Structure dictates the mechanism of ligand recognition in the histidine and maltose binding proteins

• Main Authors: Lakshmi P. Jayanthi, Nahren Manuel Mascarenhas, Shachi Gosavi
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier 2020-01-01
• Series: Current Research in Structural Biology
• Subjects: Conformational selection; Induced fit; Periplasmic binding proteins; Structural restraints; Dual structure based models; MD simulations
• Online Access: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665928X20300155

Two mechanisms, induced fit (IF) and conformational selection (CS), have been proposed to explain ligand recognition coupled conformational changes. The histidine binding protein (HisJ) adopts the CS mechanism, in which a pre-equilibrium is established between the open and the closed states with the ligand binding to the closed state. Despite being structurally similar to HisJ, the maltose binding protein (MBP) adopts the IF mechanism, in which the ligand binds the open state and induces a transition to the closed state. To understand the molecular determinants of this difference, we performed molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of coarse-grained dual structure based models. We find that intra-protein contacts unique to the closed state are sufficient to promote the conformational transition in HisJ, indicating a CS-like mechanism. In contrast, additional ligand-mimicking contacts are required to “induce” the conformational transition in MBP suggesting an IF-like mechanism. In agreement with experiments, destabilizing modifications to two structural features, the spine helix (SH) and the balancing interface (BI), present in MBP but absent in HisJ, reduce the need for ligand-mimicking contacts indicating that SH and BI act as structural restraints that keep MBP in the open state. We introduce an SH like element into HisJ and observe that this can impede the conformational transition increasing the importance of ligand-mimicking contacts. Similarly, simultaneous mutations to BI and SH in MBP reduce the barrier to conformational transitions significantly and promote a CS-like mechanism. Together, our results show that structural restraints present in the protein structure can determine the mechanism of conformational transitions and even simple models that correctly capture such structural features can predict their positions. MD simulations of such models can thus be used, in conjunction with mutational experiments, to regulate protein ligand interactions, and modulate ligand binding affinities.