributions in the formation of the intermediate state. The presented findings may provide an understanding of protein folding intermediates in general and lead to a procedure for their prevention.A n intermediate state in protein folding is involved in amyloid fibril formation, which is responsible for a number of neurodegenerative diseases (1-7). Therefore, prevention of the aggregation of folding intermediates is one of the most important problems to surmount. Hence, it is necessary to determine the mechanism by which an intermediate state is formed. For example, one of the members of the WW domain family (8, 9), the triple β-stranded WW domain from the Formin binding protein 28 (FBP28; Protein Data Bank ID code 1E0L) (10) (Fig. 1N), has been shown to fold with biphasic kinetics exhibiting intermediates during folding (3,5,6,(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16). We address this problem here with the design of new FBP28 WW domain mutants and by examining their structural properties and folding kinetics.Because of the small size, fast folding kinetics, and biological importance, the formation of intermolecular β-sheets is thought to be a crucial event in the initiation and propagation of amyloid diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, and spongiform encephalopathy, FBP28, and other WW domain proteins (e.g., Pin1 and FiP35) have been the subjects of extensive experimental (4,11,(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23) and theoretical (3,5,6,(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(24)(25)(26)(27) studies. However, a folding mechanism of the FBP28 was debatable for a long time because of its complexity. There ar...