The evolution and evolutionary consequences of marginal thermostability in proteins
Corresponding Author
Richard A. Goldstein
Mathematical Biology, National Institute of Medical Research, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA, United Kingdom
Mathematical Biology, National Institute of Medical Research, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA, United Kingdom===Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Richard A. Goldstein
Mathematical Biology, National Institute of Medical Research, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA, United Kingdom
Mathematical Biology, National Institute of Medical Research, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA, United Kingdom===Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
When we seek to explain the characteristics of living systems in their evolutionary context, we are often interested in understanding how and why certain properties arose through evolution, and how these properties then affected the continuing evolutionary process. This endeavor has been assisted by the use of simple computational models that have properties characteristic of natural living systems but allow simulations over evolutionary timescales with full transparency. We examine a model of the evolution of a gene under selective pressure to code for a protein that exists in a prespecified folded state at a given growth temperature. We observe the emergence of proteins with modest stabilities far below those possible with the model, with a denaturation temperature tracking the simulation temperature, despite the absence of selective pressure for such marginal stability. This demonstrates that neither observations of marginally stable proteins, nor even instances where increased stability interferes with function, provide evidence that marginal stability is an adaptation. Instead the marginal stability is the result of a balance between predominantly destabilizing mutations and selection that shifts depending on effective population size. Even if marginal stability is not an adaptation, the natural tendency of proteins toward marginal stability, and the range of stabilities that occur during evolution, may have significant effect on the evolutionary process. Proteins 2011. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
REFERENCES
- 1 Elena SF,Lenski RE. Evolution experiments with microorganisms: the dynamics and genetic bases of adaptation. Nat Rev Genet 2003; 4: 457–469.
- 2
Godfrey-Smith P.
Darwinian populations and natural selection.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press;
2009.
10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199552047.001.0001 Google Scholar
- 3 Dill KA,Bromberg S,Yue K,Fiebig KM,Yee DP,Thomas PD,Chan HS. Principles of protein folding-a perspective from exact simple models. Protein Sci 1995; 4: 561–602.
- 4 Taverna DM,Goldstein RA. Why are proteins marginally stable? Proteins 2002; 46: 105–109.
- 5 Williams PD,Pollock DD,Goldstein RG. Functionality and the evolution of marginal stability in proteins: inferences from lattice simulations. Evol Bioinform Online 2006; 2: 1–11.
- 6 Williams PD,Pollock DD,Blackburne BP,Goldstein RA. Assessing the accuracy of ancestral protein reconstruction methods. PLoS Comput Biol 2006; 2: e69.
- 7 Miyazawa S,Jernigan RL. Estimation of effective interresidue contact energies from protein crystal structures: quasi-chemical approximation. Macromol 1985; 18: 534–552.
- 8 Mok YK,Kay CM,Kay LE,Forman-Kay J. NOE data demonstrating a compact unfolded state for an SH3 domain under non-denaturing conditions. J Mol Biol 1999; 289: 619–638.
- 9 Shan B,Eliezer D,Raleigh DP. The unfolded state of the C-terminal domain of the ribosomal protein L9 contains both native and non-native structure. Biochemistry 2009; 48: 4707–4719.
- 10 Shortle D. The denatured state (the other half of the folding equation) and its role in protein stability. FASEB J 1996; 10: 27–34.
- 11 Lindqvist Y,Johansson E,Kaija H,Vihko P,Schneider G. Three-dimensional structure of a mammalian purple acid phosphatase at 2.2 A resolution with a mu-(hydr)oxo bridged di-iron center. J Mol Biol 1999; 291: 135–147.
- 12 Kimura M. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rate of base substitution through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol 1980; 16: 111–120.
- 13
Crow JF,Kimura M.
An introduction to population genetics theory.
New York:
Harper & Row;
1970.
10.1006/tpbi.1995.1025 Google Scholar
- 14 Kimura M. Some problems of stochastic processes in genetics. Ann Math Stat 1957; 28: 882–901.
- 15 Kimura M. On the probability of fixation of mutant genes in a population. Genetics 1962; 47: 713–719.
- 16 Somero GN. Proteins and temperature. Ann Rev Physiol 1995; 57: 43–68.
- 17 Zavodszky P,Kardos J,Svingor A,Petsko GA. Adjustment of conformational flexibility is a key event in the thermal adaptation of proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998; 95: 7406–7411.
- 18 Tokuriki N,Stricher F,Schymkowitz J,Serrano L,Tawfik DS. The stability effects of protein mutations appear to be universally distributed. J Mol Biol 2007; 369: 1318–1332.
- 19 Bloom JD,Labthavikul ST,Otey CR,Arnold FH. Protein stability promotes evolvability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006; 103: 5869–5874.
- 20 Bloom JD,Raval A,Wilke CO. Thermodynamics of neutral protein evolution. Genetics 2007; 175: 255–266.
- 21 Bloom JD,Silberg JJ,Wilke CO,Drummond DA,Adami C,Arnold FH. Thermodynamic prediction of protein neutrality. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005; 102: 606–611.
