Evolution of Specificity in Protein-Protein Interactions

Hub proteins are proteins that maintain promiscuous molecular recognition. Because they are reported to play essential roles in cellular control, there has been a special interest in the study of their structural and functional properties, yet the mechanisms by which they evolve to maintain functional interactions are poorly understood. By combining biophysical simulations of coarse-grained proteins and analysis of proteins-complex crystallographic structures, we seek to elucidate those mechanisms. We focus on two types of hub proteins: Multi hubs, which interact with their partners through different interfaces, and Singlish hubs, which do so through a single interface. We show that loss of structural stability is required for the evolution of protein-protein-interaction (PPI) networks, and it is more profound in Singlish hub systems. In addition, different ratios of hydrophobic to electrostatic interfacial amino acids are shown to support distinct network topologies (i.e., Singlish and Multi systems), and therefore underlie a fundamental design principle of PPI in a crowded environment. We argue that the physical nature of hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions, in particular, their favoring of either same-type interactions (hydrophobic-hydrophobic), or opposite-type interactions (negatively-positively charged) plays a key role in maintaining the network topology while allowing the protein amino acid sequence to evolve.     

A network representation of protein structures: implications for protein stability

This study views each protein structure as a network of noncovalent connections between amino acid side chains. Each amino acid in a protein structure is a node, and the strength of the noncovalent interactions between two amino acids is evaluated for edge determination. The protein structure graphs (PSGs) for 232 proteins have been constructed as a function of the cutoff of the amino acid interaction strength at a few carefully chosen values. Analysis of such PSGs constructed on the basis of edge weights has shown the following: 1), The PSGs exhibit a complex topological network behavior, which is dependent on the interaction cutoff chosen for PSG construction. 2), A transition is observed at a critical interaction cutoff, in all the proteins, as monitored by the size of the largest cluster (giant component) in the graph. Amazingly, this transition occurs within a narrow range of interaction cutoff for all the proteins, irrespective of the size or the fold topology. And 3), the amino acid preferences to be highly connected (hub frequency) have been evaluated as a function of the interaction cutoff. We observe that the aromatic residues along with arginine, histidine, and methionine act as strong hubs at high interaction cutoffs, whereas the hydrophobic leucine and isoleucine residues get added to these hubs at low interaction cutoffs, forming weak hubs. The hubs identified are found to play a role in bringing together different secondary structural elements in the tertiary structure of the proteins. They are also found to contribute to the additional stability of the thermophilic proteins when compared to their mesophilic counterparts and hence could be crucial for the folding and stability of the unique three-dimensional structure of proteins. Based on these results, we also predict a few residues in the thermophilic and mesophilic proteins that can be mutated to alter their thermal stability.     

On the functional and structural characterization of hubs in protein–protein interaction networks

A number of interesting issues have been addressed on biological networks about their global and local properties. The connection between the topological properties of proteins in Protein–Protein Interaction (PPI) networks and their biological relevance has been investigated focusing on hubs, i.e. proteins with a large number of interacting partners. We will survey the literature trying to answer the following questions: Do hub proteins have special biological properties? Do they tend to be more essential than non-hub proteins? Are they more evolutionarily conserved? Do they play a central role in modular organization of the protein interaction network? Are there structural properties that characterize hub proteins?     

Decomposing PPI networks for complex discovery

Background

Protein complexes are important for understanding principles of cellular organization and functions. With the availability of large amounts of high-throughput protein-protein interactions (PPI), many algorithms have been proposed to discover protein complexes from PPI networks. However, existing algorithms generally do not take into consideration the fact that not all the interactions in a PPI network take place at the same time. As a result, predicted complexes often contain many spuriously included proteins, precluding them from matching true complexes.

Results

We propose two methods to tackle this problem: (1) The localization GO term decomposition method: We utilize cellular component Gene Ontology (GO) terms to decompose PPI networks into several smaller networks such that the proteins in each decomposed network are annotated with the same cellular component GO term. (2) The hub removal method: This method is based on the observation that hub proteins are more likely to fuse clusters that correspond to different complexes. To avoid this, we remove hub proteins from PPI networks, and then apply a complex discovery algorithm on the remaining PPI network. The removed hub proteins are added back to the generated clusters afterwards. We tested the two methods on the yeast PPI network downloaded from BioGRID. Our results show that these methods can improve the performance of several complex discovery algorithms significantly. Further improvement in performance is achieved when we apply them in tandem.

Conclusions

The performance of complex discovery algorithms is hindered by the fact that not all the interactions in a PPI network take place at the same time. We tackle this problem by using localization GO terms or hubs to decompose a PPI network before complex discovery, which achieves considerable improvement.

     

Stratus not altocumulus: a new view of the yeast protein interaction network

Systems biology approaches can reveal intermediary levels of organization between genotype and phenotype that often underlie biological phenomena such as polygenic effects and protein dispensability. An important conceptualization is the module, which is loosely defined as a cohort of proteins that perform a dedicated cellular task. Based on a computational analysis of limited interaction datasets in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, it has been suggested that the global protein interaction network is segregated such that highly connected proteins, called hubs, tend not to link to each other. Moreover, it has been suggested that hubs fall into two distinct classes: "party" hubs are co-expressed and co-localized with their partners, whereas "date" hubs interact with incoherently expressed and diversely localized partners, and thereby cohere disparate parts of the global network. This structure may be compared with altocumulus clouds, i.e., cotton ball-like structures sparsely connected by thin wisps. However, this organization might reflect a small and/or biased sample set of interactions. In a multi-validated high-confidence (HC) interaction network, assembled from all extant S. cerevisiae interaction data, including recently available proteome-wide interaction data and a large set of reliable literature-derived interactions, we find that hub-hub interactions are not suppressed. In fact, the number of interactions a hub has with other hubs is a good predictor of whether a hub protein is essential or not. We find that date hubs are neither required for network tolerance to node deletion, nor do date hubs have distinct biological attributes compared to other hubs. Date and party hubs do not, for example, evolve at different rates. Our analysis suggests that the organization of global protein interaction network is highly interconnected and hence interdependent, more like the continuous dense aggregations of stratus clouds than the segregated configuration of altocumulus clouds. If the network is configured in a stratus format, cross-talk between proteins is potentially a major source of noise. In turn, control of the activity of the most highly connected proteins may be vital. Indeed, we find that a fluctuation in steady-state levels of the most connected proteins is minimized.     

Role of intrinsic disorder in transient interactions of hub proteins

Hubs in the protein-protein interaction network have been classified as "party" hubs, which are highly correlated in their mRNA expression with their partners while "date" hubs show lesser correlation. In this study, we explored the role of intrinsic disorder in date and party hub interactions. The data reveals that intrinsic disorder is significantly enriched in date hub proteins when compared with party hub proteins. Intrinsic disorder has been largely implicated in transient binding interactions. The disorder to order transition, which occurs during binding interactions in disordered regions, renders the interaction highly reversible while maintaining the high specificity. The enrichment of intrinsic disorder in date hubs may facilitate transient interactions, which might be required for date hubs to interact with different partners at different times.     

残基相互作用网络特征与木聚糖酶耐热性的关系

残基相互作用网络是体现蛋白质中残基与残基之间协同和制约关系的重要形式。残基相互作用网络的拓扑性质以及社团结构与蛋白质的功能和性质有密切的关系。本文在构建一系列耐热木聚糖酶和常温木聚糖酶的残基相互作用网络后,通过计算网络的度、聚类系数、连接强度、特征路径长度、接近中心性、介数中心性等拓扑参数来确定网络拓扑结构与木聚糖酶耐热性的关系。识别残基相互作用网络的hub点,分析hub点的亲疏水性、带电性以及各种氨基酸在hub点中所占的比例。进一步使用GA-Net算法对网络进行社团划分,并计算社团的规模、直径和密度。网络的高平均度、高连接强度、以及更短的最短路径等表明耐热木聚糖酶残基相互作用网络的结构更加紧密;耐热木聚糖酶网络中的hub节点比常温木聚糖酶网络hub节点具有更多的疏水性残基,hub点中Phe、Ile、Val的占比更高。社团检测后发现,耐热木聚糖酶网络拥有更大的社团规模、较小的社团直径和较大的社团密度。社团规模越大表明耐热木聚糖酶的氨基酸残基更倾向于形成大的社团,而较小的社团直径和较大的社团密度则表明社团内部氨基酸残基的相互作用比常温木聚糖酶更强。     

