Survey of the geometric association of domain-domain interfaces

Considering the limited success of the most sophisticated docking methods available and the amount of computation required for systematic docking, cataloging all the known interfaces may be an alternative basis for the prediction of protein tertiary and quaternary structures. We classify domain interfaces according to the geometry of domain-domain association. By applying a simple and efficient method called "interface tag clustering," more than 4,000 distinct types of domain interfaces are collected from Protein Quaternary Structure Server and Protein Data Bank. Given a pair of interacting domains, we define "face" as the set of interacting residues in each single domain and the pair of interacting faces as an "interface." We investigate how the geometry of interfaces relates to a network of interacting protein families, such as how many different binding orientations are possible between two families or whether a family uses distinct surfaces or the same surface when the family has diverse interaction partners from various families. We show there are, on average, 1.2-1.9 different types of interfaces between interacting domains and a significant number of family pairs associate in multiple orientations. In general, a family tends to use distinct faces for each partner when the family has diverse interaction partners. Each face is highly specific to its interaction partner and the binding orientation. The relative positions of interface residues are generally well conserved within the same type of interface even between remote homologs. The classification result is available at http://www.biotec.tu-dresden.de/~wkim/supplement.     

Amino acid substitutions at protein–protein interfaces that modulate the oligomeric state

Despite similarities in their sequence and structure, there are a number of homologous proteins that adopt various oligomeric states. Comparisons of these homologous protein pairs, in terms of residue substitutions at the protein–protein interfaces, have provided fundamental characteristics that describe how proteins interact with each other. We have prepared a dataset composed of pairs of related proteins with different homo‐oligomeric states. Using the protein complexes, the interface residues were identified, and using structural alignments, the shadow‐interface residues have been defined as the surface residues that align with the interface residues. Subsequently, we investigated residue substitutions between the interfaces and the shadow interfaces. Based on the degree of the contributions to the interactions, the aligned sites of the interfaces and shadow interfaces were divided into primary and secondary sites; the primary sites are the focus of this work. The primary sites were further classified into two groups (i.e. exposed and buried) based on the degree to which the residue is buried within the shadow interfaces. Using these classifications, two simple mechanisms that mediate the oligomeric states were identified. In the primary‐exposed sites, the residues on the shadow interfaces are replaced by more hydrophobic or aromatic residues, which are physicochemically favored at protein–protein interfaces. In the primary‐buried sites, the residues on the shadow interfaces are replaced by larger residues that protrude into other proteins. These simple rules are satisfied in 23 out of 25 Structural Classification of Proteins (SCOP) families with a different‐oligomeric‐state pair, and thus represent a basic strategy for modulating protein associations and dissociations. Proteins 2010. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Protein–protein interactions leave evolutionary footprints: High molecular coevolution at the core of interfaces

Protein–protein interactions are essential to all aspects of life. Specific interactions result from evolutionary pressure at the interacting interfaces of partner proteins. However, evolutionary pressure is not homogeneous within the interface: for instance, each residue does not contribute equally to the binding energy of the complex. To understand functional differences between residues within the interface, we analyzed their properties in the core and rim regions. Here, we characterized protein interfaces with two evolutionary measures, conservation and coevolution, using a comprehensive dataset of 896 protein complexes. These scores can detect different selection pressures at a given position in a multiple sequence alignment. We also analyzed how the number of interactions in which a residue is involved influences those evolutionary signals. We found that the coevolutionary signal is higher in the interface core than in the interface rim region. Additionally, the difference in coevolution between core and rim regions is comparable to the known difference in conservation between those regions. Considering proteins with multiple interactions, we found that conservation and coevolution increase with the number of different interfaces in which a residue is involved, suggesting that more constraints (i.e., a residue that must satisfy a greater number of interactions) allow fewer sequence changes at those positions, resulting in higher conservation and coevolution values. These findings shed light on the evolution of protein interfaces and provide information useful for identifying protein interfaces and predicting protein–protein interactions.     

Predicting where Small Molecules Bind at Protein-Protein Interfaces

Small molecules that bind at protein-protein interfaces may either block or stabilize protein-protein interactions in cells. Thus, some of these binding interfaces may turn into prospective targets for drug design. Here, we collected 175 pairs of protein-protein (PP) complexes and protein-ligand (PL) complexes with known three-dimensional structures for which (1) one protein from the PP complex shares at least 40% sequence identity with the protein from the PL complex, and (2) the interface regions of these proteins overlap at least partially with each other. We found that those residues of the interfaces that may bind the other protein as well as the small molecule are evolutionary more conserved on average, have a higher tendency of being located in pockets and expose a smaller fraction of their surface area to the solvent than the remaining protein-protein interface region. Based on these findings we derived a statistical classifier that predicts patches at binding interfaces that have a higher tendency to bind small molecules. We applied this new prediction method to more than 10 000 interfaces from the protein data bank. For several complexes related to apoptosis the predicted binding patches were in direct contact to co-crystallized small molecules.     

Are protein–protein interfaces more conserved in sequence than the rest of the protein surface?

Protein interfaces are thought to be distinguishable from the rest of the protein surface by their greater degree of residue conservation. We test the validity of this approach on an expanded set of 64 protein-protein interfaces using conservation scores derived from two multiple sequence alignment types, one of close homologs/orthologs and one of diverse homologs/paralogs. Overall, we find that the interface is slightly more conserved than the rest of the protein surface when using either alignment type, with alignments of diverse homologs showing marginally better discrimination. However, using a novel surface-patch definition, we find that the interface is rarely significantly more conserved than other surface patches when using either alignment type. When an interface is among the most conserved surface patches, it tends to be part of an enzyme active site. The most conserved surface patch overlaps with 39% (+/- 28%) and 36% (+/- 28%) of the actual interface for diverse and close homologs, respectively. Contrary to results obtained from smaller data sets, this work indicates that residue conservation is rarely sufficient for complete and accurate prediction of protein interfaces. Finally, we find that obligate interfaces differ from transient interfaces in that the former have significantly fewer alignment gaps at the interface than the rest of the protein surface, as well as having buried interface residues that are more conserved than partially buried interface residues.     

Distinct properties of glycine receptor β+/α- interface: unambiguously characterizing heteromeric interface reconstituted in homomeric protein

The glycine receptor (GlyR) exists either in homomeric α or heteromeric αβ forms. Its agonists bind at extracellular subunit interfaces. Unlike subunit interfaces from the homomeric α GlyR, subunit interfaces from the heteromeric αβ GlyR have not been characterized unambiguously because of the existence of multiple types of interface within single receptors. Here, we report that, by reconstituting β+/α- interfaces in a homomeric GlyR (αChb+a- GlyR), we were able to functionally characterize the αβ GlyR β+/α- interfaces. We found that the β+/α- interface had a higher agonist sensitivity than that of the α+/α- interface. This high sensitivity was contributed primarily by loop A. We also found that the β+/α- interface differentially modulates the agonist properties of glycine and taurine. Using voltage clamp fluorometry, we found that the conformational changes induced by glycine binding to the β+/α- interface were different from those induced by glycine binding to the α+/α- interface in the α GlyR. Moreover, the distinct conformational changes found at the β+/α- interface in the αChb+a- GlyR were also found in the heteromeric αβ GlyR, which suggests that the αChb+a- GlyR reconstitutes structural components and recapitulates functional properties, of the β+/α- interface in the heteromeric αβ GlyR. Our investigation not only provides structural and functional information about the GlyR β+/α- interface, which could direct GlyR β+/α- interface-specific drug design, but also provides a general methodology for unambiguously characterizing properties of specific protein interfaces from heteromeric proteins.     

Molecular architecture of protein-RNA recognition sites

The molecular architecture of protein-RNA interfaces are analyzed using a non-redundant dataset of 152 protein-RNA complexes. We find that an average protein-RNA interface is smaller than an average protein-DNA interface but larger than an average protein–protein interface. Among the different classes of protein-RNA complexes, interfaces with tRNA are the largest, while the interfaces with the single-stranded RNA are the smallest. Significantly, RNA contributes more to the interface area than its partner protein. Moreover, unlike protein–protein interfaces where the side chain contributes less to the interface area compared to the main chain, the main chain and side chain contributions flipped in protein-RNA interfaces. We find that the protein surface in contact with the RNA in protein-RNA complexes is better packed than that in contact with the DNA in protein-DNA complexes, but loosely packed than that in contact with the protein in protein–protein complexes. Shape complementarity and electrostatic potential are the two major factors that determine the specificity of the protein-RNA interaction. We find that the H-bond density at the protein-RNA interfaces is similar with that of protein-DNA interfaces but higher than the protein–protein interfaces. Unlike protein-DNA interfaces where the deoxyribose has little role in intermolecular H-bonds, due to the presence of an oxygen atom at the 2′ position, the ribose in RNA plays significant role in protein-RNA H-bonds. We find that besides H-bonds, salt bridges and stacking interactions also play significant role in stabilizing protein-nucleic acids interfaces; however, their contribution at the protein–protein interfaces is insignificant.     

Evolution of Protein Binding Modes in Homooligomers

The evolution of protein interactions cannot be deciphered without a detailed analysis of interaction interfaces and binding modes. We performed a large-scale study of protein homooligomers in terms of their symmetry, interface sizes, and conservation of binding modes. We also focused specifically on the evolution of protein binding modes from nine families of homooligomers and mapped 60 different binding modes and oligomerization states onto the phylogenetic trees of these families. We observed a significant tendency for the same binding modes to be clustered together and conserved within clades on phylogenetic trees; this trend is especially pronounced for close homologs with 70% sequence identity or higher. Some binding modes are conserved among very distant homologs, pointing to their ancient evolutionary origin, while others are very specific for a certain phylogenetic group. Moreover, we found that the most ancient binding modes have a tendency to involve symmetrical (isologous) homodimer binding arrangements with larger interfaces, while recently evolved binding modes more often exhibit asymmetrical arrangements and smaller interfaces.     

Conservation of polar residues as hot spots at protein interfaces

A number of studies have addressed the question of which are the critical residues at protein-binding sites. These studies examined either a single or a few protein-protein interfaces. The most extensive study to date has been an analysis of alanine-scanning mutagenesis. However, although the total number of mutations was large, the number of protein interfaces was small, with some of the interfaces closely related. Here we show that although overall binding sites are hydrophobic, they are studded with specific, conserved polar residues at specific locations, possibly serving as energy "hot spots." Our results confirm and generalize the alanine-scanning data analysis, despite its limited size. Previously Trp, Arg, and Tyr were shown to constitute energetic hot spots. These were rationalized by their polar interactions and by their surrounding rings of hydrophobic residues. However, there was no compelling reason as to why specifically these residues were conserved. Here we show that other polar residues are similarly conserved. These conserved residues have been detected consistently in all interface families that we have examined. Our results are based on an extensive examination of residues which are in contact across protein interfaces. We utilize all clustered interface families with at least five members and with sequence similarity between the members in the range of 20-90%. There are 11 such clustered interface families, comprising a total of 97 crystal structures. Our three-dimensional superpositioning analysis of the occurrences of matched residues in each of the families identifies conserved residues at spatially similar environments. Additionally, in enzyme inhibitors, we observe that residues are more conserved at the interfaces than at other locations. On the other hand, antibody-protein interfaces have similar surface conservation as compared to their corresponding linear sequence alignment, consistent with the suggestion that evolution has optimized protein interfaces for function.     

The Subunit Interfaces of Weakly Associated Homodimeric Proteins

We analyzed subunit interfaces in 315 homodimers with an X-ray structure in the Protein Data Bank, validated by checking the literature for data that indicate that the proteins are dimeric in solution and that, in the case of the “weak” dimers, the homodimer is in equilibrium with the monomer. The interfaces of the 42 weak dimers, which are smaller by a factor of 2.4 on average than in the remainder of the set, are comparable in size with antibody-antigen or protease-inhibitor interfaces. Nevertheless, they are more hydrophobic than in the average transient protein-protein complex and similar in amino acid composition to the other homodimer interfaces. The mean numbers of interface hydrogen bonds and hydration water molecules per unit area are also similar in homodimers and transient complexes. Parameters related to the atomic packing suggest that many of the weak dimer interfaces are loosely packed, and we suggest that this contributes to their low stability. To evaluate the evolutionary selection pressure on interface residues, we calculated the Shannon entropy of homologous amino acid sequences at 60% sequence identity. In 93% of the homodimers, the interface residues are better conserved than the residues on the protein surface. The weak dimers display the same high degree of interface conservation as other homodimers, but their homologs may be heterodimers as well as homodimers. Their interfaces may be good models in terms of their size, composition, and evolutionary conservation for the labile subunit contacts that allow protein assemblies to share and exchange components, allosteric proteins to undergo quaternary structure transitions, and molecular machines to operate in the cell.     

PPiClust: efficient clustering of 3D protein-protein interaction interfaces

The biological mechanisms through which proteins interact with one another are best revealed by studying the structural interfaces between interacting proteins. Protein-protein interfaces can be extracted from three-dimensional (3D) structural data of protein complexes and then clustered to derive biological insights. However, conventional protein interface clustering methods lack computational scalability and statistical support. In this work, we present a new method named "PPiClust" to systematically encode, cluster, and analyze similar 3D interface patterns in protein complexes efficiently. Experimental results showed that our method is effective in discovering visually consistent and statistically significant clusters of interfaces, and at the same time sufficiently time-efficient to be performed on a single computer. The interface clusters are also useful for uncovering the structural basis of protein interactions. Analysis of the resulting interface clusters revealed groups of structurally diverse proteins having similar interface patterns. We also found, in some of the interface clusters, the presence of well-known linear binding motifs which were noncontiguous in the primary sequences. These results suggest that PPiClust can discover not only statistically significant, but also biologically significant, protein interface clusters from protein complex structural data.     

Folding of beta/alpha-unit scrambled forms of S. cerevisiae triosephosphate isomerase: Evidence for autonomy of substructure formation and plasticity of hydrophobic and hydrogen bonding interactions in core of (beta/alpha)8-barrel

We show that residues at the interfaces of protein-protein complexes have higher side-chain energy than other surface residues. Eight different sets of protein complexes were analyzed. For each protein pair, the complex structure was used to identify the interface residues in the unbound monomer structures. Side-chain energy was calculated for each surface residue in the unbound monomer using our previously developed scoring function.1 The mean energy was calculated for the interface residues and the other surface residues. In 15 of the 16 monomers, the mean energy of the interface residues was higher than that of other surface residues. By decomposing the scoring function, we found that the energy term of the buried surface area of non-hydrogen-bonded hydrophilic atoms is the most important factor contributing to the high energy of the interface regions. In spite of lacking hydrophilic residues, the interface regions were found to be rich in buried non-hydrogen-bonded hydrophilic atoms. Although the calculation results could be affected by the inaccuracy of the scoring function, patch analysis of side-chain energy on the surface of an isolated protein may be helpful in identifying the possible protein-protein interface. A patch was defined as 20 residues surrounding the central residue on the protein surface, and patch energy was calculated as the mean value of the side-chain energy of all residues in the patch. In 12 of the studied monomers, the patch with the highest energy overlaps with the observed interface. The results are more remarkable when only three residues with the highest energy in a patch are averaged to derive the patch energy. All three highest-energy residues of the top energy patch belong to interfacial residues in four of the eight small protomers. We also found that the residue with the highest energy score on the surface of a small protomer is very possibly the key interaction residue.     

Dynamic features of homodimer interfaces calculated by normal‐mode analysis

Knowledge of the dynamic features of protein interfaces is necessary for a deeper understanding of protein–protein interactions. We performed normal‐mode analysis (NMA) of 517 nonredundant homodimers and their protomers to characterize dimer interfaces from a dynamic perspective. The motion vector calculated by NMA for each atom of a dimer was decomposed into internal and external motion vectors in individual component subunits, followed by the averaging of time‐averaged correlations between these vectors over atom pairs in the interface. This averaged correlation coefficient (ACC) was defined for various combinations of vectors and investigated in detail. ACCs decrease exponentially with an increasing interface area and r‐value, that is, interface area divided by the entire subunit surface area. As the r‐value reflects the nature of dimer formation, the result suggests that both the interface area and the nature of dimer formation are responsible for the dynamic properties of dimer interfaces. For interfaces with small or medium r‐values and without intersubunit entanglements, ACCs are found to increase on dimer formation when compared with those in the protomer state. In contrast, ACCs do not increase on dimer formation for interfaces with large r‐values and intersubunit entanglements such as in interwinding dimers. Furthermore, relationships between ACCs for intrasubunit atom pairs and for intersubunit atom pairs are found to significantly differ between interwinding and noninterwinding dimers for external motions. External motions are considered as an important factor for characterizing dimer interfaces.     

Fast and accurate modeling of protein-protein interactions by combining template-interface-based docking with flexible refinement

The similarity between folding and binding led us to posit the concept that the number of protein-protein interface motifs in nature is limited, and interacting protein pairs can use similar interface architectures repeatedly, even if their global folds completely vary. Thus, known protein-protein interface architectures can be used to model the complexes between two target proteins on the proteome scale, even if their global structures differ. This powerful concept is combined with a flexible refinement and global energy assessment tool. The accuracy of the method is highly dependent on the structural diversity of the interface architectures in the template dataset. Here, we validate this knowledge-based combinatorial method on the Docking Benchmark and show that it efficiently finds high-quality models for benchmark complexes and their binding regions even in the absence of template interfaces having sequence similarity to the targets. Compared to "classical" docking, it is computationally faster; as the number of target proteins increases, the difference becomes more dramatic. Further, it is able to distinguish binders from nonbinders. These features allow performing large-scale network modeling. The results on an independent target set (proteins in the p53 molecular interaction map) show that current method can be used to predict whether a given protein pair interacts. Overall, while constrained by the diversity of the template set, this approach efficiently produces high-quality models of protein-protein complexes. We expect that with the growing number of known interface architectures, this type of knowledge-based methods will be increasingly used by the broad proteomics community.     

Architectures and functional coverage of protein-protein interfaces

The diverse range of cellular functions is performed by a limited number of protein folds existing in nature. One may similarly expect that cellular functional diversity would be covered by a limited number of protein-protein interface architectures. Here, we present 8205 interface clusters, each representing a unique interface architecture. This data set of protein-protein interfaces is analyzed and compared with older data sets. We observe that the number of both biological and crystal interfaces increases significantly compared to the number of Protein Data Bank entries. Furthermore, we find that the number of distinct interface architectures grows at a much faster rate than the number of folds and is yet to level off. We further analyze the growth trend of the functional coverage by constructing functional interaction networks from interfaces. The functional coverage is also found to steadily increase. Interestingly, we also observe that despite the diversity of interface architectures, some are more favorable and frequently used, and of particular interest, are the ones that are also preferred in single chains.     

Evaluation of the protein interfaces that form an intermolecular four-helix bundle as studied by computer simulation

Rational design of protein surface is important for creating higher order protein structures, but it is still challenging. In this study, we designed in silico the several binding interfaces on protein surfaces that allow a de novo protein–protein interaction to be formed. We used a computer simulation technique to find appropriate amino acid arrangements for the binding interface. The protein–protein interaction can be made by forming an intermolecular four-helix bundle structure, which is often found in naturally occurring protein subunit interfaces. As a model protein, we used a helical protein, YciF. Molecular dynamics simulation showed that a new protein–protein interaction is formed depending on the number of hydrophobic and charged amino acid residues present in the binding surfaces. However, too many hydrophobic amino acid residues present in the interface negatively affected on the binding. Finally, we found an appropriate arrangement of hydrophobic and charged amino acid residues that induces a protein–protein interaction through an intermolecular four-helix bundle formation.     

Surface, subunit interfaces and interior of oligomeric proteins

The solvent-accessible surface area (As) of 23 oligomeric proteins is calculated using atomic co-ordinates from high-resolution and well-refined crystal structures. As is correlated with the protein molecular weight, and a power law predicts its value to within 5% on average. The accessible surface of the average oligomer is similar to that of monomeric proteins in its hydropathy and amino acid composition. The distribution of the 20 amino acid types between the protein surface and its interior is also the same as in monomers. Interfaces, i.e. surfaces involved in subunit contacts, differ from the rest of the subunit surface. They are enriched in hydrophobic side-chains, yet they contain a number of charged groups, especially from Arg residues, which are the most abundant residues at interfaces except for Leu. Buried Arg residues are involved in H-bonds between subunits. We counted H-bonds at interfaces and found that several have none, others have one H-bond per 200 A2 of interface area on average (1 A = 0.1 nm). A majority of interface H-bonds involve charged donor or acceptor groups, which should make their contribution to the free energy of dissociation significant, even when they are few. The smaller interfaces cover about 700 A2 of the subunit surface. The larger ones cover 3000 to 10,000 A2, up to 40% of the subunit surface area in catalase. The lower value corresponds to an estimate of the accessible surface area loss required for stabilizing subunit association through the hydrophobic effect alone. Oligomers with small interfaces have globular subunits with accessible surface areas similar to those of monomeric proteins. We suggest that these oligomers assemble from preformed monomers with little change in conformation. In oligomers with large interfaces, isolated subunits should be unstable given their excessively large accessible surface, and assembly is expected to require major structural changes.