HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: ps.073071808v1 17/1/79    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kamal, J.K. A. Articles by Chance, M. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kamal, J.K. A. Articles by Chance, M. R. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Modeling of protein binary complexes using structural mass spectrometry data

Center for Proteomics and Mass spectrometry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, USA

(RECEIVED June 13, 2007; FINAL REVISION September 29, 2007; ACCEPTED October 1, 2007)

In this article, we describe a general approach to modeling the structure of binary protein complexes using structural mass spectrometry data combined molecular docking. In the first step, hydroxyl radical mediated oxidative protein footprinting is used to identify residues that experience conformational reorganization due to binding or participate in the binding interface. In the second step, a three-dimensional atomic structure of the complex is derived by computational modeling. Homology modeling approaches are used to define the structures of the individual proteins if footprinting detects significant conformational reorganization as a function of complex formation. A three-dimensional model of the complex is constructed from these binary partners using the ClusPro program, which is composed of docking, energy filtering, and clustering steps. Footprinting data are used to incorporate constraints—positive and/or negative—in the docking step and are also used to decide the type of energy filter—electrostatics or desolvation—in the successive energy-filtering step. By using this approach, we examine the structure of a number of binary complexes of monomeric actin and compare the results to crystallographic data. Based on docking alone, a number of competing models with widely varying structures are observed, one of which is likely to agree with crystallographic data. When the docking steps are guided by footprinting data, accurate models emerge as top scoring. We demonstrate this method with the actin/gelsolin segment-1 complex. We also provide a structural model for the actin/cofilin complex using this approach which does not have a crystal or NMR structure.

Keywords: radiolytic footprinting; hydroxyl radical mediated oxidation; mass spectrometry; protein–protein complex; three-dimensional structure; docking; ClusPro; footprinting constraints; actin/gelsolin segment-1; actin/cofilin

Abbreviations: ABP, actin binding protein; RMSD, root mean square deviation; GS1, gelsolin segment-1 or gelsolin S1; FICS, footprinting interface consistency score; SASA, solvent accessible surface area.

Article published online ahead of print. Article and publication date are at http://www.proteinscience.org/cgi/doi/10.1110/ps.073071808.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?