Paper detail

Amino acid composition and thermal stability of protein structures: the free energy geography of the Protein Data Bank

We study the combined influence of amino acid composition and chain length on the thermal stability of protein structures. A new parameterization of the internal free energy is considered, as the sum of hydrophobic effect, hydrogen-bond and de-hydration energy terms. We divided a non-redundant selection of protein structures from the Protein Data Bank into three groups: i) rich in order-promoting residues (OPR proteins); ii) rich in disorder-promoting residues (DPR proteins); iii) belonging to a twilight zone (TZ proteins). We observe a partition of PDB in several groups with different internal free energies, amino acid compositions and protein lengths. Internal free energy of 96% of the proteins analyzed ranges from -2 to -6.5 kJ/mol/res. We found many DPR and OPR proteins with the same relative thermal stability. Only OPR proteins with internal energy between -4 and -6.5 kJ/mol/res are observed to have chains longer than 200 residues, with a high de-hydration energy compensated by the hydrophobic effect. DPR and TZ proteins are shorter than 200 residues and they have an internal energy above -4 kJ/mol/res, with a few exceptions among TZ proteins. Hydrogen-bonds play an important role in the stabilization of these DPR folds, often higher than contact energy. The new parameterization of internal free energy let emerge a geography of thermal stabilities of PDB structures. Amino acid composition per se is not sufficient to determine the stability of protein folds, since. DPR and TZ proteins generally have a relatively high internal free energy, and they are stabilized by hydrogen-bonds. Long DPR proteins are not observed in the PDB, because their low hydrophobicity cannot compensate the high de-hydration energy necessary to accommodate residues within a highly packed globular fold.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.