Katie A. Wilson

DNA–protein π-interactions in nature: abundance, structure, composition and strength of contacts between aromatic amino acids and DNA nucleobases or deoxyribose sugar

Four hundred twenty-eight high-resolution DNA–protein complexes were chosen for a bioinformatics study. Although 164 crystal structures (38% of those searched) contained no interactions, 574 discrete π–contacts between the aromatic amino acids and the DNA nucleobases or deoxyribose were identified using strict criteria, including visual inspection. The abundance and structure of the interactions were determined by unequivocally classifying the contacts as either π–π stacking, π–π T-shaped or sugar–π contacts. Three hundred forty-four nucleobase–amino acid π–π contacts (60% of all interactions identified) were identified in 175 of the crystal structures searched. Unprecedented in the literature, 230 DNA–protein sugar–π contacts (40% of all interactions identified) were identified in 137 crystal structures, which involve C–H···π and/or lone–pair···π interactions, contain any amino acid and can be classified according to sugar atoms involved. Both π–π and sugar–π interactions display a range of relative monomer orientations and therefore interaction energies (up to –50 (–70) kJ mol−1 for neutral (charged) interactions as determined using quantum chemical calculations). In general, DNA–protein π-interactions are more prevalent than perhaps currently accepted and the role of such interactions in many biological processes may yet to be uncovered.

Serine and Cysteine π-Interactions in Nature: A Comparison of the Frequency, Structure, and Stability of Contacts Involving Oxygen and Sulfur

Despite many DNA–protein π-interactions in high-resolution crystal structures, only four X–H···π or X···π interactions were found between serine (Ser) or cysteine (Cys) and DNA nucleobase π-systems in over 100 DNA–protein complexes (where X = O for Ser and X = S for Cys). Nevertheless, 126 non-covalent contacts occur between Ser or Cys and the aromatic amino acids in many binding arrangements within proteins. Furthermore, Ser and Cys protein–protein π-interactions occur with similar frequencies and strengths. Most importantly, due to the great stability that can be provided to biological macromolecules (up to –20 kJ mol–1 for neutral π-systems or –40 kJ mol–1 for cationic π-systems), Ser and Cys π-interactions should be considered when analyzing protein stability and function.

An ONIOM and MD Investigation of Possible Monofunctional Activity of Human 8-Oxoguanine–DNA Glycosylase (hOgg1)

Since the formation of 8-oxoguanine (OG) is one of the most common DNA-damaging events, cells have evolved efficient repair processes to avoid the mutagenic effects associated with this lesion, including base excision repair (BER) initiated by hOgg1. In the present work, three distinct mechanisms for deglycosylation catalyzed by hOgg1 that represent monofunctional activity were characterized using a combination of molecular dynamics (MD) simulations on the full DNA-enzyme complex and ONIOM calculations on a truncated DNA-protein model. The initial lysine activation step common to all pathways involves proton transfer from (cationic) K249 to (anionic) C253 and subsequent active-site rearrangement to align key amino acids and/or water for the next reaction step. In the first mechanism, K249 initiates deglycosylation as the nucleophile and the resulting DNA-protein cross-link is hydrolyzed to generate an abasic site. In the remaining two mechanisms, an active-site water molecule is the nucleophile, which is activated by either K249 or D268. These latter mechanisms are supported by MD simulations that reveal an abundance of water in the active site that could function as the nucleophile. Our ONIOM model suggests that the most likely mechanism involves water nucleophile activation by K249, which allows the active-site aspartate (D268) to electrostatically stabilize the charge buildup on the sugar residue throughout the entire reaction pathway. This newly conjectured mechanism is consistent with the proposed activity of other monofunctional glycosylases. In addition to providing the first atomic level evidence for a monofunctional hOgg1 catalytic pathway, the mechanistic details revealed in the present work can be used to direct future large-scale reaction modeling on the entire DNA-protein complex, which can be coupled with experimental kinetic data to afford a reliable comparison of the potential mono- and bifunctional activity of this crucial enzyme.

Complex Conformational Heterogeneity of the Highly Flexible O6-Benzyl-guanine DNA Adduct

The conformational preference of the O6-benzyl-guanine (BzG) adduct was computationally examined using nucleoside, nucleotide, and DNA models, which provided critical information about the potential mutagenic consequences and toxicity of the BzG adduct in our cells. Substantial conformational flexibility of the BzG moiety, including rotation of the bulky group with respect to the base and the internal conformation of the bulk moiety, is seen in the nucleoside and nucleotide models. This large conformational flexibility suggests the conformation adopted by BzG is dependent on the local environment of the BzG adduct. Upon incorporation of the adduct into the DNA helix, the BzG conformational flexibility is maintained. The range of BzG conformations adopted in DNA likely arises due to a combination of the long and flexible (-CH2-) linker, the small adduct size, and the lack of discrete interactions between the bulky moiety and G. Because of the conformational flexibility of the adduct, many DNA conformations are observed for BzG adducted DNA, including those not previously reported in the literature, and thus, a modified nomenclature for adducted DNA conformations is presented. Furthermore, the preferred conformation of BzG adducted DNA is greatly dependent on a number of factors, including the pairing nucleotide, the discrete interactions in the helix, and the solvation of the benzyl moiety. These factors in turn lead to a complicated mutagenic and toxic profile that may invoke pairing with natural C, mispairs, or deletion mutations, which is supported by previously reported experimental biochemical studies. Despite this complex mutagenic profile, pairing with C leads to the most stable helical structure, which is the first combined structural and energetic explanation for experimental studies reporting a higher rate of C incorporation than any other nucleobase upon BzG replication.

Standard role for a conserved aspartate or more direct involvement in deglycosylation? An ONIOM and MD investigation of adenine-DNA glycosylase.

8-Oxoguanine (OG) is one of the most frequently occurring forms of DNA damage and is particularly deleterious since it forms a stable Hoogsteen base pair with adenine (A). The repair of an OG:A mispair is initiated by adenine-DNA glycosylase (MutY), which hydrolyzes the sugar-nucleobase bond of the adenine residue before the lesion is processed by other proteins. MutY has been proposed to use a two-part chemical step involving protonation of the adenine nucleobase, followed by SN1 hydrolysis of the glycosidic bond. However, differences between a recent (fluorine recognition complex, denoted as the FLRC) crystal structure and the structure on which most mechanistic conclusions have been based to date (namely, the lesion recognition complex or LRC) raise questions regarding the mechanism used by MutY and the discrete role of various active-site residues. The present work uses both molecular dynamics (MD) and quantum mechanical (ONIOM) models to compare the active-site conformational dynamics in the two crystal structures, which suggests that only the understudied FLRC leads to a catalytically competent reactant. Indeed, all previous computational studies on MutY have been initiated from the LRC structure. Subsequently, for the first time, various mechanisms are examined with detailed ONIOM(M06-2X:PM6) reaction potential energy surfaces (PES) based on the FLRC structure, which significantly extends the mechanistic picture. Specifically, our work reveals that the reaction proceeds through a different route than the commonly accepted mechanism and the catalytic function of various active-site residues (Geobacillus stearothermophilus numbering). Specifically, contrary to proposals based on the LRC, E43 is determined to solely be involved in the initial adenine protonation step and not the deglycosylation reaction as the general base. Additionally, a novel catalytic role is proposed for Y126, whereby this residue plays a significant role in stabilizing the highly charged active site, primarily through interactions with E43. More importantly, D144 is found to explicitly catalyze the nucleobase dissociation step through partial nucleophilic attack. Although this is a more direct role than previously proposed for any other DNA glycosylase, comparison to previous work on other glycosylases justifies the larger contribution in the case of MutY and allows us to propose a unified role for the conserved Asp/Glu in the DNA glycosylases, as well as other enzymes that catalyze nucleotide deglycosylation reactions.

Landscape of π-π and sugar-π contacts in DNA-protein interactions.

There were 1765 contacts identified between DNA nucleobases or deoxyribose and cyclic (W, H, F, Y) or acyclic (R, E, D) amino acids in 672 X-ray structures of DNA–protein complexes. In this first study to compare π-interactions between the cyclic and acyclic amino acids, visual inspection was used to categorize amino acid interactions as nucleobase π–π (according to biological edge) or deoxyribose sugar–π (according to sugar edge). Overall, 54% of contacts are nucleobase π–π interactions, which involve all amino acids, but are more common for Y, F, and R, and involve all DNA nucleobases with similar frequencies. Among binding arrangements, cyclic amino acids prefer more planar (stacked) π-systems than the acyclic counterparts. Although sugar–π interactions were only previously identified with the cyclic amino acids and were found to be less common (38%) than nucleobase–cyclic amino acid contacts, sugar–π interactions are more common than nucleobase π–π contacts for the acyclic series (61% of contacts). Similar to DNA–protein π–π interactions, sugar–π contacts most frequently involve Y and R, although all amino acids adopt many binding orientations relative to deoxyribose. These DNA–protein π-interactions stabilize biological systems, by up to approximately −40 kJ mol−1 for neutral nucleobase or sugar–amino acid interactions, but up to approximately −95 kJ mol−1 for positively or negatively charged contacts. The high frequency and strength, despite variation in structure and composition, of these π-interactions point to an important function in biological systems.

