Dataset Information

A relation between the principal axes of inertia and ligand binding.

ABSTRACT: The principal axes of inertia are eigenvectors that can be calculated for any rigid body. We report studies of the position of the principal axes in crystallographically solved protein molecules. We find with high frequency that at least one principal axis penetrates the surface of the respective protein in a region used for ligand binding. In antibody variable regions, an axis goes through the third hypervariable loop of the heavy chain. In major histocompatibility complex proteins, an axis goes through the peptide-binding groove. In protein-protein heterodimers, a principal axis of one subunit will often penetrate the interface formed with the other subunit. In many of these protein-protein complexes, the axis specifically intersects residues known to be critical for molecular recognition.

SUBMITTER: Foote J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC15493 | biostudies-literature | 2000 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A relation between the principal axes of inertia and ligand binding.

Foote J J Raman A A

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 20000201 3

The principal axes of inertia are eigenvectors that can be calculated for any rigid body. We report studies of the position of the principal axes in crystallographically solved protein molecules. We find with high frequency that at least one principal axis penetrates the surface of the respective protein in a region used for ligand binding. In antibody variable regions, an axis goes through the third hypervariable loop of the heavy chain. In major histocompatibility complex proteins, an axis goe ...[more]

PMID: 10655470

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Comparison of different protein x-ray structures has previously been made in a number of different ways; for example, by visual examination, by differences in the locations of secondary structures, by explicit superposition of structural elements, e.g. alpha-carbon atom locations, or by procedures that utilize a common symmetry element or geometrical feature of the structures to be compared. RESULTS: A new approach is applied to determine the structural changes that an antibody protein domain experiences upon its interaction with an antigenic target. These changes are determined with the use of two different, however comparable, sets of principal axes that are obtained by diagonalizing the second-order tensors that yield the moments-of-geometry as well as an ellipsoidal characterization of domain shape, prior to and after interaction. Determination of these sets of axes for structural comparison requires no internal symmetry features of the domains, depending solely upon their representation in three-dimensional space. This representation may involve atomic, Calpha, or residue centroid coordinates. The present analysis utilizes residue centroids. When the structural changes are minimal, the principal axes of the domains, prior to and after interaction, are essentially comparable and consequently may be used for structural comparison. When the differences of the axes cannot be neglected, but are nevertheless slight, a smaller relatively invariant substructure of the domains may be utilized for comparison. The procedure yields two distance metrics for structural comparison. First, the displacements of the residue centroids due to antigenic binding, referenced to the ellipsoidal principal axes, are noted. Second, changes in the ellipsoidal distances with respect to the non-interacting structure provide a direct measure of the spatial displacements of the residue centroids, towards either the interior or exterior of the domain. CONCLUSION: With use of x-ray data from the protein data bank (PDB), these two metrics are shown to highlight, in a manner different from before, the structural changes that are induced in the overall domains as well as in the H3 loops of the complementarity-determining regions (CDR) upon FAB antibody binding to a truncated and to a synthetic hemagglutinin viral antigenic target.

Project description:Macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) has been defined as an important chemokine-like function (CLF) chemokine with an essential role in monocyte recruitment and arrest. Adhesion of monocytes to the vessel wall and their transendothelial migration are critical in atherogenesis and many other inflammatory diseases. Chemokines carefully control all steps of the monocyte recruitment process. Those chemokines specialized in controlling arrest are typically immobilized on the endothelial surface, mediating the arrest of rolling monocytes by chemokine receptor-triggered pathways. The chemokine receptor CXCR2 functions as an important arrest receptor on monocytes. An arrest function has been revealed for the bona fide CXCR2 ligands CXCL1 and CXCL8, but genetic studies also suggested that additional arrest chemokines are likely to be involved in atherogenic leukocyte recruitment. While CXCR2 is known to interact with numerous CXC chemokine ligands, the CLF chemokine MIF, which structurally does not belong to the CXC chemokine sub-family, was surprisingly identified as a non-cognate ligand of CXCR2, responsible for critical arrest functions during the atherogenic process. MIF was originally identified as macrophage migration inhibitory factor (this function being eponymous), but is now known as a potent inflammatory cytokine with CLFs including chemotaxis and leukocyte arrest. This review will cover the mechanisms underlying these functions, including MIF's effects on LFA1 integrin activity and signal transduction, and will discuss the structural similarities between MIF and the bona fide CXCR2 ligand CXCL8 while emphasizing the structural differences. As MIF also interacts with CXCR4, a chemokine receptor implicated in CXCL12-elicited lymphocyte arrest, the arrest potential of the MIF/CXCR4 axis will also be scrutinized as well as the recently identified role of pericyte MIF in attracting leukocytes exiting through venules as part of the pericyte "motility instruction program."

Project description:HIV-1 protease (HIV-1-pr) plays an important role in viral replication and maturation, making it one of the most attractive targets for anti-retroviral therapy. To design new effective inhibitors able to combat drug resistance in mutant HIV-1-pr variants, it is essential to gain further understanding about the mechanisms by which the recently proposed inhibitors deactivate the mutant HIV-1-pr variants. In the present work, we explored the interactions between two P2-ligands (DRV, and one new derivative, 4UY) with wild type (WT) and two multiple mutant HIV-1-pr variants (p20 and p51) with all atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, binding free energy calculations, and principal component analysis (PCA). The trajectories of MD simulations show that both 4UY and DRV primarily bind with the active sites, flap and 80s loop regions of HIV-1-pr variants through either hydrogen bonds or hydrophobic interactions. More hydrogen bonds and hydrophobic interactions were located for 4UY/HIV-1-pr complexes than for DRV/HIV-1-pr counterparts. More importantly, 4UY was found to have an extra hydrogen bond with the backbone of Gly48' in the flap region of the HIV-1-prs. The flap tip-tip distance (I50-I50') and flap tip-active site distance (I50-D25 and I50'-D25') indicate that the flaps turn more closed in 4UY bound HIV-1-prs than DRV bound ones, and the former also have more compact hydrophobic cavities than the latter. Further, the vector projections from PCA indicate that 4UY/DRV inhibitor binding projects the closing of flap in HIV-1-pr variants. In line with the above trajectory analysis, the thermodynamics calculation with MM-PBSA method suggests much stronger binding affinity for 4UY/HIV-1-pr than DRV/HIV-1-pr by 4.3-6.4 kcal/mol. Although p20 and p51 also induce weaker binding due to multiple mutants for 4UY inhibitor by 1.9-1.8 kcal/mol, their bindings to the new P2 ligand (4UY) are indeed significantly enhanced as compared to DRV. The thermodynamic components responsible for the binding differences and the contribution from key residues to the binding were also discussed in detail.

Dataset Information

A relation between the principal axes of inertia and ligand binding.

Publications

A relation between the principal axes of inertia and ligand binding.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets