An orientation-dependent hydrogen bonding potential improves prediction of specificity and structure for proteins and protein-protein complexes

Journal of Molecular Biology

Volumn 326, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 1239-1259

  Kortemme, Tanja ^a   Morozov, Alexandre V ^a,b   Baker, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Electrostatics; Free energy function; Hydrogen bond; Protein design; Protein docking

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; BINDING AFFINITY; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; HYDROGEN BOND; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE;

EID: 0037470581     PISSN: 00222836     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-2836(03)00021-4     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Baker E.N., Hubbard R.E. Hydrogen bonding in globular proteins. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 44:1984;97-179.
2. Conte L.L., Chothia C., Janin J. The atomic structure of protein-protein recognition sites. J. Mol. Biol. 285:1999;2177-2198.
3. Hendsch Z.S., Tidor B. Do salt bridges stabilize proteins? A continuum electrostatic analysis. Protein Sci. 3:1994;211-226.
4. Pace C.N. Polar group burial contributes more to protein stability than nonpolar group burial. Biochemistry. 40:2001;310-313.
5. McDonald I.K., Thornton J.M. Satisfying hydrogen bonding potential in proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 238:1994;777-793.
6. Waldburger C.D., Schildbach J.F., Sauer R.T. Are buried salt bridges important for protein stability and conformational specificity? Nature Struct. Biol. 2:1995;122-128.
7. Yang A.S., Honig B. Free energy determinants of secondary structure formation: I. alpha-helices. J. Mol. Biol. 252:1995;351-365.
8. Hendsch Z.S., Jonsson T., Sauer R.T., Tidor B. Protein stabilization by removal of unsatisfied polar groups: computational approaches and experimental tests. Biochemistry. 35:1996;7621-7625.
9. Lumb K.J., Kim P.S. A buried polar interaction imparts structural uniqueness in a designed heterodimeric coiled coil. Biochemistry. 34:1995;8642-8648.
10. Petrey D., Honig B. Free energy determinants of tertiary structure and the evaluation of protein models. Protein Sci. 9:2000;2181-2191.
11. Morokuma K. Why do molecules interact? The origin of electron donor-acceptor complexes, hydrogen bonding and proton affinity. Accts. Chem. Res. 10:1977;294-300.
12. Kollman P.A. Noncovalent interactions. Accts. Chem. Res. 10:1977;365-371.
13. Taylor R., Kennard O., Versichel W. Geometry of the N-HOC hydrogen bond. 1. Lone-pair directionality. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 105:1983;5761-5766.
14. Taylor R., Kennard O. Hydrogen-bond geometry in organic crystals. Accts. Chem. Res. 17:1984;320-325.
15. Gavezzotti A., Filippini G. Geometry of the intermolecular X-H́Y (X, Y=N, O) hydrogen bond and the calibration of empirical hydrogen-bond potentials. J. Phys. Chem. ser. B. 98:1994;4831-4837.
16. Platts J.A., Howard S.T., Bracke B.R.F. Directionality of hydrogen bonds to sulfur and oxygen. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118:1996;2726-2733.
17. Lommerse J.P.M., Price S.L., Taylor R. Hydrogen bonding of carbonyl, ether, and ester oxygen atoms with alkanol hydroxyl groups. J. Comput. Chem. 18:1997;757-774.
18. Grzybowski B.A., Ishchenko A.V., DeWitte R.S., Whitesides G.M., Shakhnovich E.I. Development of a knowledge-based potential for crystals of small organic molecules: calculation of energy surfaces for ĆÓH-N hydrogen bonds. J. Phys. Chem. ser. B. 104:2000;7293-7298.
19. Ippolito J.A., Alexander R.S., Christianson D.W. Hydrogen bond stereochemistry in protein structure and function. J. Mol. Biol. 215:1990;457-471.
20. Stickle D.F., Presta L.G., Dill K.A., Rose G.D. Hydrogen bonding in globular proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 226:1992;1143-1159.
21. Fabiola F., Bertram R., Korostelev A., Chapman M.S. An improved hydrogen bond potential: impact on medium resolution protein structures. Protein Sci. 11:2002;1415-1423.
22. McGuire R.F., Momany F.A., Scheraga H.A. Energy parameters in polypeptides. V. An empirical hydrogen bond function based on molecular orbital calculations. J. Phys. Chem. 76:1972;375-393.
23. Wiberg K.B., Marquez M., Castejon H. Lone pairs in carbonyl compounds and ethers. J. Org. Chem. 59:1994;6817-6822.
24. Brooks B.R., Bruccoleri R.E., Olafson B.D., States D.J., Swaminathan S., Karplus M. CHARMM: a program for macromolecular energy, minimization and dynamics calculations. J. Comput. Chem. 4:1983;187-217.
25. Weiner S.J., Kollman P.A., Case D.A., Singh U.C., Ghio C., Alagona G., et al. A new force field for molecular mechanical simulation of nucleic acids and proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 106:1984;765-784.
26. Jorgensen W.J., Tirado-Rives J. The OPLS potential function for proteins. Energy minimizations for crystals of cyclic peptides and crambin. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 110:1988;1657-1666.
27. Cornell W.D., Cieplak P., Bayly C.I., Gould I.R., Merz K.M.J., Ferguson D.M., et al. A second generation force field for the simulation of proteins, nucleic acids, and organic molecules. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 117:1995;5179-5197.
28. Neria E., Fischer S., Karplus M. Simulation of activation free energies in molecular systems. J. Chem. Phys. 105:1996;1902-1921.
29. Buck M., Karplus M. Hydrogen bond energetics: a simulation and statistical analysis of N-methyl acetamide (NMA), water and human lysozyme. J. Phys. Chem. ser. B. 105:2001;11000-11015.
30. Mayo S.L., Olafson B.D., Goddard W.A.I. DREIDING: a generic force field for molecular simulations. J. Phys. Chem. 94:1990;8897-8909.
31. Dahiyat B.I., Gordon D.B., Mayo S.L. Automated design of the surface positions of protein helices. Protein Sci. 6:1997;1333-1337.
32. Pokala N., Handel T.M. Review: protein design - where we were, where we are, where we're going. J. Struct. Biol. 134:2001;269-281.
33. Hao M.H., Scheraga H.A. Designing potential energy functions for protein folding. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 9:1999;184-188.
34. Osguthorpe D.J. Ab initio protein folding. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 10:2000;146-152.
35. Sternberg M.J., Gabb H.A., Jackson R.M. Predictive docking of protein-protein and protein-DNA complexes. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 8:1998;250-256.
36. Brunger A.T., Karplus M. Polar hydrogen positions in proteins: empirical energy placement and neutron diffraction comparison. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 4:1988;148-156.
37. Lipsitz R.S., Sharma Y., Brooks B.R., Tjandra N. Hydrogen bonding in high-resolution protein structures: a new method to assess NMR protein geometry. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 124:2002;10621-10626.
38. Anfinsen C.B. Principles that govern the folding of protein chains. Science. 181:1973;223-230.
39. Dunbrack R.L. Jr, Cohen F.E. Bayesian statistical analysis of protein side-chain rotamer preferences. Protein Sci. 6:1997;1661-1681.
40. Schreiber G. Kinetic studies of protein-protein interactions. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 12:2002;41-47.
41. Sheinerman F.B., Norel R., Honig B. Electrostatic aspects of protein-protein interactions. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 10:2000;153-159.
42. Lee L.P., Tidor B. Barstar is electrostatically optimized for tight binding to barnase. Nature Struct. Biol. 8:2001;73-76.
43. Bonneau R., Tsai J., Ruczinski I., Chivian D., Rohl C., Strauss C.E., Baker D. Rosetta in CASP4: progress in ab initio protein structure prediction. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 45:2001;119-126.
44. Simons K.T., Ruczinski I., Kooperberg C., Fox B.A., Bystroff C., Baker D. Improved recognition of native-like protein structures using a combination of sequence-dependent and sequence-independent features of proteins. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 34:1999;82-95.
45. Kuhlman B., Baker D. Native protein sequences are close to optimal for their structures. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 97:2000;10383-10388.
46. Kortemme T., Baker D. A simple physical model for binding energy hot spots in protein-protein complexes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 99:2002;14116-14121.
47. Park B.H., Huang E.S., Levitt M. Factors affecting the ability of energy functions to discriminate correct from incorrect folds. J. Mol. Biol. 266:1997;831-846.
48. Gatchell D.W., Dennis S., Vajda S. Discrimination of near-native protein structures from misfolded models by empirical free energy functions. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 41:2000;518-534.
49. Vorobjev Y.N., Hermans J. Free energies of protein decoys provide insight into determinants of protein stability. Protein Sci. 10:2001;2498-2506.
50. Gray, J. J., Moughon, S., Kortemme, T., Schueler-Furman, O., Misura, K. M. S., Morozov, A. V. & Baker, D. (2003). Protein-protein docking predictions for the CAPRI experiment. In press.
51. Lawrence M.C., Colman P.M. Shape complementarity at protein/protein interfaces. J. Mol. Biol. 234:1993;946-950.
52. Camacho C.J., Vajda S. Protein docking along smooth association pathways. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 98:2001;10636-10641.
53. Chevalier B.S., Kortemme T., Chadsey M.S., Baker D., Monnat R.J.J., Stoddard B.L. Design, activity and structure of E-DreI, a highly site-specific artifical endonuclease. Mol. Cell. 10:2002;895-905.
54. Word J.M., Lovell S.C., LaBean T.H., Taylor H.C., Zalis M.E., Presley B.K., et al. Visualizing and quantifying molecular goodness-of-fit: small-probe contact dots with explicit hydrogen atoms. J. Mol. Biol. 285:1999;1711-1733.
55. Laskowski R.A., Rullmannn J.A., MacArthur M.W., Kaptein R., Thornton J.M. AQUA and PROCHECK-NMR: programs for checking the quality of protein structures solved by NMR. J. Biomol. NMR. 8:1996;477-486.
56. Tsai C.J., Lin S.L., Wolfson H.J., Nussinov R. A dataset of protein-protein interfaces generated with a sequence-order-independent comparison technique. J. Mol. Biol. 260:1996;604-620.
57. Lazaridis T., Karplus M. Effective energy function for proteins in solution. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 35:1999;133-152.
58. Dahiyat B.I., Mayo S.L. De novo protein design: fully automated sequence selection. Science. 278:1997;82-87.
59. Kossiakoff A.A., Shpungin J., Sintchak M.D. Hydroxyl hydrogen conformations in trypsin determined by the neutron diffraction solvent difference map method: relative importance of steric and electrostatic factors in defining hydrogen-bonding geometries. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 87:1990;4468-4472.
60. Tsai, J., Bonneau, R., Morozov, A. V., Kuhlman, B., Rohl, C. A. & Baker, D. (2003). An improved protein decoy set for testing energy functions for protein structure prediction. In press.
61. Morozov A.V., Kortemme T., Baker D. Evaluation of models of electrostatic interactions in proteins. J. Phys. Chem. B. 2003;. In press.