| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Department of Physics and Institute of Molecular Biophysics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306; and Department of Physics, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
Correspondence: Address reprint requests to Huan-Xiang Zhou, Institute of Molecular Biophysics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306. Tel.: 850-644-7052; Fax: 850-644-0098; E-mail: hxzhou{at}csit.fsu.edu.
The thermophilic Bacillus caldolyticus cold shock protein (Bc-Csp) differs from the mesophilic Bacillus subtilis cold shock protein B (Bs-CspB) in 11 of the 66 residues. Stability measurements of Schmid and co-workers have implicated contributions of electrostatic interactions to the thermostability. To further elucidate the physical basis of the difference in stability, previously developed theoretical methods that treat electrostatic effects in both the folded and the unfolded states were used in this paper to study the effects of mutations, ionic strength, and temperature. For 27 mutations that narrow the difference in sequence between Bc-Csp and Bs-CspB, calculated changes in unfolding free energy (
G) and experimental results have a correlation coefficient of 0.98. Bc-Csp appears to use destabilization of the unfolded state by unfavorable charge-charge interactions as a mechanism for increasing stability. Accounting for the effects of ionic strength and temperature on the electrostatic free energies in both the folded and the unfolded states, explanations for two important experimental observations are presented. The disparate ionic strength dependences of
G for Bc-Csp and Bs-CspB were attributed to the difference in the total charges (-2e and -6e, respectively). A main contribution to the much higher unfolding entropy of Bs-CspB was found to come from the less favorable electrostatic interactions in the folded state. These results should provide insight for understanding the thermostability of other thermophilic proteins.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
X. Huang and H.-X. Zhou Similarity and Difference in the Unfolding of Thermophilic and Mesophilic Cold Shock Proteins Studied by Molecular Dynamics Simulations Biophys. J., October 1, 2006; 91(7): 2451 - 2463. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Wunderlich and F. X. Schmid The correlation between protein stability and dipole moment: a critical test Protein Eng. Des. Sel., August 1, 2006; 19(8): 355 - 358. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Perez-Jimenez, R. Godoy-Ruiz, B. Ibarra-Molero, and J. M. Sanchez-Ruiz The Efficiency of Different Salts to Screen Charge Interactions in Proteins: A Hofmeister Effect? Biophys. J., April 1, 2004; 86(4): 2414 - 2429. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Torrez, M. Schultehenrich, and D. R. Livesay Conferring Thermostability to Mesophilic Proteins through Optimized Electrostatic Surfaces Biophys. J., November 1, 2003; 85(5): 2845 - 2853. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Dong, M. Vijayakumar, and H.-X. Zhou Comparison of Calculation and Experiment Implicates Significant Electrostatic Contributions to the Binding Stability of Barnase and Barstar Biophys. J., July 1, 2003; 85(1): 49 - 60. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |