Skip to main content
PMC home page
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America logoLink to Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
. 1986 Sep;83(17):6258–6262. doi: 10.1073/pnas.83.17.6258

Interaction between proteins localized in membranes.

B Grasberger, A P Minton, C DeLisi, H Metzger
PMCID: PMC386482  PMID: 3018721

Abstract

We present a conceptual framework for evaluating the effect on the self-association of proteins in membranes due to the presence of other proteins at high concentrations (excluded volume effect) and the high concentration and preoriented state of the reactive species. We have calculated the magnitude of such effects using plausible values for the concentrations of proteins in membranes, for the degree to which proteins may tilt and move vertically, and for their dimensions. Compared to the association of monomers tumbling freely in an experimentally realistic volume, we calculate that these factors alone can increase the likelihood of forming dimers 10(6)-fold and of forming trimers and higher oligomers many orders of magnitude greater. We discuss the implications of our calculations for experimental manipulations of membrane proteins, for biosynthetic assembly of multisubunit membrane proteins and formation of membrane lesions by assemblies of exogenous proteins, and for the activation of cellular events induced by the interaction of membrane receptors with themselves or with other membrane proteins.

Full text

PDF
6258

Selected References

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

  1. DeLisi C. The biophysics of ligand-receptor interactions. Q Rev Biophys. 1980 May;13(2):201–230. doi: 10.1017/s0033583500001657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Engelman D. M. Surface area per lipid molecule in the intact membrane of the human red cell. Nature. 1969 Sep 20;223(5212):1279–1280. doi: 10.1038/2231279a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Gilman A. G. G proteins and dual control of adenylate cyclase. Cell. 1984 Mar;36(3):577–579. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(84)90336-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Henkart P. A. Mechanism of lymphocyte-mediated cytotoxicity. Annu Rev Immunol. 1985;3:31–58. doi: 10.1146/annurev.iy.03.040185.000335. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Honjo T. Immunoglobulin genes. Annu Rev Immunol. 1983;1:499–528. doi: 10.1146/annurev.iy.01.040183.002435. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Janin J., Chothia C. Role of hydrophobicity in the binding of coenzymes. Appendix. Translational and rotational contribution to the free energy of dissociation. Biochemistry. 1978 Jul 25;17(15):2943–2948. doi: 10.1021/bi00608a001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Kahn C. R., Baird K. L., Jarrett D. B., Flier J. S. Direct demonstration that receptor crosslinking or aggregation is important in insulin action. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1978 Sep;75(9):4209–4213. doi: 10.1073/pnas.75.9.4209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Klein P., Kanehisa M., DeLisi C. The detection and classification of membrane-spanning proteins. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1985 May 28;815(3):468–476. doi: 10.1016/0005-2736(85)90375-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Levine Y. K., Wilkins M. H. Structure of oriented lipid bilayers. Nat New Biol. 1971 Mar 17;230(11):69–72. doi: 10.1038/newbio230069a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Majerus P. W., Neufeld E. J., Wilson D. B. Production of phosphoinositide-derived messengers. Cell. 1984 Jul;37(3):701–703. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(84)90405-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Metzger H., Alcaraz G., Hohman R., Kinet J. P., Pribluda V., Quarto R. The receptor with high affinity for immunoglobulin E. Annu Rev Immunol. 1986;4:419–470. doi: 10.1146/annurev.iy.04.040186.002223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Minton A. P. The effect of volume occupancy upon the thermodynamic activity of proteins: some biochemical consequences. Mol Cell Biochem. 1983;55(2):119–140. doi: 10.1007/BF00673707. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Müller-Eberhard H. J. The membrane attack complex of complement. Annu Rev Immunol. 1986;4:503–528. doi: 10.1146/annurev.iy.04.040186.002443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Noda M., Takahashi H., Tanabe T., Toyosato M., Kikyotani S., Hirose T., Asai M., Takashima H., Inayama S., Miyata T. Primary structures of beta- and delta-subunit precursors of Torpedo californica acetylcholine receptor deduced from cDNA sequences. Nature. 1983 Jan 20;301(5897):251–255. doi: 10.1038/301251a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Podack E. R., Tschopp J. Circular polymerization of the ninth component of complement. Ring closure of the tubular complex confers resistance to detergent dissociation and to proteolytic degradation. J Biol Chem. 1982 Dec 25;257(24):15204–15212. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Quinn P., Griffiths G., Warren G. Density of newly synthesized plasma membrane proteins in intracellular membranes II. Biochemical studies. J Cell Biol. 1984 Jun;98(6):2142–2147. doi: 10.1083/jcb.98.6.2142. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Schreiber A. B., Libermann T. A., Lax I., Yarden Y., Schlessinger J. Biological role of epidermal growth factor-receptor clustering. Investigation with monoclonal anti-receptor antibodies. J Biol Chem. 1983 Jan 25;258(2):846–853. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Wilkins M. H., Blaurock A. E., Engelman D. M. Bilayer structure in membranes. Nat New Biol. 1971 Mar 17;230(11):72–76. doi: 10.1038/newbio230072a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America are provided here courtesy of National Academy of Sciences

RESOURCES