Cargando…

Inherent versus induced protein flexibility: Comparisons within and between apo and holo structures

Understanding how ligand binding influences protein flexibility is important, especially in rational drug design. Protein flexibility upon ligand binding is analyzed herein using 305 proteins with 2369 crystal structures with ligands (holo) and 1679 without (apo). Each protein has at least two apo a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Clark, Jordan J., Benson, Mark L., Smith, Richard D., Carlson, Heather A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6370239/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30699115
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006705
_version_ 1783394338481373184
author Clark, Jordan J.
Benson, Mark L.
Smith, Richard D.
Carlson, Heather A.
author_facet Clark, Jordan J.
Benson, Mark L.
Smith, Richard D.
Carlson, Heather A.
author_sort Clark, Jordan J.
collection PubMed
description Understanding how ligand binding influences protein flexibility is important, especially in rational drug design. Protein flexibility upon ligand binding is analyzed herein using 305 proteins with 2369 crystal structures with ligands (holo) and 1679 without (apo). Each protein has at least two apo and two holo structures for analysis. The inherent variation in structures with and without ligands is first established as a baseline. This baseline is then compared to the change in conformation in going from the apo to holo states to probe induced flexibility. The inherent backbone flexibility across the apo structures is roughly the same as the variation across holo structures. The induced backbone flexibility across apo-holo pairs is larger than that of the apo or holo states, but the increase in RMSD is less than 0.5 Å. Analysis of χ(1) angles revealed a distinctly different pattern with significant influences seen for ligand binding on side-chain conformations in the binding site. Within the apo and holo states themselves, the variation of the χ(1) angles is the same. However, the data combining both apo and holo states show significant displacements. Upon ligand binding, χ(1) angles are frequently pushed to new orientations outside the range seen in the apo states. Influences on binding-site variation could not be easily attributed to features such as ligand size or x-ray structure resolution. By combining these findings, we find that most binding site flexibility is compatible with the common practice in flexible docking, where backbones are kept rigid and side chains are allowed some degree of flexibility.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6370239
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63702392019-02-22 Inherent versus induced protein flexibility: Comparisons within and between apo and holo structures Clark, Jordan J. Benson, Mark L. Smith, Richard D. Carlson, Heather A. PLoS Comput Biol Research Article Understanding how ligand binding influences protein flexibility is important, especially in rational drug design. Protein flexibility upon ligand binding is analyzed herein using 305 proteins with 2369 crystal structures with ligands (holo) and 1679 without (apo). Each protein has at least two apo and two holo structures for analysis. The inherent variation in structures with and without ligands is first established as a baseline. This baseline is then compared to the change in conformation in going from the apo to holo states to probe induced flexibility. The inherent backbone flexibility across the apo structures is roughly the same as the variation across holo structures. The induced backbone flexibility across apo-holo pairs is larger than that of the apo or holo states, but the increase in RMSD is less than 0.5 Å. Analysis of χ(1) angles revealed a distinctly different pattern with significant influences seen for ligand binding on side-chain conformations in the binding site. Within the apo and holo states themselves, the variation of the χ(1) angles is the same. However, the data combining both apo and holo states show significant displacements. Upon ligand binding, χ(1) angles are frequently pushed to new orientations outside the range seen in the apo states. Influences on binding-site variation could not be easily attributed to features such as ligand size or x-ray structure resolution. By combining these findings, we find that most binding site flexibility is compatible with the common practice in flexible docking, where backbones are kept rigid and side chains are allowed some degree of flexibility. Public Library of Science 2019-01-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6370239/ /pubmed/30699115 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006705 Text en © 2019 Clark et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Clark, Jordan J.
Benson, Mark L.
Smith, Richard D.
Carlson, Heather A.
Inherent versus induced protein flexibility: Comparisons within and between apo and holo structures
title Inherent versus induced protein flexibility: Comparisons within and between apo and holo structures
title_full Inherent versus induced protein flexibility: Comparisons within and between apo and holo structures
title_fullStr Inherent versus induced protein flexibility: Comparisons within and between apo and holo structures
title_full_unstemmed Inherent versus induced protein flexibility: Comparisons within and between apo and holo structures
title_short Inherent versus induced protein flexibility: Comparisons within and between apo and holo structures
title_sort inherent versus induced protein flexibility: comparisons within and between apo and holo structures
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6370239/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30699115
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006705
work_keys_str_mv AT clarkjordanj inherentversusinducedproteinflexibilitycomparisonswithinandbetweenapoandholostructures
AT bensonmarkl inherentversusinducedproteinflexibilitycomparisonswithinandbetweenapoandholostructures
AT smithrichardd inherentversusinducedproteinflexibilitycomparisonswithinandbetweenapoandholostructures
AT carlsonheathera inherentversusinducedproteinflexibilitycomparisonswithinandbetweenapoandholostructures