Abstract
Protein sequences can be represented as binary patterns of polar ([symbol: see text]) and nonpolar ([symbol: see text]) amino acids. These binary sequence patterns are categorized into two classes: Class A patterns match the structural repeat of an idealized amphiphilic alpha-helix (3.6 residues per turn), and class B patterns match the structural repeat of an idealized amphiphilic beta-strand (2 residues per turn). The difference between these two classes of sequence patterns has led to a strategy for de novo protein design based on binary patterning of polar and nonpolar amino acids. Here we ask whether similar binary patterning is incorporated in the sequences and structures of natural proteins. Analysis of the Protein Data Bank demonstrates the following. (1) Class A sequence patterns occur considerably more frequently in the sequences of natural proteins that would be expected at random, but class B patterns occur less often than expected. (2) Each pattern is found predominantly in the secondary structure expected from the binary strategy for protein design. Thus, class A patterns are found more frequently in alpha-helices than in beta-strands, and class B patterns are found more frequently in beta-strands than in alpha-helices. (3) Among the alpha-helices of natural proteins, the most commonly used binary patterns are indeed the class A patterns. (4) Among all beta-strands in the database, the most commonly used binary patterns are not the expected class B patterns. (5) However, for solvent-exposed beta-strands, the correlation is striking: All beta-strands in the database that contain the class B patterns are exposed to solvent.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (3.9 MB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Argos P. Analysis of sequence-similar pentapeptides in unrelated protein tertiary structures. Strategies for protein folding and a guide for site-directed mutagenesis. J Mol Biol. 1987 Sep 20;197(2):331–348. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(87)90127-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bernstein F. C., Koetzle T. F., Williams G. J., Meyer E. F., Jr, Brice M. D., Rodgers J. R., Kennard O., Shimanouchi T., Tasumi M. The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures. J Mol Biol. 1977 May 25;112(3):535–542. doi: 10.1016/s0022-2836(77)80200-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bowie J. U., Clarke N. D., Pabo C. O., Sauer R. T. Identification of protein folds: matching hydrophobicity patterns of sequence sets with solvent accessibility patterns of known structures. Proteins. 1990;7(3):257–264. doi: 10.1002/prot.340070307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dill K. A. Dominant forces in protein folding. Biochemistry. 1990 Aug 7;29(31):7133–7155. doi: 10.1021/bi00483a001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Eisenberg D., Weiss R. M., Terwilliger T. C. The hydrophobic moment detects periodicity in protein hydrophobicity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1984 Jan;81(1):140–144. doi: 10.1073/pnas.81.1.140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hecht M. H., Richardson J. S., Richardson D. C., Ogden R. C. De novo design, expression, and characterization of Felix: a four-helix bundle protein of native-like sequence. Science. 1990 Aug 24;249(4971):884–891. doi: 10.1126/science.2392678. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- KAUZMANN W. Some factors in the interpretation of protein denaturation. Adv Protein Chem. 1959;14:1–63. doi: 10.1016/s0065-3233(08)60608-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kabsch W., Sander C. Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers. 1983 Dec;22(12):2577–2637. doi: 10.1002/bip.360221211. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kabsch W., Sander C. On the use of sequence homologies to predict protein structure: identical pentapeptides can have completely different conformations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1984 Feb;81(4):1075–1078. doi: 10.1073/pnas.81.4.1075. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kaiser E. T., Kézdy F. J. Secondary structures of proteins and peptides in amphiphilic environments. (A review). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1983 Feb;80(4):1137–1143. doi: 10.1073/pnas.80.4.1137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kamtekar S., Schiffer J. M., Xiong H., Babik J. M., Hecht M. H. Protein design by binary patterning of polar and nonpolar amino acids. Science. 1993 Dec 10;262(5140):1680–1685. doi: 10.1126/science.8259512. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Orengo C. A., Jones D. T., Thornton J. M. Protein superfamilies and domain superfolds. Nature. 1994 Dec 15;372(6507):631–634. doi: 10.1038/372631a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schiffer M., Edmundson A. B. Use of helical wheels to represent the structures of proteins and to identify segments with helical potential. Biophys J. 1967 Mar;7(2):121–135. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(67)86579-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vazquez S., Thomas C., Lew R. A., Humphreys R. E. Favored and suppressed patterns of hydrophobic and nonhydrophobic amino acids in protein sequences. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993 Oct 1;90(19):9100–9104. doi: 10.1073/pnas.90.19.9100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Xiong H., Buckwalter B. L., Shieh H. M., Hecht M. H. Periodicity of polar and nonpolar amino acids is the major determinant of secondary structure in self-assembling oligomeric peptides. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995 Jul 3;92(14):6349–6353. doi: 10.1073/pnas.92.14.6349. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
