Table 1.
Representative examples of proteins designed using various approaches
Design principles, methodsa | Parameters introduced/optimized | Representative citations |
---|---|---|
Substitution of amino acids by rational design | ||
Visual inspection, Docking, ISM | Substrate specificity Stereoselectivity | [1] |
CAVER, ISM | Activity, Stabiliy | [3, 4] |
B-Fit, ISM | Thermostability | [5] |
MD-simulations | Enantioselectivity | [6, 7] |
Prediction of pKa | pH Optimum | [8–11] |
Computational design | ||
FRESCO | Thermostability | [12] |
CASCO Rosetta Design | Enantioselectivity | [13] |
Rosetta Design/Rosetta match | Introducing new chemical activities | [14–17] |
Minimalist design | Introducing new chemical activities | [18–20] |
De novo design of protein folds | ||
Semiempirical computation | Introducing catalysis | [21] |
Introduction of noncanonical amino acids | ||
Rational, substrate docking | Introducing new chemical activities | [22] |
Rosetta | Protein–peptide interface, metal cofactor binding | [23, 24] |
Redesign of the existing or introduction of new cofactors | ||
Introducing metal cofactors into proteins | [25] | |
Substitution of metal ions in existing cofactors | Introducing new chemical activities | [26] |
Transition metal complexes anchored by biotin conjugation | [27] |
Note the list is by no means exhaustive
ISM iterative saturation mutagenesis, MD molecular dynamics, FRESCO framework for rapid enzyme stabilization by computational libraries, CASCO catalytic selectivity by computational design