| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||



* School of Medicine and Pharmacology, QEII Medical Centre, University of Western Australia, Crawley WA 6009, Australia; and
Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois
Correspondence: Address reprint requests to Grischa Meyer at his present address, School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia. Tel: 617-3346-1224; Fax: 617-3365-1766; E-mail: grischa{at}uq.edu.au.
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Asymmetric addition of amphipaths, including lysophospholipids, lipids with a single fatty acid, to a homogeneous lipid bilayer opens bacterial MS channels even under zero applied pressure (17
). Recent electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) and fluorescent resonance energy transfer (FRET) experiments investigated this effect on MscL in more detail (14
,18
). It was shown that asymmetric addition of amphipaths to the bilayer increased the opening probability of MscL, leading eventually to full channel opening. It was also shown that short lipids, although they did not open the channel fully, reduced the applied tension required to gate the channel (14
).
The asymmetric addition of amphipaths has been shown to induce local curvature into the erythrocyte membrane (19
). A change in bilayer shape induced by addition of amphipaths causing membrane curvature is thought to induce the opening of the MS channels (17
,20
).
Radial forces previously used to accelerate opening of MscL (10
,12
,16
,21
) bias all movement in unfortunate ways. The large strength of forces applied accelerates radial movements to a degree that may not allow enough time for movements in other directions to take place before the channel reaches an open state. Furthermore, radial forces could guide the structure along a different opening pathway than that chosen under native conditions. Even though rather convincing suggestions have been advanced by Gullingsrud and Schulten (10
), it is not exactly known in what way the proteinlipid interactions exert force on the protein, and the forces assumed in past simulations may have resulted in a nonnative final structure.
Accordingly, we employ in this study a molecular dynamics simulation that does not apply external forces. Instead, we modeled a bilayer of curved shape, incorporating nonbilayer-forming lipids, to directly affect the embedded MscL through the bilayer curvature.
Because of the size of the system and limited resources, only one simulation of one bilayer composition was performed. Lacking controls, this "virtual experiment" is presented primarily as the first simulation of a curved lipid bilayer, suggesting a geometry and setup that can be used for more exhaustive investigations in the future. The results show details of the MscL gating mechanism that have not been investigated thoroughly before. Although they cannot be regarded as true results, they provide incentive for further experiments.
| METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
For the lipid we chose 1,2-dilauroyl-phosphatidylethanolamine (DLPE). This lipid has two fatty acid tails that were chosen much shorter, each only 12 Cs long, than found in common bilayers; however, the chosen lipid furnishes a feasible lipid environment that reduces the opening threshold of MscL as demonstrated in observations (14
). To stabilize a nonplanar membrane, we introduced into the two monolayers a heterogeneous distribution (see below) of a single-tail lipid 1-lauroyl-deoxylysophosphatidylcholine (LLPC). The length of LLPC was chosen commensurate with DLPE as 12 Cs.
The scripting abilities of the software package VMD (26
) were used to construct first a pure curved (dome-shaped) bilayer as shown schematically in Fig. 1 A. For this purpose we employed two sets of mathematical functions for two separate segments describing the lipid dome, segment I (convex) and segment II (concave), as defined in Fig. 1 A. The parametric equations describing the bilayer geometry are, for the top layer of segment I,
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
the angle of the circle segment. The curved bilayer for this study has r = 68 Å (1 Å = 1010 m), t = 36 Å, and
= 44°. The bilayer results from a rotation of both segments around the z axis (dashed line in Fig. 1 A).
|
|
The protein was placed into the center of the bilayer using VMD (26
), deleting all overlapping lipids. The method has been described numerous times, e.g., in Gullingsrud et al. (16
). The protein lipid bilayer system was then solvated in a bath of explicit water molecules, again following earlier procedures (10
). The boundary of the overall system was chosen to be a hexagonal prism with a side length of 109 Å and a height of 114 Å. The entire system consisted of 276,167 atoms, 8745 protein atoms in five monomers of 110 residues each, the remaining atoms stemming from 1034 lipids and 58,588 water molecules. Fig. 1 C shows an overall view of the system, and Fig. 1 B presents a cut through the system after 2 ns of equilibration.
Molecular dynamics simulations were performed using the program NAMD2 (27
) together with the CHARMM27 force field for lipids (28
,29
) and CHARMM22 for proteins (30
,31
). For all but the first 470 ps of the simulation, the bonds to all hydrogen atoms were kept rigid using the SHAKE algorithm (32
). This permitted a time step of 2 fs to be used. The simulation was performed with periodic boundary conditions accounting for full electrostatics described by means of the particle mesh Ewald (PME) method (33
) with a grid spacing of 1 Å or less. The temperature was kept at 300 K using Langevin dynamics on all but the hydrogen atoms with a damping coefficient of 5 ps1. During the simulations the pressure was kept constant at 1.013 bar, but the size of the simulation cell was allowed to change.
Simulations started with a 3000-step minimization of the entire protein-lipid water system that removed all unfavorable steric contacts. The system was then heated for 6 ps at a time step of 1 fs up to 300 K using Langevin dynamics (34
). The C
-atoms of the protein were constrained to their initial position during heating. The system was equilibrated first for 228 ps with a time step of 1 fs and C
-atoms constrained. The next 231 ps were performed without the constraints. For the remainder of the simulation, the SHAKE (32
) algorithm was used to constrain the bonds to hydrogen atoms, as pointed out above. After the equilibration phase, the system was permitted free dynamics for an extensive period of 9.5 ns and monitored for analysis using VMD (26
). The simulations were carried out on a 750 AlphaServer ES45 node computer cluster at the Pittsburgh Supercomputer Center. On 512 processors 1-ns dynamics required 9 h.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
1.4 Å. Hence, the channel did not reach an open or subconducting state during the simulation time.
|
For comparison with recent EPR experiments (13
,14
), the rotation of helices was measured using a vector between the center of mass of the backbone of the helix and the two helices of opposing subunits. The helix in question was fixed, and the movement of the other two helices was measured. Fig. 4 A indicates a 20° rotation after 7 ns of the hydrophobic gate part formed by the TM1 helix. This is accompanied by an inverse rotation of the upper part (residues I-32 to I-40, not shown) of the same helix.
|
The rotational movements of subunit 1 are related to the breakdown of the
-helix backbone hydrogen bonding between residues A-28 and I-32. Fig. 4 B shows that at first the TM1 helix kinks at this position and in the end straightens again. A plot of the distance between the hydrogen-bonding atoms of I-28 and I-32, shown in Fig. 4 C, reveals a possible correlation with the rotational movements outlined above. When the different parts of TM1 rotate after 7 ns, the hydrogen bond reforms. The TM2 helix of subunit 1 goes through a bending motion simultaneously.
The helix structures of the other subunits stay intact throughout the whole simulation. However, subunit 3 exhibits TM1 helix bending, which resembles the bending and breakdown of structure seen in subunit 1 (data not shown), suggesting a common mechanism.
In the initially modeled structure, residues M-42 to Y-75 form a ring with 4.9-Å radius around the top. During the simulation all of the five subunits' loops changed significantly from their initial conformations. As can be seen from an RMSD analysis (Fig. 2), none of the loops have reached a stable conformation by the end of the simulation. One of the loops exhibits an interesting behavior involving interaction with the lipid headgroups after
9 ns.
Fig. 5 A shows the hydrogen-bonding interactions of periplasmic residues with lipid headgroups. In the equilibrated protein in its closed form, residues 39 to 43 and 78, 79, 82, and 83, but not the loop in between, are interacting with the lipid headgroups. Glutamine residue Q-65 of subunit 1 is a notable exception to that set of interacting residues, as it is located at the tip of the loop, which sits on top of the channel. Due to the interactions the lipid molecules involved rose slightly above the level of the neighboring lipids.
|
The bilayer thickness was measured between the phosphorus atoms of the lipid headgroups, as shown in Fig. 5 B. The native thickness of the bilayer used in the simulation is much thinner, <30 Å. The lipids near the protein first come together, closer to the native thickness, as they had not yet interacted with the protein much (see Fig. 4 A). As these interactions increase, from 3.2 ns onward, the bilayer thickness near the protein expands to almost 35 Å thickness, matching the protein's hydrophobic region, whereas the overall bilayer retains its initial low thickness of slightly <30 Å. The increase in proteinlipid contacts after 3.2 ns is also visible in Fig. 5 A.
The bilayer remains stable throughout the whole simulation time. However, the bilayer does not keep its initial ideal dome shape. The amount of curvature is slightly reduced, and the beginning of slow undulations is apparent around the perimeter of the dome.
The total surface tension is small, and the system stays stress-free during all but the initial few steps of the simulation, as shown by the near constant area and height of the simulation box (Fig. 1, supplementary material). Previous simulations suggest that a rapid change in area would be seen if the tension were far from zero (36
).
To confirm that the biologically relevant liquid crystal phase prevails in our DLPE/LLPC bilayer, we calculated the lipid order parameter for DLPE and LLPC separately, at several time points in the simulation, using the standard expression SCD =
3/2 cos2
1/2
, where
is the angle between each C-H bond and the bilayer normal. This parameter is directly comparable to the deuterium order parameter, which is experimentally measurable through quadrupole splittings (37
). The curvature of the bilayer was taken into account at each lipid position by defining the local bilayer normal as a vector from a given lipid to its nearest neighbor in the opposite leaflet. We tested this algorithm on flat bilayers and found that it produced results within 5% of what one would obtain using an idealized normal aligned with a Cartesian axis.
The order parameters for the DLPE acyl chains were found to stabilize within 2 ns, whereas the corresponding values for the single LLPC chain increased by
15% during the entire simulation. Average order parameters averaged over the final 5 ns are shown in Fig. 5 C. The DLPE parameters compare very well to previous simulations of flat DLPE bilayers in the liquid crystalline state (38
, Fig. 3). Compared to experimental values for DLPC (39
), our order parameters for DLPE are slightly higher, as might be expected from the smaller headgroup of DLPE (38
). The LLPC chains are seen to be slightly more ordered than those of DLPE, possibly reflecting the increased area available to the DLPE chains imparted by the glycerol chain.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The RMSD values show that the only parts of the structure that undergo major rearrangements in our simulations are the periplasmic loops and extracellular helices. There are two possible reasons for these rearrangements. One is that the model may be incorrect in that region. Uncertainties in the model have been acknowledged by Sukharev et al. (24
). The other reason, which is founded on experimental observations, may be that the curved bilayer environment guides the channel toward the open state. Naturally, we permit ourselves to believe that the second possibility is actually reflecting a native response of MscL. We learn then from our simulations that the rearrangement of some of the MscL loops could play an important role in MscL's gating mechanism. As explained in the Introduction, previous simulations could not resolve this step because they emphasized, through the application of strong radial forces, large-scale rearrangements of the TM helices (10
,12
,16
,21
) or targeted an assumed final structure for the protein (15
).
The periplasmic loop of MscL has been shown to play a significant role in the channel gating. Ajouz et al. (40
) demonstrated that cutting of the loops by proteases increased dramatically MscL pressure sensitivity, which led to a proposal that the periplasmic loop functions as a spring resisting the movement of the transmembrane helices that underlie the critical event in mechanical gating of MscL. This proposal received support from a recent study showing that coreconstitution of the N- and C-terminal halves of MscL into liposomes yielded mechanosensitive channels exhibiting increased sensitivity to bilayer tension (41
). Together, both studies seem to support our assumption that the unfolding of the loop may present the initial step in the opening of MscL. A cut in the loop makes it easier for both ends to move freely and to unfold or refold. If it were necessary for the channel opening that the loops unfold, the cut would make this step easier. Experimental studies of the periplasmic loop residue Q-65 have further confirmed the important role of the periplasmic loop in the gating process (42
).
A less visible feature, the rotation of some of the TM helices, could possibly be related to previous experimental findings in which closed intermediate states of MscL (13
) showed similar movements. Models based on EPR measurements of a closed intermediate conformation predict 30° rotation (per subunit on average) from the closed initial state to a (yet) closed intermediate state (13
). In the simulation, we see a 20° rotation for one subunit, less for the others.
At least in one subunit, the rotation is linked to a breakdown of secondary structure in the TM1 helix and bending in TM2. Bending or kinking of the TM helices has been suggested to be important in the mechanism of ion-channel gating as well as for the functional control of other proteins (43
,44
) and has been observed in an MD simulation (15
) as well as by normal-mode analysis (45
). The kink in the first TM helix occurs in a region of well-conserved residues of the gating region. In a new MD simulation of the mechanosensitive channel of small conductance, MscS, embedded in a lipid bilayer (46
), similar kinks in the homologous region of conserved residues in the inner TM helix were observed. The agreement with experimental results for the MscL gating mechanisms supports our assumption that the curved bilayer affects the structure of the embedded MscL and leads it toward opening.
The interaction between the protein and lipids is also in agreement with experiments. Hydrophobic matching was to be expected and agrees with what has been postulated for membrane proteins previously (2
,47
52
). Fig. 5 B clearly shows that matching of the bilayer thickness to the protein's hydrophobic region occurred over time. The correlation with the increase of lipid-protein interactions is visible in Fig. 5 A.
Although we did not apply global tension, and the system is overall stress-free, we are aware that this might not be true locally. The local pressure profiles of the curved bilayer would deserve further investigation similar to what has been done for planar bilayers (38
). We were already at the limit of available computer power for this 280,000-atom, 10-ns simulation, and the bilayer is still undergoing adjustments to its curvature. An even longer simulation would be necessary to gather good statistics on the lateral pressure, especially if it is desired to find the local pressure near the protein. Fortunately, NAMD has been updated recently to permit pressure profile analysis with partitions by atom type (53
); this new feature will serve future analysis of curved membrane simulations.
| CONCLUSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH P41 RR05969 and NIH 1 RO1 GM067887-01) and by the Australian Research Council (ARC DP0342581). The authors also acknowledge computer time provided by the National Science Foundation NRAC Grant MCA93S028. Some of this work was conducted while Grischa Meyer was International Postgraduate Research Scholar in Australia. The molecular images in this article were created with the molecular graphics program VMD (26
).
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Boris Martinac's present address is School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane QLD 4072, Australia.
Submitted on January 2, 2006; accepted for publication May 10, 2006.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Hamill, O., and B. Martinac. 2001. Molecular basis of mechanotransduction in living cells. Physiol. Rev. 81:685740.
3. Sukharev, S., W. Sigurdson, C. Kung, and F. Sachs. 1999. Energetic and spatial parameters for gating of the bacterial large conductance mechanosensitive channel, MscL. J. Gen. Physiol. 113:525540.
4. Häse, C., A. Le Dain, and B. Martinac. 1995. Purification and functional reconstitution of the recombinant large mechanosensitive ion channel (MscL) of Escherichia coli. J. Biol. Chem. 270:1832918334.
5. Maurer, J., and D. Dougherty. 2003. Generation and evaluation of a large mutational library from the Escherichia coli mechanosensitive channel of large conductance, MscL: implications for channel gating and evolutionary design. J. Biol. Chem. 278:2107621082.
6. Yoshimura, K., A. Batiza, and C. Kung. 2001. Chemically charging the pore constriction opens the mechanosensitive channel MscL. Biophys. J. 80:21982206.
7. Ou, X., P. Blount, R. Hoffman, and C. Kung. 1998. One face of a transmembrane helix is crucial in mechanosensitive channel gating. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 95:1147111475.
8. Blount, P., S. I. Sukharev, M. J. Schroeder, S. K. Nagle, and C. Kung. 1996. Single residue substitutions that change the gating properties of a mechanosensitive channel in Escherichia coli. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 93:1165211657.
9. Chang, G., R. Spencer, A. Lee, M. Barclay, and D. Rees. 1998. Structure of the MscL homolog from Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a gated mechanosensitive ion channel. Science. 282:22202226.
10. Gullingsrud, J., and K. Schulten. 2003. Gating of MscL studied by steered molecular dynamics. Biophys. J. 85:20872099.
11. Elmore, D., and D. Dougherty. 2003. Investigating lipid composition effects on the mechanosensitive channel of large conductance (MscL) using molecular dynamics simulations. Biophys. J. 85:15121524.
12. Colombo, G., S. Marrink, and A. Mark. 2003. Simulation of MscL gating in a bilayer under stress. Biophys. J. 84:23312337.
13. Perozo, E., D. Cortes, P. Sompornpisut, A. Kloda, and B. Martinac. 2002. Open channel structure of MscL and the gating mechanism of mechanosensitive channels. Nature. 418:942948.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Perozo, E., A. Kloda, D. Cortes, and B. Martinac. 2002. Physical principles underlying the transduction of bilayer deformation forces during mechanosensitive channel gating. Nat. Struct. Biol. 9:696703.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. Kong, Y., Y. Shen, T. Warth, and J. Ma. 2002. Conformational pathways in the gating of Escherichia coli mechanosensitive channel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:59996004.
16. Gullingsrud, J., D. Kosztin, and K. Schulten. 2001. Structural determinants of MscL gating studied by molecular dynamics simulations. Biophys. J. 80:20742081.
17. Martinac, B., J. Adler, and C. Kung. 1990. Mechanosensitive ion channels of E. coli activated by amphipaths. Nature. 348:261263.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Corry, B., P. Rigby, Z. W. Liu, and B. Martinac. 2005. Conformational Changes involved in MscL channel gating measured using FRET spectroscopy. Biophys. J. 89:L49L51.
19. Sheetz, M., and S. Singer. 1974. Biological membranes as bilayer couples. A molecular mechanism of drugerythrocyte interactions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 71:44574461.
20. Patel, A., E. Honore, F. Maingret, F. Lesage, M. Fink, F. Duprat, and M. Lazdunski. 1998. A mammalian two pore domain mechano-gated S-like K+ channel. EMBO J. 17:42834290.[CrossRef][Medline]
21. Bilston, L., and K. Mylvaganam. 2002. Molecular simulations of the large conductance mechanosensitive (MscL) channel under mechanical loading. FEBS Lett. 512:185190.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Frenkel, D., and B. Smit. 1996. Understanding Molecular Simulation: From Algorithms to Applications. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
23. Sukharev, S., M. Betanzos, C. Chiang, and H. Guy. 2001. The gating mechanism of the large mechanosensitive channel MscL. Nature. 409:720724.[CrossRef][Medline]
24. Sukharev, S., S. Durell, and H. Guy. 2001. Structural models of the MscL gating mechanism. Biophys. J. 81:917936.
25. Häse, C., A. Le Dain, and B. Martinac. 1997. Molecular dissection of the large mechanosensitive ion channel (MscL) of E. coli: mutants with altered channel gating and pressure sensitivity. J. Membr. Biol. 157:1725.[CrossRef][Medline]
26. Humphrey, W., A. Dalke, and K. Schulten. 1996. VMDvisual molecular dynamics. J. Mol. Graph. 14:3338.[CrossRef][Medline]
27. Phillips, J. C., R. Braun, W. Wang, J. Gumbart, E. Tajkhorshid, E. Villa, C. Chipot, R. D. Skeel, L. Kale, and K. Schulten. 2005. Scalable molecular dynamics with NAMD. J. Comput. Chem. 26:17811802.[CrossRef][Medline]
28. Feller, S., D. Yin, R. Pastor, and A. MacKerell Jr. 1997. Molecular dynamics simulation of unsaturated lipid bilayers at low hydration: parameterization and comparison with diffraction studies. Biophys. J. 73:22692279.
29. Schlenkrich, M., J. Brickmann, A. D. MacKerell Jr., and M. Karplus. 1996. Empirical potential energy function for phospholipids: Criteria for parameter optimization and applications. In Biological Membranes: A Molecular Perspective from Computation and Experiment. K. M. Merz and B. Roux, editors. Birkhauser, Boston. 3181.
30. MacKerell, A. D. Jr., D. Bashford, M. Bellott, R. L. Dunbrack, M. J. Field, S. Fischer, J. Gao, H. Guo, S. Ha, D. Joseph, L. Kuchnir, K. Kuczera, F. T. K. Lau, C. Mattos, S. Michnick, D. T. Nguyen, T. Ngo, B. Prodhom, B. Roux, M. Schlenkrich, J. Smith, R. Stote, J. Straub, J. Wiorkiewiczkuczera, and M. Karplus. 1992. Self-consistent parameterization of biomolecules for molecular modeling and condensed phase simulations. FASEB J. 6:A143.
31. MacKerell, A. D. Jr., D. Bashford, M. Bellott, R. L. Dunbrack, J. D. Evanseck, M. J. Field, S. Fischer, J. Gao, H. Guo, S. Ha, D. Joseph-McCarthy, L. Kuchnir, K. Kuczera, F. T. K. Lau, C. Mattos, S. Michnick, T. Ngo, D. T. Nguyen, B. Prodhom, W. E. Reiher, B. Roux, M. Schlenkrich, J. C. Smith, R. Stote, J. Straub, M. Watanabe, J. Wiorkiewicz-Kuczera, D. Yin, and M. Karplus. 1998. All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins. J. Phys. Chem. B. 102:35863616.
32. Ryckaert, J., G. Ciccotti, and H. J. C. Berendsen. 1977. Numerical integration of the Cartesian equations of motion of a system with constraints: molecular dynamics of n-alkanes. J. Comput. Phys. 23:327341.[CrossRef]
33. Darden, T., D. York, and L. Pedersen. 1993. Particle mesh Ewaldan N.Log(N) method for Ewald sums in large systems. J. Chem. Phys. 98:1008910092.[CrossRef]
34. Pastor, R. W., B. R. Brooks, and A. Szabo. 1988. An analysis of the accuracy of Langevin and molecular dynamics algorithms. Mol. Phys. 65:14091419.[CrossRef]
35. Smart, O., J. Goodfellow, and B. Wallace. 1993. The pore dimensions of gramicidin A. Biophys. J. 65:24552460.
36. Feller, S. E., and R. W. Pastor. 1999. Constant surface tension simulations of lipid bilayers: The sensitivity of surface areas and compressibilities. J. Chem. Phys. 111:12811287.[CrossRef]
37. Seelig, J. 1977. Deuterium magnetic resonance: theory and application to lipid membranes. Q. Rev. Biophys. 10:353418.[Medline]
38. Gullingsrud, J., and K. Schulten. 2004. Lipid bilayer pressure profiles and mechanosensitive channel gating. Biophys. J. 86:34963509.
