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

* Biology Department, Faculty of Science, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor; and
Department of Statistics, School of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3SY, United Kingdom
Correspondence: Address reprint requests to Andrew R. Dalby, E-mail: dalby{at}stats.ox.ac.uk.
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
1-antitrypsin deficiency, sickle cell anemia, and familial amyloid polyneuropathy as all these diseases have comparable inherent conformational instability of a specific protein that results in its deposition in the tissue of the affected organism (9
There are 15 proline residues in the human PrP structure, with 12 residues in the flexible N-terminus. The 12 proline residues in the N-terminus are periodic and conformationally stabilized by copper (11
). The other three proline residues are located within the globular domain of PrPC. The antiparallel ß-sheet consisting of strand S2 is flanked at both ends by Pro-158 and Pro-165, with the opposing strand S1 flanked by a single proline at position 137 (Fig. 1). Proline is an amino acid that has a pyrrolidine ring structure that prevents participation in the usual hydrogen bonding between NH and CO groups of other amino acids. The presence of the ring causes proline to be disfavored in ß-sheet structure as its
-angle is incompatible and it lacks one potential H-bond donor (12
). Consequently, this makes its occurrence in ß-sheet rare. In fact, the rare occurrences of proline in secondary structure have led to the practice of systematically substituting proline in mutagenesis studies, thus becoming a practical tool to identify segments involved in protein aggregation (13
). Proline residues are more frequently found in sharp turns linking ß-strands (ß-bends), kinks in transmembrane
-helices, at the edges of ß-sheets or, most frequently, within loops and disordered regions of proteins (13
).
|
A study has also shown that proline is the residue most commonly found in the flanking segments of protein-protein interaction sites (20
). Examination of over 1600 protein-protein interaction sites indicated that proline residues are commonly found within these flanking segments and the probability of occurrence in flanking segments is 2.5 times greater than elsewhere in the structure (20
). As a result, proline brackets have been proposed to perform a structural role in protecting the conformation and integrity of the interaction site by blocking the "invasion" of neighboring secondary structures (20
). Investigation of the properties of proline-delimited regions has also led to the discovery of the L-type Ca2+ channel binding site of calciseptine (21
).
The presence of proline residues at the edge of the ß-sheet has also been proposed as a negative design feature to avoid aggregation and essentially to serve as a capping mechanism (22
). A survey of all the prion structures available in the Protein Data Bank (PDB) revealed that proline bracket is present and that the secondary structure architecture of the S2 strand is highly conserved in the different species, as expected from the high degree of sequence identity (Table 1).
|
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
root mean-square deviations (RMSDs) and C
root mean-square fluctuations (RMSFs) relative to the average MD structure were calculated. The DSSP program was used to determine the percentage of secondary structure throughout the simulations (29| RESULTS AND DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
atom in each variant. Fig. 3 shows that the RMSF from the NMR structure is a function of residue number for the C
atom in each variant. The MD simulation showed that all variants were stable throughout the simulation. The C
RMSD values for all eight variants increased during the first 0.1 ns before reaching a plateau at 0.150.3 ns (Fig. 2). The RMSFs of all variants showed that highest fluctuations occurred in the N-terminus and the loop between helices (H2 and H3) (Fig. 3), whereas the globular domain containing H2 and H3 remains relatively stable. Consequently, this created the groove pattern observed in reported MD simulations (14
rotation in mutated structures did not substantially increase the fluctuations of the global conformation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
rotation, consequently limiting the plasticity of the same segment in PVV and PPP. The global stability of the structure and realignment of the N-terminus suggest that the elongation of ß-sheet occurs through the ability of valine to form hydrogen bonding after substituting proline, thus allowing the zippering process to continue.
Extended simulations
Extended MD simulations were performed to examine structural stability over a longer simulation period. Three variantsVVV, PVV, and PPPand chicken prion 1U3M were simulated. VVV and PVV were selected, as both showed an extended zippering of the ß-sheet compared to the other variants, and PPP is selected as a control representing the wild-type structure. 1U3M was chosen as the chicken prion structure (38
) has a different proline trimer sequence at position 151-165-176, with
30% sequence identity, and is expected to show different conformational behavior.
Fig. 8, ad, shows the evolution of the secondary structures and Fig. 9, ad, shows the ß-sheets' content of each variant as determined by DSSP for (a) PVV, (b) PPP, (c) 1U5L, and (d) VVV, respectively. The result for PVV, PPP, and VVV is similar to their initial runs where the increase of ß-sheets occurred through the extension of the existing secondary structure and not by creation of new ß-structures anywhere else in the protein structure. The simulation is also stable without any changes in the overall protein conformation. The C
RMSD values for all three variants stabilized after 0.3 ns and the C
RMSF of all variants showed a similar groove pattern signature observed in the 2-ns MD simulation and to other reported MD simulations (14
,17
,19
,32
,33
). The PVV variant showed a 100% increase in the number of residues participating in the ß-sheet elongation to 13 residues similar to the initial 2-ns MD simulation (Fig. 9 a). The longer simulation showed the ß-sheet formation stabilizing at 4.4 ns and showed similar elongation mechanism to the earlier MD. The VVV variant also showed similar behavior to the initial MD but with a higher degree of structural fluctuation in residues forming segments between S1 and S2 that include H1 compared to PVV. These larger fluctuations are exemplified by the failure to recruit adjacent residues to extend the ß-sheet, thus limiting the residue participation to eight amino acids (Fig. 9 d). In addition, the PPP variant also behaved in a similar manner to the initial MD simulation with the number of participating residues limited to between six and nine (Fig. 9 b). The chicken prion also showed similar global conformational behavior with the other three variants (Fig. 8 c). The secondary structures were maintained throughout the MD simulation but with larger fluctuations. The ß-sheet content fluctuated throughout the simulation, with the number of residues forming ß-sheets fluctuating between 8 and 10 residues, similar to the ranges shown by VVV (Fig. 9 c). There was a temporary increase in the number of residues participating in ß-sheet formation between 1 ns and 2 ns via the formation of a turn at the N-terminal and the creation of unstable triple-stranded ß-sheets (Fig. 8 c).
|
|
| CONCLUSIONS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The elongation occurred via a zippering process that is discernible by a pairing pattern caused by sequential recruitment of residues in pairs. Therefore, when the zipper-like process is halted by the flanking proline in the structure, this suggests that proline residues act as a steric barrier by restricting the number of residues to six within the proline bracket of Pro-158 and Pro-165. Interestingly, the six-residue length is near the intrinsic limit of conformational stability in antiparallel ß-sheet. Studies have shown that at least for some antiparallel sequences, the conformational stability increases with strand length to a maximum of seven residues (39
). The proline bracket has also been shown to confine the secondary structures within its boundary even in elevated temperature. In contrast, the lone proline at residue 137 does not play a role in this bracket but seems to contribute only to the structural rigidity of the segment between S1 and S2. If the presence of the proline brackets is instrumental in determining and maintaining the length of the ß-sheet to a fixed number of residues, there is a possibility that the length of additional ß-sheet propagated by the residues 90124 of the flexible N-terminus (17
) must not exceed a certain length of the seed strand (S2). Models of possible prion protofibrils created using electron crystallography data showed preservation of ß-sheet length within the proline bracket, thus reinforcing its possible role in determining ß-sheet length (40
,41
). Analysis of sequence evolutionary conservation in 27 mammalian and 9 avian PrPC has shown that the proline bracket segment PNQVYYRP is highly conserved (42
). In addition, the segment XPNXVY that contains Pro-158 has a higher than average sequence conservation and appears to be needed for the stability of the "PrP-fold" (38
). Experimentally, studies have shown that the existence of proline residues plays a significant role in protein conformational stability (43
,44
) and function (45
). However, this unique role is attributed to the limited conformation that proline residues confer on the N-C
rotation and not because of its inability to form ß-sheet hydrogen bonding. In addition, this is the first time, to our knowledge, that MD simulations have shown the role of proline in maintaining the secondary structure in such a manner. Nevertheless, further work needs to be done by conducting a survey of existing protein structures to examine if this phenomenon applies to other similarly structured proteins.
Submitted on June 27, 2006; accepted for publication November 16, 2006.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Pan, K. M., M. Baldwin, J. Nguyen, M. Gasset, A. Serban, D. Groth, I. Mehlhorn, Z. W. Huang, R. J. Fletterick, F. E. Cohen, and S. B. Prusiner. 1993. Conversion of alpha-helices into beta-sheets features in the formation of the scrapie prion proteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 90:1096210966.
3. Gasset, M., M. A. Baldwin, R. J. Fletterick, and S. B. Prusiner. 1993. Perturbation of the secondary structure of the scrapie prion protein under conditions that alter infectivity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 90:15.
4. Borchelt, D. R., M. Scott, A. Taraboulos, N. Stahl, and S. B. Prusiner. 1990. Scrapie and cellular prion proteins differ in their kinetics of synthesis and topology in cultured cells. J. Cell Biol. 110:743752.
5. Caughey, B., K. Neary, R. Buller, D. Ernst, L. L. Perry, B. Chesebro, and R. E. Race. 1990. Normal and scrapie-associated forms of prion protein differ in their sensitivities to phospholipase and proteases in intact neuroblastoma cells. J. Virol. 64:10931101.
6. Brown, P., and L. Cervenakova. 2005. A prion lexicon (out of control). Lancet. 365:122.[CrossRef][Medline]
7. Prusiner, S. B., N. Stahl, and S. J. Dearmond. 1988. Novel mechanisms of degeneration of the central nervous systemprion structure and biology. Ciba Found. Symp. 135:239260.[Medline]
8. Downing, D. T., and N. D. Lazo. 1999. Molecular modelling indicates that the pathological conformations of prion proteins might be beta-helical. Biochem. J. 343:453460.[Medline]
9. Carrell, R. W., and D. A. Lomas. 1997. Conformational disease. Lancet. 350:134138.[CrossRef][Medline]
10. Kopito, R. R., and D. Ron. 2000. Conformational diseases. Nat. Cell Biol. 2:208209.
11. Clarke, A. R., G. S. Jackson, and J. Collinge. 2001. The molecular biology of prion propagation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 356:185194.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Li, S. C., N. K. Goto, K. A. Williams, and C. M. Deber. 1996. Alpha-helical, but not beta-sheet, propensity of proline is determined by peptide environment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 93:66766681.
13. Reiersen, H., and A. R. Rees. 2001. The hunchback and its neighbours: proline as an environmental modulator. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26:679684.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Shamsir, M. S., and A. R. Dalby. 2005. One gene, two diseases and three conformations: molecular dynamics simulations of mutants of human prion protein at room temperature and elevated temperatures. Proteins. 59:275290.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. DeMarco, M. L., and V. Daggett. 2004. From conversion to aggregation: protofibril formation of the prion protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 101:22932298.
16. Barducci, A., R. Chelli, P. Procacci, and V. Schettino. 2004. Misfolding pathways of the prion protein probed by molecular dynamics simulations. Biophys. J. 88:13341343.
17. Alonso, D. O. V., S. J. DeArmond, F. E. Cohen, and V. Daggett. 2001. Mapping the early steps in the pH-induced conformational conversion of the prion protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 98:29852989.
18. Sekijima, M., C. Motono, S. Yamasaki, K. Kaneko, and Y. Akiyama. 2003. Molecular dynamics simulation of dimeric and monomeric forms of human prion protein: insight into dynamics and properties. Biophys. J. 85:11761185.
19. Gu, W., T. T. Wang, J. Zhu, Y. Y. Shi, and H. Y. Liu. 2003. Molecular dynamics simulation of the unfolding of the human prion protein domain under low pH and high temperature conditions. Biophys. Chem. 104:7994.[CrossRef][Medline]
20. Kini, R. M., and H. J. Evans. 1995. A hypothetical structural role for proline residues in the flanking segments of protein-protein interaction sites. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 212:11151124.[CrossRef][Medline]
21. Kini, R. M., R. A. Caldwell, Q. Y. Wu, C. M. Baumgarten, J. J. Feher, and H. J. Evans. 1998. Flanking proline residues identify the L-type Ca2+ channel binding site of calciseptine and FS2. Biochemistry. 37:90589063.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Richardson, J. S., and D. C. Richardson. 2002. Natural beta-sheet proteins use negative design to avoid edge-to-edge aggregation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:27542759.
23. Zahn, R., A. Liu, T. Luhrs, R. Riek, C. von Schroetter, F. Lopez Garcia, M. Billeter, L. Calzolai, G. Wider, and K. Wuthrich. 2000. NMR solution structure of the human prion protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 97:145150.
