Skip to main content
NCBI 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 Nov;83(21):8069–8072. doi: 10.1073/pnas.83.21.8069

Temperature dependence of the hydrophobic interaction in protein folding.

R L Baldwin
PMCID: PMC386868  PMID: 3464944

Abstract

Accurate calorimetric data for the thermodynamics of transfer of six liquid hydrocarbons to water have been combined with solubility data to provide a model for the temperature dependence of the hydrophobic interaction in protein folding. The model applies at temperatures for which the change in heat capacity (delta Cp) is constant. The extrapolated value of the temperature (Ts) at which the entropy of transfer (delta S degrees) reaches zero is strikingly similar (Ts = 112.8 degrees C +/- 2.2 degrees C) for the six hydrocarbons. This finding provides an interpretation for the empirical relation discovered by Sturtevant: the ratio delta S degrees/delta Cp measured at 25 degrees C is constant for the transfer of nonpolar substances from nonaqueous media to water. Constancy of this ratio is equivalent to Ts = constant. When applied to protein folding, the hydrocarbon model gives estimates of the contributions of the hydrophobic interaction to the entropy and enthalpy changes on unfolding and, by difference, estimates of the residual contributions from other sources. The major share of the large enthalpy change observed on unfolding at high temperatures comes from the hydrophobic interaction. The hydrophobic interaction changes from being entropy-driven at 22 degrees C to being enthalpy-driven at 113 degrees C. Finally, the hydrocarbon model predicts that plots of the specific entropy change on unfolding versus temperature should nearly intersect close to 113 degrees C, as observed by Privalov.

Full text

PDF
8069

Selected References

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

  1. Bello J. Tight packing of protein cores and interfaces. Relation to conservative amino acid sequences and stability of protein-protein interaction. Int J Pept Protein Res. 1978 Jul;12(1):38–41. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Brandts J. F., Oliveira R. J., Westort C. Thermodynamics of protein denaturation. Effect of pressu on the denaturation of ribonuclease A. Biochemistry. 1970 Feb 17;9(4):1038–1047. doi: 10.1021/bi00806a045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Gill S. J., Wadsö I. An equation of state describing hydrophobic interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1976 Sep;73(9):2955–2958. doi: 10.1073/pnas.73.9.2955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hawkes R., Grutter M. G., Schellman J. Thermodynamic stability and point mutations of bacteriophage T4 lysozyme. J Mol Biol. 1984 May 15;175(2):195–212. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(84)90474-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hawley S. A. Reversible pressure--temperature denaturation of chymotrypsinogen. Biochemistry. 1971 Jun 22;10(13):2436–2442. doi: 10.1021/bi00789a002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hvidt A. A discussion of pressure-volume effects in aqueous protein solutions. J Theor Biol. 1975 Mar;50(1):245–252. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(75)90035-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Janin J. Surface and inside volumes in globular proteins. Nature. 1979 Feb 8;277(5696):491–492. doi: 10.1038/277491a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. 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]
  9. Klapper M. H. On the nature of the protein interior. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1971 Mar 23;229(3):557–566. doi: 10.1016/0005-2795(71)90271-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Kyte J., Doolittle R. F. A simple method for displaying the hydropathic character of a protein. J Mol Biol. 1982 May 5;157(1):105–132. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(82)90515-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Lee B. The physical origin of the low solubility of nonpolar solutes in water. Biopolymers. 1985 May;24(5):813–823. doi: 10.1002/bip.360240507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Nozaki Y., Tanford C. The solubility of amino acids and two glycine peptides in aqueous ethanol and dioxane solutions. Establishment of a hydrophobicity scale. J Biol Chem. 1971 Apr 10;246(7):2211–2217. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Privalov P. L. Stability of proteins: small globular proteins. Adv Protein Chem. 1979;33:167–241. doi: 10.1016/s0065-3233(08)60460-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Richards F. M. Areas, volumes, packing and protein structure. Annu Rev Biophys Bioeng. 1977;6:151–176. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bb.06.060177.001055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Richmond T. J. Solvent accessible surface area and excluded volume in proteins. Analytical equations for overlapping spheres and implications for the hydrophobic effect. J Mol Biol. 1984 Sep 5;178(1):63–89. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(84)90231-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Rose G. D., Geselowitz A. R., Lesser G. J., Lee R. H., Zehfus M. H. Hydrophobicity of amino acid residues in globular proteins. Science. 1985 Aug 30;229(4716):834–838. doi: 10.1126/science.4023714. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Sturtevant J. M. Heat capacity and entropy changes in processes involving proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1977 Jun;74(6):2236–2240. doi: 10.1073/pnas.74.6.2236. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Wolfenden R., Andersson L., Cullis P. M., Southgate C. C. Affinities of amino acid side chains for solvent water. Biochemistry. 1981 Feb 17;20(4):849–855. doi: 10.1021/bi00507a030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Zipp A., Kauzmann W. Pressure denaturation of metmyoglobin. Biochemistry. 1973 Oct 9;12(21):4217–4228. doi: 10.1021/bi00745a028. [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