A knowledge-based forcefield for protein-protein interface design

被引:12
作者
Clark, Louis A. [1 ]
van Vlijmen, Herman W. T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Biogen Idec Inc, Protein Engn Grp, Cambridge, MA 02142 USA
关键词
forcefield; protein-protein docking; protein design; antibody; binding energy;
D O I
10.1002/prot.21694
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
A distance-dependent knowledge-based potential for prote-in-protein interactions is derived and tested for application in protein design. Information on residue type specific C. and C-beta pair distances is extracted from complex crystal structures in the Protein Data Bank and used in the form of radial distribution functions. The use of only backbone and C-beta position information allows generation of relative protein-protein orientation poses with minimal sidechain information. Further coarse-graining can be done simply in the same theoretical framework to give potentials for residues of known type interacting with unknown type, as in a one-sided interface design problem. Both interface design via pose generation followed by sidechain repacking and localized protein-protein docking tests are performed on 39 non-redundant antibody-antigen complexes for which crystal structures are available. As reference, Lennard-Jones potentials, unspecific for residue type and biasing toward varying degrees of residue pair separation are used as controls. For interface design, the knowledge-based potentials give the best combination of consistently designable poses, low RMSD to the known structure, and more tightly bound interfaces with no added computational cost. 77% of the poses could be designed to give complexes with negative free energies of binding. Generally, larger interface separation promotes designability, but weakens the binding of the resulting designs. A localized docking test shows that the knowledge-based nature of the potentials improves performance and compares respectably with more sophisticated all-atoms potentials.
引用
收藏
页码:1540 / 1550
页数:11
相关论文
共 44 条
[31]   Free energy decomposition of protein-protein interactions [J].
Noskov, SY ;
Lim, C .
BIOPHYSICAL JOURNAL, 2001, 81 (02) :737-750
[32]   Knowledge-based potential functions in protein design [J].
Russ, WP ;
Ranganathan, R .
CURRENT OPINION IN STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY, 2002, 12 (04) :447-452
[33]   CALCULATION OF CONFORMATIONAL ENSEMBLES FROM POTENTIALS OF MEAN FORCE - AN APPROACH TO THE KNOWLEDGE-BASED PREDICTION OF LOCAL STRUCTURES IN GLOBULAR-PROTEINS [J].
SIPPL, MJ .
JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, 1990, 213 (04) :859-883
[34]   Prediction of protein-protein interactions by docking methods [J].
Smith, GR ;
Sternberg, MJE .
CURRENT OPINION IN STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY, 2002, 12 (01) :28-35
[35]   Protein-protein interactions: Interface structure, binding thermodynamics, and mutational analysis [J].
Stites, WE .
CHEMICAL REVIEWS, 1997, 97 (05) :1233-1250
[36]   Coupling backbone flexibility and amino acid sequence selection in protein design [J].
Su, A ;
Mayo, SL .
PROTEIN SCIENCE, 1997, 6 (08) :1701-1707
[37]   An atomic environment potential for use in protein structure prediction [J].
Summa, CM ;
Levitt, M ;
DeGrado, WF .
JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, 2005, 352 (04) :986-1001
[38]   Medium- and long-range interaction parameters between amino acids for predicting three-dimensional structures of proteins. [J].
TANAKA, S ;
SCHERAGA, HA .
MACROMOLECULES, 1976, 9 (06) :945-950
[39]   Protein-protein docking: is the glass half-full or half-empty? [J].
Vajda, S ;
Camacho, CJ .
TRENDS IN BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2004, 22 (03) :110-116
[40]  
Vajda Sandor, 2002, Proteins, V47, P444