23 research outputs found

    Longitudinal exchange: an alternative strategy towards quantification of dynamics parameters in ZZ exchange spectroscopy

    Get PDF
    Longitudinal exchange experiments facilitate the quantification of the rates of interconversion between the exchanging species, along with their longitudinal relaxation rates, by analyzing the time-dependence of direct correlation and exchange cross peaks. Here we present a simple and robust alternative to this strategy, which is based on the combination of two complementary experiments, one with and one without resolving exchange cross peaks. We show that by combining the two data sets systematic errors that are caused by differential line-broadening of the exchanging species are avoided and reliable quantification of kinetic and relaxation parameters in the presence of additional conformational exchange on the ms–μs time scale is possible. The strategy is applied to a bistable DNA oligomer that displays different line-broadening in the two exchanging species

    Using Entropy Maximization to Understand the Determinants of Structural Dynamics beyond Native Contact Topology

    Get PDF
    Comparison of elastic network model predictions with experimental data has provided important insights on the dominant role of the network of inter-residue contacts in defining the global dynamics of proteins. Most of these studies have focused on interpreting the mean-square fluctuations of residues, or deriving the most collective, or softest, modes of motions that are known to be insensitive to structural and energetic details. However, with increasing structural data, we are in a position to perform a more critical assessment of the structure-dynamics relations in proteins, and gain a deeper understanding of the major determinants of not only the mean-square fluctuations and lowest frequency modes, but the covariance or the cross-correlations between residue fluctuations and the shapes of higher modes. A systematic study of a large set of NMR-determined proteins is analyzed using a novel method based on entropy maximization to demonstrate that the next level of refinement in the elastic network model description of proteins ought to take into consideration properties such as contact order (or sequential separation between contacting residues) and the secondary structure types of the interacting residues, whereas the types of amino acids do not play a critical role. Most importantly, an optimal description of observed cross-correlations requires the inclusion of destabilizing, as opposed to exclusively stabilizing, interactions, stipulating the functional significance of local frustration in imparting native-like dynamics. This study provides us with a deeper understanding of the structural basis of experimentally observed behavior, and opens the way to the development of more accurate models for exploring protein dynamics

    The Role of Oligomerization and Cooperative Regulation in Protein Function: The Case of Tryptophan Synthase

    Get PDF
    The oligomerization/co-localization of protein complexes and their cooperative regulation in protein function is a key feature in many biological systems. The synergistic regulation in different subunits often enhances the functional properties of the multi-enzyme complex. The present study used molecular dynamics and Brownian dynamics simulations to study the effects of allostery, oligomerization and intermediate channeling on enhancing the protein function of tryptophan synthase (TRPS). TRPS uses a set of α/β–dimeric units to catalyze the last two steps of L-tryptophan biosynthesis, and the rate is remarkably slower in the isolated monomers. Our work shows that without their binding partner, the isolated monomers are stable and more rigid. The substrates can form fairly stable interactions with the protein in both forms when the protein reaches the final ligand–bound conformations. Our simulations also revealed that the α/β–dimeric unit stabilizes the substrate–protein conformation in the ligand binding process, which lowers the conformation transition barrier and helps the protein conformations shift from an open/inactive form to a closed/active form. Brownian dynamics simulations with a coarse-grained model illustrate how protein conformations affect substrate channeling. The results highlight the complex roles of protein oligomerization and the fine balance between rigidity and dynamics in protein function

    Propagation of conformational changes during μ-opioid receptor activation

    No full text
    μ-Opioid receptors (μOR) are G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) that are activated by a structurally diverse spectrum of natural and synthetic agonists including endogenous endorphin peptides, morphine and methadone. The recent structures of the μOR in inactive(1) and agonist-induced active states (companion article) provide snapshots of the receptor at the beginning and end of a signaling event, but little is known about the dynamic sequence of events that span these two states. Here we report the use of solution-state NMR to examine the process of μOR activation. We obtained spectra of the μOR in the absence of ligand, and in the presence of the high-affinity agonist BU72 alone, or with BU72 and a G protein mimetic nanobody. Our results show that conformational changes in transmembrane segments (TM) 5 and 6, which are required for the full engagement of a G protein, are almost completely dependent on the presence of both the agonist and the G protein mimetic nanobody revealing a weak allosteric coupling between the agonist binding pocket and the G protein coupling interface (TM5 and TM6) similar to what has been observed for the β2-adrenergic receptor(2). Unexpectedly, in the presence of agonist alone, we observe larger spectral changes involving intracellular loop 1 (ICL1) and helix 8 (H8), when compared to changes in TM5 and TM6. These results suggest that one or both of these domains may play a role in the initial interaction with the G protein, and that TM5 and TM6 are only engaged later in the process of complex formation. The initial interactions between the G protein and ICL1 and/or H8 may play a role in G protein coupling specificity as has been suggested for other family A GPCRs
    corecore