Predicting Protein–Protein Interfaces that Bind Intrinsically Disordered Protein Regions

A long-standing goal in biology is the complete annotation of function and structure on all protein–protein interactions, a large fraction of which is mediated by intrinsically disordered protein regions (IDRs). However, knowledge derived from experimental structures of such protein complexes is disproportionately small due, in part, to challenges in studying interactions of IDRs. Here, we introduce IDRBind, a computational method that by combining gradient boosted trees and conditional random field models predicts binding sites of IDRs with performance approaching state-of-the-art globular interface predictions, making it suitable for proteome-wide applications. Although designed and trained with a focus on molecular recognition features, which are long interaction-mediating-elements in IDRs, IDRBind also predicts the binding sites of short peptides more accurately than existing specialized predictors. Consistent with IDRBind's specificity, a comparison of protein interface categories uncovered uniform trends in multiple physicochemical properties, positioning molecular recognition feature interfaces between peptide and globular interfaces.     

Relative Binding Affinity Prediction of Charge-Changing Sequence Mutations with FEP in Protein–Protein Interfaces

Building on the substantial progress that has been made in using free energy perturbation (FEP) methods to predict the relative binding affinities of small molecule ligands to proteins, we have previously shown that results of similar quality can be obtained in predicting the effect of mutations on the binding affinity of protein–protein complexes. However, these results were restricted to mutations which did not change the net charge of the side chains due to known difficulties with modeling perturbations involving a change in charge in FEP. Various methods have been proposed to address this problem. Here we apply the co-alchemical water approach to study the efficacy of FEP calculations of charge changing mutations at the protein–protein interface for the antibody–gp120 system investigated previously and three additional complexes. We achieve an overall root mean square error of 1.2 kcal/mol on a set of 106 cases involving a change in net charge selected by a simple suitability filter using side-chain predictions and solvent accessible surface area to be relevant to a biologic optimization project. Reasonable, although less precise, results are also obtained for the 44 more challenging mutations that involve buried residues, which may in some cases require substantial reorganization of the local protein structure, which can extend beyond the scope of a typical FEP simulation. We believe that the proposed prediction protocol will be of sufficient efficiency and accuracy to guide protein engineering projects for which optimization and/or maintenance of a high degree of binding affinity is a key objective.     

Utilization of Methyl Proton Resonances in Cross-Saturation Measurement for Determining the Interfaces of Large Protein–Protein Complexes

Cross-saturation experiments allow the identification of the contact residues of large protein complexes (MW>50 K) more rigorously than conventional NMR approaches which involve chemical shift perturbations and hydrogen-deuterium exchange experiments [Takahashi et al. (2000) Nat. Struct. Biol., 7, 220–223]. In the amide proton-based cross-saturation experiment, the combined use of high deuteration levels for non-exchangeable protons of the ligand protein and a solvent with a low concentration of ¹H₂O greatly enhanced the selectivity of the intermolecular cross-saturation phenomenon. Unfortunately, experimental limitations caused losses in sensitivity. Furthermore, since main chain amide protons are not generally exposed to solvent, the efficiency of the saturation transfer directed to the main chain amide protons is not very high. Here we propose an alternative cross-saturation experiment which utilizes the methyl protons of the side chains of the ligand protein. Owing to the fast internal rotation along the methyl axis, we theoretically and experimentally demonstrated the enhanced efficiency of this approach. The methyl-utilizing cross-saturation experiment has clear advantages in sensitivity and saturation transfer efficiency over the amide proton-based approach. Electronic supplementary material Electronic supplementary material is available for this article at and accessible for authorised users.     

Computational Prediction of Protein–Protein Interactions

Recently a number of computational approaches have been developed for the prediction of protein–protein interactions. Complete genome sequencing projects have provided the vast amount of information needed for these analyses. These methods utilize the structural, genomic, and biological context of proteins and genes in complete genomes to predict protein interaction networks and functional linkages between proteins. Given that experimental techniques remain expensive, time-consuming, and labor-intensive, these methods represent an important advance in proteomics. Some of these approaches utilize sequence data alone to predict interactions, while others combine multiple computational and experimental datasets to accurately build protein interaction maps for complete genomes. These methods represent a complementary approach to current high-throughput projects whose aim is to delineate protein interaction maps in complete genomes. We will describe a number of computational protocols for protein interaction prediction based on the structural, genomic, and biological context of proteins in complete genomes, and detail methods for protein interaction network visualization and analysis.     

Spectroscopic Characterization of the Excitation Energy Transfer in the Fucoxanthin–Chlorophyll Protein of Diatoms

We characterized the energy transfer pathways in the fucoxanthin–chlorophyll protein (FCP) complex of the diatom Cyclotella meneghiniana by conducting ultrafast transient absorption measurements. This light harvesting antenna has a distinct pigment composition and binds chlorophyll a (Chl-a), fucoxanthin and chlorophyll c (Chl-c) molecules in a 4:4:1 ratio. We find that upon excitation of fucoxanthin to its S₂ state, a significant amount of excitation energy is transferred rapidly to Chl-a. The ensuing dynamics illustrate the presence of a complex energy transfer network that also involves energy transfer from the unrelaxed or ‘hot’ intermediates. Chl-c to Chl-a energy transfer occurs on a timescale of a 100 fs. We observe no significant spectral evolution in the Chl-a region of the spectrum. We have applied global and target analysis to model the measured excited state dynamics and estimate the spectra of the states involved; the energy transfer network is discussed in relation to the pigment organization of the FCP complex.     

A Second-generation Protein–Protein Interaction Network of Helicobacter pylori

Helicobacter pylori infections cause gastric ulcers and play a major role in the development of gastric cancer. In 2001, the first protein interactome was published for this species, revealing over 1500 binary protein interactions resulting from 261 yeast two-hybrid screens. Here we roughly double the number of previously published interactions using an ORFeome-based, proteome-wide yeast two-hybrid screening strategy. We identified a total of 1515 protein–protein interactions, of which 1461 are new. The integration of all the interactions reported in H. pylori results in 3004 unique interactions that connect about 70% of its proteome. Excluding interactions of promiscuous proteins we derived from our new data a core network consisting of 908 interactions. We compared our data set to several other bacterial interactomes and experimentally benchmarked the conservation of interactions using 365 protein pairs (interologs) of E. coli of which one third turned out to be conserved in both species.Helicobacter pylori is a Gram-negative, microaerophilic bacterium that colonizes the stomach, an unusual highly acidic niche for microorganisms. In 1983, Warren and Marshall found it to be associated with gastric inflammation and duodenal ulcer disease (1, 2). A chronic infection with H. pylori can lead to development of stomach carcinoma and MALT lymphoma (reviewed in (3)). Hence, the World Health Organization has classified H. pylori as a class I carcinogen (4). It is estimated that half of the world′s population harbors H. pylori but with large variations in the geographical and socioeconomic distribution while causing annually 700,000 deaths worldwide (reviewed in (5)).The pathogenesis of H. pylori has been extensively studied, including the effector CagA, cytotoxin VacA, its adhesins and urease (reviewed in (3, 5–7)). The latter allows the bacterium to neutralize the stomach acid through ammonia production. However, H. pylori is not a classical model organism and thus many gaps in our knowledge still exist.The genome of H. pylori reference strain 26695 was completely sequenced in 1997 (8) and encodes 1587 proteins of which about 950 (61%) have been assigned functions (excluding “putatives”; Uniprot, CMR (9)). These numbers indicate that a large fraction of the proteins of H. pylori has not been functionally characterized.Protein–protein interactions (PPIs)¹ are required for nearly all biological processes. Unbiased interactomes are helpful to understand proteins or pathways and how they are linking poorly or uncharacterized proteins via their interactions. For instance, our study of the Treponema pallidum interactome (10) has led to the characterization of several previously “unknown” proteins such as YbeB, a ribosomal silencing factor (11), or TP0658, a regulator of flagellar translation and assembly (12, 13). However, only a few other comprehensive bacterial interactome studies have been published to date, including Campylobacter jejuni (14), Synechocystis sp. (15), Mycobacterium tuberculosis (16), Mesorhizobium loti (17), and recently Escherichia coli (18). In addition, partial interactomes are available for Bacillus subtilis (19) and H. pylori (20). Most of them used the yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) screening technology (21) which allows the pairwise detection of PPIs. Furthermore, a few other studies (22–25) systematically identified protein complexes and their compositions in bacteria.In 2001, Rain and colleagues have established a partial interactome of H. pylori, the first published protein interaction network of a bacterium (20). In this study, 261 bait constructs were screened against a random prey pool library resulting in the detection of over 1500 PPIs. Although this network likely represents a small fraction of all PPIs that occur in H. pylori, many downstream studies were motivated by these results (see below).Recent studies have disproved the notion that Y2H data sets are of poor quality (26, 27). Similarly, a high false-negative rate can be avoided by multiple Y2H expression vector systems (28–30) or protein fragments as opposed to full-length constructs (31). The aim of this study was to systematically screen the H. pylori proteome for binary protein interactions using a complementary approach to that of Rain et al. to produce an extended protein–protein interaction map of H. pylori. As a result, we have roughly doubled the number of known binary protein–protein interactions for H. pylori in this study.     

A Critical Assessment of Information-guided Protein–Protein Docking Predictions

The structures of protein complexes are increasingly predicted via protein–protein docking (PPD) using ambiguous interaction data to help guide the docking. These data often are incomplete and contain errors and therefore could lead to incorrect docking predictions. In this study, we performed a series of PPD simulations to examine the effects of incompletely and incorrectly assigned interface residues on the success rate of PPD predictions. The results for a widely used PPD benchmark dataset obtained using a new interface information-driven PPD (IPPD) method developed in this work showed that the success rate for an acceptable top-ranked model varied, depending on the information content used, from as high as 95% when contact relationships (though not contact distances) were known for all residues to 78% when only the interface/non-interface state of the residues was known. However, the success rates decreased rapidly to ∼40% when the interface/non-interface state of 20% of the residues was assigned incorrectly, and to less than 5% for a 40% incorrect assignment. Comparisons with results obtained by re-ranking a global search and with those reported for other data-guided PPD methods showed that, in general, IPPD performed better than re-ranking when the information used was more complete and more accurate, but worse when it was not, and that when using bioinformatics-predicted information on interface residues, IPPD and other data-guided PPD methods performed poorly, at a level similar to simulations with a 40% incorrect assignment. These results provide guidelines for using information about interface residues to improve PPD predictions and reveal a bottleneck for such improvement imposed by the low accuracy of current bioinformatic interface residue predictions.Proteins work in close association with other proteins to mediate the intricate functions of a cell. The atomic resolution of the structure of a protein complex can therefore help one understand a protein''s function in detail. Protein–protein docking (PPD),¹ a computational approach that complements experimental structure determinations, has attracted increasing research interest (1, 2), in part because it remains challenging to determine most structures of protein complexes via experimental techniques (3).To improve the performance of PPD predictions, experimentally derived data (e.g. distances) and information (e.g. the identity of interface residues) have been used either as a filter allowing less plausible docking solutions to be disregarded (4–9) or as a constraint to guide the docking process (10, 11). Various types of data and information have been used to aid PPD (12); these range from distances between, or the relative orientation of, the two interacting proteins to simple identification of the amino acid residues directly involved in the binding of the two proteins (13). Despite considerable success, the caveat for all these data-guided PPD predictions is that the data or information used must be correct in order to avoid spurious results caused by misguiding (12). It is therefore pertinent and important to evaluate the effects of errors in the incorporated data or information on the quality of PPD solutions.We have recently shown that the use of just a few distance constraints can improve the success rates of PPD such that they rival, or are even better than, those of a global search ranked using a sophisticated energy function, and that errors in the distance data significantly decrease the success rates of prediction (11). However, because distance data for interacting proteins are usually hard to obtain, other types of data or information, even if “ambiguous” (10), are increasingly used in PPD predictions (12, 14). In this study, we investigated the effects of incompletely and incorrectly assigned interface/non-interface residues, a major source of the so-called ambiguous data, on information-guided PPD predictions.As illustrated in Fig. 1, the information content of interface/non-interface residues can be rich enough to reveal the identity of every pair of residues in contact, but not their contact distances, or so poor as to reveal the interface/non-interface state of these residues but not their pairing relationship, for one or both of the two interacting proteins. To determine how these different levels of residue information content can help PPD predictions and the extent to which the use of incorrectly assigned residues degrades prediction success rates, we have developed a new interface information-driven PPD method (IPPD) and carried out a series of PPD simulations on a well-tested benchmark dataset. The results showed that when the information content was rich, excellent predictions (success rates for producing an acceptable top-ranked model > 70%) could be made via IPPD or by re-ranking a global search''s solutions using the same interface information, and that, encouragingly, the success of predictions remained respectable (top-ranked success rates > 15%) when the content was poor. However, when enough of the interface residues were incorrectly assigned, as would be the case when using interface residues predicted by a state-of-the-art bioinformatics method such as CPORT (15), few models ranked first by IPPD or other PPD methods, including HADDOCK (10), a popular ambiguous data-driven PPD method, came close to being acceptable. These results suggest that we can greatly increase the power of PPD predictions for practical applications only if the accuracy of current bioinformatics methods for predicting the interface residues of protein complexes can be significantly improved.Open in a separate windowFig. 1.Contact matrix of two interacting proteins, A and B, and the contact vectors of their residues. In the contact matrix, M_ij = 1 or 0, respectively, denotes contact or a lack of contact between residue i in protein A and residue j in protein B. In the contact vectors, V_Ai = 1 or 0, respectively, when residue Ai has, or does not have, at least one contact with any residue of protein B.     

Generation and Characterization of ATP Analog-specific Protein Kinase Cδ

To better study the role of PKCδ in normal function and disease, we developed an ATP analog-specific (AS) PKCδ that is sensitive to specific kinase inhibitors and can be used to identify PKCδ substrates. AS PKCδ showed nearly 200 times higher affinity (K_m) and 150 times higher efficiency (k_cat/K_m) than wild type (WT) PKCδ toward N⁶-(benzyl)-ATP. AS PKCδ was uniquely inhibited by 1-(tert-butyl)-3-(1-naphthyl)-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidin-4-amine (1NA-PP1) and 1-(tert-butyl)-3-(2-methylbenzyl)-1H-pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidin-4-amine (2MB-PP1) but not by other 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidine (PP1) analogs tested, whereas WT PKCδ was insensitive to all PP1 analogs. To understand the mechanisms for specificity and affinity of these analogs, we created in silico WT and AS PKCδ homology models based on the crystal structure of PKCι. N⁶-(Benzyl)-ATP and ATP showed similar positioning within the purine binding pocket of AS PKCδ, whereas N⁶-(benzyl)-ATP was displaced from the pocket of WT PKCδ and was unable to interact with the glycine-rich loop that is required for phosphoryl transfer. The adenine rings of 1NA-PP1 and 2MB-PP1 matched the adenine ring of ATP when docked in AS PKCδ, and this interaction prevented the potential interaction of ATP with Lys-378, Glu-428, Leu-430, and Phe-633 residues. 1NA-PP1 failed to effectively dock within WT PKCδ. Other PP1 analogs failed to interact with either AS PKCδ or WT PKCδ. These results provide a structural basis for the ability of AS PKCδ to efficiently and specifically utilize N⁶-(benzyl)-ATP as a phosphate donor and for its selective inhibition by 1NA-PP1 and 2MB-PP1. Such homology modeling could prove useful in designing molecules to target PKCδ and other kinases to understand their function in cell signaling and to identify unique substrates.     

Characterization of Hoxd1 Protein–DNA-Binding Specificity Using Affinity Chromatography and Random DNA Oligomer Selection

1. Hoxd1 is member of the labial subfamily of Hox genes that has a conserved 60 amino acid homeodomain region. The homeodomain is an important determining factor in the binding of the protein to specific DNA sequence(s). DNA-binding specificity for the Hoxd1 protein has not been determined previously.2. We have employed a rapid affinity chromatography method to determine optimal DNA binding sequences for the 109 amino acid Hoxd1 peptide, comprising the homeodomain and the entire carboxy terminal region of the Hoxd1 protein.3. Labial Hox proteins have intrinsically weak DNA-binding activity that has been attributed to the nonbasic residues at positions 2 and 3 in the N-terminal arm of the homeodomain. The presence of the Hoxd1 carboxy terminal region negated the influence of the nonbasic residues and facilitated Hoxd1 DNA-binding specificity.4. DNA sequences bound to the Hoxd1 peptide-affinity column were separated from a random pool of oligonucleotide sequences by gradient elution and enriched by polymerase chain reaction. Preferred sequences were identified on 5w and 3 of a TAAT core, extending the binding site to T/AT/gTAATTGTA.5. Stability and specificity of optimal DNA-binding sequence for Hoxd1 homeodomain were determined by equilibrium and kinetic studies. Dissociation coefficient constant (K _D) was estimated to be 8.6 × 10^–9 M and the DNA–Hoxd1 homeodomain complex has a half life (t _1/2) of 12.7 min.6. A molecular model of Hoxd1 homeodomain–-DNA interaction based on the X-ray coordinates of Antennapedia homeodomain–DNA complex has revealed novel interactions of key Hoxd1 residues at the protein–DNA interface.     

Selection of Protein–Protein Interactions of Desired Affinities with a Bandpass Circuit

We have developed a genetic circuit in Escherichia coli that can be used to select for protein–protein interactions of different strengths by changing antibiotic concentrations in the media. The genetic circuit links protein–protein interaction strength to β-lactamase activity while simultaneously imposing tuneable positive and negative selection pressure for β-lactamase activity. Cells only survive if they express interacting proteins with affinities that fall within set high- and low-pass thresholds; i.e. the circuit therefore acts as a bandpass filter for protein–protein interactions. We show that the circuit can be used to recover protein–protein interactions of desired affinity from a mixed population with a range of affinities. The circuit can also be used to select for inhibitors of protein–protein interactions of defined strength.     

Multiple Modes of Protein–Protein Interactions Promote RNP Granule Assembly

Eukaryotic cells are known to contain a wide variety of RNA–protein assemblies, collectively referred to as RNP granules. RNP granules form from a combination of RNA–RNA, protein–RNA, and protein–protein interactions. In addition, RNP granules are enriched in proteins with intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs), which are frequently appended to a well-folded domain of the same protein. This structural organization of RNP granule components allows for a diverse set of protein–protein interactions including traditional structured interactions between well-folded domains, interactions of short linear motifs in IDRs with the surface of well-folded domains, interactions of short motifs within IDRs that weakly interact with related motifs, and weak interactions involving at most transient ordering of IDRs and folded domains with other components. In addition, both well-folded domains and IDRs in granule components frequently interact with RNA and thereby can contribute to RNP granule assembly. We discuss the contribution of these interactions to liquid–liquid phase separation and the possible role of phase separation in the assembly of RNP granules. We expect that these principles also apply to other non-membrane bound organelles and large assemblies in the cell.     

Specificity of Intramembrane Protein–Lipid Interactions

Our concept of biological membranes has markedly changed, from the fluid mosaic model to the current model that lipids and proteins have the ability to separate into microdomains, differing in their protein and lipid compositions. Since the breakthrough in crystallizing membrane proteins, the most powerful method to define lipid-binding sites on proteins has been X-ray and electron crystallography. More recently, chemical biology approaches have been developed to analyze protein–lipid interactions. Such methods have the advantage of providing highly specific cellular probes. With the advent of novel tools to study functions of individual lipid species in membranes together with structural analysis and simulations at the atomistic resolution, a growing number of specific protein–lipid complexes are defined and their functions explored. In the present article, we discuss the various modes of intramembrane protein–lipid interactions in cellular membranes, including examples for both annular and nonannular bound lipids. Furthermore, we will discuss possible functional roles of such specific protein–lipid interactions as well as roles of lipids as chaperones in protein folding and transport.Our concept of biological membranes has markedly changed in the last two decades, from the fluid mosaic model (Singer and Nicolson 1972), in which the membrane was thought to be formed by a homogenous lipid fluid phase with proteins embedded, to the current model that lipids and proteins are not homogenously distributed, but have the ability to separate into microdomains, differing in their protein and lipid compositions. A well established example of domains are lipid rafts (see Box 1 for definitions). Raft domains are described as dynamic domain structures enriched in cholesterol, sphingolipids, and membrane proteins (Brown and London 1998; Simons and Ikonen 1997) that have an important role in different cellular processes (Lingwood and Simons 2010). Formation of domains within cellular membranes has been extensively investigated over the past years leading to various models that differ in the primary forces involved in the formation and the recruitment of surrounding membrane components into such domains.

BOX 1.

Definitions

Annular Lipids/Lipid Shell

An annular lipid shell is formed when selected lipid classes or molecular species bind preferentially to the hydrophobic and/or hydrophilic surfaces of a membrane protein. Per definition these lipids show markedly reduced residence times at the protein–lipid interface as compared to bulk lipids.

Bulk Lipids

Lipids within the membrane that diffuse rapidly in the bilayer plane and show a low residence time at the protein–lipid interface following random collisions. Typical diffusion coefficients for bulk lipids in a liquid disordered phase are in the range of D_L = 7×10⁻¹² m²/sec (DOPC) (Filippov et al. 2003).

Hydrophobic Mismatch

A term to describe any deviation from the compatibility of the hydrophobic surface of membrane proteins (their TMDs) to the vertically and laterally encountered hydrophobic surfaces of the lipid bilayer in biological membranes. In the case of a hydrophobic mismatch, the resulting energy penalty may cause the recruitment of a suitable local lipid environment, the deformation of the membrane and/or in conformational changes of the protein to achieve a status of hydrophobic match (for advanced reading, see Killian 1998).

Lateral Pressure Field/Profile of Membranes

Biological membranes can be considered as the “solvent” for membrane proteins that are embedded in them. The lateral pressure profile (Ω(z)) describes the force or pressure that is exerted by the membrane on the matter residing inside it. This pressure is modulated by different extents of lipid–lipid interactions and asymmetries across and within the bilayer, which in turn results in varying lateral pressures that may locally correspond to several hundreds of atmospheres.

Lipid Rafts

Sterol and sphingolipid-dependent microdomains that form a network of lipid–lipid, protein–protein, and protein–lipid interactions; involved in the compartmentalization of processes such as signaling within biological membranes.

Liquid-Disordered Phase (I_d)

A predominantly fluid phase of lipids, characterized by a high degree of mobility (cis-gauche flexibility of acyl chains; lateral diffusion) and a high content of short and/or unsaturated fatty acyl chains.

Liquid-Ordered Phase (I_o)

A liquid crystalline phase (that displays physical properties of both liquids and of solid crystals), characterized by a high degree of acyl chain order (“packing”), a reduced lateral mobility of lipid and protein molecules, and a reduction in the elasticity of the membrane as a result of specific interactions between sterols and phospholipids containing long, saturated acyl chains and/or glycosphingolipids.

Microdomains

Membrane compartments of distinct lipid and protein composition that may modulate the enzymatic functions of membrane proteins.

Molecular Lipid Species

Individual members of a lipid class that differ in their fatty acid composition.

Nonannular Lipids

Lipids that specifically interact with membrane proteins are neither bulk lipids, nor do they belong to the shell/annulus of lipids that surround the membrane protein. These nonannular lipids often reside within membrane protein complexes, in which they may fulfill diverse functions ranging from structural building blocks to allosteric effectors of enzymatic activity (see text). Nonannular lipids bind to distinct hydrophobic sites of membrane proteins or membrane protein complexes.According to one model, membrane domains can form by specific protein–protein interactions (Douglass and Vale 2005). This model is based on single-molecule microscopy experiments. In these studies, single fluorophores were chemically attached to specific proteins, and the dynamics of individual proteins was tracked by monitoring the fluorescent probe. In this kind of set up, a dynamic behavior of lipids is not assessed. Here, proteins involved in signaling processes are trapped within interconnected microdomains created by specific protein–protein interactions, probably involving additional scaffolding proteins. The proteins of such domains can exchange with the surrounding membrane area at individual kinetics, some components are immobile over minutes, and others can diffuse rapidly.Another model emphasizes the importance of lipid–lipid interactions, initiating the formation of subdomains of defined lipid compositions. Transmembrane proteins then can be attracted to such subdomains via various specific interactions with lipids. The resulting lipid–protein complexes then eventually coalesce to form larger lipid–protein assemblies (Anderson and Jacobson 2002).The idea of lipid-dependent domain formation is inherent to the biophysical properties and therefore to the complex lipid composition of cellular membranes that include up to a thousand lipids that vary in structure (van Meer et al. 2008). This wide range of lipid species has been proposed to facilitate the “solvation” of membrane proteins. Taken into account the sum of lipid species present in a cellular membrane, it is important to understand the different interactions and affinities within the bilayer between different lipids. Molecular dynamics simulations have been successfully employed to investigate lipid interactions between different lipid species and found specific interactions of various lipid classes and molecular species (Hofsass et al. 2003; Niemela et al. 2004, 2006, 2009; Pandit et al. 2004; Zaraiskaya and Jeffrey 2005; Bhide et al. 2007). These results are supported and expanded by recent data from our group that suggest a specific order of interactions of sphingomyelin species with cholesterol in membranes (A.M. Ernst, F. Wieland, and B. Brügger, unpubl.). At low cholesterol concentrations, some sphingomyelin species preferentially interact with cholesterol, whereas others prefer their kin. At higher cholesterol concentrations, all sphingomyelin species investigated display an increased affinity for the sterol. These findings open the possibility of differentiated pathways of self-assembly of microdomains, dependent on molecular lipid species.In the present article the various modes of intramembrane protein–lipid interactions in cellular membranes (Fig. 1) will be discussed. This includes possible functional roles of such specific protein–lipid interactions.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Intramembrane protein–lipid interactions within a cell membrane. (A) Bulk lipids; (B) annular lipids; (C) nonannular lipids/lipid ligands. For details see text.     

