Volume 17, Issue 8, Pages (August 2009)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Volume 18, Issue 2, Pages (February 2010)
Advertisements

Volume 20, Issue 8, Pages (August 2012)
Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages (August 2011)
Ross Alexander Robinson, Xin Lu, Edith Yvonne Jones, Christian Siebold 
Identification of Structural Mechanisms of HIV-1 Protease Specificity Using Computational Peptide Docking: Implications for Drug Resistance  Sidhartha.
Olivier Fisette, Stéphane Gagné, Patrick Lagüe  Biophysical Journal 
Energetic Pathway Sampling in a Protein Interaction Domain
Bin Li, Darwin O.V Alonso, Valerie Daggett  Structure 
Structure of an LDLR-RAP Complex Reveals a General Mode for Ligand Recognition by Lipoprotein Receptors  Carl Fisher, Natalia Beglova, Stephen C. Blacklow 
Natalie Zeytuni, Raz Zarivach  Structure 
The Structure of the Cytoplasmic Domain of the Chloride Channel ClC-Ka Reveals a Conserved Interaction Interface  Sandra Markovic, Raimund Dutzler  Structure 
Solution Structure of the U11-48K CHHC Zinc-Finger Domain that Specifically Binds the 5′ Splice Site of U12-Type Introns  Henning Tidow, Antonina Andreeva,
Volume 25, Issue 8, Pages (August 2017)
Protein Kinase C Regulation: C1 Meets C-tail
Structure and Intrinsic Disorder in Protein Autoinhibition
Srayanta Mukherjee, Yang Zhang  Structure 
Protein folding via binding and vice versa
Chromosomal DNA Replication on a Protein “Chip”
AnchorDock: Blind and Flexible Anchor-Driven Peptide Docking
Xiaojing He, Yi-Chun Kuo, Tyler J. Rosche, Xuewu Zhang  Structure 
Expanding the PP2A Interactome by Defining a B56-Specific SLiM
Volume 24, Issue 12, Pages (December 2016)
Structure of the Angiopoietin-2 Receptor Binding Domain and Identification of Surfaces Involved in Tie2 Recognition  William A. Barton, Dorothea Tzvetkova,
Volume 14, Issue 5, Pages (May 2007)
Volume 18, Issue 2, Pages (February 2010)
Volume 19, Issue 12, Pages (December 2011)
Volume 17, Issue 6, Pages (June 2009)
Volume 19, Issue 10, Pages (October 2011)
Ross Alexander Robinson, Xin Lu, Edith Yvonne Jones, Christian Siebold 
Veronica Salmaso, Mattia Sturlese, Alberto Cuzzolin, Stefano Moro 
Volume 14, Issue 9, Pages (September 2006)
Hong Ye, Young Chul Park, Mara Kreishman, Elliott Kieff, Hao Wu 
A Conformational Switch in the CRIB-PDZ Module of Par-6
Between Order and Disorder in Protein Structures: Analysis of “Dual Personality” Fragments in Proteins  Ying Zhang, Boguslaw Stec, Adam Godzik  Structure 
Structural Analysis of Ligand Stimulation of the Histidine Kinase NarX
The Monomeric dUTPase from Epstein-Barr Virus Mimics Trimeric dUTPases
Monica Berrondo, Marc Ostermeier, Jeffrey J. Gray  Structure 
Srayanta Mukherjee, Yang Zhang  Structure 
Volume 21, Issue 12, Pages (December 2013)
Volume 20, Issue 6, Pages (June 2012)
Volume 13, Issue 8, Pages (August 2005)
Elizabeth J. Little, Andrea C. Babic, Nancy C. Horton  Structure 
The Structure of the Tiam1 PDZ Domain/ Phospho-Syndecan1 Complex Reveals a Ligand Conformation that Modulates Protein Dynamics  Xu Liu, Tyson R. Shepherd,
Recognizing Protein Substructure Similarity Using Segmental Threading
Probing the “Dark Matter” of Protein Fold Space
Karen A. Lewis, Deborah S. Wuttke  Structure 
Volume 24, Issue 8, Pages (August 2016)
Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages (August 2011)
Volume 14, Issue 8, Pages (August 2006)
Protein-Protein Docking: From Interaction to Interactome
The Structural Basis of Peptide-Protein Binding Strategies
Incomplete Protein Packing as a Selectivity Filter in Drug Design
Crystal Structures of the BAR-PH and PTB Domains of Human APPL1
Volume 23, Issue 6, Pages (June 2015)
A Critical Comparative Assessment of Predictions of Protein-Binding Sites for Biologically Relevant Organic Compounds  Ke Chen, Marcin J. Mizianty, Jianzhao.
Volume 18, Issue 9, Pages (September 2010)
The Active Conformation of the PAK1 Kinase Domain
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages (January 2012)
Volume 19, Issue 7, Pages (July 2011)
Crystal Structures of Human GlyRα3 Bound to Ivermectin
Volume 22, Issue 4, Pages (April 2014)
Volume 26, Issue 1, Pages e3 (January 2018)
Vilas Menon, Brinda K. Vallat, Joseph M. Dybas, Andras Fiser  Structure 
Molecular Similarity Analysis Uncovers Heterogeneous Structure-Activity Relationships and Variable Activity Landscapes  Lisa Peltason, Jürgen Bajorath 
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages (January 2012)
Volume 17, Issue 10, Pages (October 2009)
Volume 27, Issue 7, Pages e5 (July 2019)
Gydo C.P. van Zundert, Adrien S.J. Melquiond, Alexandre M.J.J. Bonvin 
Chengfei Yan, Xianjin Xu, Xiaoqin Zou  Structure 
Volume 21, Issue 6, Pages (June 2013)
Presentation transcript:

Volume 17, Issue 8, Pages 1128-1136 (August 2009) Protein-Peptide Interactions Adopt the Same Structural Motifs as Monomeric Protein Folds  Peter Vanhee, Francois Stricher, Lies Baeten, Erik Verschueren, Tom Lenaerts, Luis Serrano, Frederic Rousseau, Joost Schymkowitz  Structure  Volume 17, Issue 8, Pages 1128-1136 (August 2009) DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2009.06.013 Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Coverage of Protein-Peptide Interfaces Protein-peptide interfaces are covered with fragments found in monomeric proteins. The two-body coverage shown in light gray captures the percentage of the protein-peptide interface that can be covered with pairs of protein fragments from different proteins. The single BriX protein coverage shown in dark gray captures the best coverage of the binding site with a single monomeric protein. Results are averaged over the entire dataset of 301 complexes. Structure 2009 17, 1128-1136DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2009.06.013) Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Protein-Peptide Interfaces Can Be Described as Interactions Between Recurrent Protein Fragments from Monomeric Proteins Protein covers from the BriX database are shown in dark gray for receptor fragments and light gray for ligand fragments. The PDB identifier with the receptor and peptide chains is shown below. Each interaction covering a part of the protein-peptide interface consists of two fragments of five residues each. (A) PDZ domain bound to ligand; 7298 interacting fragment pairs covering 100% of the interface with 0.49 Å average pairwise RMSD. (B) Human estrogen receptor α-ligand binding domain bound to peptide; 42,092 interacting fragment pairs covering 85% of the interface with 0.28 Å average pairwise RMSD. (C) Class I MHC bound to peptide; 325 interacting fragment pairs covering 82% of the interface with 0.80 Å average pairwise RMSD. (D) SH3 domain with polyproline peptide; 14 interacting fragment pairs covering 77% of the interface with 0.90 Å average pairwise RMSD. Structure 2009 17, 1128-1136DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2009.06.013) Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Relationship Between Intermolecular Interface Architectures and Intramolecular Protein Architectures The protein-peptide complex is colored blue for the receptor and green for the ligand (left); the monomeric protein from BriX is colored red (right). The superposing region is shown in ribbon view, and the number of superposed residues and the superposition value are shown. The PDB ID with the protein and peptide chains is shown below the figures. (A) PDZ domain with peptide and unrelated enzyme-substrate complex. (B) α-ligand binding domain with peptide and unrelated all-α citrate synthase from a different species. (C) Class I MHC complex with peptide and ferritin-like protein. (D) Hepatitis C protease with inhibitor and MurB, a glucosamine reductase protein. (E) Repetition of the ligand-bound TPR motif in complex and single-chain form. (F) SH3 domain with polyproline peptide and protein of unknown function. Structure 2009 17, 1128-1136DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2009.06.013) Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Properties of the Protein-Peptide Interface Coverage The coverage data of 301 complexes is equally distributed in 20 bins and plotted against (A) secondary structure distribution (α-helix and β strand) in the binding site (0.88 correlation), (B) interface H-bonds (ΔG) with FoldX (0.81 correlation), and (C) BLOSUM62 score for similarity between residues from the protein-peptide complex and the covering BriX fragment (no correlation). In (D), the correlation between the secondary structure of the interface is plotted against the predicted binding energy ΔG (0.62 correlation). Structure 2009 17, 1128-1136DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2009.06.013) Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Reconstruction of the PDZ Domain-Peptide Interface At the left, the superposition between the BriX protein (1k6z, gray) and the PDZ domain (1w9q, cyan) on the receptor β strand is shown. The fragments from the BriX protein are colored blue, and the receptor fragment from the PDZ domain is colored green. At the right, the peptide ligand according to the interaction motif from the BriX protein is shown (red), superposed on the original ligand (yellow), with RMSD 0.29 Å. Structure 2009 17, 1128-1136DOI: (10.1016/j.str.2009.06.013) Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions