Charged residues at protein interaction interfaces: unexpected conservation and orchestrated divergence

Protein-protein interactions play an essential role in the functioning of cell. The importance of charged residues and their diverse role in protein-protein interactions have been well studied using experimental and computational methods. Often, charged residues located in protein interaction interfaces are conserved across the families of homologous proteins and protein complexes. However, on a large scale, it has been recently shown that charged residues are significantly less conserved than other residue types in protein interaction interfaces. The goal of this work is to understand the role of charged residues in the protein interaction interfaces through their conservation patterns. Here, we propose a simple approach where the structural conservation of the charged residue pairs is analyzed among the pairs of homologous binary complexes. Specifically, we determine a large set of homologous interactions using an interaction interface similarity measure and catalog the basic types of conservation patterns among the charged residue pairs. We find an unexpected conservation pattern, which we call the correlated reappearance, occurring among the pairs of homologous interfaces more frequently than the fully conserved pairs of charged residues. Furthermore, the analysis of the conservation patterns across different superkingdoms as well as structural classes of proteins has revealed that the correlated reappearance of charged residues is by far the most prevalent conservation pattern, often occurring more frequently than the unconserved charged residues. We discuss a possible role that the new conservation pattern may play in the long-range electrostatic steering effect.     

Structural segments and residue propensities in protein-RNA interfaces: comparison with protein-protein and protein-DNA complexes

The interface of a protein molecule that is involved in binding another protein, DNA or RNA has been characterized in terms of the number of unique secondary structural segments (SSSs), made up of stretches of helix, strand and non-regular (NR) regions. On average 10-11 segments define the protein interface in protein-protein (PP) and protein-DNA (PD) complexes, while the number is higher (14) for protein-RNA (PR) complexes. While the length of helical segments in PP interaction increases with the interface area, this is not the case in PD and PR complexes. The propensities of residues to occur in the three types of secondary structural elements (SSEs) in the interface relative to the corresponding elements in the protein tertiary structures have been calculated. Arg, Lys, Asn, Tyr, His and Gln are preferred residues in PR complexes; in addition, Ser and Thr are also favoured in PD interfaces.     

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.     

On the relationship between residue structural environment and sequence conservation in proteins

Residues that are crucial to protein function or structure are usually evolutionarily conserved. To identify the important residues in protein, sequence conservation is estimated, and current methods rely upon the unbiased collection of homologous sequences. Surprisingly, our previous studies have shown that the sequence conservation is closely correlated with the weighted contact number (WCN), a measure of packing density for residue's structural environment, calculated only based on the C_α positions of a protein structure. Moreover, studies have shown that sequence conservation is correlated with environment‐related structural properties calculated based on different protein substructures, such as a protein's all atoms, backbone atoms, side‐chain atoms, or side‐chain centroid. To know whether the C_α atomic positions are adequate to show the relationship between residue environment and sequence conservation or not, here we compared C_α atoms with other substructures in their contributions to the sequence conservation. Our results show that C_α positions are substantially equivalent to the other substructures in calculations of various measures of residue environment. As a result, the overlapping contributions between C_α atoms and the other substructures are high, yielding similar structure–conservation relationship. Take the WCN as an example, the average overlapping contribution to sequence conservation is 87% between C_α and all‐atom substructures. These results indicate that only C_α atoms of a protein structure could reflect sequence conservation at the residue level.     

Comprehensive statistical analysis of residues interaction specificity at protein-protein interfaces

We calculated interchain contacts on the atomic level for nonredundant set of 4602 protein-protein interfaces using an unbiased Voronoi-Delaune tessellation method, and made 20x20 residue contact matrixes both for homodimers and heterocomplexes. The area of contacts and the distance distribution for these contacts were calculated on both the residue and the atomic levels. We analyzed residue area distribution and showed the existence of two types of interresidue contacts: stochastic and specific. We also derived formulas describing the distribution of contact area for stochastic and specific interactions in parametric form. Maximum pairing preference index was found for Cys-Cys contacts and for oppositely charged interactions. A significant difference in residue contacts was observed between homodimers and heterocomplexes. Interfaces in homodimers were enriched with contacts between residues of the same type due to the effects of structure symmetry.     

Dissecting subunit interfaces in homodimeric proteins

The subunit interfaces of 122 homodimers of known three-dimensional structure are analyzed and dissected into sets of surface patches by clustering atoms at the interface; 70 interfaces are single-patch, the others have up to six patches, often contributed by different structural domains. The average interface buries 1,940 A2 of the surface of each monomer, contains one or two patches burying 600-1,600 A2, is 65% nonpolar and includes 18 hydrogen bonds. However, the range of size and of hydrophobicity is wide among the 122 interfaces. Each interface has a core made of residues with atoms buried in the dimer, surrounded by a rim of residues with atoms that remain accessible to solvent. The core, which constitutes 77% of the interface on average, has an amino acid composition that resembles the protein interior except for the presence of arginine residues, whereas the rim is more like the protein surface. These properties of the interfaces in homodimers, which are permanent assemblies, are compared to those of protein-protein complexes where the components associate after they have independently folded. On average, subunit interfaces in homodimers are twice larger than in complexes, and much less polar due to the large fraction belonging to the core, although the amino acid compositions of the cores are similar in the two types of interfaces.     

Conserved residue clustering and protein structure prediction

Protein residues that are critical for structure and function are expected to be conserved throughout evolution. Here, we investigate the extent to which these conserved residues are clustered in three-dimensional protein structures. In 92% of the proteins in a data set of 79 proteins, the most conserved positions in multiple sequence alignments are significantly more clustered than randomly selected sets of positions. The comparison to random subsets is not necessarily appropriate, however, because the signal could be the result of differences in the amino acid composition of sets of conserved residues compared to random subsets (hydrophobic residues tend to be close together in the protein core), or differences in sequence separation of the residues in the different sets. In order to overcome these limits, we compare the degree of clustering of the conserved positions on the native structure and on alternative conformations generated by the de novo structure prediction method Rosetta. For 65% of the 79 proteins, the conserved residues are significantly more clustered in the native structure than in the alternative conformations, indicating that the clustering of conserved residues in protein structures goes beyond that expected purely from sequence locality and composition effects. The differences in the spatial distribution of conserved residues can be utilized in de novo protein structure prediction: We find that for 79% of the proteins, selection of the Rosetta generated conformations with the greatest clustering of the conserved residues significantly enriches the fraction of close-to-native structures.     

Predicting DNA-binding amino acid residues from electrostatic stabilization upon mutation to Asp/Glu and evolutionary conservation

Binding of polyanionic DNA depends on the cluster of electropositive atoms in the binding site of a DNA-binding protein. Such a cluster of electropositive protein atoms would be electrostatically unfavorable without stabilizing interactions from the respective electronegative DNA atoms and would likely be evolutionary conserved due to its critical biological role. Consequently, our strategy for predicting DNA-binding residues is based on detecting a cluster of evolutionary conserved surface residues that are electrostatically stabilized upon mutation to negatively charged Asp/Glu residues. The method requires as input the protein structure and sufficient sequence homologs to define each residue's relative conservation, and it yields as output experimentally testable residues that are predicted to bind DNA. By incorporating characteristic DNA-binding site features (i.e., electrostatic strain and amino acid conservation), the new method yields a prediction accuracy of 83%, which is much higher than methods based on only electrostatic strain (57%) or conservation alone (50%). It is also less sensitive to protein conformational changes upon DNA binding than methods that mainly depend on the 3D protein structure.     

Analysing six types of protein-protein interfaces

Non-covalent residue side-chain interactions occur in many different types of proteins and facilitate many biological functions. Are these differences manifested in the sequence compositions and/or the residue-residue contact preferences of the interfaces? Previous studies analysed small data sets and gave contradictory answers. Here, we introduced a new data-mining method that yielded the largest high-resolution data set of interactions analysed. We introduced an information theory-based analysis method. On the basis of sequence features, we were able to differentiate six types of protein interfaces, each corresponding to a different functional or structural association between residues. Particularly, we found significant differences in amino acid composition and residue-residue preferences between interactions of residues within the same structural domain and between different domains, between permanent and transient interfaces, and between interactions associating homo-oligomers and hetero-oligomers. The differences between the six types were so substantial that, using amino acid composition alone, we could predict statistically to which of the six types of interfaces a pool of 1000 residues belongs at 63-100% accuracy. All interfaces differed significantly from the background of all residues in SWISS-PROT, from the group of surface residues, and from internal residues that were not involved in non-trivial interactions. Overall, our results suggest that the interface type could be predicted from sequence and that interface-type specific mean-field potentials may be adequate for certain applications.     

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.     

Identifying protein-protein interfacial residues in heterocomplexes using residue conservation scores

Identifying protein–protein interfaces is crucial for structural biology. Because of the constraints in wet experiments, many computational methods have been proposed. Without knowing any information about the partner chains, a new method of predicting protein–protein interaction interface residues purely based on evolutionary information in heterocomplexes is proposed here. Unlike traditional approaches using multiple sequence alignment profiles to represent the conservation level for each residue, we make predictions based on the concept of residue conservation scores so that the dimension of the feature vector for each residue can be drastically reduced, at least 20 times less than conventional methods. Based on the representation approach, a simple linear discriminant function is used to make predictions, so the computational complexity of the whole prediction procedure can also be greatly decreased. By testing our approach on 69 heterocomplex chains, experimental results demonstrate the performance of our approach is indeed superior to current existing methods.     

Comparing four different approaches for the determination of inter‐residue interactions provides insight for the structure prediction of helical membrane proteins

Studying inter‐residue interactions provides insight into the folding and stability of both soluble and membrane proteins and is essential for developing computational tools for protein structure prediction. As the first step, various approaches for elucidating such interactions within protein structures have been proposed and proven useful. Since different approaches may grasp different aspects of protein structural folds, it is of interest to systematically compare them. In this work, we applied four approaches for determining inter‐residue interactions to the analysis of three distinct structure datasets of helical membrane proteins and compared their correlation to the three individual quality measures of structures in these datasets. These datasets included one of 35 structures of rhodopsin receptors and bacterial rhodopsins determined at various resolutions, one derived from the HOMEP benchmark dataset previously reported, and one comprising of 139 homology models. It was found that the correlation between the average number of inter‐residue interactions obtained by applying the four approaches and the available structure quality measures varied quite significantly among them. The best correlation was achieved by the approach focusing exclusively on favorable inter‐residue interactions. These results provide interesting insight for the development of objective quality measure for the structure prediction of helical membrane proteins. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Biopolymers 91: 547–556, 2009. This article was originally published online as an accepted preprint. The “Published Online” date corresponds to the preprint version. You can request a copy of the preprint by emailing the Biopolymers editorial office at biopolymers@wiley.com     

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.     

Insights from the structural analysis of protein heterodimer interfaces

Protein heterodimer complexes are often involved in catalysis, regulation, assembly, immunity and inhibition. This involves the formation of stable interfaces between the interacting partners. Hence, it is of interest to describe heterodimer interfaces using known structural complexes. We use a non-redundant dataset of 192 heterodimer complex structures from the protein databank (PDB) to identify interface residues and describe their interfaces using amino-acids residue property preference. Analysis of the dataset shows that the heterodimer interfaces are often abundant in polar residues. The analysis also shows the presence of two classes of interfaces in heterodimer complexes. The first class of interfaces (class A) with more polar residues than core but less than surface is known. These interfaces are more hydrophobic than surfaces, where protein-protein binding is largely hydrophobic. The second class of interfaces (class B) with more polar residues than core and surface is shown. These interfaces are more polar than surfaces, where binding is mainly polar. Thus, these findings provide insights to the understanding of protein-protein interactions.     

Prediction of interfaces for oligomerizations of G-protein coupled receptors

Several lines of biochemical and pharmacological evidence have suggested that some G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) form homo oligomers, hetero oligomers or both. The GPCRs oligomerizations are considered to be related to signal transduction and some diseases. Therefore, an accurate prediction of the residues that interact upon oligomerization interface would further our understanding of signal transduction and the diseases in which GPCRs are involved. One of the complications for such a prediction is that the interfaces differ with the subtypes, even within the same GPCR family. Focusing on the distribution of residues conserved on the molecular surface in a particular subtype, we developed a new method to predict the interface for the GPCR oligomers, and applied it to several subtypes of known GPCRs to check the sensitivity. Subsequently, we found that predicted interfaces of rhodopsin, D(2) dopamine receptor and beta(2) adrenergic receptor agreed with the experimentally suggested interfaces, despite difference in the interface region among the three subtypes. Moreover, a highly conserved residue detected from the D(2) dopamine receptor corresponded to a residue involved in a missense change found in the large family of myoclonus dystonia. Our observation suggests the possibility that the disease is caused by the disorder of the oligomerization, although the molecular mechanism of the disease has not been revealed yet. The benefits and the pitfalls of the new method will be discussed, based on the results of the applications.     

A structural view of bacterial DNA replication

DNA replication mechanisms are conserved across all organisms. The proteins required to initiate, coordinate, and complete the replication process are best characterized in model organisms such as Escherichia coli. These include nucleotide triphosphate‐driven nanomachines such as the DNA‐unwinding helicase DnaB and the clamp loader complex that loads DNA‐clamps onto primer–template junctions. DNA‐clamps are required for the processivity of the DNA polymerase III core, a heterotrimer of α, ε, and θ, required for leading‐ and lagging‐strand synthesis. DnaB binds the DnaG primase that synthesizes RNA primers on both strands. Representative structures are available for most classes of DNA replication proteins, although there are gaps in our understanding of their interactions and the structural transitions that occur in nanomachines such as the helicase, clamp loader, and replicase core as they function. Reviewed here is the structural biology of these bacterial DNA replication proteins and prospects for future research.