Sequence co-evolution gives 3D contacts and structures of protein complexes

  1. Thomas A Hopf
  2. Charlotta P.I Schärfe
  3. João P.G.L.M Rodrigues
  4. Anna G Green
  5. Oliver Kohlbacher
  6. Chris Sander
  7. Alexandre M.J.J. Bonvin
  8. Debora S Marks  Is a corresponding author
  1. Harvard University, United States
  2. University of Tübingen, Germany
  3. Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research, Utrecht University, Netherlands
  4. Harvard Medical School, United States
  5. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States

Abstract

Protein-protein interactions are fundamental to many biological processes. Experimental screens have identified tens of thousands of interactions and structural biology has provided detailed functional insight for select 3D protein complexes. An alternative rich source of information about protein interactions is the evolutionary sequence record. Building on earlier work, we show that analysis of correlated evolutionary sequence changes across proteins identifies residues that are close in space with sufficient accuracy to determine the three-dimensional structure of the protein complexes. We evaluate prediction performance in blinded tests on 76 complexes of known 3D structure, predict protein-protein contacts in 32 complexes of unknown structure, and demonstrate how evolutionary couplings can be used to distinguish between interacting and non-interacting protein pairs in a large complex. With the current growth of sequences, we expect that the method can be generalized to genome-wide elucidation of protein-protein interaction networks and used for interaction predictions at residue resolution.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Thomas A Hopf

    Harvard University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Charlotta P.I Schärfe

    University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. João P.G.L.M Rodrigues

    Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Anna G Green

    Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Oliver Kohlbacher

    University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Chris Sander

    Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Alexandre M.J.J. Bonvin

    Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Debora S Marks

    Harvard University, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    debbie@hms.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2014, Hopf et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 15,706
    views
  • 2,803
    downloads
  • 424
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Thomas A Hopf
  2. Charlotta P.I Schärfe
  3. João P.G.L.M Rodrigues
  4. Anna G Green
  5. Oliver Kohlbacher
  6. Chris Sander
  7. Alexandre M.J.J. Bonvin
  8. Debora S Marks
(2014)
Sequence co-evolution gives 3D contacts and structures of protein complexes
eLife 3:e03430.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.03430

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.03430

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Raji E Joseph, Thomas E Wales ... Amy H Andreotti
    Research Advance

    Inhibition of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) has proven to be highly effective in the treatment of B-cell malignancies such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), autoimmune disorders, and multiple sclerosis. Since the approval of the first BTK inhibitor (BTKi), Ibrutinib, several other inhibitors including Acalabrutinib, Zanubrutinib, Tirabrutinib, and Pirtobrutinib have been clinically approved. All are covalent active site inhibitors, with the exception of the reversible active site inhibitor Pirtobrutinib. The large number of available inhibitors for the BTK target creates challenges in choosing the most appropriate BTKi for treatment. Side-by-side comparisons in CLL have shown that different inhibitors may differ in their treatment efficacy. Moreover, the nature of the resistance mutations that arise in patients appears to depend on the specific BTKi administered. We have previously shown that Ibrutinib binding to the kinase active site causes unanticipated long-range effects on the global conformation of BTK (Joseph et al., 2020). Here, we show that binding of each of the five approved BTKi to the kinase active site brings about distinct allosteric changes that alter the conformational equilibrium of full-length BTK. Additionally, we provide an explanation for the resistance mutation bias observed in CLL patients treated with different BTKi and characterize the mechanism of action of two common resistance mutations: BTK T474I and L528W.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Mart GF Last, Leoni Abendstein ... Thomas H Sharp
    Tools and Resources

    Segmentation is a critical data processing step in many applications of cryo-electron tomography. Downstream analyses, such as subtomogram averaging, are often based on segmentation results, and are thus critically dependent on the availability of open-source software for accurate as well as high-throughput tomogram segmentation. There is a need for more user-friendly, flexible, and comprehensive segmentation software that offers an insightful overview of all steps involved in preparing automated segmentations. Here, we present Ais: a dedicated tomogram segmentation package that is geared towards both high performance and accessibility, available on GitHub. In this report, we demonstrate two common processing steps that can be greatly accelerated with Ais: particle picking for subtomogram averaging, and generating many-feature segmentations of cellular architecture based on in situ tomography data. Featuring comprehensive annotation, segmentation, and rendering functionality, as well as an open repository for trained models at aiscryoet.org, we hope that Ais will help accelerate research and dissemination of data involving cryoET.