Mass & secondary structure propensity of amino acids explain their mutability and evolutionary replacements

Abstract Why is an amino acid replacement in a protein accepted during evolution? The answer given by bioinformatics relies on the frequency of change of each amino acid by another one and the propensity of each to remain unchanged. We propose that these replacement rules are recoverable from the se...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hugo J. Bohórquez, Carlos F. Suárez, Manuel E. Patarroyo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Publishing Group 2017-08-01
Series:Scientific Reports
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08041-7
id doaj-cb76b1d6138444888f1136d1f6f0f2f2
record_format Article
spelling doaj-cb76b1d6138444888f1136d1f6f0f2f22020-12-08T02:57:43ZengNature Publishing GroupScientific Reports2045-23222017-08-017111210.1038/s41598-017-08041-7Mass & secondary structure propensity of amino acids explain their mutability and evolutionary replacementsHugo J. Bohórquez0Carlos F. Suárez1Manuel E. Patarroyo2Bio-mathematics, Fundación Instituto de Inmunología de Colombia, FIDICBio-mathematics, Fundación Instituto de Inmunología de Colombia, FIDICBio-mathematics, Fundación Instituto de Inmunología de Colombia, FIDICAbstract Why is an amino acid replacement in a protein accepted during evolution? The answer given by bioinformatics relies on the frequency of change of each amino acid by another one and the propensity of each to remain unchanged. We propose that these replacement rules are recoverable from the secondary structural trends of amino acids. A distance measure between high-resolution Ramachandran distributions reveals that structurally similar residues coincide with those found in substitution matrices such as BLOSUM: Asn ↔ Asp, Phe ↔ Tyr, Lys ↔ Arg, Gln ↔ Glu, Ile ↔ Val, Met → Leu; with Ala, Cys, His, Gly, Ser, Pro, and Thr, as structurally idiosyncratic residues. We also found a high average correlation ($$\overline{R}$$ R¯  = 0.85) between thirty amino acid mutability scales and the mutational inertia (I X ), which measures the energetic cost weighted by the number of observations at the most probable amino acid conformation. These results indicate that amino acid substitutions follow two optimally-efficient principles: (a) amino acids interchangeability privileges their secondary structural similarity, and (b) the amino acid mutability depends directly on its biosynthetic energy cost, and inversely with its frequency. These two principles are the underlying rules governing the observed amino acid substitutions.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08041-7
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Hugo J. Bohórquez
Carlos F. Suárez
Manuel E. Patarroyo
spellingShingle Hugo J. Bohórquez
Carlos F. Suárez
Manuel E. Patarroyo
Mass & secondary structure propensity of amino acids explain their mutability and evolutionary replacements
Scientific Reports
author_facet Hugo J. Bohórquez
Carlos F. Suárez
Manuel E. Patarroyo
author_sort Hugo J. Bohórquez
title Mass & secondary structure propensity of amino acids explain their mutability and evolutionary replacements
title_short Mass & secondary structure propensity of amino acids explain their mutability and evolutionary replacements
title_full Mass & secondary structure propensity of amino acids explain their mutability and evolutionary replacements
title_fullStr Mass & secondary structure propensity of amino acids explain their mutability and evolutionary replacements
title_full_unstemmed Mass & secondary structure propensity of amino acids explain their mutability and evolutionary replacements
title_sort mass & secondary structure propensity of amino acids explain their mutability and evolutionary replacements
publisher Nature Publishing Group
series Scientific Reports
issn 2045-2322
publishDate 2017-08-01
description Abstract Why is an amino acid replacement in a protein accepted during evolution? The answer given by bioinformatics relies on the frequency of change of each amino acid by another one and the propensity of each to remain unchanged. We propose that these replacement rules are recoverable from the secondary structural trends of amino acids. A distance measure between high-resolution Ramachandran distributions reveals that structurally similar residues coincide with those found in substitution matrices such as BLOSUM: Asn ↔ Asp, Phe ↔ Tyr, Lys ↔ Arg, Gln ↔ Glu, Ile ↔ Val, Met → Leu; with Ala, Cys, His, Gly, Ser, Pro, and Thr, as structurally idiosyncratic residues. We also found a high average correlation ($$\overline{R}$$ R¯  = 0.85) between thirty amino acid mutability scales and the mutational inertia (I X ), which measures the energetic cost weighted by the number of observations at the most probable amino acid conformation. These results indicate that amino acid substitutions follow two optimally-efficient principles: (a) amino acids interchangeability privileges their secondary structural similarity, and (b) the amino acid mutability depends directly on its biosynthetic energy cost, and inversely with its frequency. These two principles are the underlying rules governing the observed amino acid substitutions.
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08041-7
work_keys_str_mv AT hugojbohorquez masssecondarystructurepropensityofaminoacidsexplaintheirmutabilityandevolutionaryreplacements
AT carlosfsuarez masssecondarystructurepropensityofaminoacidsexplaintheirmutabilityandevolutionaryreplacements
AT manuelepatarroyo masssecondarystructurepropensityofaminoacidsexplaintheirmutabilityandevolutionaryreplacements
_version_ 1724393138023301120