Evolutionary-guided de novo structure prediction of self-associated transmembrane helical proteins with near-atomic accuracy

Nature Communications

Volumn 6, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Wang, Y ^a   Barth, P ^a  

^a BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIMER; HOMODIMER; MEMBRANE PROTEIN; MEMBRANE RECEPTOR; OLIGOMER; PROTEIN TYROSINE KINASE; PROTEIN VARIANT; CELL SURFACE RECEPTOR;

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; CHEMICAL BINDING; INHIBITOR; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; PREDICTION; PROTEIN;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; HYPOTHESIS; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; MOLECULAR MODEL; MOLECULAR RECOGNITION; POINT MUTATION; PREDICTION; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SIMULATION; STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGY; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS; SURFACE PROPERTY; CHEMISTRY; GENETICS; HUMAN; MOLECULAR GENETICS; PROTEIN MULTIMERIZATION; SOFTWARE;

EUKARYOTA;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; HUMANS; MOLECULAR SEQUENCE DATA; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN MULTIMERIZATION; RECEPTOR PROTEIN-TYROSINE KINASES; RECEPTORS, CELL SURFACE; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84930227406     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms8196     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Moore, D. T., Berger, B. W. & DeGrado, W. F. Protein-protein interactions in the membrane: sequence, structural, and biological motifs. Structure 16, 991-1001 (2008).
2. Lemmon, M. A. & Schlessinger, J. Cell signaling by receptor tyrosine kinases. Cell 141, 1117-1134 (2010).
3. Call, M. E. et al. The structure of the zetazeta transmembrane dimer reveals features essential for its assembly with the T cell receptor. Cell 127, 355-368 (2006).
4. Call, M. E. & Wucherpfennig, K. W. Common themes in the assembly and architecture of activating immune receptors. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 7, 841-850 (2007).
5. Maurel, D. et al. Cell-surface protein-protein interaction analysis with time-resolved FRET and snap-tag technologies: application to GPCR oligomerization. Nat. Methods 5, 561-567 (2008).
6. Langosch, D. & Arkin, I. T. Interaction and conformational dynamics of membrane-spanning protein helices. Protein Sci. 18, 1343-1358 (2009).
7. Matthews, E. E., Zoonens, M. & Engelman, D. M. Dynamic helix interactions in transmembrane signaling. Cell 127, 447-450 (2006).
8. Endres, N. F. et al. Conformational coupling across the plasma membrane in activation of the EGF receptor. Cell 152, 543-556 (2013).
9. Arkhipov, A. et al. Architecture and membrane interactions of the EGF receptor. Cell 152, 557-569 (2013).
10. Cymer, F. & Schneider, D. Transmembrane helix-helix interactions involved in ErbB receptor signaling. Cell Adh. Migr. 4, 299-312 (2010).
11. Li, E., You, M. & Hristova, K. FGFR3 dimer stabilization due to a single amino acid pathogenic mutation. J. Mol. Biol. 356, 600-612 (2006).
12. Toffalini, F. & Demoulin, J. B. New insights into the mechanisms of hematopoietic cell transformation by activated receptor tyrosine kinases. Blood 116, 2429-2437 (2010).
13. Yang, Y. et al. Structural basis for dimerization of ICAM-1 on the cell surface. Mol. Cell 14, 269-276 (2004).
14. Zhang, X., Gureasko, J., Shen, K., Cole, P. A. & Kuriyan, J. An allosteric mechanism for activation of the kinase domain of epidermal growth factor receptor. Cell 125, 1137-1149 (2006).
15. MacKenzie, K. R., Prestegard, J. H. & Engelman, D. M. A transmembrane helix dimer: structure and implications. Science 276, 131-133 (1997).
16. Bocharov, E. V. et al. Spatial structure of the dimeric transmembrane domain of the growth factor receptor ErbB2 presumably corresponding to the receptor active state. J. Biol. Chem. 283, 6950-6956 (2008).
17. Jura, N. et al. Mechanism for activation of the EGF receptor catalytic domain by the juxtamembrane segment. Cell 137, 1293-1307 (2009).
18. Mineev, K. S. et al. Spatial structure of the transmembrane domain heterodimer of ErbB1 and ErbB2 receptor tyrosine kinases. J. Mol. Biol. 400, 231-243 (2010).
19. Zhu, J. et al. The structure of a receptor with two associating transmembrane domains on the cell surface: integrin alphaIIbbeta3. Mol. Cell 34, 234-249 (2009).
20. Lau, T. L., Kim, C., Ginsberg, M. H. & Ulmer, T. S. The structure of the integrin alphaIIbbeta3 transmembrane complex explains integrin transmembrane signalling. EMBO J. 28, 1351-1361 (2009).
21. Lu, C. et al. Structural evidence for loose linkage between ligand binding and kinase activation in the epidermal growth factor receptor. Mol. Cell. Biol. 30, 5432-5443 (2010).
22. Soto, C. S., Hannigan, B. T. & DeGrado, W. F. A photon-free approach to transmembrane protein structure determination. J. Mol. Biol. 414, 596-610 (2011).
23. Barth, P., Schonbrun, J. & Baker, D. Toward high-resolution prediction and design of transmembrane helical protein structures. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 15682-15687 (2007).
24. Mueller, B. K., Subramaniam, S. & Senes, A. A frequent, GxxxG-mediated, transmembrane association motif is optimized for the formation of interhelical Calpha-H hydrogen bonds. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, E888-E895 (2014).
25. Walters, R. F. & DeGrado, W. F. Helix-packing motifs in membrane proteins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 13658-13663 (2006).
26. Sulistijo, E. S. & Mackenzie, K. R. Structural basis for dimerization of the BNIP3 transmembrane domain. Biochemistry 48, 5106-5120 (2009).
27. Bocharov, E. V. et al. Structure of FGFR3 transmembrane domain dimer: implications for signaling and human pathologies. Structure 21, 2087-2093 (2013).
28. Bocharov, E. V. et al. Left-handed dimer of EphA2 transmembrane domain: helix packing diversity among receptor tyrosine kinases. Biophys. J. 98, 881-889 (2010).
29. Ried, C. L., Kube, S., Kirrbach, J. & Langosch, D. Homotypic interaction and amino acid distribution of unilaterally conserved transmembrane helices. J. Mol. Biol. 420, 251-257 (2012).
30. Polyansky, A. A., Volynsky, P. E. & Efremov, R. G. Multistate organization of transmembrane helical protein dimers governed by the host membrane. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134, 14390-14400 (2012).
31. Baker, D. & Sali, A. Protein structure prediction and structural genomics. Science 294, 93-96 (2001).
32. Fleishman, S. J. & Baker, D. Role of the biomolecular energy gap in protein design, structure, and evolution. Cell 149, 262-273 (2012).
33. Gray, J. J. High-resolution protein-protein docking. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 16, 183-193 (2006).
34. Chen, K. Y., Sun, J., Salvo, J. S., Baker, D. & Barth, P. High-resolution modeling of transmembrane helical protein structures from distant homologues. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10, e1003636 (2014).
35. Thomas, J., Ramakrishnan, N. & Bailey-Kellogg, C. Graphical models of residue coupling in protein families. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinform. 5, 183-197 (2008).
36. Marks, D. S. et al. Protein 3D structure computed from evolutionary sequence variation. PLoS ONE 6, e28766 (2011).
37. Jones, D. T., Buchan, D. W., Cozzetto, D. & Pontil, M. PSICOV: precise structural contact prediction using sparse inverse covariance estimation on large multiple sequence alignments. Bioinformatics 28, 184-190 (2012).
38. Morcos, F. et al. Direct-coupling analysis of residue coevolution captures native contacts across many protein families. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, E1293-E1301 (2011).
39. Kamisetty, H., Ovchinnikov, S. & Baker, D. Assessing the utility of coevolutionbased residue-residue contact predictions in a sequence-and structure-rich era. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 15674-15679 (2013).
40. Balakrishnan, S., Kamisetty, H., Carbonell, J. G., Lee, S. I. & Langmead, C. J. Learning generative models for protein fold families. Proteins 79, 1061-1078 (2011).
41. Ekeberg, M., Lovkvist, C., Lan, Y., Weigt, M. & Aurell, E. Improved contact prediction in proteins: using pseudolikelihoods to infer Potts models. Phys. Rev. E. Stat. Nonlin. Soft. Matter Phys. 87, 012707 (2013).
42. Hopf, T. A. et al. Three-dimensional structures of membrane proteins from genomic sequencing. Cell 149, 1607-1621 (2012).
43. Nugent, T. & Jones, D. T. Accurate de novo structure prediction of large transmembrane protein domains using fragment-assembly and correlated mutation analysis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, E1540-E1547 (2012).
44. Morcos, F., Jana, B., Hwa, T. & Onuchic, J. N. Coevolutionary signals across protein lineages help capture multiple protein conformations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 20533-20538 (2013).
45. Ovchinnikov, S., Kamisetty, H. & Baker, D. Robust and accurate prediction of residue-residue interactions across protein interfaces using evolutionary information. eLife 3, e02030 (2014).
46. Dago, A. E. et al. Structural basis of histidine kinase autophosphorylation deduced by integrating genomics, molecular dynamics, and mutagenesis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, E1733-E1742 (2012).
47. Madaoui, H. & Guerois, R. Coevolution at protein complex interfaces can be detected by the complementarity trace with important impact for predictive docking. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 7708-7713 (2008).
48. Barth, P., Wallner, B. & Baker, D. Prediction of membrane protein structures with complex topologies using limited constraints. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 1409-1414 (2009).
49. Adamian, L. & Liang, J. Prediction of transmembrane helix orientation in polytopic membrane proteins. BMC Struct. Biol. 6, 13 (2006).
50. Defour, J. P. et al. Tryptophan at the transmembrane-cytosolic junction modulates thrombopoietin receptor dimerization and activation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 2540-2545 (2013).
51. Bocharov, E. V. et al. Spatial structure and pH-dependent conformational diversity of dimeric transmembrane domain of the receptor tyrosine kinase EphA1. J. Biol. Chem. 283, 29385-29395 (2008).
52. Acharya, R. et al. Structure and mechanism of proton transport through the transmembrane tetrameric M2 protein bundle of the influenza A virus. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 15075-15080 (2010).
53. Stouffer, A. L. et al. Structural basis for the function and inhibition of an influenza virus proton channel. Nature 451, 596-599 (2008).
54. Chen, K. Y., Zhou, F., Fryszczyn, B. G. & Barth, P. Naturally evolved G proteincoupled receptors adopt metastable conformations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 13284-13289 (2012).
55. Yin, H. et al. Computational design of peptides that target transmembrane helices. Science 315, 1817-1822 (2007).
56. Bocharov, E. V., Mineev, K. S., Goncharuk, M. V. & Arseniev, A. S. Structural and thermodynamic insight into the process of 'weak' dimerization of the ErbB4 transmembrane domain by solution NMR. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1818, 2158-2170 (2012).
57. Bocharov, E. V. et al. Unique dimeric structure of BNip3 transmembrane domain suggests membrane permeabilization as a cell death trigger. J. Biol. Chem. 282, 16256-16266 (2007).
58. Chen, W. et al. Familial Alzheimer's mutations within APPTM increase Abeta42 production by enhancing accessibility of epsilon-cleavage site. Nat. Commun. 5, 3037 (2014).
59. Mineev, K. S. et al. Spatial structure and dimer - monomer equilibrium of the ErbB3 transmembrane domain in DPC micelles. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1808, 2081-2088 (2011).
60. Call, M. E., Wucherpfennig, K. W. & Chou, J. J. The structural basis for intramembrane assembly of an activating immunoreceptor complex. Nat. Immunol. 11, 1023-1029 (2010).
61. Muhle-Goll, C. et al. Hydrophobic matching controls the tilt and stability of the dimeric platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) beta transmembrane segment. J. Biol. Chem. 287, 26178-26186 (2012).
62. Nadezhdin, K. D., Bocharova, O. V., Bocharov, E. V. & Arseniev, A. S. Dimeric structure of transmembrane domain of amyloid precursor protein in micellar environment. FEBS Lett. 586, 1687-1692 (2012).
63. Wang, J., Pielak, R. M., McClintock, M. A. & Chou, J. J. Solution structure and functional analysis of the influenza B proton channel. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 16, 1267-1271 (2009).
64. Verardi, R., Shi, L., Traaseth, N. J., Walsh, N. & Veglia, G. Structural topology of phospholamban pentamer in lipid bilayers by a hybrid solution and solid-state NMR method. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 9101-9106 (2011).
65. Stenson, P. D. et al. The Human Gene Mutation Database (HGMD) and its exploitation in the fields of personalized genomics and molecular evolution. Curr. Protoc. Bioinform. Chapter 1, Unit1 13 (2012).
66. Remmert, M., Biegert, A., Hauser, A. & Soding, J. HHblits: lightning-fast iterative protein sequence searching by HMM-HMM alignment. Nat. Methods 9, 173-175 (2012).
67. Wolf, E., Kim, P. S. & Berger, B. MultiCoil: a program for predicting two-and three-stranded coiled coils. Protein Sci. 6, 1179-1189 (1997).
68. Das, R. et al. Simultaneous prediction of protein folding and docking at high resolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 18978-18983 (2009).
69. Viklund, H. & Elofsson, A. OCTOPUS: improving topology prediction by two-track ANN-based preference scores and an extended topological grammar. Bioinformatics 24, 1662-1668 (2008).
70. Soding, J., Biegert, A. & Lupas, A. N. The HHpred interactive server for protein homology detection and structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res. 33, W244-W248 (2005).