39. Petrache, H. I., S. W. Dodd, and M. F. Brown. 2000. Area per Lipid and Acyl Length Distributions in Fluid Phosphatidylcholines Determined by 2H NMR Spectroscopy. Biophys. J. 79:31723192.
40. Ajouz, B., C. Berrier, M. Besnard, B. Martinac, and A. Ghazi. 2000. Contributions of the different extramembranous domains of the mechanosensitive ion channel MscL to its response to membrane tension. J. Biol. Chem. 275:10151022.
41. Park, K. H., C. Berrier, B. Martinac, and A. Ghazi. 2004. Purification and Functional Reconstitution of N- and C-halves of the MscL channel. Biophys. J. 86:21292136.
42. Tsai, I. J., Z. W. Liu, J. Rayment, C. Norman, A. McKinley, and B. Martinac. 2005. The role of the periplasmic loop residue glutamine 65 for MscL mechanosensitivity. Eur. Biophys. J. 34:403412.[CrossRef][Medline]
43. Sansom, M., and H. Weinstein. 2000. Hinges, swivels and switches: the role of prolines in signalling via transmembrane alpha-helices. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 21:445451.[CrossRef][Medline]
44. Doyle, D. A. 2004. Structural changes during ion channel gating. Trends Neurosci. 27:298302.[CrossRef][Medline]
45. Valadie, H., J. Lacapcre, Y. Sanejouand, and C. Etchebest. 2003. Dynamical properties of the MscL of Escherichia coli: a normal mode analysis. J. Mol. Biol. 332:657674.[CrossRef][Medline]
46. Sotomayor, M., and K. Schulten. 2004. Molecular dynamics study of gating in the mechanosensitive channel of small conductance MscS. Biophys. J. 87:30503065.
47. Tieleman, D. P., L. R. Forrest, M. S. Sansom, and H. J. Berendsen. 1998. Lipid properties and the orientation of aromatic residues in OmpF, influenza M2, and alamethicin systems: molecular dynamics simulations. Biochemistry. 37:1755417561.[CrossRef][Medline]
48. Dumas, F., M. C. Lebrun, and J. F. Tocanne. 1999. Is the protein/lipid hydrophobic matching principle relevant to membrane organization and functions? FEBS Lett. 458:271277.[CrossRef][Medline]
49. Mouritsen, O. G., and M. Bloom. 1984. Mattress model of lipid-protein interactions in membranes. Biophys. J. 46:141153.
50. Mouritsen, O. G., and M. Bloom. 1993. Models of lipid-protein interactions in membranes. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 22:145171.[Medline]
51. Mouritsen, O. G., and M. M. Sperotto. 1993. Thermodynamics of lipid-protein interactions in lipid membranes. In The Hydrophobic Matching Condition. M. Jackson, editor. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
52. Mouritsen, O. G., B. Dammann, H. C. Fogedby, J. H. Ipsen, C. Jeppesen, K. Jorgensen, J. Risbo, M. C. Sabra, M. M. Sperotto, and M. J. Zuckermann. 1995. The computer as a laboratory for the physical-chemistry of membranes. Biophys. Chem. 55:5568.[CrossRef][Medline]
53. Gullingsrud, J., A. Babakhani, and J. A. McCammon. 2006. Computational investigation of pressure profiles in lipid bilayers with embedded proteins. Mol. Simul. In press.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
Y. Tang, J. Yoo, A. Yethiraj, Q. Cui, and X. Chen Gating Mechanisms of Mechanosensitive Channels of Large Conductance, II: Systematic Study of Conformational Transitions Biophys. J., July 15, 2008; 95(2): 581 - 596. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Jeon and G. A. Voth Gating of the Mechanosensitive Channel Protein MscL: The Interplay of Membrane and Protein Biophys. J., May 1, 2008; 94(9): 3497 - 3511. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Yefimov, E. van der Giessen, P. R. Onck, and S. J. Marrink Mechanosensitive Membrane Channels in Action Biophys. J., April 15, 2008; 94(8): 2994 - 3002. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |