Protein folding and binding can emerge as evolutionary spandrels through structural coupling

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 112, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1797-1802

  Manhart, Michael ^a   Morozov, Alexandre V ^a,b  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Evolutionary spandrels; Fitness landscapes; Folding stability; Protein evolution; Protein interactions

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID; LIGAND; PROTEIN; PROTEIN BINDING;

ARTICLE; EPISTASIS; EVOLUTION; EVOLUTIONARY ADAPTATION; EVOLUTIONARY SPANDRELS; FITNESS LANDSCAPE; GENOTYPE; KINETICS; MOLECULE; MUTATION; NONHUMAN; ORGANISMS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN STABILITY; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; ADAPTATION; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETICS; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYSIOLOGY; POPULATION GENETICS;

ADAPTATION, BIOLOGICAL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; GENETICS, POPULATION; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MUTATION; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEINS;

EID: 84922642514     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1415895112     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Creighton TE (1992) Proteins: Structures and Molecular Properties (Freeman, New York).
2. Campbell RE, et al. (2002) A monomeric red fluorescent protein. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99(12):7877-7882.
3. Bloom JD, Arnold FH (2009) In the light of directed evolution: Pathways of adaptive protein evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(Suppl 1):9995-10000.
4. Bucciantini M, et al. (2002) Inherent toxicity of aggregates implies a common mechanism for protein misfolding diseases. Nature 416(6880):507-511.
5. Chiti F, Stefani M, Taddei N, Ramponi G, Dobson CM (2003) Rationalization of the effects of mutations on peptide and protein aggregation rates. Nature 424(6950): 805-808.
6. Drummond DA, Wilke CO (2008) Mistranslation-induced protein misfolding as a dominant constraint on coding-sequence evolution. Cell 134(2):341-352.
7. Geiler-Samerotte KA, et al. (2011) Misfolded proteins impose a dosage-dependent fitness cost and trigger a cytosolic unfolded protein response in yeast. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(2):680-685.
8. Tokuriki N, Stricher F, Schymkowitz J, Serrano L, Tawfik DS (2007) The stability effects of protein mutations appear to be universally distributed. J Mol Biol 369(5):1318-1332.
9. Tokuriki N, Stricher F, Serrano L, Tawfik DS (2008) How protein stability and new functions trade off. PLOS Comput Biol 4(2):e1000002.
10. Wang X, Minasov G, Shoichet BK (2002) Evolution of an antibiotic resistance enzyme constrained by stability and activity trade-offs. J Mol Biol 320(1):85-95.
11. Sun SB, et al. (2013) Mutational analysis of 48G7 reveals that somatic hypermutation affects both antibody stability and binding affinity. J Am Chem Soc 135(27):9980-9983.
12. Taverna DM, Goldstein RA (2002) Why are proteins marginally stable? Proteins 46(1): 105-109.
13. Zeldovich KB, Chen P, Shakhnovich EI (2007) Protein stability imposes limits on organism complexity and speed of molecular evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(41): 16152-16157.
14. Bloom JD, Labthavikul ST, Otey CR, Arnold FH (2006) Protein stability promotes evolvability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103(15):5869-5874.
15. DePristo MA, Weinreich DM, Hartl DL (2005) Missense meanderings in sequence space: A biophysical view of protein evolution. Nat Rev Genet 6(9):678-687.
16. Drummond DA, Bloom JD, Adami C, Wilke CO, Arnold FH (2005) Why highly expressed proteins evolve slowly. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102(40):14338-14343.
17. Serohijos AWR, Rimas Z, Shakhnovich EI (2012) Protein biophysics explains why highly abundant proteins evolve slowly. Cell Reports 2(2):249-256.
18. Johnson ME, Hummer G (2011) Nonspecific binding limits the number of proteins in a cell and shapes their interaction networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(2):603-608.
