Advertisement

In Silico Characterization and Analysis of RTBP1 and NgTRF1 Protein Through MD Simulation and Molecular Docking: A Comparative Study

  • Koel Mukherjee
  • Dev Mani PandeyEmail author
  • Ambarish Saran Vidyarthi
Original Research Article
  • 360 Downloads

Abstract

Gaining access to sequence and structure information of telomere-binding proteins helps in understanding the essential biological processes involve in conserved sequence-specific interaction between DNA and the proteins. Rice telomere-binding protein (RTBP1) and Nicotiana glutinosa telomere repeat binding factor (NgTRF1) are helix–turn–helix motif type of proteins that plays role in telomeric DNA protection and length regulation. Both the proteins share same type of domain, but till now there is very less communication on the in silico studies of these complete proteins. Here we intend to do a comparative study between two proteins through modeling of the complete proteins, physiochemical characterization, MD simulation and DNA-protein docking. I-TASSER and CLC protein work bench was performed to find out the protein 3D structure as well as the different parameters to characterize the proteins. MD simulation was completed by GROMOS forcefield of GROMACS for 10 ns of time stretch. The simulated 3D structures were docked with template DNA (3D DNA modeled through 3D-DART) of TTTAGGG conserved sequence motif using HADDOCK Web server. By digging up all the facts about the proteins, it was revealed that around 120 amino acids in the tail part were showing a good sequence similarity between the proteins. Molecular modeling, sequence characterization and secondary structure prediction also indicate the similarity between the protein’s structure and sequence. The result of MD simulation highlights on the RMSD, RMSF, Rg, PCA and energy plots which also conveys the similar type of motional behavior between them. The best complex formation for both the proteins in docking result also indicates for the first interaction site which is mainly the helix3 region of the DNA-binding domain. The overall computational analysis reveals that RTBP1 and NgTRF1 proteins display good amount of similarity in their physicochemical properties, structure, dynamics and binding mode.

Keywords

Telomere-binding protein HTH motif I-TASSER GROMACS DNA-protein docking 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge TEQIP-II, Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi, Jharkhand, for providing all the facilities to carry out this work. DBT, New Delhi, India, is greatly acknowledged for providing Bioinformatics Facility at our Institute.

References

  1. 1.
    Broccoli D (2004) Function, replication and structure of the mammalian telomere. Cytotechnology 45:3–12. doi: 10.1007/s10616-004-5120-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Julianne M, Robert LR, Robert KM (1989) Conservation of the human telomere sequence (TTAGGG)n among vertebrates. PNAS 86:7049–7053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Greider CW, Blackburn EH (1985) Identification of a specific telomere terminal transferase activity in tetrahymena extracts. Cell 43:405–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Herbig U, Jobling WA, Chen BP, Chen DJ, Sedivy JM (2004) Telomere shortening triggers senescence of human cells through a pathway involving ATM, p53, and p21 (CIP1), but not p16(INK4a). Mol Cell 14:501–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van Steensel B, Smogorzewska A, de Lange T (1998) TRF2 protects human telomeres from end-to-end fusions. Cell 92:401–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zentgraf U, Hinderhofer K, Kolb D (2000) Specific association of a small protein with the telomeric DNA-protein complex during the onset of leaf senescence in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Mol Biol 42(3):429–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Patikoglou G, Burley SK (1997) Eukaryotic transcription factor-DNA complexes. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 26:289–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huang H, Tudor M, Su T, Zhang Y, Hu Y, Ma H (1996) DNA binding properties of two Arabidopsis MADS domain proteins: binding consensus and dimer formation. Plant Cell 8:81–94PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kosugi S, Ohashi Y (1997) PCF1 and PCF2 specifically bind to cis elements in the rice proliferating cell nuclear antigen gene. Plant Cell 9:1607–1619PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nugent CI, Hughes TR, Lue NF, Lundblad V (1996) Cdc13p: a single-strand telomeric DNA-binding protein with a dual role in yeast telomere maintenance. Science 274:249–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baumann P, Cech TR (2001) the putative telomere end-binding protein in fission yeast and humans. Science 292:1171–1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shakirov EV, Surovtseva YV, Osbun N, Shippen DE (2005) The Arabidopsis Pot1 and Pot2 proteins function in telomere length homeostasis and chromosome end protection. Mol Cell Biol 25:7725–7733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kwon C, Chung IK (2004) Interaction of an Arabidopsis RNA-binding protein with plant single-stranded telomeric DNA modulates telomerase activity. J Biol Chem 279:12812–12818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yoo HH, Kwon C, Lee MM, Chung IK (2007) Single stranded DNA binding factor AtWHY1 modulates telomere length homeostasis in Arabidopsis. Plant J 49:442–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chen CM, Wang CT, Ho CH (2001) A plant gene encoding a Myb-like protein that binds telomeric GGTTAG repeats in vitro. J Biol Chem 276:16511–16519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hwang MG, Chung IK, Kang BG, Cho MH (2001) Sequence-specific binding property of Arabidopsis thaliana telomeric DNA binding protein 1 (AtTBP1). FEBS Lett 503:35–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ko S, Jun SH, Bae H, Byun JS, Han W, Park H, Yang SW, Park SY, Jeon YH, Cheong C (2008) Structure of the DNA-binding domain of NgTRF1 reveals unique features of plant telomere-binding proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 36:2739–2755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ko S, Yu EY, Shin J, Yoo HH, Tanaka T, Kim WT, Cho HS, Lee W, Chung IK (2009) Solution structure of the DNA binding domain of rice telomere binding protein RTBP1. Biochemistry 48:827–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hanoka S, Nagadoi A, Nishimura Y (2005) Comparison between TRF2 and TRF1 of their telomeric DNA-bound structures and DNA-binding activities. Protein Sci 14:119–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ogata K, Morikawa S, Nakamura H, Srkikawa A, Inoue T, Kanai H, Sarai A, Ishii S, Nishimura Y et al (1994) Solution structure of a specific DNA complex of the Myb DNA-binding domain with cooperative recognition helices. Cell 79:639–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brennan GR, Matthews WB (1982) The helix turn helix DNA binding domain. J Biol Chem 264:1903–1906Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Otting G, Qian YQ, Billeter M, Muller M, Affolter M, Gehring WJ, Wuthrich K (1990) Protein-DNA contacts in the structure of a homeodomain-DNA complex determined by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy in solution. EMBO J 9:3085–3092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bachmair A, Finley D, Varshavsky A (1986) In vivo half life of a protein is a function of its amino-terminal residue. Science 234:179–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Guruprasad K, Reddy BVB, Pandit MW (1990) Correlation between stability of a protein and its dipeptide composition: a novel approach for predicting in vivo stability of a protein from its primary sequence. Protein Eng. 4:155–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ikai A (1980) Thermostability and aliphatic index of globular proteins. J Biochem 88:1895–1898PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Geourjon C, Deleage G (1995) SOPMA: significant improvements in protein secondary structure prediction by consensus prediction from multiple alignments. Comput Appl Biosci 11:681–684PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Roy A, Kucukural A, Zhang Y (2010) I-TASSER: a unified platform for automated protein structure and function prediction. Nat Protoc 5:725–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhang Y (2007) Template based modeling and free modeling by ITASSER in CASP7. Proteins 8:108–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zhang Y (2008) I-TASSER server for protein 3D structure prediction. BMC Bioinform 9:40. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-9-40 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wu S, Zhang Y (2007) LOMETS: a local meta-threading-server for protein structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res 35:3375–3382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vriend G (1990) WHAT IF: a molecular modeling and drug design program. J Mol Graph 8:52–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Eisenberg D, Luthy R, Bowie JU (1997) VERIFY3D: assessment of protein models with three-dimensional profiles. Methods Enzymol 277:396–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lindahl E, Hess B, Van der Spoel D (2001) GROMACS, 3.0; a package for molecular simulation and trajectory analysis. J Mol Model 7:306–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hess B, Bekker H, Beredsen HJC, Fraaiji J (1997) LINCS: a linear constraint solver for molecular simulations. J Comput Chem 18:1463–1472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Essman U, Perela L, Berkowitz ML, Darden HL, Pedersen LG (1995) A smooth particle mesh Ewald method. J Chem Phys 103:8577–8593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Van Dijk M, Bonvin AJJ (2009) 3D-DART: a DNA structure modelling server. Nucl Acids Res (Web Server Issue) 37:W235–W239. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkp287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    de Vries SJ, van Dijk M, Bonvin AJJ (2010) The HADDOCK web server fordata-driven biomolecular docking. Nat Protoc 5:883–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mukherjee K, Kumar A, Pandey DM, Vidyarthi A (2011) Study of rice telomere binding protein1 (RTBP1): an in silico approach. Int J Pharm Sci Rev Res 10(1):193–197Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Walker JM (2005) The proteomics protocols handbook, Chap. 52. Humana Press, CliftonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pandey DM, Kumar A (2013) 3D structure prediction and protein-DNA interaction of CCCH-type zinc finger transcription factor gene in Rice (Oryza sativa L.). Int J Comput Bioinform In Silico Model 2(2):94–103Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Laskowski RA et al (1993) PROCHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures. J Appl Crystallogr 26:283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mukherjee K, Pandey DM, Vidyarthi A (2012) Molecular dynamics simulation of Rap1 Myb-type domain in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Bioinformation 8(18):881–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mukherjee K, Pandey DM, Vidyarthi A (2014) 3D structure modeling of human telomere repeat binding factor 2 and DNA-protein docking studies. Br Biotechnol J 4(1):81–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Roberts VA, Pique ME, Ten Eyck LF, Li S (2013) Predicting protein-DNA interactions by full search computational docking. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinform 81(12):2106–2118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nadassy K, Wodak SJ, Janin J (1999) Structural features of protein–nucleic acid recognition sites. Biochemistry 38:1999–2017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Xiong Y, Sundaralingam M (2013) Protein–nucleic acid interaction: major groove recognition determinants. Encyclopedia of life sciences. Macmillan Publishers Ltd, Nature Publishing Group. www.els.net

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Koel Mukherjee
    • 1
  • Dev Mani Pandey
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ambarish Saran Vidyarthi
    • 2
  1. 1.Bioinformatics Laboratory, Department of Bio-EngineeringBirla Institute of Technology, MesraRanchiIndia
  2. 2.Department of BiotechnologyBirla Institute of Technology, PatnaRanchiIndia

Personalised recommendations