Conformational Search for the Protein Native State

Introduction to Protein Structure Prediction: Methods and Algorithms

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 431-452

  Shehu, Amarda ^a  

^a Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study   (United States)

Author keywords

Conformational search for protein native state Anfinsen experiments, to understand how amino acid sequence determines biologically active conformation; Enhanced sampling of conformational space; Protein "sample" its native state implementing MD approach systematically searching conformational space by numerically solving Newton's equations of motion

Indexed keywords

EID: 84888711909     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470882207.ch19     Document Type: Chapter

References (89)

1. H. Wu. Studies on denaturation of proteins XIII. A theory of denaturation. Chin J Physiol, 5 (4): 321-344, 1931.
2. A.E. Mirsky and L. Pauling. On the structure of native, denatured and coagulated proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 22: 439-447, 1936.
3. C.B. Anfinsen, E. Haber, M. Sela, and F.H. Jr. White. The kinetics of formation of native ribonuclease during oxidation of the reduced polypeptide chain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 47 (9): 1309-1314, 1961.
4. C.B. Anfinsen. Principles that govern the folding of protein chains. Science, 181 (4096): 223-230, 1973.
5. K.A. Dill, B. Ozkan, M.S. Shell, and T.R. Weikl. The protein folding problem. Annu Rev Biophys, 37: 289-316, 2008.
6. Y. Zhang. Progress and challenges in protein structure prediction. Curr Opin Struct Biol, 18 (3): 342-348, 2008.
7. B. Kuhlman, G. Dantas, G.C. Ireton, G. Varani, B.L. Stoddard, and D. Baker. Design of a novel globular protein fold with atomic-level accuracy. Science, 302 (5649): 1364-1368, 2003.
8. G. Chikenji, Y. Fujitsuka, and S. Takada. A reversible fragment assembly method for de novo protein structure prediction. J Chem Phys, 119 (13): 6895-6903, 2003.
9. P. Bradley, K.M.S. Misura, and D. Baker. Toward high-resolution de novo structure prediction for small proteins. Science, 309 (5742): 1868-1871, 2005.
10. A. Colubri, A.K. Jha, M.-Y. Sheri, A. Sali, R.S. Berry, T.R. Sosnick, and K.F. Freed. Minimalist representations and the importance of nearest neighbor effects in protein folding simulations. J Mol Biol, 363 (4): 835-857, 2006.
11. S. Oldziej, C. Czaplewski, A. Liwo, M. Chinchio, M. Nanias, J.A. Vila, M. Khalili, Y.A. Arnautova, A. Jagielska, M. Makowski, H.D. Schafroth, R. Kazmierkiewicz, D.R. Ripoll, J. Pillardy, J.A. Saunders, Y.K. Kang, K.D. Gibson, and H.A. Scheraga. Physics-based protein-structure prediction using a hierarchical protocol based on the UNRES force field: Assessment in two blind tests. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 102 (21): 7547-7552, 2005.
12. H. Gong, P.J. Fleming, and G.D. Rose. Building native protein conformations from highly approximate backbone torsion angles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 102 (45): 16227-16232, 2005.
13. S.B. Ozkan, G.H.A. Wu, J.D. Chodera, and K.A. Dill. Protein folding by zipping and assembly. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 104 (29): 11987-11992, 2007.
14. Y. Zhang. Template-based modeling and free modeling by I-TASSER in CASP7. Proteins, 8 (S1): 108-117, 2007.
15. J. Moult, K. Fidelis, A. Kryshtafovych, B. Rost, T. Hubbard, and A. Tramontano. Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (GASP) round VII. Proteins, 69 (S8): 3-9, 2007.
16. E. Schroedinger. What is Life? Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1944.
17. R.P. Feynman, R.B. Leighton, and M. Sands. The Feynman Lectures on Physics: Volume I. Boston: Addison Wesley Longman, 1964.
18. A.J. Wand. Dynamic activation of protein function: A view emerging from NMR spetroscopy. Nat Struct Biol, 8 (11): 926-931, 2001.
19. G.A. III Palmer. NMR characterization of the dynamics of biomacromolecules. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct, 104 (8): 3623-3640, 2004.
20. E.Z. Eisenmesser, O. Millet, W. Labeikovsky, D.M. Korzhnev, M. Wolf-Watz, D.A. Bosco, J.J. Skalicky, L.E. Kay, and D. Kern. Intrinsic dynamics of an enzyme underlies catalysis. Nature, 438 (7064): 117-121, 2005.
21. Y.P.J. Huang and G.T. Montellione. Structural biology: Proteins fl ex to function. Nature, 438 (7064): 36-37, 2005.
22. M. Karplus and J. Kuriyan. Molecular dynamics and protein function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 102 (19): 6679-6685, 2005.
23. V.J. Hilser, B. Garcia-Moreno, G.T. Oas, G. Kapp, and S.T. Whitten. A statistical thermodynamic model of the protein ensemble. Chem Rev, 106 (5): 1545-1558, 2006.
24. D.A. Hinds and M. Levitt. Exploring conformational space with a simple lattice model for protein structure. J Mol Biol, 243 (4): 668-682, 1994.
25. A. Kolinski and J. Skolnick. Monte Carlo simulations of protein folding. I. Lattice model and interaction scheme. Proteins, 18 (4): 338-352, 1994.
26. K. Ishikawa, K. Yue, and K.A. Dill. Predicting the structures of 18 peptides using Geocore. Protein Sci, 8 (4): 716-721, 1999.
27. B.H. Park and M. Levitt. The complexity and accuracy of discrete state models of protein structure. J Mol Biol, 249 (2): 493-507, 1995.
28. B.A. Reva, A.V. Finkelstein, M.F. Sanner, and A.J. Olson. Adjusting potential energy functions for lattice models of chain molecules. Proteins, 25 (3): 379-388, 1996.
29. C. Levinthal. Are there pathways for protein folding? J Chem Phys, 65 (1): 44-45, 1968.
30. K.F. Lau and A.K. Dill. A lattice statistical mechanics model of the conformational and sequence spaces of proteins. Macromolecules, 22 (10): 3986-3997, 1989.
31. R. Unger and J. Moult. Finding lowest free energy conformation of a protein is an NP-hard problem: Proof and implications. Bull Math Biol, 55 (6): 1183-1198, 1993.
32. W.E. Hart and S. Istrail. Robust proofs of NP-hardness for protein folding: General lattices and energy potentials. J Comp Biol, 4 (1): 1-22, 1997.
33. T. Lazaridis and M. Karplus. New view of protein folding reconciled with the old through multiple unfolding simulations. Science, 278 (5345): 1928-1931, 1997.
34. K.A. Dill and H.S. Chan. From Levinthal to pathways to funnels. Nat Struct Biol, 4 (1): 10-19, 1997.
35. J.N. Onuchic, Z. Luthey-Schulten, and P.G. Wolynes. Theory of protein folding: The energy landscape perspective. Annu Rev Phys Chem, 48: 545-600, 1997.
36. O.M. Becker and M. Karplus. The topology of multidimensional potential energy surfaces: Theory and application to peptide structure and kinetics. J Chem Phys, 106 (4): 1495-1517, 1997.
37. M. Gruebele. Protein folding: The free energy surface. Curr Opin Struct Biol, 12 (2): 161-168, 2002.
38. C. Clementi. Coarse-grained models of protein folding: Toy-models or predictive tools? Curr Opin Struct Biol, 18 (1): 10-15, 2008.
39. G.R. Smith, M.J.E. Sternberg, and P.A. Bates. The relationship between the fl exibility of proteins and their conformational states on forming protein-protein complexes with an application to protein-protein docking. J Mol Biol, 347 (5): 1077-1101, 2005.
40. V.J. Hilser, T. Oas, D. Dowdy, and E. Freire. The structural distribution of cooperative interactions in proteins: Analysis of the native state ensemble. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 95 (17): 9903-9908, 1998.
41. K. Lindorff-Larsen, R.B. Best, M.A. DePristo, C.M. Dobson, and M. Vendruscolo. Simultaneous determination of protein structure and dynamics. Nature, 433 (7022): 128-132, 2005.
42. A. Shehu, L.E. Kavraki, and C. Clementi. Multiscale characterization of protein conformational ensembles. Proteins, 76 (4): 837-851, 2009.
43. D. Baker and D.A. Agard. Kinetics versus thermodynamics in protein folding. Biochemistry, 33 (24): 7505-7509, 1994.
44. S. Govindarajan and R.A. Goldstein. On the thermodynamic hypothesis of protein folding. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 95 (10): 5545-5549, 1997.
45. J. DeBartolo, A. Colubri, A. Jha, J.E. Fitzgerald, K.F. Freed, and T.R. Sosnick. Mimicking the folding pathway to improve homology-free protein structure prediction . Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 106 (10): 3734-3739, 2009.
46. G. Chikenji, Y. Fujitsuka, and S. Takada. Shaping up the protein folding funnel by local interaction: lesson from a structure prediction study. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 103 (9): 3141-3146, 2006.
47. P. Das, M. Moll, H. Stamati, L.E. Kavraki, and C. Clementi. Low-dimensional free energy landscapes of protein folding reactions by nonlinear dimensionality reduction . Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 103 (26): 9885-9890, 2006.
48. Z. Li and H.A. Scheraga. Monte Carlo-minimization approach to the multiple -minima problem in protein folding. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 84 (19): 6611-6615, 1987.
49. R. Abagyan and M. Totrov. Biased probability Monte Carlo conformational searches and electrostatic calculations for peptides and proteins. J Mol Biol, 235 (3): 983-1002, 1994.
50. R.B. Best and M. Vendruscolo. Determination of ensembles of structures consistent with NMR order parameters. J Am Chem Soc, 126 (26): 8090-8091, 2004.
51. A. Shehu, C. Clementi, and L.E. Kavraki. Modeling protein conformational ensembles: From missing loops to equilibrium fl uctuations. Proteins, 65 (1): 164 - 179, 2006.
52. H. Taketomi, Y. Ueda, and N. Go. Studies on protein folding, unfolding and fl uctuations by computer simulation: The effect of specific amino acid sequence represented by specific inter-unit interactions. Int J Pept Protein Res, 7 (6): 445-459, 1975.
53. K. Yue, K.M. Fiebig, P.D. Thomas, H.S. Chan, E.I. Shakhnovich, and K.A. Dill. A test of lattice protein folding algorithms. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 92 (1): 325 - 329, 1995.
54. T.H. Hoang, A. Trovato, F. Seno, J.R. Banavar, and A. Maritan. Geometry and symmetry presculpt the free-energy landscape of proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 101 (21): 7960-7964, 2007.
55. G.A. Papoian, J. Ulander, M.P. Eastwood, Z. Luthey-Schulten, and P.G. Wolynes. Water in protein structure prediction. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 101 (10): 3352 - 3357, 2004.
56. S. Matysiak and C. Clementi. Optimal combination of theory and experiment for the characterization of the protein folding landscape of S6: How far can a minimalist model go? J Mol Biol, 343 (8): 235-248, 2004.
57. P. Das, S. Matysiak, and C. Clementi. Balancing energy and entropy: A minimalist model for the characterization of protein folding landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 102 (29): 10141-10146, 2005.
58. S. Matysiak and C. Clementi. Minimalist protein model as a diagnostic tool for misfolding and aggregation. J Mol Biol, 363 (1): 297-308, 2006.
59. C. Hardin, Z. Luthey-Schulten, and P.G. Wolynes. Backbone dynamics, fast folding, and secondary structure formation in helical proteins and peptides. Proteins, 34 (3): 281-294, 1999.
60. W. Kwak and U.H. Hansmann. Efficient sampling of protein structures by model hopping. Phys Rev Lett, 95 (13): 138102, 2005.
61. E. Lyman, F.M. Ytreberg, and D.M. Zuckermann. Resolution exchange simulations . Phys Rev Lett, 96 (2): 028105, 2006.
62. S. Christakos, C. Gabrielides, and W.B. Rhoten. Multigraining: An algorithm for simultaneous fine-grained and coarse-grained simulation of molecular systems. J Chem Phys, 125 (15): 154106, 2006.
63. A.P. Heath, L.F. Kavraki, and C. Clementi. From coarse-grain to all-atom: Towards multiscale analysis of protein landscapes. Proteins, 68 (3): 646-661, 2007.
64. A. Shehu, L.E. Kavraki, and C. Clementi. Unfolding the fold of cyclic cysteine-rich peptides. Protein Sci, 17 (3): 482-493, 2008.
65. W.F. van Gunsteren, D. Bakowies, R. Baron, I. Chandrasekhar, M. Christen, X. Daura, P. Gee, D.P. Geerke, A. Glättli, P.H. Hünenberger, M.A. Kastenholz, C. Oostenbrink, M. Schenk, D. Trzesniak, N.F. van der Vegt, and H.B. Yu. Biomolecular modeling: Goals, problems, perspectives. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl, 45 (25): 4064-4092, 2006.
66. Y. Duan and Y.A. Kollman. Pathways to a protein folding intermediate observed in a 1-μ s simulation in aqueous solution. Science, 282 (5389): 740-744, 1998.
67. M. Shirts and V.J. Pande. Computing: Screen savers of the world unite! Science, 290 (5498): 1903-1904, 2000.
68. J.W. Pitera and W. Swope. Understanding folding and design: Replica-exchange simulations of Trp-cage miniproteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 100 (13): 7587 - 7592, 2003.