- 22 Beadle BM,Shoichet BK. Structural bases of stability-function tradeoffs in enzymes. J Mol Biol 2002; 321: 285–296.
- 23 Daniel RM,Dunn RV,Finney JL,Smith JC. The role of dynamics in enzyme activity. Ann Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 2003; 32: 69–92.
- 24 DePristo MA,Weinreich DM,Hartl DL. Missense meanderings in sequence space: a biophysical view of protein evolution. Nat Rev Genet 2005; 6: 678–687.
- 25 Fields PA. Review: protein function at thermal extremes: balancing stability and flexibility. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol 2001; 129: 417–431.
- 26 Schreiber C,Buckle AM,Fersht AR. Stability and function: two constraints in the evolution of barstar and other proteins. Structure 1994; 2: 945–951.
- 27 Giver L,Gershenson A,Freskgard PO,Arnold FH. Directed evolution of a thermostable esterase. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 1998; 95: 12809–12813.
- 28 Serrano L,Day AG,Fersht AR. Step-wise mutation of barnase to binase—a procedure for engineering increased stability of proteins and an experimental-analysis of the evolution of protein stability. J Mol Biol 1993; 233: 305312.
- 29 Van den Burg B,Vriend G,Veltman OR,Eijsink VGH. Engineering an enzyme to resist boiling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998; 95: 2056–2060.
- 30 Zhao HM,Arnold FH. Directed evolution converts subtilisin E into a functional equivalent of thermitase. Protein Eng 1999; 12: 47–53.
- 31 Tokuriki N,Stricher F,Serrano L,Tawfik DS. How protein stability and new functions trade off. PLoS Comput Biol 2008; 4: e1000002.
- 32 Bastolla U,Moya A,Viguera E,van Ham RC. Genomic determinants of protein folding thermodynamics in prokaryotic organisms. J Mol Biol 2004; 343: 1451–1466.
- 33 Mendez R,Fritsche M,Porto M,Bastolla U. Mutation bias favors protein folding stability in the evolution of small populations. PLoS Comput Biol 2010; 6: e1000767.
- 34 Lambert JD,Moran NA. Deleterious mutations destabilize ribosomal RNA in endosymbiotic bacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998; 95: 4458–4462.
- 35 Dunker AK,Obradovic Z,Romero P,Garner EC,Brown CJ. Intrinsic protein disorder in complete genomes. Genome Inform Workshop Genome Inform 2000; 11: 161–171.
- 36 Tokuriki N,Oldfield CJ,Uversky VN,Berezovsky IN,Tawfik DS. Do viral proteins possess unique biophysical features? Trends Biochem Sci 2009; 34: 53–59.
- 37 Bershtein S,Segal M,Bekerman R,Tokuriki N,Tawfik D. Robustness–epistasis link shapes the fitness landscape of a randomly drifting protein. Nature 2006; 444: 929–932.
- 38 Tokuriki N,Tawfik DS. Stability effects of mutations and protein evolvability. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2009; 19: 596–604.
- 39 Drummond DA,Wilke CO. Mistranslation-induced protein misfolding as a dominant constraint on coding-sequence evolution. Cell 2008; 134: 341–352.
- 40 Drummond DA,Wilke CO. The evolutionary consequences of erroneous protein synthesis. Nat Rev Genet 2009; 10: 715–724.
- 41 Wilke CO,Bloom JD,Drummond DA,Raval A. Predicting the tolerance of proteins to random amino acid substitution. Biophys J 2005; 89: 3714–3720.
- 42 Goodey NM,Benkovic SJ. Allosteric regulation and catalysis emerge via a common route. Nat Chem Biol 2008; 4: 474–482.
- 43 Kirschner M,Gerhart J. Evolvability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998; 95: 8420–8427.
- 44 Babajide A,Farber R,Hofacker IL,Inman J,Lapedes AS,Stadler PF. Exploring protein sequence space using knowledge-based potentials. J Theor Biol 2001; 212: 35–46.
- 45 Bornberg-Bauer E. How are model protein structures distributed in sequence space? Biophys J 1997; 73: 2393–2403.
- 46 Bryan PN,Orban J. Proteins that switch folds. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2010; 20: 482–488.
- 47 James LC,Tawfik DS. Conformational diversity and protein evolution—a 60-year-old hypothesis revisited. Trends Biochem Sci 2003; 28: 361–368.
- 48 Tokuriki N,Tawfik DS. Protein dynamism and evolvability. Science 2009; 324: 203–207.
- 49 Baldwin JM. A new factor in evolution. Am Nat 1896; 30: 441–451.
- 50 Morgan CL. On modification and variation. Science 1896; 4: 733–740.
- 51 Osborn HL. Ontogenic and phylogenic variation. Science 1896; 4: 786–789.
- 52 Ancel LW,Fontana W. Plasticity, evolvability, and modularity in RNA. J Exp Zool 2000; 288: 242–283.