PSI Structural Biology Knowledgebase

PSI | Structural Biology Knowledgebase
Header Icons
E-Collection

Related Articles
Drug Discovery: Solving the Structure of an Anti-hypertension Drug Target
July 2015
Retrospective: 7,000 Structures Closer to Understanding Biology
July 2015
Families in Gene Neighborhoods
June 2015
Channels and Transporters: BEST in Show
April 2015
Channels and Transporters: Reorienting a Peptide in the Pocket
April 2015
Ryanodine Receptor
April 2015
Protein Folding and Misfolding: It's the Journey, Not the Destination
March 2015
Protein Folding and Misfolding: Refolding in Membrane Mimetic
March 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: A Flexible Transporter
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: Higher Resolution of Macromolecules
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: Integrative Approach to Probe Nup133
February 2015
Piecing Together the Nuclear Pore Complex
February 2015
Mitochondrion: Flipping for UCP2
December 2014
Transmembrane Spans
December 2014
Glucagon Receptor
April 2014
Membrane Proteome: A Cap on Transport
April 2014
Membrane Proteome: Microcrystals Yield Big Data
April 2014
Membrane Proteome: Pumping Out Heavy Metal
April 2014
Design and Discovery: Virtual Drug Screening
January 2014
G Proteins and Cancer
November 2013
Drug Discovery: Antidepressant Potential of 6-NQ SERT Inhibitors
October 2013
Drug Discovery: Modeling NET Interactions
October 2013
Microbiome: Solid-State NMR, Crystallized
September 2013
CAAX Endoproteases
August 2013
Membrane Proteome: A Funnel-like Viroporin
August 2013
Membrane Proteome: GPCR Substrate Recognition and Functional Selectivity
August 2013
Membrane Proteome: Making DNA Nanotubes for NMR Structure Determination
August 2013
Membrane Proteome: Unveiling the Human α-helical Membrane Proteome
August 2013
Cell-Cell Interaction: Magic Structure from Microcrystals
March 2013
Cell-Cell Interaction: Nanoparticles in Cell Camouflage
March 2013
Membrane Proteome: Capturing Multiple Conformations
December 2012
Membrane Proteome: Soft Sampling
December 2012
Membrane Proteome: Sphingolipid Synthesis Selectivity
December 2012
Membrane Proteome: Tuning Membrane Protein Expression
December 2012
Cytochrome Oxidase
November 2012
Membrane Proteome: Building a Carrier
November 2012
Membrane Proteome: Every Protein Has Its Tag
November 2012
Membrane Proteome: Specific vs. Non-specific weak interactions
November 2012
Membrane Proteome: The ABCs of Transport
November 2012
Bacterial Phosphotransferase System
October 2012
Insert Here
October 2012
Solute Channels
September 2012
To structure, faster
August 2012
Pocket changes
July 2012
Predictive protein origami
July 2012
G Protein-Coupled Receptors
May 2012
Twist to open
March 2012
Anchoring's the way
February 2012
Overexpressed problems
February 2012
Gentle membrane protein extraction
January 2012
Docking and rolling
October 2011
A fragmented approach to membrane protein structures
September 2011
Raising a glass to GLIC
August 2011
Sugar transport
June 2011
A2A Adenosine Receptor
May 2011
TrkH Potassium Ion Transporter
April 2011
Subtly different
March 2011
A new amphiphile for crystallizing membrane proteins
January 2011
CXCR4
January 2011
Guard cells pick up the SLAC
December 2010
ABA receptor diversity
November 2010
COX inhibition: Naproxen by proxy
November 2010
Zinc Transporter ZntB
July 2010
Formate transporter or channel?
March 2010
Tips for crystallizing membrane proteins in lipidic mesophases
February 2010
Urea transporter
February 2010
Five good reasons to use single protein production for membrane proteins
January 2010
Membrane proteins spotted in their native habitat
January 2010
Spot the pore
January 2010
Get3 into the groove
October 2009
GPCR subunits: Separate but not equal
September 2009
GPCR modeling: any good?
August 2009
Surviving in an acid environment
August 2009
Tips for crystallizing membrane proteins
June 2009
You look familiar: the Type VI secretion system
June 2009
Bacterial Leucine Transporter, LeuT
May 2009
Aquaglyceroporin
March 2009
Death clusters
March 2009
Protein nanopores
March 2009
Transporter mechanism in sight
February 2009
A pocket guide to GPCRs
December 2008
Tuning membrane protein overexpression
October 2008
Blocking AmtB
September 2008

Research Themes Membrane proteins

Predictive protein origami

SBKB [doi:10.1038/sbkb.2011.88]
Technical Highlight - July 2012
Short description: Membrane protein 3D folds are accurately predicted from evolutionary constraints derived from genomic sequencing.

Evolutionary couplings as calculated by EVfold.
Figure courtesy of Thomas Hopf.

Protein sequence families embody an evolutionary record of mutations that sustain protein structure and function over the course of species diversification. Sequence variation and functional integrity can be dually achieved via correlated mutations, whereby sets of amino acids engaged in long-range contacts mutate simultaneously, with retention of favorable interactions in a functional mutant. In a study both predictive and practical, Marks and colleagues hypothesize that nature imposes constraints on mutation sets to preserve contacts deemed critical to protein structure and function. The authors examine the possibility of identifying meaningful evolutionary constraints from genomic sequencing data for use in predicting three-dimensional (3D) structures of transmembrane proteins, which represent over 25% of all human proteins and over half of all drug targets.

The predictive algorithm, EVfold_membrane, uses a maximum entropy approach to derive evolutionary constraints from correlated mutations identified through multiple sequence alignments. The constraint set is supplemented with predicted secondary structural elements and filtered to remove contacts that conflict with transmembrane topology. Distance constraints are imposed on extended polypeptide chains, which undergo ab initio folding via distance geometry (DG) and simulated annealing. Because DG allows direct translation of constraints to 3D coordinates, the protocol trumps de novo protein folding strategies limited by massive conformational search space.

Performance was benchmarked by computing 3D folds for 25 established transmembrane proteins from diverse families. Comparison of coordinates from predicted versus crystal structures revealed unparalleled levels of agreement (template modeling scores > 0.5 in 22 cases). The method wielded strong predictive power for functionally relevant motifs; residues with multiple pair constraints were localized to substrate binding pockets, oligomeric interfaces, and/or involved in conformational changes. When applied to sequence families representing transmembrane proteins of unknown structure (with up to 14 helices), several predicted structures shared 3D folds with sequence-distant yet functionally related proteins. Challenges remain, including distinguishing intra- from intermonomer contacts, as well as couplings arising from distinct conformations. Its applications include complementing experimental structure determination methods, guiding rational drug design and functional mutation experiments, and engineering proteins. Predicting protein structure from evolutionary constraints encrypted in sequence families promises to harness the potential of the genomic age.

Barbara Potts

References

  1. T.A. Hopf et al. Three-dimensional structures of membrane proteins from genomic sequencing.
    Cell. (9 May 2012). doi:10.1016/j.cell.2012.04.012

  2. D.S. Marks et al. Protein 3D structure computed from evolutionary sequence variation.
    PLoS ONE. 6, e28766 (2011). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0028766

Structural Biology Knowledgebase ISSN: 1758-1338
Funded by a grant from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health