69. D.E. Shaw et al. Anton, a special-purpose machine for molecular dynamics simulation . Commun ACM, 51 (7): 91-97, 2008.
70. D.R. Ripoll, J.A. Vila, and H.A. Scheraga. Folding of the villin headpiece subdomain from random structures. Analysis of the charge distribution as a function of pH. J Mol Biol, 339 (4): 915-925, 2004.
71. N. Metropolis, A.W. Rosenbluth, M.N. Rosenbluth, A.H. Teller, and E. Teller. Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J Chem Phys, 21 (6): 1087-1092, 1953.
72. G.M. Clore and C.D. Schwieters. How much backbone motion in ubiquitin is required to account for dipolar coupling data measured in multiple alignment media as assessed by independent cross-validation? J Am Chem Soc, 126 (9): 2923 - 2938, 2004.
73. G.M. Clore and C.D. Schwieters. Concordance of residual dipolar couplings, backbone order parameters and crystallographic B-factors for a small α / β protein: A unified picture of high probability, fast atomic motions in proteins. J Mol Biol, 355 (5): 879-886, 2006.
74. B. Richter, J. Gsponer, P. Várnai, X. Salvatella, and M. Vendruscolo. The MUMO (minimal under-restraining minimal over-restraining) method for the determination of native state ensembles of proteins. J Biomol NMR, 37 (2): 117-135, 2007.
75. V. Hornak, R. Abel, A. Okur, B. Strockbine, A. Roitberg, and C. Simmerling. Comparison of multiple amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters. Proteins, 65 (3): 712-725, 2006.
76. F. DiMao, D. Kondrashov, E. Bitto, A. Soni, G. Bingman, G. Phillips, and J. Shavlik. Creating protein models from electron-density maps using particle -filtering methods. Bioinformatics, 23 (21): 2851-2858, 2007.
77. S. Potluri, A.K. Yarr, J.J. Chou, B.R. Donald, and C. Bailey-Kellogg. Structure determination of symmetric homo-oligomers by a complete search of symmetry configuration space, using NMR restraints and van der Waals packing. Proteins, 65 (1): 203-219, 2006.
78. A. Shehu, C. Clementi, and L.E. Kavraki. Sampling conformation space to model equilibrium fl uctuations in proteins. Algorithmica, 48 (4): 303-327, 2007.
79. S. Wells, S. Menor, B. Hespenheide, and M.F. Thorpe. Constrained geometric simulation of diffusive motion in proteins. J Phys Biol, 2 (4): 127-136, 2005.
80. M. Chubunsky, B. Hespenheide, D.J. Jacobs, L.A. Kuhn, M. Lei, S. Menor, A.J. Rader, M.F. Thorpe, W. Whiteley, and M.I. Zadovsky. Constraint theory applied to proteins. Nanotechnol Res J, 2 (1): 61-72, 2008.
81. A. Shehu, L.E. Kavraki, and C. Clementi. On the characterization of protein native state ensembles. Biophys J, 92 (5): 1503-1511, 2007.
82. K.A. De Jong. Evolutionary Computation: A Unified Approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006.
83. M.C. Prentiss, C. Hardin, M.P. Eastwood, C. Zong, and P.G. Wolynes. Protein structure prediction: The next generation. J Chem Theory Comput, 2 (3): 705-716, 2006.
84. K. Ghosh, S.B. Ozkan, and K.A. Dill. The ultimate speed limit to protein folding is conformational searching. J Am Chem Soc, 129 (39): 11920-11927, 2007.
85. H. Choset, K.M. Lynch, S. Hutchinson, G. Kantor, W. Burgard, L.E. Kavraki, and S. Thrun. Principles of Robot Motion: Theory, Algorithms, and Implementations, 1st edition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005.
86. A. Shehu. An Ab-initio tree-based exploration to enhance sampling of low-energy protein conformations. In Proceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems, J. Trinkle, Y. Matsuoka, and J.A. Castellanos (Eds.), pp. 31-39. Seattle, WA, June, 2009.
87. G.D. Rose, P.J. Fleming, J.R. Banavar, and A. Maritan. A backbone-based theory of protein folding. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 103 (45): 16623-16633, 2006.
88. N. Haspel, C.J. Tsai, H. Wolfson, and R. Nussinov. Hierarchical protein folding pathways: A computational study of protein fragments. Proteins, 51 (2): 203-215, 2003.
89. J. Hegler, J. Laetzer, A. Shehu, C. Clementi, and P.G. Wolynes. Restriction vs. guidance: Fragment assembly and associative memory Hamiltonians for protein structure prediction. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 106 (36): 15302-15307, 2009.