Topology of RNA–protein nucleobase–amino acid π–π interactions and comparison to analogous DNA–protein π–π contacts

The present work analyzed 120 high-resolution X-ray crystal structures and identified 335 RNA-protein π-interactions (154 nonredundant) between a nucleobase and aromatic (W, H, F, or Y) or acyclic (R, E, or D) π-containing amino acid. Each contact was critically analyzed (including using a visual inspection protocol) to determine the most prevalent composition, structure, and strength of π-interactions at RNA-protein interfaces. These contacts most commonly involve F and U, with U:F interactions comprising one-fifth of the total number of contacts found. Furthermore, the RNA and protein π-systems adopt many different relative orientations, although there is a preference for more parallel (stacked) arrangements. Due to the variation in structure, the strength of the intermolecular forces between the RNA and protein components (as determined from accurate quantum chemical calculations) exhibits a significant range, with most of the contacts providing significant stability to the associated RNA-protein complex (up to -65 kJ mol(-1)). Comparison to the analogous DNA-protein π-interactions emphasizes differences in RNA- and DNA-protein π-interactions at the molecular level, including the greater abundance of RNA contacts and the involvement of different nucleobase/amino acid residues. Overall, our results provide a clearer picture of the molecular basis of nucleic acid-protein binding and underscore the important role of these contacts in biology, including the significant contribution of π-π interactions to the stability of nucleic acid-protein complexes. Nevertheless, more work is still needed in this area in order to further appreciate the properties and roles of RNA nucleobase-amino acid π-interactions in nature.

Combining crystallographic and quantum chemical data to understand DNA-protein π-interactions in nature

Noncovalent interactions are accepted to be prevalent across biochemical systems, including governing interactions between nucleic acids and proteins. The present review summarizes work done to characterize the abundance, structure and strength of DNA–protein π interactions by combining rigorous searches of experimental X-ray crystal structures of DNA–protein complexes and quantum chemical calculations. Focus is placed on interactions that occur between the π-containing amino acids (W, H, F, Y, R, E, and D) and the canonical DNA nucleobases (A, T, G, and C) or 2′-deoxyribose moiety. These studies highlight the considerable frequency of both DNA–protein π–π and sugar–π interactions in nature, which can involve any π-containing amino acid arranged in many unique binding orientations with respect to any DNA component. When combined with the significant strength predicted for the identified DNA–protein π contacts using density functional theory, these works underscore the potential impact of these interactions on critical biological functions. This conclusion is supported by a review of examples from the recent literature that have acknowledged the role of DNA–protein π interactions in binding, specificity, and catalysis.

A Survey of DNA–Protein π–Interactions: A Comparison of Natural Occurrences and Structures, and Computationally Predicted Structures and Strengths

Non-covalent interactions between DNA and proteins play critical roles in cellular functions, including DNA replication and repair. To gain an appreciation of the biomolecular components involved, several bioinformatics studies have data mined experimental X-ray crystal structures to identify close contacts between DNA and protein building blocks. These critical studies have revealed that DNA–protein non-covalent interactions include π–π, C–H···π, O–H···π, N–H···π or lone pair–π (X···π, X = O, N or S) contacts. Unfortunately, however, experimental structural data cannot provide information about the relative strength of biologically-relevant non-covalent interactions. Therefore, quantum mechanical calculations have been used to determine the stability of DNA–protein π–heterodimers, as well as the dependence of the interaction energy on changes in relative monomer orientations. In this light, the present review summarizes work done in the literature to characterize π–interactions between the DNA nucleobases (A, C, T and G) or deoxyribose moiety and cyclic (His, Phe, Tyr and Trp) or acyclic (Arg, Glu and Asp) amino acid side chains. Collectively, this body of work emphasizes the importance of DNA–protein π–interactions for providing stability to biomolecular complexes and driving key cellular functions.

DNA base sequence effects on bulky lesion-induced conformational heterogeneity during DNA replication

Abstract 4-Aminobiphenyl (ABP) and its structure analog 2-aminofluorene (AF) are well-known carcinogens. In the present work, an unusual sequence effect in the 5′-CTTCTG1G2TCCTCATTC-3′ DNA duplex is reported for ABP- and AF-modified G. Specifically, the ABP modification at G1 resulted in a mixture of 67% major groove B-type (B) and 33% stacked (S) conformers, while at the ABP modification at G2 exclusively resulted in the B-conformer. The AF modification at G1 and G2 lead to 25%:75% and 83%:17% B:S population ratios, respectively. These differences in preferred conformation are due to an interplay between stabilizing (hydrogen bonding and stacking that is enhanced by lesion planarity) and destabilizing (solvent exposure) forces at the lesion site. Furthermore, while the B-conformer is a thermodynamic stabilizer and the S-conformer is a destabilizer in duplex settings, the situation is reversed at the single strands/double strands (ss/ds) junction. Specifically, the twisted biphenyl is a better stacker at the ss/ds junction than the coplanar AF. Therefore, the ABP modification leads to a stronger strand binding affinity of the ss/ds junction than the AF modification. Overall, the current work provides conformational insights into the role of sequence and lesion effects in modulating DNA replication.