Advertisement

Conformational Preferences of ππ Stacking Between Ligand and Protein, Analysis Derived from Crystal Structure Data Geometric Preference of ππ Interaction

  • Yuan Zhao
  • Jue Li
  • Hui Gu
  • Dongqing Wei
  • Yao-chang Xu
  • Wei FuEmail author
  • Zhengtian YuEmail author
Original Research Article

Abstract

ππ Interaction is a direct attractive non-covalent interaction between aromatic moieties, playing an important role in DNA stabilization, drug intercalation, etc. Aromatic rings interact through several different conformations including face-to-face, T-shaped, and offset stacked conformation. Previous quantum calculations indicated that T-shaped and offset stacked conformations are preferred for their smaller electron repulsions. However, substitution group on aromatic ring could have a great impact on ππ interaction by changing electron repulsion force between two rings. To investigate ππ interaction between ligand and aromatic side chain of protein, Brookhaven Protein Data Bank was analyzed. We extracted isolated dimer pairs with the aim of excluding multiple ππ stacking effects and found that T-shaped conformation is prevalent among aromatic interaction between phenyl ring of ligand and protein, which corresponds with the phenomenon of Phe–Phe interactions in small peptide. Specifically, for the non-substitution model, both Phe–Phe and Phenyl–Phe exhibit a favored T-shaped conformation whose dihedral angle is around 50°–70° and centroid distance is between 5.0 and 5.6 Å. However, it could be changed by substituent effect. The hydroxyl group could contact in the case of Tyr–Tyr pairs, while they point away from phenyl plane in Phe–Tyr pairs.

Keywords

ππ interaction Multiple ππ interaction Parallel conformation T-shaped conformation Substitution effect Geometric preference 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Dr. En Li of China Novartis for his support and encouragement. Financial support from the Educational Office of Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research is gratefully acknowledged. We also wish to thank Timothy Yu for his re-checking of the data reported in some of the Tables during his internship day at Fudan University.

References

  1. 1.
    Hunter CA, Lawson KR, Perkins J, Urch CJ (2001) Aromatic interactions. J Chem Soc Perkin Trans 2:651–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Saenger W (1984) Principles of nucleic acid structure. Springer, New York, pp 132–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wakelin LPG (1986) Polyfunctional DNA intercalating agents. Med Res Rev 6(3):275–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brana MF, Cacho M, Gradillas A, Pascual-Teresa B, Ramos A (2001) Intercalators as anticancer drugs. Curr Pharm Des 7(17):1745–1780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kryger G, Silman I, Sussman JL (1999) Structure of acetylcholinesterase complexed with E2020 (Aricept): implications for the design of new anti-Alzheimer drugs. Structure 7(3):297–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Desiraju GR, Gavezzotti A (1989) From molecular to crystal structure; polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. J Chem Soc Chem Commun 10:621–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Burley SK, Petsko GA (1988) Weakly polar interactions in proteins. Adv Protein Chem 39:125–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang YZ, Wu AX (2008) ππ interaction in aromatic supramolecular system. Chin J Org Chem 28(6):997–1011Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Waters ML (2002) Aromatic interactions in model systems. Curr Opin Chem Biol 6(6):736–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hunter CA, Sanders JKM (1990) The nature of ππ interactions. J Am Chem Soc 112(14):5525–5534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meyer EA, Castellano RK, Diederich F (2003) Interactions with aromatic rings in chemical and biological recognition. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 42(11):1210–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ye XY, Li ZH, Wang WN, Fan KN, Xu W, Hua ZY (2004) The parallel ππ stacking: a model study with MP2 and DFT methods. Chem Phys Lett 397(1):56–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tsuzuki S, Honda K, Uchimaru T, Mikami M, Tanabe K (2002) Origin of attraction and directionality of the π/π interaction: model chemistry calculations of benzene dimer interaction. J Am Chem Soc 124(1):104–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Boehr DD, Farley AR, Wright GD, Cox JR (2002) Analysis of the ππ stacking interactions between the aminoglycoside antibiotic kinase APH(3′)-IIIa and its nucleotide ligands. Chem Biol 9(11):1209–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wu JI, Puhlhofer FG, Schleyer PV, Puchta R, Kiran B, Mauksch M, Hommes NJRV, Alkorta I, Elguero J (2009) The effect of perfluorination on the aromaticity of benzene and heterocyclic six-membered rings. J Phys Chem A 113(24):6789–6794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rashkin MJ, Waters ML (2002) Unexpected substituent effects in offset ππ stacked interactions in water. J Am Chem Soc 124(9):1860–1861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tsuzuki S, Honda K, Azumi R (2002) Model chemistry calculations of thiophene dimer interactions: origin of π-stacking. J Am Chem Soc 124(41):12200–12209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wheeler SE, Houk KN (2008) Substituent effects in the benzene dimer are due to direct interactions of the substituents with the unsubstituted benzene. J Am Chem Soc 130(33):10854–10855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cockroft SL, Hunter CA (2009) Desolvation and substituent effects in edge-to-face aromatic interactions. Chem Commun 26:3961–3963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hunter CA, Singh J, Thornton JM (1991) ππ interactions: the geometry and energetics of phenylalanine-phenylalanine interactions in proteins. J Mol Biol 218(4):837–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Burley SK, Petsko GA (1985) Aromatic–aromatic interaction: a mechanism of protein-structure stabilization. Science 229(4708):23–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McGaughey GB, Gagne M, Rappe AK (1998) π-stacking interactions. Alive and well in proteins. J Biol Chem 273(25):15458–15463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thomas A, Meurisse R, Brasseur R (2002) Aromatic side-chain interactions in proteins II. Near- and far-sequence Phe-X pairs. Proteins Struct Funct Genet 48(4):635–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hendlich M, Bergner A, Gunther J, Klebe G (2003) Relibase: design and development of a database for comprehensive analysis of protein-ligand interactions. J Mol Biol 326(2):607–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gunther J, Bergner A, Hendlich M, Klebe G (2003) Utilising structural knowledge in drug design strategies: applications using relibase. J Mol Biol 326(2):621–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bergner A, Gunther J, Endlich M, Lebe G, Erdonk M (2001) Use of Relibase for retrieving complex three-dimensional interaction patterns including crystallographic packing effects. Biopolymers 61(2):99–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Arunan E, Gutowsky HS (1993) The rotational spectrum, structure and dynamics of a benzene dimer. J Chem Phys 98(5):4294–4296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Meurisse R, Brasseur R, Thomas A (2003) Aromatic side-chain interactions in proteins. Near- and far-sequence His-X pairs. Biochim Biophys Acta 1649(1):85–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dahl T (1994) The nature of stacking interactions between organic molecules elucidated by analysis of crystal structures. Acta Chem Scand 48:95–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tauer TP, Sherrill CD (2005) Beyond the benzene dimer: an investigation of the additivity of ππ interactions. J Phys Chem A 109(46):10475–10478CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association of Scientists in the Interdisciplinary Areas and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ChemistryChina Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research Co. Ltd.ShanghaiChina
  2. 2.College of Life Science and Biotechnology and State Key Laboratory of Microbial MetabolismShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina
  3. 3.Department of Medicinal Chemistry, School of PharmacyFudan UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations