{"id":1723,"date":"2014-03-27T13:24:00","date_gmt":"2014-03-27T13:24:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/?p=1723"},"modified":"2014-03-27T15:41:34","modified_gmt":"2014-03-27T15:41:34","slug":"journal-club-the-role-of-native-contacts-in-folding-of-small-proteins","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/2014\/03\/journal-club-the-role-of-native-contacts-in-folding-of-small-proteins\/","title":{"rendered":"Journal Club: Native contacts in protein folding"},"content":{"rendered":"

Like your good old headphone cables, strings of amino acids have the potential to fold into a\u00a0vast number of different conformations given the appropriate conditions. A conservative estimation for the time it would take a 100 residue protein to explore all theoretically possible conformations would exceed the age of the Universe several times. This is obviously not feasible and was pointed out by Levinthal when he published his <\/span>“How To Fold Graciously”<\/em><\/a>\u00a0in 1969.<\/span><\/p>\n

The so called Protein-Folding Problem has since been under intense study, which inevitably has led to a few theories and models about its nature.<\/span>\u00a0Due to the lack of appropriate wet-lab methods to study this phenomenon theoretical, computational approaches have been key to devising im<\/span>pactful frameworks for formally describing protein folding. One of these goes under the name of\u00a0<\/span>principle of minimum frustration <\/em>introduced by\u00a0Bryngelson and Wolynes in the late 80s (1). It states that proteins by evolution were enriched for sequences with the propensity to fold into low-energy structures, while actively selecting against traps. By avoiding mis-folding and non-native contacts, the theory says, a smooth\u00a0<\/span>funnel-like\u00a0energy landscape with native-state minima is created that ensures robust and fast folding.<\/span><\/p>\n

This implies that native contacts, i.e. residues that interact in the fully folded protein play a major role in the folding process. G\u014d\u00a0models (2), named after\u00a0Nobuhiro G\u014d who\u00a0first proposed this method, are based around this assumption with the energetic contributions of native interactions acting as the sole driving forces in the folding process. While this approach has yielded promising results, many of which were in concordance with experiments, its underlying principles have never been validated in a statistically meaningful way.<\/p>\n

\"native<\/a>

A schematic for native-contact-driven protein folding<\/p><\/div>\n

In 2013 a study by Best, Hummer and Eaton (3) formally addressed this question. By devising a set of statistical quantities aimed at weighting the importance of native and non-native interactions for folding and applying these to the analysis of several long MD folding simulations they were able to show a “native-centric mechanism” for small fast-folding proteins.<\/p>\n

In a first step it was assessed whether the fraction of native contacts \u00a0provided a suitable reaction coordinate for the simulated folding events. From their equilibrium simulations two thresholds of native-contact-fractions \u00a0were chosen that defined folded and unfolded states (a two-state model is assumed). Overlaying the values for the most visited\u00a0native-contact-fractions during simulation\u00a0against these thresholds revealed a strong correlation between the two equilibrium probability density maxima and the protein’s fold state. In addition they showed that the range of native-contact-fractions between those found to represent unfolded and folded thresholds were indicative of being on a transition path (defined as the\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0“..\u00a0regions of the trajectories that cross directly from the unfolded well to the folded well ..”)<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n

A further measure was introduced with the <\/span>contact lifetime test<\/em>. The log-ratio of the time a contact spent on a transition path vs the time it existed in the unfolded state was calculated and compared in a\u00a0<\/span>heat-map\u00a0to\u00a0the native contact map\u00a0<\/span>coloured\u00a0by the number of contacts between residues.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"figure2\"<\/a>

Contact life time test for a selected protein.
Adapted from (3).<\/p><\/div>\n

Among others this result revealed a clear connection between contacts with longer transition path life times and the number of contacts they made in the native structure.<\/p>\n

So what about non-native interactions?<\/p>\n

\"Screenshot<\/p>\n

One of the measures addressing this question was the Bayesian measure for non-native contacts on transition paths. In the examples used in this paper, no obvious link between being on a transition path given a non-native contact was found unless they were close to native contacts. Further criteria such as the complementary quantity, which is the probability of being on a transition path when a contact is not made, concluded in a similar fashion.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, it was found that the one protein that was influenced by non-native contacts was the designed\u00a0\u03b13D. Best et al. reasoned that additional frustration introduced when building a protein with artificially introduced stability has led to a shifting of helix register giving rise to this outlier.<\/p>\n

When taken together, these results lay a robust foundation for further studies along the same lines. It is too early to accept or reject the presented findings as universal truth, but strong arguments for the native-centric mechanism being a reasonable model in small fast-folding proteins have been made. It would not be far-fetched to think that larger proteins would adhere to similar principles with non-native contacts modulating the landscape, especially when considering individual downhill folding modules.<\/p>\n

References:<\/span><\/p>\n

(1)\u00a0Bryngelson, J.D. et al., 1995. Funnels, pathways, and the energy landscape of protein folding: a synthesis. Proteins, 21(3), pp.167\u201395.<\/p>\n

(2)\u00a0Taketomi, H., Ueda, Y. & G\u014d, N., 1975. Studies on protein folding, unfolding and fluctuations by computer simulation. I. The effect of specific amino acid sequence represented by specific inter-unit interactions. International journal of peptide and protein research<\/i>, 7(6), pp.445\u201359.<\/p>\n

(3)\u00a0Best, R.B., Hummer, G. & Eaton, W.A., 2013. Native contacts determine protein folding mechanisms in atomistic simulations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America<\/i>, 110(44), pp.17874\u20139.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Like your good old headphone cables, strings of amino acids have the potential to fold into a\u00a0vast number of different conformations given the appropriate conditions. A conservative estimation for the time it would take a 100 residue protein to explore all theoretically possible conformations would exceed the age of the Universe several times. This is […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":29,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","wikipediapreview_detectlinks":true,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[24,75,73,13,72,71,27,76,74,70,5],"ppma_author":[519],"class_list":["post-1723","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-groupmeetings","tag-bioinformatics","tag-energy-landscape","tag-go-model","tag-journal-club","tag-md-simulation","tag-native-contacts","tag-opig","tag-oxford","tag-principle-of-minimal-frustration","tag-protein-folding","tag-protein-structure"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"authors":[{"term_id":519,"user_id":29,"is_guest":0,"slug":"samuel","display_name":"Samuel Demharter","avatar_url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9a7fc311ca91aec48d77ebd689fe2070f28c5442207cffd3adbd026c24de4d17?s=96&d=mm&r=g","0":null,"1":"","2":"","3":"","4":"","5":"","6":"","7":"","8":""}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1723","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/29"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1723"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1723\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1745,"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1723\/revisions\/1745"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1723"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1723"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1723"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blopig.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=1723"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}