Biology subjects

Dunbrack, R. L.

Publications and source records attributed to Dunbrack, R. L..

4 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2018

Clustering of the structures of protein kinase activation loops: A new nomenclature for active and inactive kinase structures

Targeting protein kinases is an important strategy for intervention in cancer. Inhibitors are directed at the active conformation or a variety of inactive conformations. While attempts have been made to classify these conformations, a structurally rigorous catalogue of states has not been achieved. The kinase activation loop is crucial for catalysis and begins with the conserved DFGmotif (Asp-Phe-Gly). This motif is observed in two major classes of conformations, DFGin - a set of active and inactive conformations where the Phe residue is in contact with the C-helix of the N-terminal lobe, and DFGout - an inactive form where Phe occupies the ATP site exposing the C-helix pocket. We have developed a clustering of kinase conformations based on the location of the Phe side chain (DFGin, DFGout, and DFGinter or intermediate) and the backbone dihedral angles of the sequence X-D-F, where X is the residue before the DFGmotif, and the DFG-Phe side-chain rotamer, utilizing a density-based clustering algorithm. We have identified 8 distinct conformations and labeled them based on their Ramachandran regions (A=alpha, B=beta, L=left) and the Phe rotamer (minus, plus, trans). Our clustering divides the DFGin group into six clusters including BLAminus, which contains active structures, and two common inactive forms, BLBplus and ABAminus. DFGout structures are predominantly in the BBAminus conformation, which is essentially required for binding Type II inhibitors. The inactive conformations have specific features that make them unable to bind ATP, magnesium ion, and/or substrates. Our structurally intuitive nomenclature will aid in understanding the conformational dynamics of these proteins and structure-based development of kinase drugs.\n\nSignificance statementProtein kinases play important roles in signaling pathways and are widely studied as drug targets. Their active site exhibits remarkable structural variation as observed in the large number of available crystal structures. We have developed a clustering scheme and nomenclature to categorize and label all the observed conformations in human protein kinases. This has enabled us to clearly define the geometry of the active state and to distinguish closely related inactive states which were previously not characterized. Our classification of kinase conformations will help in better understanding the conformational dynamics of these proteins and the development of inhibitors against them.

bioinformatics↗

bioRxiv2018

A New Clustering and Nomenclature for Beta Turns Derived form High-Resolution Protein Structures

Protein loops connect regular secondary structures and contain 4-residue beta turns which represent 63% of the residues in loops. The commonly used classification of beta turns (Type I, I, II, II, VIa1, VIa2, VIb, and VIII) was developed in the 1970s and 1980s from analysis of a small number of proteins of average resolution, and represents only two thirds of beta turns observed in proteins (with a generic class Type IV representing the rest). We present a new clustering of beta turn conformations from a set of 13,030 turns from 1078 ultra-high resolution protein structures ([≤]1.2 [A]). Our clustering is derived from applying the DBSCAN and k-medoids algorithms to this data set with a metric commonly used in directional statistics applied to the set of dihedral angles from the second and third residues of each turn. We define 18 turn types compared to the 8 classical turn types in common use. We propose a new 2-letter nomenclature for all 18 beta-turn types using Ramachandran region names for the two central residues (e.g., A and D for alpha regions on the left side of the Ramachandran map and a and d for equivalent regions on the right-hand side; classical Type I turns are AD turns and Type I turns are ad). We identify 11 new types of beta turn, 5 of which are sub-types of classical beta turn types. Up-to-date statistics, probability densities of conformations, and sequence profiles of beta turns in loops were collected and analyzed. A library of turn types, BetaTurnLib18, and cross-platform software, BetaTurnTool18, which identifies turns in an input protein structure, are freely available and redistributable from dunbrack.fccc.edu/betaturn and github.com/sh-maxim/BetaTurn18. Given the ubiquitous nature of beta turns, this comprehensive study updates understanding of beta turns and should also provide useful tools for protein structure determination, refinement, and prediction programs.

bioinformatics↗

bioRxiv2017

Rosetta Antibody Design (RAbD): A General Framework for Computational Antibody Design

A structural-bioinformatics-based computational methodology and framework have been developed for the design of antibodies to targets of interest. RosettaAntibodyDesign (RAbD) samples the diverse sequence, structure, and binding space of an antibody to an antigen in highly customizable protocols for the design of antibodies in a broad range of applications. The program samples antibody sequences and structures by grafting structures from a widely accepted set of the canonical clusters of CDRs (North et al., J. Mol. Biol., 406:228-256, 2011). It then performs sequence design according to amino acid sequence profiles of each cluster, and samples CDR backbones using a flexible-backbone design protocol incorporating cluster-based CDR constraints. Starting from an existing experimental or computationally modeled antigen-antibody structure, RAbD can be used to redesign a single CDR or multiple CDRs with loops of different length, conformation, and sequence. We rigorously benchmarked RAbD on a set of 60 diverse antibody-antigen complexes, using two design strategies - optimizing total Rosetta energy and optimizing interface energy alone. We utilized two novel metrics for measuring success in computational protein design. The design risk ratio (DRR) is equal to the frequency of recovery of native CDR lengths and clusters divided by the frequency of sampling of those features during the Monte Carlo design procedure. Ratios greater than 1.0 indicate that the design process is picking out the native more frequently than expected from their sampled rate. We achieved DRRs for the non-H3 CDRs of between 2.4 and 4.0. The antigen risk ratio (ARR) is the ratio of frequencies of the native amino acid types, CDR lengths, and clusters in the output decoys for simulations performed in the presence and absence of the antigen. For CDRs, we achieved cluster ARRs as high as 2.5 for L1 and 1.5 for H2. For sequence design simulations without CDR grafting, the overall recovery for the native amino acid types for residues that contact the antigen in the native structures was 72% in simulations performed in the presence of the antigen and 48% in simulations performed without the antigen, for an ARR of 1.5. For the non-contacting residues, the ARR was 1.08. This shows that the sequence profiles are able to maintain the amino acid types of these conserved, buried sites, while recovery of the exposed, contacting residues requires the presence of the antigen-antibody interface. We tested RAbD experimentally on both a lambda and kappa antibody-antigen complex, successfully improving their affinities 10 to 50 fold by replacing individual CDRs of the native antibody with new CDR lengths and clusters.\n\nAuthor SummaryAntibodies are proteins produced by the immune system to attack infections and cancer and are also used as drugs to treat cancer and autoimmune diseases. The mechanism that has evolved to produce them is able to make 10s of millions of different antibodies, each with a different surface used to bind the foreign or mutated molecule. We have developed a method to design antibodies computationally, based on the 1000s of experimentally determined three-dimensional structures of antibodies available. The method works by treating pieces of these structures as a collection of parts that can be combined in new ways to make better antibodies. Our method has been implemented in the protein modeling program Rosetta, and is called RosettaAntibodyDesign (RAbD). We tested RAbD both computationally and experimentally. The experimental test shows that we can improve existing antibodies by 10 to 50 fold, paving the way for design of entirely new antibodies in the future.

bioengineering↗

bioRxiv2017

The Rosetta all-atom energy function for macromolecular modeling and design

Over the past decade, the Rosetta biomolecular modeling suite has informed diverse biological questions and engineering challenges ranging from interpretation of low-resolution structural data to design of nanomaterials, protein therapeutics, and vaccines. Central to Rosettas success is the energy function: amodel parameterized from small molecule and X-ray crystal structure data used to approximate the energy associated with each biomolecule conformation. This paper describes the mathematical models and physical concepts that underlie the latest Rosetta energy function, beta_nov15. Applying these concepts,we explain how to use Rosetta energies to identify and analyze the features of biomolecular models.Finally, we discuss the latest advances in the energy function that extend capabilities from soluble proteins to also include membrane proteins, peptides containing non-canonical amino acids, carbohydrates, nucleic acids, and other macromolecules.

biophysics↗