19. Heo M, Maslov S, Shakhnovich E (2011) Topology of protein interaction network shapes protein abundances and strengths of their functional and nonspecific interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(10):4258-4263.
20. Gould SJ, Lewontin RC (1979) The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 205(1161): 581-598.
21. Pigliucci I, Kaplan I (2000) The fall and rise of Dr Pangloss: Adaptationism and the Spandrels paper 20 years later. Trends Ecol Evol 15(2):66-70.
22. Weiss MA, et al. (2002) Protein structure and the spandrels of San Marco: Insulin's receptor-binding surface is buttressed by an invariant leucine essential for its stability. Biochemistry 41(3):809-819.
23. Barrett RDH, Hoekstra HE (2011) Molecular spandrels: Tests of adaptation at the genetic level. Nat Rev Genet 12(11):767-780.
24. Weinreich DM, Delaney NF, Depristo MA, Hartl DL (2006) Darwinian evolution can follow only very few mutational paths to fitter proteins. Science 312(5770):111-114.
25. Chou HH, Chiu HC, Delaney NF, Segrè D, Marx CJ (2011) Diminishing returns epistasis among beneficial mutations decelerates adaptation. Science 332(6034):1190-1192.
26. Manhart M, Morozov AV (2013) Path-based approach to random walks on networks characterizes how proteins evolve new functions. Phys Rev Lett 111(8):088102.
27. Manhart M, Morozov AV (2014) First-Passage Phenomena and Their Applications, eds Metzler R, Oshanin G, Redner S (World Scientific, Singapore).
28. Wright PE, Dyson HJ (2009) Linking folding and binding. Curr Opin Struct Biol 19(1): 31-38.
29. Habchi J, Tompa P, Longhi S, Uversky VN (2014) Introducing protein intrinsic disorder. Chem Rev 114(13):6561-6588.
30. Clackson T, Wells JA (1995) A hot spot of binding energy in a hormone-receptor interface. Science 267(5196):383-386.
31. Moreira IS, Fernandes PA, Ramos MJ (2007) Hot spots-a review of the proteinprotein interface determinant amino-acid residues. Proteins 68(4):803-812.
32. Wells JA (1990) Additivity of mutational effects in proteins. Biochemistry 29(37): 8509-8517.
33. Champagnat N (2006) A microscopic interpretation for adaptive dynamics trait substitution sequence models. Stoch Proc Appl 116(8):1127-1160.
34. Lynch M (2007) The Origins of Genome Architecture (Sinauer, Sunderland, MA).
35. Charlesworth B (2009) Fundamental concepts in genetics: Effective population size and patterns of molecular evolution and variation. Nat Rev Genet 10(3):195-205.
36. Shoval O, et al. (2012) Evolutionary trade-offs, Pareto optimality, and the geometry of phenotype space. Science 336(6085):1157-1160.
37. Lynch M(2007) The evolution of genetic networks by non-adaptive processes. Nat Rev Genet 8(10):803-813.
38. Rodrigues JV, Henriques BJ, Lucas TG, Gomes CM (2012) Cofactors and metabolites as protein folding helpers in metabolic diseases. Curr Top Med Chem 12(22):2546-2559.
39. Stark C, et al. (2006) BioGRID: A general repository for interaction datasets. Nucleic Acids Res 34(Database issue):D535-D539.
40. Yang JR, Liao BY, Zhuang SM, Zhang J (2012) Protein misinteraction avoidance causes highly expressed proteins to evolve slowly. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(14):E831-E840.
41. Dixit PD, Maslov S (2013) Evolutionary capacitance and control of protein stability in protein-protein interaction networks. PLOS Comput Biol 9(4):e1003023.
42. Hartl FU, Bracher A, Hayer-Hartl M (2011) Molecular chaperones in protein folding and proteostasis. Nature 475(7356):324-332.
43. Poelwijk FJ, Kiviet DJ, Weinreich DM, Tans SJ (2007) Empirical fitness landscapes reveal accessible evolutionary paths. Nature 445(7126):383-386.
44. Szendro IG, Schenk MF, Franke J, Krug J, de Visser JA (2013) Quantitative analyses of empirical fitness landscapes. J Stat Mech 2013:P01005.
45. Gould SJ (1990) Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History (Norton, New York).
46. Lobkovsky AE, Koonin EV (2012) Replaying the tape of life: Quantification of the predictability of evolution. Front Genet 3:246.
47. Thorn KS, Bogan AA (2001) ASEdb: A database of alanine mutations and their effects on the free energy of binding in protein interactions. Bioinformatics 17(3):284-285.