24. Guex, N., and M. C. Peitsch. 1997. SWISS-MODEL and the Swiss-PdbViewer: an environment for comparative protein modeling. Electrophoresis. 18:27142723.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. Turk, E., D. B. Teplow, L. E. Hood, and S. B. Prusiner. 1988. Purification and properties of the cellular and scrapie hamster prion proteins. Eur. J. Biochem. 176:2130.[Medline]
26. Herrmann, L. M., and B. Caughey. 1998. The importance of the disulfide bond in prion protein conversion. Neuroreport. 9:24572461.[Medline]
27. Darden, T., D. York, and L. Pedersen. 1993. Particle mesh Ewald: an N·log(N) method for Ewald sums in large systems. J. Chem. Phys. 98:1008910092.[CrossRef]
28. Lindahl, E., B. Hess, and D. van der Spoel. 2001. GROMACS 3.0: a package for molecular simulation and trajectory analysis. J. Mol. Model. (Online). 7:306317.
29. Kabsch, W., and C. Sander. 1983. Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers. 22:25772637.[CrossRef][Medline]
30. Delano, W. L. 2002. The PyMOL Molecular Graphics System, DeLano Scientific, San Carlos, CA.
31. Martz, E. 2002. Protein Explorer: easy yet powerful macromolecular visualization. Trends Biochem. Sci. 27:107109.[CrossRef][Medline]
32. Guilbert, C., F. Ricard, and J. C. Smith. 2000. Dynamic simulation of the mouse prion protein. Biopolymers. 54:406415.[CrossRef][Medline]
33. Parchment, O. G., and J. W. Essex. 2000. Molecular dynamics of mouse and Syrian hamster PrP: implications for activity. Proteins. 38:327340.[CrossRef][Medline]
34. Munoz, V., P. A. Thompson, J. Hofrichter, and W. A. Eaton. 1997. Folding dynamics and mechanism of beta-hairpin formation. Nature. 390:196199.[CrossRef][Medline]
35. De Simone, A., G. G. Dodson, C. S. Verma, A. Zagari, and F. Fraternali. 2005. Prion and water: tight and dynamical hydration sites have a key role in structural stability. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 102:75357540.
36. Langella, E., R. Improta, and V. Barone. 2004. Checking the pH-induced conformational transition of prion protein by molecular dynamics simulations: effect of protonation of histidine residues. Biophys. J. 87:36233632.
37. Gsponer, J., P. Ferrara, and A. Caflisch. 2001. Flexibility of the murine prion protein and its Asp178Asn mutant investigated by molecular dynamics simulations. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 20:169182.[CrossRef][Medline]
38. Calzolai, L., D. A. Lysek, D. R. Perez, P. Guntert, and K. Wuthrich. 2005. Prion protein NMR structures of chickens, turtles, and frogs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 102:651655.
39. Stanger, H. E., F. A. Syud, J. F. Espinosa, I. Giriat, T. Muir, and S. H. Gellman. 2001. Length-dependent stability and strand length limits in antiparallel beta-sheet secondary structure. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 98:1201512020.
40. Govaerts, C., H. Wille, S. B. Prusiner, and F. E. Cohen. 2004. Evidence for assembly of prions with left-handed ß-helices into trimers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 101:83428347.
41. Wille, H., M. D. Michelitsch, V. Guenebaut, S. Supattapone, D. J. Segel, D. Walther, H. Serban, S. Doniach, F. E. Cohen, D. A. Agard, and S. B. Prusiner. 2002. Structural studies of the scrapie prion protein by electron crystallography. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:35633568.
42. Wopfner, F., G. Weidenhofer, R. Schneider, A. von Brunn, S. Gilch, T. F. Schwarz, T. Werner, and M. Schatzl. 1999. Analysis of 27 mammalian and 9 avian PrPs reveals high conservation of flexible regions of the prion protein. J. Mol. Biol. 289:11631178.[CrossRef][Medline]
43. Zscherp, C., H. Aygun, J. W. Engels, and W. Mantele. 2003. Effect of proline to alanine mutation on the thermal stability of the all-ß-sheet protein tendamistat. Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 1651:139145.[Medline]
44. Nathaniel, C., L. A. Wallace, J. Burke, and H. W. Dirr. 2003. The role of an evolutionarily conserved cis-proline in the thioredoxin-like domain of human class Alpha glutathione transferase A1-1. Biochem. J. 372:241246.
45. Cordes, F. S., J. N. Bright, and M. S. P. Sansom. 2002. Proline-induced distortions of transmembrane helices. J. Mol. Biol. 323:951960.[CrossRef][Medline]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |