Abstract

Historical interpretations of the thermodynamics characterizing biomolecular recognition have marginalized the role of water. An important (even, perhaps, dominant) contribution to molecular recognition in water comes from the “hydrophobic effect,” in which non-polar portions of a ligand interact preferentially with non-polar regions of a protein. Water surrounds the ligand, and water fills the binding pocket of the protein: when the protein-ligand complex forms, and hydrophobic surfaces of the binding pocket and the ligand approach one another, the molecules (and hydrogen-bonded networks of molecules) of water associated with both surfaces rearrange and, in part, entirely escape into the bulk solution. It is now clear that neither of the two most commonly cited rationalizations for the hydrophobic effect—an entropy-dominated hydrophobic effect, in which ordered waters at the surface of the ligand, and water at the surface of the protein, are released to the bulk upon binding, and a “lock-and-key” model, in which the surface of a ligand interacts directly with a surface of a protein having a complementary shape–can account for water-mediated interactions between the ligand and the protein, and neither is sufficient to account for the experimental observation of both entropy- andenthalpy-dominated hydrophobic effects. What is now clear is that there is no single hydrophobic effect, with a universally applicable, common, thermodynamic description: different processes (i.e., partitioning between phases of different hydrophobicity, aggregation in water, and binding) with different thermodynamics, depend on the molecular-level details of the structures of the molecules involved, and of the aggregates that form. A “water-centric” description of the hydrophobic effect in biomolecular recognition focuses on the structures of water surrounding the ligand, and of water filling the binding pocket of the protein, both before and after binding. This view attributes the hydrophobic effect to changes in the free energy of the networks of hydrogen bonds that are formed, broken, or re-arranged when two hydrophobic surfaces approach (but do not necessarily contact) one another. The details of the molecular topography (and the polar character) of the mole- cular surfaces play an important role in determining the structure of these networks of hydrogen-bonded waters, and in the thermodynamic description of the hydrophobic effect(s). Theorists have led the formulation of this “water-centric view”, although experiments are now supplying support for it. It poses complex problems for would-be “designers” of protein-ligand interactions, and for so-called “rational drug design”.

Highlights

  • The “hydrophobic effect” is a term describing the tendency of non-polar molecules or molecular surfaces to aggregate in an aqueous solution

  • The following sections discuss, in detail, some of the important experimental, and theoretical, thermodynamic studies that lead to the conclusion that the free energy of the hydrophobic effect in biomolecular recognition is dependent on the “shape of the water”: that is, the shape—the structures and free energies of the networks of water molecules—of the water surrounding the ligand, and the analogous shape of the networks of water molecules within the binding pocket of the protein

  • The major problem with this approach to sampling the configurations of molecules of water near the surface of a protein is that waters in highly confined regions of the protein exchange slowly with the bulk solvent; these slow exchange rates hinder the computation of their free energies of binding. Methods such as the JAWS program[132] employ a Grand Canonical Monte Carlo (GCMC) sampling approach to accelerate the diffusion of water molecules in confined regions; as a result, these simulations converge more quickly, and produce more accurate estimates of energies, for confined waters

Read more

Summary

THE PROBLEM

We observe that: i) hydrocarbons are poorly soluble in water, ii) proteins—alone or complexed with ligands—have large areas of apposed non-polar surface that are shielded from contact with water (i.e., buried), and iii) the interactions of low molecular weight ligands, substrates, or drugs with the active sites of proteins tend to involve the interaction of non-polar surfaces These three observations have been unified under the umbrella of a single, common type of non-covalent interaction—called the “hydrophobic effect.”. Page 18 of 82 intermolecular bonding of molecules of water, formamide, and urea,[55, 56] and watermediated interactions between mono- and disaccharides.[57, 58]

SUMMARY OF MODELS OF THE HYDROPHOBIC EFFECT
SIMULATIONS OF WATER IN THE VICINITY OF PROTEINS
MOLECULAR SCALE TOPOGRAPHY
Findings
CONCLUSIONS
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.