Leveraging structure for enzyme function prediction: Methods, opportunities, and challenges

Trends in Biochemical Sciences

Volumn 39, Issue 8, 2014, Pages 363-371

  Jacobson, Matthew P ^a,b   Kalyanaraman, Chakrapani ^a,b   Zhao, Suwen ^a,b   Tian, Boxue ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Docking; Enzyme function prediction; Homology modeling; Metabolic pathways; Protein structures

Indexed keywords

ALKALOID; AMIDASE; CYTOCHROME P450; DEAMINASE; ERYTHROMYCIN; ISOPRENOID; LANCOVUTIDE; MORPHINE; NATURAL PRODUCT; OXIDOREDUCTASE; PACLITAXEL; POLYKETIDE; VANCOMYCIN; PROTEIN;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; BIOINFORMATICS; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; ENZYME ACTIVE SITE; ENZYME ACTIVITY; ENZYME METABOLISM; ENZYME STRUCTURE; ESCHERICHIA COLI; METABOLITE; MOLECULAR DOCKING; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; NONHUMAN; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN DOMAIN; PROTEIN FUNCTION; REVIEW; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY; THERMOTOGA MARITIMA; ANIMAL; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; ENZYME SPECIFICITY; HUMAN; METABOLISM; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEINS; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; SUBSTRATE SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84905035501     PISSN: 09680004     EISSN: 13624326     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibs.2014.05.006     Document Type: Review

References (82)

1. ExPASy UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot Protein Knowledgebase Release 2014_04 Statistics 2014, ExPASy.
2. UniProt UniProtKB/TrEMBL protein database release 2014_04 statistics 2014, UniProt.
3. Friedberg I. Automated protein function prediction: the genomic challenge. Brief. Bioinform. 2006, 7:225-242.
4. Schnoes A.M., et al. Annotation error in public databases: misannotation of molecular function in enzyme superfamilies. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2009, 5:e1000605.
5. Seffernick J.L., et al. Melamine deaminase and atrazine chlorohydrolase: 98 percent identical but functionally different. J. Bacteriol. 2001, 183:2405-2410.
6. Patti G.J., et al. Innovation: metabolomics: the apogee of the omics trilogy. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2012, 13:263-269.
7. Wagner E.M. Monitoring gene expression: quantitative real-time rt-PCR. Methods Mol. Biol. 2013, 1027:19-45.
8. Wang Z., et al. RNA-Seq: a revolutionary tool for transcriptomics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2009, 10:57-63.
9. Wu A.R., et al. Quantitative assessment of single-cell RNA-sequencing methods. Nat. Methods 2014, 11:41-46.
10. Gavin A.C., et al. Functional organization of the yeast proteome by systematic analysis of protein complexes. Nature 2002, 415:141-147.
11. Meier M., et al. Proteome-wide protein interaction measurements of bacterial proteins of unknown function. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2013, 110:477-482.
12. Fuchs H., et al. Mouse phenotyping. Methods 2011, 53:120-135.
13. Bassel G.W., et al. Systems analysis of plant functional, transcriptional, physical interaction, and metabolic networks. Plant Cell 2012, 24:3859-3875.
14. Kufareva I., et al. Compound activity prediction using models of binding pockets or ligand properties in 3D. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2012, 12:1869-1882.
15. Nilmeier J.P., et al. Rapid catalytic template searching as an enzyme function prediction procedure. PLoS ONE 2013, 8:e62535.
16. Yang Y., et al. Understanding a substrate's product regioselectivity in a family of enzymes: a case study of acetaminophen binding in cytochrome P450s. PLoS ONE 2014, 9:e87058.
17. Amin S.R., et al. Prediction and experimental validation of enzyme substrate specificity in protein structures. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2013, 110:E4195-E4202.
18. Carbonell P., Faulon J.L. Molecular signatures-based prediction of enzyme promiscuity. Bioinformatics 2010, 26:2012-2019.
19. Meng E.C., et al. Automated docking with grid-based energy evaluation. J. Comput. Chem. 1992, 13:505-524.
20. Wang R.X., et al. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46:2287-2303.
21. Kalyanaraman C., et al. Virtual screening against highly charged active sites: identifying substrates of alpha-beta barrel enzymes. Biochemistry 2005, 44:2059-2071.
22. Favia A.D., et al. Molecular docking for substrate identification: the short-chain dehydrogenases/reductases. J. Mol. Biol. 2008, 375:855-874.
23. Xiang D.F., et al. Functional annotation and three-dimensional structure of Dr0930 from Deinococcus radiodurans, a close relative of phosphotriesterase in the amidohydrolase superfamily. Biochemistry 2009, 48:2237-2247.
24. Song L., et al. Prediction and assignment of function for a divergent N-succinyl amino acid racemase. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2007, 3:486-491.
25. Kalyanaraman C., et al. Discovery of a dipeptide epimerase enzymatic function guided by homology modeling and virtual screening. Structure 2008, 16:1668-1677.
26. Kalyanaraman C., Jacobson M.P. Studying enzyme-substrate specificity in silico: a case study of the Escherichia coli glycolysis pathway. Biochemistry 2010, 49:4003-4005.
27. Lukk T., et al. Homology models guide discovery of diverse enzyme specificities among dipeptide epimerases in the enolase superfamily. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2012, 109:4122-4127.
28. Fan H., et al. Assignment of pterin deaminase activity to an enzyme of unknown function guided by homology modeling and docking. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135:795-803.
29. Hitchcock D.S., et al. Structure-guided discovery of new deaminase enzymes. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135:13927-13933.
30. Hermann J.C., et al. Structure-based activity prediction for an enzyme of unknown function. Nature 2007, 448:775-779.
31. Kumar R., et al. Prediction and biochemical demonstration of a catabolic pathway for the osmoprotectant proline betaine. MBio 2014, 5. e00933-13.
32. Zhao S.W., et al. Discovery of new enzymes and metabolic pathways by using structure and genome context. Nature 2013, 502:698-702.
33. Wallrapp F.H., et al. Prediction of function for the polyprenyl transferase subgroup in the isoprenoid synthase superfamily. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2013, 110:E1196-E1202.
34. Rakus J.F., et al. Computation-facilitated assignment of the function in the enolase superfamily: a regiochemically distinct galactarate dehydratase from Oceanobacillus iheyensis. Biochemistry 2009, 48:11546-11558.
35. Jacobson M.P., et al. Force field validation using protein side chain prediction. J. Phys. Chem. B 2002, 106:11673-11680.
36. Hermann J.C., et al. Predicting substrates by docking high-energy intermediates to enzyme structures. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128:15882-15891.
37. Sherman W., et al. Novel procedure for modeling ligand/receptor induced fit effects. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49:534-553.
38. Tian B.X., et al. Predicting enzyme-substrate specificity with QM/MM methods: a case study of the stereospecificity of D-glucarate dehydratase. Biochemistry 2013, 52:5511-5513.
39. Kamat S.S., et al. Enzymatic deamination of the epigenetic base N-6-methyladenine. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133:2080-2083.
40. Moult J., et al. Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP): round x. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Bioinform. 2014, 82:1-6.
41. Baker D., Sali A. Protein structure prediction and structural genomics. Science 2001, 294:93-96.
42. Biasini M., et al. SWISS-MODEL: modelling protein tertiary and quaternary structure using evolutionary information. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 10.1093/nar/gku340.
43. Pieper U., et al. ModBase, a database of annotated comparative protein structure models and associated resources. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 42:D336-D346.
44. Kim J., et al. Structure-guided discovery of the metabolite carboxy-SAM that modulates tRNA function. Nature 2013, 498:123-126.
45. Binkowski T.A., et al. Assisted assignment of ligands corresponding to unknown electron density. J. Struct. Funct. Genomics 2010, 11:21-30.
46. Lasker K., et al. Determining macromolecular assembly structures by molecular docking and fitting into an electron density map. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Bioinform. 2010, 78:3205-3211.
47. Irwin J.J., et al. Automated docking screens: a feasibility study. J. Med. Chem. 2009, 52:5712-5720.
48. Caspi R., et al. The MetaCyc database of metabolic pathways and enzymes and the BioCyc collection of pathway/genome databases. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40:D742-D753.
49. Dehal P.S., et al. MicrobesOnline: an integrated portal for comparative and functional genomics. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010, 38:D396-D400.
50. Franceschini A., et al. STRING v9.1: protein-protein interaction networks, with increased coverage and integration. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013, 41:D808-D815.
51. Aziz R.K., et al. SEED Servers: high-performance access to the SEED genomes, annotations, and metabolic models. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e48053.
52. Markowitz V.M., et al. IMG: the integrated microbial genomes database and comparative analysis system. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40:D115-D122.
53. Babu M., et al. Interaction landscape of membrane-protein complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature 2012, 489:585-589.
54. Havugimana P.C., et al. A census of human soluble protein complexes. Cell 2012, 150:1068-1081.
55. Zhang Y., et al. Three-dimensional structural view of the central metabolic network of Thermotoga maritima. Science 2009, 325:1544-1549.
56. Zotchev S.B. Alkaloids from marine bacteria. Adv. Bot. Res. 2013, 68:301-333.
57. Ziegler J., Facchini P.J. Alkaloid biosynthesis: metabolism and trafficking. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2008, 59:735-769.
58. Walsh C.T., Fischbach M.A. Natural products version 2.0: connecting genes to molecules. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132:2469-2493.
59. Keatinge-Clay A.T. The structures of type I polyketide synthases. Nat. Prod. Rep. 2012, 29:1050-1073.
60. Rottig M., et al. NRPSpredictor2: a web server for predicting NRPS adenylation domain specificity. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39:W362-W367.
61. Go M.K., et al. Establishing a toolkit for precursor-directed polyketide biosynthesis: exploring substrate promiscuities of acid-CoA ligases. Biochemistry 2012, 51:4568-4579.
62. Williams G.J. Engineering polyketide synthases and nonribosomal peptide synthetases. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2013, 23:603-612.
63. Wong F.T., Khosla C. Combinatorial biosynthesis of polyketides: a perspective. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2012, 16:117-123.
64. Sacchettini J.C., Poulter C.D. Biochemistry: creating isoprenoid diversity. Science 1997, 277:1788-1789.
65. Christianson D.W. Roots of biosynthetic diversity. Science 2007, 316:60-61.
66. Tantillo D.J. Biosynthesis via carbocations: theoretical studies on terpene formation. Nat. Prod. Rep. 2011, 28:1035-1053.
67. Punta M., et al. The Pfam protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40:D290-D301.
68. Goodacre N.F., et al. Protein domains of unknown function are essential in bacteria. MBio 2013, 5. e00744-13.
69. Bastard K., et al. Revealing the hidden functional diversity of an enzyme family. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2014, 10:42-49.
70. Yamada T., et al. Prediction and identification of sequences coding for orphan enzymes using genomic and metagenomic neighbours. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2012, 8:581.
71. Smith A.A.T., et al. The CanOE strategy: integrating genomic and metabolic contexts across multiple prokaryote genomes to find candidate genes for orphan enzymes. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2012, 8:e1002540.
72. Pouliot Y., Karp P.D. A survey of orphan enzyme activities. BMC Bioinformatics 2007, 8:244.
73. Chen L.F., Vitkup D. Distribution of orphan metabolic activities. Trends Biotechnol. 2007, 25:343-348.
74. Ramkissoon K.R., et al. Rapid identification of sequences for orphan enzymes to power accurate protein annotation. PLoS ONE 2013, 8:e84508.
75. Watschinger K., Werner E.R. Orphan enzymes in ether lipid metabolism. Biochimie 2013, 95:59-65.
76. Lespinet O., Labedan B. ORENZA: a web resource for studying ORphan ENZyme activities. BMC Bioinformatics 2006, 7:436.
77. ExplorEnz Enzyme Database Statistics 2014, ExplorEnz.
78. Artimo P., et al. ExPASy: SIB bioinformatics resource portal. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40:W597-W603.
79. Schomburg I., et al. BRENDA in 2013: integrated reactions, kinetic data, enzyme function data, improved disease classification: new options and contents in BRENDA. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013, 41:D764-D772.
80. Lespinet O., Labedan B. Orphan enzymes could be an unexplored reservoir of new drug targets. Drug Discov. Today 2006, 11:300-305.
81. Karp P.D., et al. Pathway Tools version 13.0: integrated software for pathway/genome informatics and systems biology. Brief. Bioinform. 2010, 11:40-79.
82. Mackie A., et al. Dead end metabolites: defining the known unknowns of the E. coli metabolic network. PLoS ONE 2013, 8:e75210.