Vladimir N. Uversky

Why are “natively unfolded” proteins unstructured under physiologic conditions?

“Natively unfolded” proteins occupy a unique niche within the protein kingdom in that they lack ordered structure under conditions of neutral pH in vitro. Analysis of amino acid sequences, based on the normalized net charge and mean hydrophobicity, has been applied to two sets of proteins: small globular folded proteins and “natively unfolded” ones. The results show that “natively unfolded” proteins are specifically localized within a unique region of charge‐hydrophobicity phase space and indicate that a combination of low overall hydrophobicity and large net charge represent a unique structural feature of “natively unfolded” proteins. Proteins 2000;41:415–427.

Natively unfolded proteins: a point where biology waits for physics.

The experimental material accumulated in the literature on the conformational behavior of intrinsically unstructured (natively unfolded) proteins was analyzed. Results of this analysis showed that these proteins do not possess uniform structural properties, as expected for members of a single thermodynamic entity. Rather, these proteins may be divided into two structurally different groups: intrinsic coils, and premolten globules. Proteins from the first group have hydrodynamic dimensions typical of random coils in poor solvent and do not possess any (or almost any) ordered secondary structure. Proteins from the second group are essentially more compact, exhibiting some amount of residual secondary structure, although they are still less dense than native or molten globule proteins. An important feature of the intrinsically unstructured proteins is that they undergo disorder–order transition during or prior to their biological function. In this respect, the Protein Quartet model, with function arising from four specific conformations (ordered forms, molten globules, premolten globules, and random coils) and transitions between any two of the states, is discussed.

Flexible nets. The roles of intrinsic disorder in protein interaction networks.

Proteins participate in complex sets of interactions that represent the mechanistic foundation for much of the physiology and function of the cell. These protein–protein interactions are organized into exquisitely complex networks. The architecture of protein–protein interaction networks was recently proposed to be scale‐free, with most of the proteins having only one or two connections but with relatively fewer ‘hubs’ possessing tens, hundreds or more links. The high level of hub connectivity must somehow be reflected in protein structure. What structural quality of hub proteins enables them to interact with large numbers of diverse targets? One possibility would be to employ binding regions that have the ability to bind multiple, structurally diverse partners. This trait can be imparted by the incorporation of intrinsic disorder in one or both partners. To illustrate the value of such contributions, this review examines the roles of intrinsic disorder in protein network architecture. We show that there are three general ways that intrinsic disorder can contribute: First, intrinsic disorder can serve as the structural basis for hub protein promiscuity; secondly, intrinsically disordered proteins can bind to structured hub proteins; and thirdly, intrinsic disorder can provide flexible linkers between functional domains with the linkers enabling mechanisms that facilitate binding diversity. An important research direction will be to determine what fraction of protein–protein interaction in regulatory networks relies on intrinsic disorder.

Intrinsically Disordered Proteins in Human Diseases: Introducing the D2 Concept

Intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) lack stable tertiary and/or secondary structures under physiological conditions in vitro. They are highly abundant in nature and their functional repertoire complements the functions of ordered proteins. IDPs are involved in regulation, signaling, and control, where binding to multiple partners and high-specificity/low-affinity interactions play a crucial role. Functions of IDPs are tuned via alternative splicing and posttranslational modifications. Intrinsic disorder is a unique structural feature that enables IDPs to participate in both one-to-many and many-to-one signaling. Numerous IDPs are associated with human diseases, including cancer, cardiovascular disease, amyloidoses, neurodegenerative diseases, and diabetes. Overall, intriguing interconnections among intrinsic disorder, cell signaling, and human diseases suggest that protein conformational diseases may result not only from protein misfolding, but also from misidentification, missignaling, and unnatural or nonnative folding. IDPs, such as alpha-synuclein, tau protein, p53, and BRCA1, are attractive targets for drugs modulating protein-protein interactions. From these and other examples, novel strategies for drug discovery based on IDPs have been developed. To summarize work in this area, we are introducing the D2 (disorder in disorders) concept.

Function and structure of inherently disordered proteins

The application of bioinformatics methodologies to proteins inherently lacking 3D structure has brought increased attention to these macromolecules. Here topics concerning these proteins are discussed, including their prediction from amino acid sequence, their enrichment in eukaryotes compared to prokaryotes, their more rapid evolution compared to structured proteins, their organization into specific groups, their structural preferences, their half-lives in cells, their contributions to signaling diversity (via high contents of multiple-partner binding sites, post-translational modifications, and alternative splicing), their distinct functional repertoire compared to that of structured proteins, and their involvement in diseases.

DisProt: The database of disordered proteins

The Database of Protein Disorder (DisProt) links structure and function information for intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs). Intrinsically disordered proteins do not form a fixed three-dimensional structure under physiological conditions, either in their entireties or in segments or regions. We define IDP as a protein that contains at least one experimentally determined disordered region. Although lacking fixed structure, IDPs and regions carry out important biological functions, being typically involved in regulation, signaling and control. Such functions can involve high-specificity low-affinity interactions, the multiple binding of one protein to many partners and the multiple binding of many proteins to one partner. These three features are all enabled and enhanced by protein intrinsic disorder. One of the major hindrances in the study of IDPs has been the lack of organized information. DisProt was developed to enable IDP research by collecting and organizing knowledge regarding the experimental characterization and the functional associations of IDPs. In addition to being a unique source of biological information, DisProt opens doors for a plethora of bioinformatics studies. DisProt is openly available at .

