J. Martin Scholtz

A Helix Propensity Scale Based on Experimental Studies of Peptides and Proteins

The average globular protein contains 30% alpha-helix, the most common type of secondary structure. Some amino acids occur more frequently in alpha-helices than others; this tendency is known as helix propensity. Here we derive a helix propensity scale for solvent-exposed residues in the middle positions of alpha-helices. The scale is based on measurements of helix propensity in 11 systems, including both proteins and peptides. Alanine has the highest helix propensity, and, excluding proline, glycine has the lowest, approximately 1 kcal/mol less favorable than alanine. Based on our analysis, the helix propensities of the amino acids are as follows (kcal/mol): Ala = 0, Leu = 0.21, Arg = 0.21, Met = 0.24, Lys = 0.26, Gln = 0.39, Glu = 0.40, Ile = 0.41, Trp = 0.49, Ser = 0.50, Tyr = 0. 53, Phe = 0.54, Val = 0.61, His = 0.61, Asn = 0.65, Thr = 0.66, Cys = 0.68, Asp = 0.69, and Gly = 1.

Protein ionizable groups: pK values and their contribution to protein stability and solubility.

The structure, stability, solubility, and function of proteins depend on their net charge and on the ionization state of the individual residues. Consequently, biochemists are interested in the pK values of the ionizable groups in proteins and how these pK values depend on their environment. We review what has been learned about pK values of ionizable groups in proteins from experimental studies and discuss the important contributions they make to protein stability and solubility.

A summary of the measured pK values of the ionizable groups in folded proteins

We tabulated 541 measured pK values reported in the literature for the Asp, Glu, His, Cys, Tyr, and Lys side chains, and the C and N termini of 78 folded proteins. The majority of these values are for the Asp, Glu, and His side chains. The average pK values are Asp 3.5 ± 1.2 (139); Glu 4.2 ± 0.9 (153); His 6.6 ± 1.0 (131); Cys 6.8 ± 2.7 (25); Tyr 10.3 ± 1.2 (20); Lys 10.5 ± 1.1 (35); C‐terminus 3.3 ± 0.8 (22) and N‐terminus 7.7 ± 0.5 (16). We compare these results with the measured pK values of these groups in alanine pentapeptides, and comment on our overall findings.

Lessons in stability from thermophilic proteins

Studies that compare proteins from thermophilic and mesophilic organisms can provide insights into ability of thermophiles to function at their high habitat temperatures and may provide clues that enable us to better define the forces that stabilize all proteins. Most of the comparative studies have focused on thermal stability and show, as expected, that thermophilic proteins have higher Tm values than their mesophilic counterparts. Although these comparisons are useful, more detailed thermodynamic analyses are required to reach a more complete understanding of the mechanisms thermophilic protein employ to remain folded over a wider range of temperatures. This complete thermodynamic description allows one to generate a stability curve for a protein that defines how the conformational stability (ΔG) varies with temperature. Here we compare stability curves for many pairs of homologous proteins from thermophilic and mesophilc organisms. Of the basic methods that can be employed to achieve enhanced thermostability, we find that most thermophilic proteins use the simple method that raises the ΔG at all temperatures as the principal way to increase their Tm. We discuss and compare this thermodynamic method with the possible alternatives. In addition we propose ways that structural alterations and changes to the amino acid sequences might give rise to varied methods used to obtain thermostability.

pK values of the ionizable groups of proteins

We have used potentiometric titrations to measure the pK values of the ionizable groups of proteins in alanine pentapeptides with appropriately blocked termini. These pentapeptides provide an improved model for the pK values of the ionizable groups in proteins. Our pK values determined in 0.1 M KCl at 25°C are: 3.67±0.03 (α‐carboxyl), 3.67±0.04 (Asp), 4.25±0.05 (Glu), 6.54±0.04 (His), 8.00±0.03 (α‐amino), 8.55±0.03 (Cys), 9.84±0.11 (Tyr), and 10.40±0.08 (Lys). The pK values of some groups differ from the Nozaki and Tanford (N&T) pK values often used in the literature: Asp (3.67 this work vs. 4.0 N&T); His (6.54 this work vs. 6.3 N&T); α‐amino (8.00 this work vs. 7.5 N&T); Cys (8.55 this work vs. 9.5 N&T); and Tyr (9.84 this work vs. 9.6 N&T). Our pK values will be useful to those who study pK perturbations in folded and unfolded proteins, and to those who use theory to gain a better understanding of the factors that determine the pK values of the ionizable groups of proteins.

The role of protein stability, solubility, and net charge in amyloid fibril formation.

Ribonuclease Sa and two charge‐reversal variants can be converted into amyloid in vitro by the addition of 2,2,2‐triflouroethanol (TFE). We report here amyloid fibril formation for these proteins as a function of pH. The pH at maximal fibril formation correlates with the pH dependence of protein solubility, but not with stability, for these variants. Additionally, we show that the pH at maximal fibril formation for a number of well‐characterized proteins is near the pI, where the protein is expected to be the least soluble. This suggests that protein solubility is an important determinant of fibril formation.

Contribution of hydrophobic interactions to protein stability.

Our goal was to gain a better understanding of the contribution of hydrophobic interactions to protein stability. We measured the change in conformational stability, Δ(ΔG), for hydrophobic mutants of four proteins: villin headpiece subdomain (VHP) with 36 residues, a surface protein from Borrelia burgdorferi (VlsE) with 341 residues, and two proteins previously studied in our laboratory, ribonucleases Sa and T1. We compared our results with those of previous studies and reached the following conclusions: (1) Hydrophobic interactions contribute less to the stability of a small protein, VHP (0.6±0.3 kcal/mol per -CH(2)- group), than to the stability of a large protein, VlsE (1.6±0.3 kcal/mol per -CH(2)- group). (2) Hydrophobic interactions make the major contribution to the stability of VHP (40 kcal/mol) and the major contributors are (in kilocalories per mole) Phe18 (3.9), Met13 (3.1), Phe7 (2.9), Phe11 (2.7), and Leu21 (2.7). (3) Based on the Δ(ΔG) values for 148 hydrophobic mutants in 13 proteins, burying a -CH(2)- group on folding contributes, on average, 1.1±0.5 kcal/mol to protein stability. (4) The experimental Δ(ΔG) values for aliphatic side chains (Ala, Val, Ile, and Leu) are in good agreement with their ΔG(tr) values from water to cyclohexane. (5) For 22 proteins with 36 to 534 residues, hydrophobic interactions contribute 60±4% and hydrogen bonds contribute 40±4% to protein stability. (6) Conformational entropy contributes about 2.4 kcal/mol per residue to protein instability. The globular conformation of proteins is stabilized predominantly by hydrophobic interactions.

Charge-charge interactions are key determinants of the pK values of ionizable groups in ribonuclease Sa (pI = 3.5) and a basic variant (pI = 10.2)

The pK values of the titratable groups in ribonuclease Sa (RNase Sa) (pI=3.5), and a charge-reversed variant with five carboxyl to lysine substitutions, 5K RNase Sa (pI=10.2), have been determined by NMR at 20 degrees C in 0.1M NaCl. In RNase Sa, 18 pK values and in 5K, 11 pK values were measured. The carboxyl group of Asp33, which is buried and forms three intramolecular hydrogen bonds in RNase Sa, has the lowest pK (2.4), whereas Asp79, which is also buried but does not form hydrogen bonds, has the most elevated pK (7.4). These results highlight the importance of desolvation and charge-dipole interactions in perturbing pK values of buried groups. Alkaline titration revealed that the terminal amine of RNase Sa and all eight tyrosine residues have significantly increased pK values relative to model compounds.A primary objective in this study was to investigate the influence of charge-charge interactions on the pK values by comparing results from RNase Sa with those from the 5K variant. The solution structures of the two proteins are very similar as revealed by NMR and other spectroscopic data, with only small changes at the N terminus and in the alpha-helix. Consequently, the ionizable groups will have similar environments in the two variants and desolvation and charge-dipole interactions will have comparable effects on the pK values of both. Their pK differences, therefore, are expected to be chiefly due to the different charge-charge interactions. As anticipated from its higher net charge, all measured pK values in 5K RNase are lowered relative to wild-type RNase Sa, with the largest decrease being 2.2 pH units for Glu14. The pK differences (pK(Sa)-pK(5K)) calculated using a simple model based on Coulombs Law and a dielectric constant of 45 agree well with the experimental values. This demonstrates that the pK differences between wild-type and 5K RNase Sa are mainly due to changes in the electrostatic interactions between the ionizable groups. pK values calculated using Coulombs Law also showed a good correlation (R=0.83) with experimental values. The more complex model based on a finite-difference solution to the Poisson-Boltzmann equation, which considers desolvation and charge-dipole interactions in addition to charge-charge interactions, was also used to calculate pK values. Surprisingly, these values are more poorly correlated (R=0.65) with the values from experiment. Taken together, the results are evidence that charge-charge interactions are the chief perturbant of the pK values of ionizable groups on the protein surface, which is where the majority of the ionizable groups are positioned in proteins.

Forces stabilizing proteins.

The goal of this article is to summarize what has been learned about the major forces stabilizing proteins since the late 1980s when site‐directed mutagenesis became possible. The following conclusions are derived from experimental studies of hydrophobic and hydrogen bonding variants. (1) Based on studies of 138 hydrophobic interaction variants in 11 proteins, burying a –CH2− group on folding contributes 1.1 ± 0.5 kcal/mol to protein stability. (2) The burial of non‐polar side chains contributes to protein stability in two ways: first, a term that depends on the removal of the side chains from water and, more importantly, the enhanced London dispersion forces that result from the tight packing in the protein interior. (3) Based on studies of 151 hydrogen bonding variants in 15 proteins, forming a hydrogen bond on folding contributes 1.1 ± 0.8 kcal/mol to protein stability. (4) The contribution of hydrogen bonds to protein stability is strongly context dependent. (5) Hydrogen bonds by side chains and peptide groups make similar contributions to protein stability. (6) Polar group burial can make a favorable contribution to protein stability even if the polar group is not hydrogen bonded. (7) Hydrophobic interactions and hydrogen bonds both make large contributions to protein stability.

Measuring and Increasing Protein Solubility

High concentration protein delivery is difficult to achieve for several protein pharmaceuticals due to low solubility. In this review, we discuss different types of low protein solubility, including low in vitro solubility, which is relevant to the formulation of protein pharmaceuticals. We also discuss different methods of measuring protein solubility with an emphasis on the method of inducing amorphous precipitation using ammonium sulfate. Finally, we discuss strategies for increasing protein solubility, including site-directed mutagenesis. Evidence from solubility-changing mutations in the literature indicate that some hydrophilic residues (aspartic acid, glutamic acid, and serine) contribute significantly more favorably to protein solubility than other hydrophilic residues (asparagine, glutamine, threonine, lysine, and arginine). These findings should prove useful especially in cases where protein structure is not known. In these cases, instead of targeting hydrophobic residues that are often buried, one could target hydrophilic residues that do not contribute favorably to protein solubility and replace them with hydrophilic residues that contribute more favorably.