Section: Research Program
Modeling interfaces and contacts
Keywords: Docking, interfaces, protein complexes, structural alphabets, scoring functions, Voronoi diagrams, arrangements of balls.
The Protein Data Bank, http://www.rcsb.org/pdb, contains the structural data which have been resolved experimentally. Most of the entries of the PDB feature isolated proteins (For structures resolved by crystallography, the PDB contains the asymmetric unit of the crystal. Determining the biological unit from the asymmetric unit is a problem in itself.), the remaining ones being protein - protein or protein - drug complexes. These structures feature what Nature does – up to the bias imposed by the experimental conditions inherent to structure elucidation, and are of special interest to investigate non-covalent contacts in biological complexes. More precisely, given two proteins defining a complex, interface atoms are defined as the atoms of one protein interacting with atoms of the second one. Understanding the structure of interfaces is central to understand biological complexes and thus the function of biological molecules [52]. Yet, in spite of almost three decades of investigations, the basic principles guiding the formation of interfaces and accounting for its stability are unknown [55]. Current investigations follow two routes. From the experimental perspective [37], directed mutagenesis enables one to quantify the energetic importance of residues, important residues being termed hot residues. Such studies recently evidenced the modular architecture of interfaces [49]. From the modeling perspective, the main issue consists of guessing the hot residues from sequence and/or structural informations [44].
The description of interfaces is also of special interest to improve
scoring functions. By scoring function, two things are meant:
either a function which assigns to a complex a quantity homogeneous to
a free energy change (The Gibbs free energy of a system is
defined by
Describing interfaces poses problems in two settings: static and dynamic.
In the static setting, one seeks the minimalist geometric model
providing a relevant bio-physical signal. A first step in doing so
consists of identifying interface atoms, so as to relate the geometry and
the bio-chemistry at the interface level [12].
To elaborate at the atomic level, one seeks a structural alphabet
encoding the spatial structure of proteins. At the side-chain and
backbone level, an example of such alphabet is that of
[32]. At the atomic level and in spite of recent
observations on the local structure of the neighborhood of a given
atom [54], no such alphabet is known. Specific
important local conformations are known, though. One of them is the
so-called dehydron structure, which is an under-desolvated hydrogen
bond – a property that can be directly inferred from the spatial
configuration of the
In the dynamic setting, one wishes to understand whether selected (hot) residues exhibit specific dynamic properties, so as to serve as anchors in a binding process [48]. More generally, any significant observation raised in the static setting deserves investigations in the dynamic setting, so as to assess its stability. Such questions are also related to the problem of correlated motions, which we discuss next.