残基相互作用网络特征与木聚糖酶耐热性的关系

残基相互作用网络是体现蛋白质中残基与残基之间协同和制约关系的重要形式。残基相互作用网络的拓扑性质以及社团结构与蛋白质的功能和性质有密切的关系。本文在构建一系列耐热木聚糖酶和常温木聚糖酶的残基相互作用网络后,通过计算网络的度、聚类系数、连接强度、特征路径长度、接近中心性、介数中心性等拓扑参数来确定网络拓扑结构与木聚糖酶耐热性的关系。识别残基相互作用网络的hub点,分析hub点的亲疏水性、带电性以及各种氨基酸在hub点中所占的比例。进一步使用GA-Net算法对网络进行社团划分,并计算社团的规模、直径和密度。网络的高平均度、高连接强度、以及更短的最短路径等表明耐热木聚糖酶残基相互作用网络的结构更加紧密;耐热木聚糖酶网络中的hub节点比常温木聚糖酶网络hub节点具有更多的疏水性残基,hub点中Phe、Ile、Val的占比更高。社团检测后发现,耐热木聚糖酶网络拥有更大的社团规模、较小的社团直径和较大的社团密度。社团规模越大表明耐热木聚糖酶的氨基酸残基更倾向于形成大的社团,而较小的社团直径和较大的社团密度则表明社团内部氨基酸残基的相互作用比常温木聚糖酶更强。     

Dynamic Hubs Show Competitive and Static Hubs Non-Competitive Regulation of Their Interaction Partners

Date hub proteins have 1 or 2 interaction interfaces but many interaction partners. This raises the question of whether all partner proteins compete for the interaction interface of the hub or if the cell carefully regulates aspects of this process? Here, we have used real-time rendering of protein interaction networks to analyse the interactions of all the 1 or 2 interface hubs of Saccharomyces cerevisiae during the cell cycle. By integrating previously determined structural and gene expression data, and visually hiding the nodes (proteins) and their edges (interactions) during their troughs of expression, we predict when interactions of hubs and their partners are likely to exist. This revealed that 20 out of all 36 one- or two- interface hubs in the yeast interactome fell within two main groups. The first was dynamic hubs with static partners, which can be considered as ‘competitive hubs’. Their interaction partners will compete for the interaction interface of the hub and the success of any interaction will be dictated by the kinetics of interaction (abundance and affinity) and subcellular localisation. The second was static hubs with dynamic partners, which we term ‘non-competitive hubs’. Regulatory mechanisms are finely tuned to lessen the presence and/or effects of competition between the interaction partners of the hub. It is possible that these regulatory processes may also be used by the cell for the regulation of other, non-cell cycle processes.     

Characterization of protein hubs by inferring interacting motifs from protein interactions

The characterization of protein interactions is essential for understanding biological systems. While genome-scale methods are available for identifying interacting proteins, they do not pinpoint the interacting motifs (e.g., a domain, sequence segments, a binding site, or a set of residues). Here, we develop and apply a method for delineating the interacting motifs of hub proteins (i.e., highly connected proteins). The method relies on the observation that proteins with common interaction partners tend to interact with these partners through a common interacting motif. The sole input for the method are binary protein interactions; neither sequence nor structure information is needed. The approach is evaluated by comparing the inferred interacting motifs with domain families defined for 368 proteins in the Structural Classification of Proteins (SCOP). The positive predictive value of the method for detecting proteins with common SCOP families is 75% at sensitivity of 10%. Most of the inferred interacting motifs were significantly associated with sequence patterns, which could be responsible for the common interactions. We find that yeast hubs with multiple interacting motifs are more likely to be essential than hubs with one or two interacting motifs, thus rationalizing the previously observed correlation between essentiality and the number of interacting partners of a protein. We also find that yeast hubs with multiple interacting motifs evolve slower than the average protein, contrary to the hubs with one or two interacting motifs. The proposed method will help us discover unknown interacting motifs and provide biological insights about protein hubs and their roles in interaction networks.     

Identification and classification of hubs in brain networks

Brain regions in the mammalian cerebral cortex are linked by a complex network of fiber bundles. These inter-regional networks have previously been analyzed in terms of their node degree, structural motif, path length and clustering coefficient distributions. In this paper we focus on the identification and classification of hub regions, which are thought to play pivotal roles in the coordination of information flow. We identify hubs and characterize their network contributions by examining motif fingerprints and centrality indices for all regions within the cerebral cortices of both the cat and the macaque. Motif fingerprints capture the statistics of local connection patterns, while measures of centrality identify regions that lie on many of the shortest paths between parts of the network. Within both cat and macaque networks, we find that a combination of degree, motif participation, betweenness centrality and closeness centrality allows for reliable identification of hub regions, many of which have previously been functionally classified as polysensory or multimodal. We then classify hubs as either provincial (intra-cluster) hubs or connector (inter-cluster) hubs, and proceed to show that lesioning hubs of each type from the network produces opposite effects on the small-world index. Our study presents an approach to the identification and classification of putative hub regions in brain networks on the basis of multiple network attributes and charts potential links between the structural embedding of such regions and their functional roles.     

Erosion of interaction networks in reduced and degraded genomes

Unlike eukaryotes, which often recruit duplicated genes into existing protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks, the low levels of gene duplication coupled with the high probability of lateral transfer of novel genes alters the manner in which PPI networks can evolve in bacteria. By inferring the PPIs present in the ancestor to contemporary Gammaproteobacteria, we were able to trace the changes in gene repertoires, and their consequences on PPI network evolution, in several bacterial lineages that have independently undergone reductions in genome size and genome contents. As genomes degrade, virtually all multi-partner proteins have lost interactors; however, the overall average number of connections increases due to the preferential elimination of proteins that interact with only one other protein partner. We also studied the effect of lateral gene transfer on PPI network evolution by analyzing the connectivity of genes that have been gained along the Escherichia coli lineage, as well as those acquired genes subsequently silenced in Shigella flexneri, since diverging from the gammaproteobacterial ancestor. The situation in PPI networks, in which newly acquired genes preferentially attach to the hubs of the network, contrasts that observed in metabolic networks, which evolve by the peripheral gain and loss of genes, and in regulatory networks, in which high connectivity increases the propensity of loss.     

Revisiting Date and Party Hubs: Novel Approaches to Role Assignment in Protein Interaction Networks

The idea of “date” and “party” hubs has been influential in the study of protein–protein interaction networks. Date hubs display low co-expression with their partners, whilst party hubs have high co-expression. It was proposed that party hubs are local coordinators whereas date hubs are global connectors. Here, we show that the reported importance of date hubs to network connectivity can in fact be attributed to a tiny subset of them. Crucially, these few, extremely central, hubs do not display particularly low expression correlation, undermining the idea of a link between this quantity and hub function. The date/party distinction was originally motivated by an approximately bimodal distribution of hub co-expression; we show that this feature is not always robust to methodological changes. Additionally, topological properties of hubs do not in general correlate with co-expression. However, we find significant correlations between interaction centrality and the functional similarity of the interacting proteins. We suggest that thinking in terms of a date/party dichotomy for hubs in protein interaction networks is not meaningful, and it might be more useful to conceive of roles for protein-protein interactions rather than for individual proteins.     

Understanding gene essentiality by finely characterizing hubs in the yeast protein interaction network

The centrality-lethality rule, i.e., high-degree proteins or hubs tend to be more essential than low-degree proteins in the yeast protein interaction network, reveals that a protein’s central position indicates its important function, but whether and why hubs tend to be more essential have been heavily debated. Here, we integrated gene expression and functional module data to classify hubs into four types: non-co-expressed non-co-cluster hubs, non-co-expressed co-cluster hubs, co-expressed non-co-cluster hubs and co-expressed co-cluster hubs. We found that all the four hub types are more essential than non-hubs, but they also show different enrichments in essential proteins. Non-co-expressed non-co-cluster hubs play key role in organizing different modules formed by the other three hub types, but they are less important to the survival of the yeast cell. Among the four hub types, co-expressed co-cluster hubs, which likely correspond to the core components of stable protein complexes, are the most essential. These results demonstrated that our classification of hubs into four types could better improve the understanding of gene essentiality.     

Structure networks of E. coli glutaminyl-tRNA synthetase: effects of ligand binding

It is well known that proteins undergo backbone as well as side chain conformational changes upon ligand binding, which is not necessarily confined to the active site. Both the local and the global conformational changes brought out by ligand-binding have been extensively studied earlier. However, the global changes have been reported mainly at the protein backbone level. Here we present a method that explicitly takes into account the side chain interactions, yet providing a global view of the ligand-induced conformational changes. This is achieved through the analysis of Protein Structure Networks (PSN), constructed from the noncovalent side chain interactions in the protein. Here, E. coli Glutaminyl-tRNA synthetase (GlnRS) in the ligand-free and different ligand-bound states is used as a case study to assess the effect of binding of tRNA, ATP, and the amino acid Gln to GlnRS. The PSNs are constructed on the basis of the strength of noncovalent interactions existing between the side chains of amino acids. The parameters like the size of the largest cluster, edge to node ratio, and the total number of hubs are used to quantitatively assess the structure network changes. These network parameters have effectively captured the ligand-induced structural changes at a global structure network level. Hubs, the highly connected amino acids, are also identified from these networks. Specifically, we are able to characterize different types of hubs based on the comparison of structure networks of the GlnRS system. The differences in the structure networks in both the presence and the absence of the ligands are reflected in these hubs. For instance, the characterization of hubs that are present in both the ligand-free and all the ligand-bound GlnRS (the invariant hubs) might implicate their role in structural integrity. On the other hand, identification of hubs unique to a particular ligand-bound structure (the exclusive hubs) not only highlights the structural differences mediated by ligand-binding at the structure network level, but also highlights significance of these amino acids hubs in binding to the ligand and catalyzing the biochemical function. Further, the hubs identified from this study could be ideal targets for mutational studies to ascertain the ligand-induced structure-function relationships in E. coli GlnRS. The formalism used in this study is simple and can be applied to other protein-ligands in general to understand the allosteric changes mediated by the binding of ligands.     

Disorder and sequence repeats in hub proteins and their implications for network evolution

Protein interaction networks display approximate scale-free topology, in which hub proteins that interact with a large number of other proteins determine the overall organization of the network. In this study, we aim to determine whether hubs are distinguishable from other networked proteins by specific sequence features. Proteins of different connectednesses were compared in the interaction networks of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Drosophila melanogaster, Caenorhabditis elegans, and Homo sapienswith respect to the distribution of predicted structural disorder, sequence repeats, low complexity regions, and chain length. Highly connected proteins ("hub proteins") contained significantly more of, and greater proportion of, these sequence features and tended to be longer overall as compared to less connected proteins. These sequence features provide two different functional means for realizing multiple interactions: (1) extended interaction surface and (2) flexibility and adaptability, providing a mechanism for the same region to bind distinct partners. Our view contradicts the prevailing view that scaling in protein interactomes arose from gene duplication and preferential attachment of equivalent proteins. We propose an alternative evolutionary network specialization process, in which certain components of the protein interactome improved their fitness for binding by becoming longer or accruing regions of disorder and/or internal repeats and have therefore become specialized in network organization.     

PPI network analyses of human WD40 protein family systematically reveal their tendency to assemble complexes and facilitate the complex predictions

Background

WD40 repeat proteins constitute one of the largest families in eukaryotes, and widely participate in various fundamental cellular processes by interacting with other molecules. Based on individual WD40 proteins, previous work has demonstrated that their structural characteristics should confer great potential of interaction and complex formation, and has speculated that they may serve as hubs in the protein-protein interaction (PPI) network. However, what roles the whole family plays in organizing the PPI network, and whether this information can be utilized in complex prediction remain unclear. To address these issues, quantitative and systematic analyses of WD40 proteins from the perspective of PPI networks are highly required.

Results

In this work, we built two human PPI networks by using data sets with different confidence levels, and studied the network properties of the whole human WD40 protein family systematically. Our analyses have quantitatively confirmed that the human WD40 protein family, as a whole, tends to be hubs with an odds ratio of about 1.8 or greater, and the network decomposition has revealed that they are prone to enrich near the global center of the whole network with a fold change of two in the median k-values. By integrating expression profiles, we have further shown that WD40 hub proteins are inclined to be intramodular, which is indicative of complex assembling. Based on this information, we have further predicted 1674 potential WD40-associated complexes by choosing a clique-based method, which is more sensitive than others, and an indirect evaluation by co-expression scores has demonstrated its reliability.

Conclusions

At the systems level but not sporadic examples’ level, this work has provided rich knowledge for better understanding WD40 proteins’ roles in organizing the PPI network. These findings and predicted complexes can offer valuable clues for prioritizing candidates for further studies.

     

Promiscuous domains: facilitating stability of the yeast protein-protein interaction network

Domain-domain interactions are a critical type of the mechanisms mediating protein-protein interactions (PPIs). For a given protein domain, its ability to combine with distinct domains is usually referred to as promiscuity or versatility. Interestingly, a previous study has reported that a domain's promiscuity may reflect its ability to interact with other domains in human proteins. In this work, promiscuous domains were first identified from the yeast genome. Then, we sought to determine what roles promiscuous domains might play in the PPI network. Mapping the promiscuous domains onto the proteins in this network revealed that, consistent with the previous knowledge, the hub proteins were significantly enriched with promiscuous domains. We also found that the set of hub proteins were not the same set as those proteins with promiscuous domains, although there was some overlap. Analysis of the topological properties of this yeast PPI network showed that the characteristic path length of the network increased significantly after deleting proteins with promiscuous domains. This indicated that communication between two proteins was longer and the network stability decreased. These observations suggested that, as the hub proteins, proteins with promiscuous domains might play a role in maintaining network stability. In addition, functional analysis revealed that proteins with promiscuous domains mainly participated in the "Folding, Sorting, and Degradation" and "Replication and Repair" biological pathways, and that they significantly execute key molecular functions, such as "nucleoside-triphosphatase activity (GO:0017111)."     

Simulated evolution of protein-protein interaction networks with realistic topology

We model the evolution of eukaryotic protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks. In our model, PPI networks evolve by two known biological mechanisms: (1) Gene duplication, which is followed by rapid diversification of duplicate interactions. (2) Neofunctionalization, in which a mutation leads to a new interaction with some other protein. Since many interactions are due to simple surface compatibility, we hypothesize there is an increased likelihood of interacting with other proteins in the target protein's neighborhood. We find good agreement of the model on 10 different network properties compared to high-confidence experimental PPI networks in yeast, fruit flies, and humans. Key findings are: (1) PPI networks evolve modular structures, with no need to invoke particular selection pressures. (2) Proteins in cells have on average about 6 degrees of separation, similar to some social networks, such as human-communication and actor networks. (3) Unlike social networks, which have a shrinking diameter (degree of maximum separation) over time, PPI networks are predicted to grow in diameter. (4) The model indicates that evolutionarily old proteins should have higher connectivities and be more centrally embedded in their networks. This suggests a way in which present-day proteomics data could provide insights into biological evolution.     

Identification of transient hub proteins and the possible structural basis for their multiple interactions

Proteins that can interact with multiple partners play central roles in the network of protein-protein interactions. They are called hub proteins, and recently it was suggested that an abundance of intrinsically disordered regions on their surfaces facilitates their binding to multiple partners. However, in those studies, the hub proteins were identified as proteins with multiple partners, regardless of whether the interactions were transient or permanent. As a result, a certain number of hub proteins are subunits of stable multi-subunit proteins, such as supramolecules. It is well known that stable complexes and transient complexes have different structural features, and thus the statistics based on the current definition of hub proteins will hide the true nature of hub proteins. Therefore, in this paper, we first describe a new approach to identify proteins with multiple partners dynamically, using the Protein Data Bank, and then we performed statistical analyses of the structural features of these proteins. We refer to the proteins as transient hub proteins or sociable proteins, to clarify the difference with hub proteins. As a result, we found that the main difference between sociable and nonsociable proteins is not the abundance of disordered regions, in contrast to the previous studies, but rather the structural flexibility of the entire protein. We also found greater predominance of charged and polar residues in sociable proteins than previously reported.