• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of biophysjLink to Publisher's site
Biophys J. Feb 2001; 80(2): 613–625.
PMCID: PMC1301261

Calculation of weak protein-protein interactions: the pH dependence of the second virial coefficient.

Abstract

Interactions between proteins are often sufficiently weak that their study through the use of conventional structural techniques becomes problematic. Of the few techniques capable of providing experimental measures of weak protein-protein interactions, perhaps the most useful is the second virial coefficient, B(22), which quantifies a protein solution's deviations from ideal behavior. It has long been known that B(22) can in principle be computed, but only very recently has it been demonstrated that such calculations can be performed using protein models of true atomic detail (Biophys. J. 1998, 75:2469-2477). The work reported here extends these previous efforts in an attempt to develop a transferable energetic model capable of reproducing the experimental trends obtained for two different proteins over a range of pH and ionic strengths. We describe protein-protein interaction energies by a combination of three separate terms: (i) an electrostatic interaction term based on the use of effective charges, (ii) a term describing the electrostatic desolvation that occurs when charged groups are buried by an approaching protein partner, and (iii) a solvent-accessible surface area term that is used to describe contributions from van der Waals and hydrophobic interactions. The magnitude of the third term is governed by an adjustable, empirical parameter, gamma, that is altered to optimize agreement between calculated and experimental values of B(22). The model is applied separately to the proteins lysozyme and chymotrypsinogen, yielding optimal values of gamma that are almost identical. There are, however, clear difficulties in reproducing B(22) values at the extremes of pH. Explicit calculation of the protonation states of ionizable amino acids in the 200 most energetically favorable protein-protein structures suggest that these difficulties are due to a neglect of the protonation state changes that can accompany complexation. Proper reproduction of the pH dependence of B(22) will, therefore, almost certainly require that account be taken of these protonation state changes. Despite this problem, the fact that almost identical gamma values are obtained from two different proteins suggests that the basic energetic formulation used here, which can be evaluated very rapidly, might find use in dynamical simulations of weak protein-protein interactions at intermediate pH values.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (252K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Albright RA, Mossing MC, Matthews BW. Crystal structure of an engineered Cro monomer bound nonspecifically to DNA: possible implications for nonspecific binding by the wild-type protein. Protein Sci. 1998 Jul;7(7):1485–1494. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Anderson DE, Becktel WJ, Dahlquist FW. pH-induced denaturation of proteins: a single salt bridge contributes 3-5 kcal/mol to the free energy of folding of T4 lysozyme. Biochemistry. 1990 Mar 6;29(9):2403–2408. [PubMed]
  • Antosiewicz J, McCammon JA, Gilson MK. Prediction of pH-dependent properties of proteins. J Mol Biol. 1994 May 6;238(3):415–436. [PubMed]
  • Antosiewicz J, McCammon JA, Gilson MK. The determinants of pKas in proteins. Biochemistry. 1996 Jun 18;35(24):7819–7833. [PubMed]
  • Asthagiri D, Neal BL, Lenhoff AM. Calculation of short-range interactions between proteins. Biophys Chem. 1999 Apr 19;78(3):219–231. [PubMed]
  • Betts MJ, Sternberg MJ. An analysis of conformational changes on protein-protein association: implications for predictive docking. Protein Eng. 1999 Apr;12(4):271–283. [PubMed]
  • Camacho CJ, Kimura SR, DeLisi C, Vajda S. Kinetics of desolvation-mediated protein-protein binding. Biophys J. 2000 Mar;78(3):1094–1105. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Chang RC, Asthagiri D, Lenhoff AM. Measured and calculated effects of mutations in bacteriophage T4 lysozyme on interactions in solution. Proteins. 2000 Oct 1;41(1):123–132. [PubMed]
  • Chothia C. Hydrophobic bonding and accessible surface area in proteins. Nature. 1974 Mar 22;248(446):338–339. [PubMed]
  • Elcock AH, McCammon JA. Electrostatic contributions to the stability of halophilic proteins. J Mol Biol. 1998 Jul 24;280(4):731–748. [PubMed]
  • Elcock AH, Gabdoulline RR, Wade RC, McCammon JA. Computer simulation of protein-protein association kinetics: acetylcholinesterase-fasciculin. J Mol Biol. 1999 Aug 6;291(1):149–162. [PubMed]
  • Gabb HA, Jackson RM, Sternberg MJ. Modelling protein docking using shape complementarity, electrostatics and biochemical information. J Mol Biol. 1997 Sep 12;272(1):106–120. [PubMed]
  • Gabdoulline RR, Wade RC. Simulation of the diffusional association of barnase and barstar. Biophys J. 1997 May;72(5):1917–1929. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Gilson MK. Multiple-site titration and molecular modeling: two rapid methods for computing energies and forces for ionizable groups in proteins. Proteins. 1993 Mar;15(3):266–282. [PubMed]
  • Havranek JJ, Harbury PB. Tanford-Kirkwood electrostatics for protein modeling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Sep 28;96(20):11145–11150. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hendsch ZS, Tidor B. Do salt bridges stabilize proteins? A continuum electrostatic analysis. Protein Sci. 1994 Feb;3(2):211–226. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Honig B, Nicholls A. Classical electrostatics in biology and chemistry. Science. 1995 May 26;268(5214):1144–1149. [PubMed]
  • Horton N, Lewis M. Calculation of the free energy of association for protein complexes. Protein Sci. 1992 Jan;1(1):169–181. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Jackson RM, Gabb HA, Sternberg MJ. Rapid refinement of protein interfaces incorporating solvation: application to the docking problem. J Mol Biol. 1998 Feb 13;276(1):265–285. [PubMed]
  • Janin J. Protein-protein recognition. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 1995;64(2-3):145–166. [PubMed]
  • Janin J, Chothia C. The structure of protein-protein recognition sites. J Biol Chem. 1990 Sep 25;265(27):16027–16030. [PubMed]
  • Jones S, Thornton JM. Principles of protein-protein interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Jan 9;93(1):13–20. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Katchalski-Katzir E, Shariv I, Eisenstein M, Friesem AA, Aflalo C, Vakser IA. Molecular surface recognition: determination of geometric fit between proteins and their ligands by correlation techniques. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992 Mar 15;89(6):2195–2199. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Majeux N, Scarsi M, Apostolakis J, Ehrhardt C, Caflisch A. Exhaustive docking of molecular fragments with electrostatic solvation. Proteins. 1999 Oct 1;37(1):88–105. [PubMed]
  • Marini MA, Martin CJ. The prototropic behavior of alpha-chymotrypsin and chymotrypsinogen in water and formaldehyde. An examination of the reactivity of the amino groups in formaldehyde. Eur J Biochem. 1971 Mar 11;19(2):162–168. [PubMed]
  • McDonald SM, Willson RC, McCammon JA. Determination of the pKa values of titratable groups of an antigen-antibody complex, HyHEL-5-hen egg lysozyme. Protein Eng. 1995 Sep;8(9):915–924. [PubMed]
  • Minton AP. The effect of volume occupancy upon the thermodynamic activity of proteins: some biochemical consequences. Mol Cell Biochem. 1983;55(2):119–140. [PubMed]
  • Neal BL, Asthagiri D, Lenhoff AM. Molecular origins of osmotic second virial coefficients of proteins. Biophys J. 1998 Nov;75(5):2469–2477. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Northrup SH, Boles JO, Reynolds JC. Brownian dynamics of cytochrome c and cytochrome c peroxidase association. Science. 1988 Jul 1;241(4861):67–70. [PubMed]
  • Ovádi J. Physiological significance of metabolic channelling. J Theor Biol. 1991 Sep 7;152(1):1–22. [PubMed]
  • Pelletier H, Kraut J. Crystal structure of a complex between electron transfer partners, cytochrome c peroxidase and cytochrome c. Science. 1992 Dec 11;258(5089):1748–1755. [PubMed]
  • Roberts VA, Pique ME. Definition of the interaction domain for cytochrome c on cytochrome c oxidase. III. Prediction of the docked complex by a complete, systematic search. J Biol Chem. 1999 Dec 31;274(53):38051–38060. [PubMed]
  • Sept D, Elcock AH, McCammon JA. Computer simulations of actin polymerization can explain the barbed-pointed end asymmetry. J Mol Biol. 1999 Dec 17;294(5):1181–1189. [PubMed]
  • Sharp KA. Calculation of HyHel10-lysozyme binding free energy changes: effect of ten point mutations. Proteins. 1998 Oct 1;33(1):39–48. [PubMed]
  • Sternberg MJ, Gabb HA, Jackson RM. Predictive docking of protein-protein and protein-DNA complexes. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 1998 Apr;8(2):250–256. [PubMed]
  • Velev OD, Kaler EW, Lenhoff AM. Protein interactions in solution characterized by light and neutron scattering: comparison of lysozyme and chymotrypsinogen. Biophys J. 1998 Dec;75(6):2682–2697. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Winkler FK, Banner DW, Oefner C, Tsernoglou D, Brown RS, Heathman SP, Bryan RK, Martin PD, Petratos K, Wilson KS. The crystal structure of EcoRV endonuclease and of its complexes with cognate and non-cognate DNA fragments. EMBO J. 1993 May;12(5):1781–1795. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from Biophysical Journal are provided here courtesy of The Biophysical Society

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

  • MedGen
    MedGen
    Related information in MedGen
  • PubMed
    PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles
  • Substance
    Substance
    PubChem Substance links

Recent Activity

    Your browsing activity is empty.

    Activity recording is turned off.

    Turn recording back on

    See more...