PONDR-FIT: A Meta-Predictor of Intrinsically Disordered Amino Acids

Protein intrinsic disorder is becoming increasingly recognized in proteomics research. While lacking structure, many regions of disorder have been associated with biological function. There are many different experimental methods for characterizing intrinsically disordered proteins and regions; nevertheless, the prediction of intrinsic disorder from amino acid sequence remains a useful strategy especially for many large-scale proteomic investigations. Here we introduced a consensus artificial neural network (ANN) prediction method, which was developed by combining the outputs of several individual disorder predictors. By eight-fold cross-validation, this meta-predictor, called PONDR-FIT, was found to improve the prediction accuracy over a range of 3 to 20% with an average of 11% compared to the single predictors, depending on the datasets being used. Analysis of the errors shows that the worst accuracy still occurs for short disordered regions with less than ten residues, as well as for the residues close to order/disorder boundaries. Increased understanding of the underlying mechanism by which such meta-predictors give improved predictions will likely promote the further development of protein disorder predictors. Access to PONDR-FIT is available at www.disprot.org.

Classification of Intrinsically Disordered Regions and Proteins.

1.1. Uncharacterized Protein Segments Are a Source of Functional Novelty Over the past decade, we have observed a massive increase in the amount of information describing protein sequences from a variety of organisms.1,2 While this may reflect the diversity in sequence space, and possibly also in function space,3 a large proportion of the sequences lacks any useful function annotation.4,5 Often these sequences are annotated as putative or hypothetical proteins, and for the majority their functions still remain unknown.6,7 Suggestions about potential protein function, primarily molecular function, often come from computational analysis of their sequences. For instance, homology detection allows for the transfer of information from well-characterized protein segments to those with similar sequences that lack annotation of molecular function.8−10 Other aspects of function, such as the biological processes proteins participate in, may come from genetic- and disease-association studies, expression and interaction network data, and comparative genomics approaches that investigate genomic context.11−17 Characterization of unannotated and uncharacterized protein segments is expected to lead to the discovery of novel functions as well as provide important insights into existing biological processes. In addition, it is likely to shed new light on molecular mechanisms of diseases that are not yet fully understood. Thus, uncharacterized protein segments are likely to be a large source of functional novelty relevant for discovering new biology.

Intrinsic disorder is a common feature of hub proteins from four eukaryotic interactomes.

Recent proteome-wide screening approaches have provided a wealth of information about interacting proteins in various organisms. To test for a potential association between protein connectivity and the amount of predicted structural disorder, the disorder propensities of proteins with various numbers of interacting partners from four eukaryotic organisms (Caenorhabditis elegans, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Drosophila melanogaster, and Homo sapiens) were investigated. The results of PONDR VL-XT disorder analysis show that for all four studied organisms, hub proteins, defined here as those that interact with ≥10 partners, are significantly more disordered than end proteins, defined here as those that interact with just one partner. The proportion of predicted disordered residues, the average disorder score, and the number of predicted disordered regions of various lengths were higher overall in hubs than in ends. A binary classification of hubs and ends into ordered and disordered subclasses using the consensus prediction method showed a significant enrichment of wholly disordered proteins and a significant depletion of wholly ordered proteins in hubs relative to ends in worm, fly, and human. The functional annotation of yeast hubs and ends using GO categories and the correlation of these annotations with disorder predictions demonstrate that proteins with regulation, transcription, and development annotations are enriched in disorder, whereas proteins with catalytic activity, transport, and membrane localization annotations are depleted in disorder. The results of this study demonstrate that intrinsic structural disorder is a distinctive and common characteristic of eukaryotic hub proteins, and that disorder may serve as a determinant of protein interactivity.

Flexible nets: disorder and induced fit in the associations of p53 and 14-3-3 with their partners

BackgroundProteins are involved in many interactions with other proteins leading to networks that regulate and control a wide variety of physiological processes. Some of these proteins, called hub proteins or hubs, bind to many different protein partners. Protein intrinsic disorder, via diversity arising from structural plasticity or flexibility, provide a means for hubs to associate with many partners (Dunker AK, Cortese MS, Romero P, Iakoucheva LM, Uversky VN: Flexible Nets: The roles of intrinsic disorder in protein interaction networks. FEBS J 2005, 272:5129-5148).ResultsHere we present a detailed examination of two divergent examples: 1) p53, which uses different disordered regions to bind to different partners and which also has several individual disordered regions that each bind to multiple partners, and 2) 14-3-3, which is a structured protein that associates with many different intrinsically disordered partners. For both examples, three-dimensional structures of multiple complexes reveal that the flexibility and plasticity of intrinsically disordered protein regions as well as induced-fit changes in the structured regions are both important for binding diversity.ConclusionsThese data support the conjecture that hub proteins often utilize intrinsic disorder to bind to multiple partners and provide detailed information about induced fit in structured regions.