Monomer topology defines folding speed of heptamer

Protein Science

Volumn 13, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 1317-1321

  Bascos, Neil ^a   Guidry, Jesse ^b   Wittung Stafshede, Pernilla ^c  

^a TULANE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c RICE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cochaperonin protein; Contact order; Protein assembly; Protein folding; Topology

Indexed keywords

MONOMER; OLIGOMER;

AMINO TERMINAL SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; BETA CHAIN; CARBOXY TERMINAL SEQUENCE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOLECULAR MODEL; NONHUMAN; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN LOCALIZATION;

CHAPERONIN 10; FLUORESCENCE; GUANIDINE; HUMANS; KINETICS; PROTEIN FOLDING; UREA;

EID: 1942473179     PISSN: 09618368     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1110/ps.03559504     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Bodenreider, C., Kellershohn, N., Goldberg, M.E., and Mejean, A. 2002. Kinetic analysis of R67 dihydrofolate reductase folding: From the unfolded monomer to the native tetramer. Biochemistry 41: 14988-14999.
2. Burston, S.G., Weissman, J.S., Farr, G.W., Fenton, W.A., and Horwich, A.L. 1996. Release of both native and non-native proteins from a cis-only GroEL ternary complex. Nature 383: 96-99.
3. Doyle, S.M., Braswell, E.H., and Teschke, C.M. 2000. SecA folds via a dimeric intermediate. Biochemistry 39: 11667-11676.
4. Gloss, L.M. and Matthews, C.R. 1998. Mechanism of folding of the dimeric core domain of Escherichia coli trp repressor: A nearly diffusion-limited reaction leads to the formation of an on-pathway dimeric intermediate. Biochemistry 37: 15990-15999.
5. Gromiha, M.M. 2003. Importance of native-state topology for determining the folding rate of two-state proteins. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43: 1481-1485.
6. Gromiha, M.M. and Selvaraj, S. 2001. Comparison between long-range interactions and contact order in determining the folding rate of two-state proteins: Application of long-range order to folding rate prediction. J. Mol. Biol. 310: 27-32.
7. Guidry, J., Moczygemba, C., Steede, K., Landry, S., and Wittung-Stafshede, P. 2000. Reversible denaturation of oligomeric human chaperonin 10: Denatured state depends on chemical denaturant. Protein Sci. 9: 2109-2117.
8. Guidry, J.J. and Wittung-Stafshede, P. 2002. Low stability for monomeric human chaperonin protein 10: Interprotein interactions contribute majority of oligomer stability. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 405: 280-282.
9. Hunt, J.F., Weaver, A.J., Landry, S.J., Gierasch, L., and Deisenhofer, J. 1996. The crystal structure of the GroES co-chaperonin at 2.8 Å resolution. Nature 379: 37-45.
10. Ivankov, D.N., Garbuzynskiy, S.O., Alm, E., Plaxco, K.W., Baker, D., and Finkelstein, A.V. 2003. Contact order revisited: Influence of protein size on the folding rate. Protein Sci. 12: 2057-2062.
11. Jackson, S.E. 1998. How do small single-domain proteins fold? Fold. Des. 3: R81-R91.
12. Jones, S. and Thornton, J.M. 1996. Principles of protein-protein interactions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 93: 13-20.
13. Jones, K. and Wittung-Stafshede, P. 2003. The largest protein observed to fold by two-state kinetic mechanism does not obey contact-order correlation. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125: 9606-9607.
14. Karanicolas, J. and Brooks III, C.L. 2003. The importance of explicit chain representation in protein folding models: An examination of lsing-like models. Proteins 53: 740-747.
15. Kaya, H. and Chan, H.S. 2003. Contact order dependent protein folding rates: Kinetic consequences of a cooperative interplay between favorable nonlocal interactions and local conformational preferences. Proteins 52: 524-533.
16. Landry, S.J., Steede, N.K., and Maskos, K. 1997. Temperature dependence of backbone dynamics in loops of human mitochondrial heat shock protein 10. Biochemistry 36: 10975-10986.
17. Levy, Y., Wolynes, P.G., and Onuchic, J.N. 2004. Protein topology determines binding mechanism. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 101: 511-516.
18. Makarov, D.E. and Plaxco, K.W. 2003. The topomer search model: A simple, quantitative theory of two-state protein folding kinetics. Protein Sci. 12: 17-26.
19. Mann, C.J., Shao, X., and Matthews, C.R. 1995. Characterization of the slow folding reactions of trp aporepressor from Escherichia coli by mutational analysis of prolines and catalysis by a peptidyl-prolyl isomerase. Biochemistry 34: 14573-14580.
20. Martin, J., Geromanos, S., Tempst, P., and Hartl, F.U. 1993. Identification of nucleotide-binding regions in the chaperonin proteins GroEL and GroES. Nature 366: 279-282.
21. Milla, M.E. and Sauer, R.T. 1994. P22 Arc repressor: Folding kinetics of a single-domain, dimeric protein. Biochemistry 33: 1125-1133.
22. Moczygemba, C., Guidry, J., and Wittung-Stafshede, P. 2000. Heme orientation affects holo-myoglobin folding and unfolding kinetics. FEBS Lett. 470: 203-206.
23. Nichtl, A., Buchner, J., Jaenicke, R., Rudolph, R., and Scheibel, T. 1998. Folding and association of β-galactosidase. J. Mol. Biol. 282: 1083-1091.
24. Oliveberg, M., Tan, Y.J., Silow, M., and Fersht, A.R. 1998. The changing nature of the protein folding transition state: Implications for the shape of the free-energy profile for folding. J. Mol. Biol. 277: 933-943.
25. Plaxco, K.W., Simons, K.T., and Baker, D. 1998. Contact order, transition state placement and the refolding rates of single domain proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 277: 985-994.
26. Plaxco, K.W., Simons, K.T., Ruczinski, I., and David, B. 2000. Topology, stability, sequence, and length: Defining the determinants of two-state protein folding kinetics. Biochemistry 39: 11177-11183.
27. Shtilerman, M., Lorimer, G.H., and Englander, S.W. 1999. Chaperonin function: Folding by forced unfolding. Science 284: 822-825.
28. Srivastava, A.K. and Sauer, R.T. 2000. Evidence for partial secondary structure formation in the transition state for arc repressor refolding and dimerization. Biochemistry 39: 8308-8314.
29. Steede, N.K., Guidry, J.J., and Landry, S.J. 2000. Preparation of recombinant human Hsp10. Methods Mol. Biol. 140: 145-151.
30. Todd, M.J., Boudkin, O., Freire, E., and Lorimer, G.H. 1995. GroES and the chaperonin-assisted protein folding cycle: GroES has no affinity for nucleotides. FEBS Lett. 359: 123-125.
31. Waldburger, C.D., Jonsson, T., and Sauer, R.T. 1996. Barriers to protein folding: Formation of buried polar interactions is a slow step in acquisition of structure. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 93: 2629-2634.
32. Ziegler, M.M., Goldberg, M.E., Chaffotte, A.F., and Baldwin, T.O. 1993. Refolding of luciferase subunits from urea and assembly of the active heterodimer: Evidence for folding intermediates that precede and follow the dimerization step on the pathway to the active form of the enzyme. J. Biol. Chem. 268: 10760-10765.