Back

Unifying the Ambivalent Mechanisms of Protein-Stabilising Osmolytes

Mukherjee, M.; Mondal, J.

2020-02-23 biophysics
10.1101/2020.02.22.960856 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The mechanism of protein stabilization by zwiterionic osmolytes has remained a long-standing puzzle. While the prevalent mechanistic hypothesis suggests an osmo-phobic model in which osmolytes are assumed to stabilize proteins by preferentially excluding themselves from the protein surface, emerging evidences of preferential binding of popular osmolyte trimethyl amine N-oxide (TMAO) with hydrophobic macromolecules contradict this view. Here we address these contrasting perspectives by investigating the folding mechanism of a set of mini proteins in aqueous solutions of two different osmolytes glycine and TMAO, via free energy simulations. Our results demonstrate that, while both osmolytes are found to stabilize the folded conformation of the mini proteins, their mechanism of actions are mutually diverse: Specifically, glycine always depletes from the surface of all mini proteins, thereby conforming to the osmophobic model; but TMAO is found to display ambivalent signatures of protein-specific preferential binding and exclusion to/from the protein surface. At molecular level, the presence of an extended hydrophobic patch in protein topology is found to be recurrent motif in proteins leading to favorable binding with TMAO. Finally, an analysis based upon the preferential interaction theory and folding free energetics reveals that irrespective of preferential binding vs exclusion of osmolytes, it is the relative preferential depletion of osmolytes on transition from folded to unfolded conformation of proteins, which drives the overall conformational equilibrium towards the folded state in presence of osmolytes. Taken together, moving beyond the model system and hypothesis, this work brings out ambivalent mechanism of osmolytes on proteins and provides an unifying justification.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
167 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
28.1%
2
The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters
63 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.5%
3
Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.6%
4
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
238 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
5.5%
5
Langmuir
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
Biophysical Journal
631 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.3%
7
Biomacromolecules
29 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
8
Protein Science
246 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
9
Chemical Science
73 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.4%
10
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
140 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.4%
11
Chemistry – A European Journal
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
12
ACS Omega
105 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
13
Chemical Communications
25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
14
The Journal of Chemical Physics
56 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
15
JACS Au
43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
16
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
88 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
17
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
18
Journal of the American Chemical Society
217 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
Soft Matter
60 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
20
Biochemistry
148 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
21
RSC Advances
22 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
22
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 75%
0.8%
23
ChemBioChem
55 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
24
International Journal of Biological Macromolecules
76 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
25
Communications Chemistry
48 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
26
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
494 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.8%
27
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 45%
0.6%