Protein–Protein and Protein–Membrane Associations in the Lignin Pathway

Supramolecular organization of enzymes is proposed to orchestrate metabolic complexity and help channel intermediates in different pathways. Phenylpropanoid metabolism has to direct up to 30% of the carbon fixed by plants to the biosynthesis of lignin precursors. Effective coupling of the enzymes in the pathway thus seems to be required. Subcellular localization, mobility, protein–protein, and protein–membrane interactions of four consecutive enzymes around the main branch point leading to lignin precursors was investigated in leaf tissues of Nicotiana benthamiana and cells of Arabidopsis thaliana. CYP73A5 and CYP98A3, the two Arabidopsis cytochrome P450s (P450s) catalyzing para- and meta-hydroxylations of the phenolic ring of monolignols were found to colocalize in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and to form homo- and heteromers. They moved along with the fast remodeling plant ER, but their lateral diffusion on the ER surface was restricted, likely due to association with other ER proteins. The connecting soluble enzyme hydroxycinnamoyltransferase (HCT), was found partially associated with the ER. Both HCT and the 4-coumaroyl-CoA ligase relocalized closer to the membrane upon P450 expression. Fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy supports P450 colocalization and interaction with the soluble proteins, enhanced by the expression of the partner proteins. Protein relocalization was further enhanced in tissues undergoing wound repair. CYP98A3 was the most effective in driving protein association.     

Computational Prediction of Protein–Protein Interaction Networks: Algo-rithms and Resources

Protein interactions play an important role in the discovery of protein functions and pathways in biological processes. This is especially true in case of the diseases caused by the loss of specific protein-protein interactions in the organism. The accuracy of experimental results in finding protein-protein interactions, however, is rather dubious and high throughput experimental results have shown both high false positive beside false negative information for protein interaction. Computational methods have attracted tremendous attention among biologists because of the ability to predict protein-protein interactions and validate the obtained experimental results. In this study, we have reviewed several computational methods for protein-protein interaction prediction as well as describing major databases, which store both predicted and detected protein-protein interactions, and the tools used for analyzing protein interaction networks and improving protein-protein interaction reliability.     

Effect of Bioregulator Isatin on Protein–Protein Interactions Involving Isatin-Binding Proteins

Isatin (2,3-dioxoindol) is an endogenous low-molecular-weight nonpeptide compound with a wide spectrum of biological and pharmacological activities. It is assumed that isatin acts through isatin-binding proteins. To date, more than a hundred of these proteins are known. Having a different structure and cellular and subcellular localization, they belong to different functional groups. Using the surface plasmon resonance technology, we found earlier that isatin affected the profile of intracellular amyloid-binding proteins and changed the stability of protein complexes in the model system. In fact, this indicates the selective effect of isatin on certain protein–protein interactions (PPI) that occur primarily with the participation of isatinbinding proteins. Therefore, we had formulated the hypothesis that isatin could be a regulator of a protein interactome. This study focuses on the verification of this assumption. Size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) profile of the rat liver tissue lysate along with mass-spectrometric protein identification has revealed 20 isatinbinding proteins that participate in the formation of the protein interactome. About 65 and 25% of them are involved in the formation of multimeric protein complexes and homo/heterodimers, respectively, and only 10% are detected as single molecules. The addition of isatin had a multidirectional effect on the profile of about half of the identified isatin-binding proteins. In some cases, the formation of protein complexes was induced, while in other cases the protein complexes were dissociated. This result confirms the hypothesis of the regulatory effect of isatin on certain PPIs. The data of this work in combination with our previous results allowed us to formulate an “interactomics image” of isatin as a bioregulator, which selectively controls both the formation and dissociation of a number of protein complexes. Two new isatin-dependent proteins were found in the work. This indicates that not all potential target proteins of the regulatory effect of isatin had been previously detected. The study of the molecular mechanisms of isatin action on PPI remains a difficult but priority task for future research.