Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Protein Science : A Publication of the Protein Society logoLink to Protein Science : A Publication of the Protein Society
. 1995 Aug;4(8):1516–1527. doi: 10.1002/pro.5560040809

The optimization of protein-solvent interactions: thermostability and the role of hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions.

V Z Spassov 1, A D Karshikoff 1, R Ladenstein 1
PMCID: PMC2143201  PMID: 8520477

Abstract

Protein-solvent interactions were analyzed using an optimization parameter based on the ratio of the solvent-accessible area in the native and the unfolded protein structure. The calculations were performed for a set of 183 nonhomologous proteins with known three-dimensional structure available in the Protein Data Bank. The dependence of the total solvent-accessible surface area on the protein molecular mass was analyzed. It was shown that there is no difference between the monomeric and oligomeric proteins with respect to the solvent-accessible area. The results also suggested that for proteins with molecular mass above some critical mass, which is about 28 kDa, a formation of domain structure or subunit aggregation into oligomers is preferred rather than a further enlargement of a single domain structure. An analysis of the optimization of both protein-solvent and charge-charge interactions was performed for 14 proteins from thermophilic organisms. The comparison of the optimization parameters calculated for proteins from thermophiles and mesophiles showed that the former are generally characterized by a high degree of optimization of the hydrophobic interactions or, in cases where the optimization of the hydrophobic interactions is not sufficiently high, by highly optimized charge-charge interactions.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (1.1 MB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Andreotti G., Tutino M. L., Sannia G., Marino G., Cubellis M. V. Indole-3-glycerol-phosphate synthase from Sulfolobus solfataricus as a model for studying thermostable TIM-barrel enzymes. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1994 Oct 19;1208(2):310–315. doi: 10.1016/0167-4838(94)90118-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Anfinsen C. B. Principles that govern the folding of protein chains. Science. 1973 Jul 20;181(4096):223–230. doi: 10.1126/science.181.4096.223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Argos P., Rossman M. G., Grau U. M., Zuber H., Frank G., Tratschin J. D. Thermal stability and protein structure. Biochemistry. 1979 Dec 11;18(25):5698–5703. doi: 10.1021/bi00592a028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chan M. K., Mukund S., Kletzin A., Adams M. W., Rees D. C. Structure of a hyperthermophilic tungstopterin enzyme, aldehyde ferredoxin oxidoreductase. Science. 1995 Mar 10;267(5203):1463–1469. doi: 10.1126/science.7878465. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chothia C. Hydrophobic bonding and accessible surface area in proteins. Nature. 1974 Mar 22;248(446):338–339. doi: 10.1038/248338a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Chothia C. The nature of the accessible and buried surfaces in proteins. J Mol Biol. 1976 Jul 25;105(1):1–12. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(76)90191-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Dill K. A. Dominant forces in protein folding. Biochemistry. 1990 Aug 7;29(31):7133–7155. doi: 10.1021/bi00483a001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Eisenberg D., McLachlan A. D. Solvation energy in protein folding and binding. Nature. 1986 Jan 16;319(6050):199–203. doi: 10.1038/319199a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Janin J., Miller S., Chothia C. Surface, subunit interfaces and interior of oligomeric proteins. J Mol Biol. 1988 Nov 5;204(1):155–164. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(88)90606-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Karshikov A., Duerring M., Huber R. Role of electrostatic interaction in the stability of the hexamer of constitutive phycocyanin from Fremyella diplosiphon. Protein Eng. 1991 Aug;4(6):681–690. doi: 10.1093/protein/4.6.681. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Koehl P., Delarue M. Polar and nonpolar atomic environments in the protein core: implications for folding and binding. Proteins. 1994 Nov;20(3):264–278. doi: 10.1002/prot.340200307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lee B., Richards F. M. The interpretation of protein structures: estimation of static accessibility. J Mol Biol. 1971 Feb 14;55(3):379–400. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(71)90324-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lesser G. J., Rose G. D. Hydrophobicity of amino acid subgroups in proteins. Proteins. 1990;8(1):6–13. doi: 10.1002/prot.340080104. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Merkler D. J., Farrington G. K., Wedler F. C. Protein thermostability. Correlations between calculated macroscopic parameters and growth temperature for closely related thermophilic and mesophilic bacilli. Int J Pept Protein Res. 1981 Nov;18(5):430–442. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Miller S., Lesk A. M., Janin J., Chothia C. The accessible surface area and stability of oligomeric proteins. 1987 Aug 27-Sep 2Nature. 328(6133):834–836. doi: 10.1038/328834a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Perutz M. F., Raidt H. Stereochemical basis of heat stability in bacterial ferredoxins and in haemoglobin A2. Nature. 1975 May 15;255(5505):256–259. doi: 10.1038/255256a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Privalov P. L., Makhatadze G. I. Contribution of hydration to protein folding thermodynamics. II. The entropy and Gibbs energy of hydration. J Mol Biol. 1993 Jul 20;232(2):660–679. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.1993.1417. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Privalov P. L. Thermodynamic problems of protein structure. Annu Rev Biophys Biophys Chem. 1989;18:47–69. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bb.18.060189.000403. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Rehaber V., Jaenicke R. Stability and reconstitution of D-glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase from the hyperthermophilic eubacterium Thermotoga maritima. J Biol Chem. 1992 Jun 5;267(16):10999–11006. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Robbins A. H., Stout C. D. The structure of aconitase. Proteins. 1989;5(4):289–312. doi: 10.1002/prot.340050406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Rose G. D., Wolfenden R. Hydrogen bonding, hydrophobicity, packing, and protein folding. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct. 1993;22:381–415. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bb.22.060193.002121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Sharp K. A., Nicholls A., Fine R. F., Honig B. Reconciling the magnitude of the microscopic and macroscopic hydrophobic effects. Science. 1991 Apr 5;252(5002):106–109. doi: 10.1126/science.2011744. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Spassov V. Z., Atanasov B. P. Spatial optimization of electrostatic interactions between the ionized groups in globular proteins. Proteins. 1994 Jul;19(3):222–229. doi: 10.1002/prot.340190306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Spassov V. Z., Karshikoff A. D., Ladenstein R. Optimization of the electrostatic interactions in proteins of different functional and folding type. Protein Sci. 1994 Sep;3(9):1556–1569. doi: 10.1002/pro.5560030921. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Zuber H. Temperature adaptation of lactate dehydrogenase. Structural, functional and genetic aspects. Biophys Chem. 1988 Feb;29(1-2):171–179. doi: 10.1016/0301-4622(88)87037-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Protein Science : A Publication of the Protein Society are provided here courtesy of The Protein Society

RESOURCES