Abstract

Intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) are abundant in eukaryotic proteomes and preform critical roles in many cellular processes, most often through the association with globular proteins. Despite lacking a stable three‐dimensional structure by themselves, they may acquire a defined conformation upon binding globular targets. The most common type of secondary structure acquired by these binding motifs entails formation of an α‐helix. It has been hypothesized that such disorder‐to‐order transitions are associated with a significant free energy penalty due to IDP folding, which reduces the overall IDP‐target affinity. However, the exact magnitude of IDP folding penalty in α‐helical binding motifs has not been systematically estimated. Here, we report the folding penalty contributions for 30 IDPs undergoing folding‐upon‐binding and find that the average IDP folding penalty is +2.0 kcal/mol and ranges from 0.7 to 3.5 kcal/mol. We observe that the folding penalty scales approximately linearly with the change in IDP helicity upon binding, which provides a simple empirical way to estimate folding penalty. We analyze to what extent do pre‐structuring and target‐bound IDP dynamics (fuzziness) reduce the folding penalty and find that these effects combined, on average, reduce the folding cost by around half. Taken together, the presented analysis provides a quantitative basis for understanding the role of folding penalty in IDP‐target interactions and introduces a method estimate this quantity. Estimation and reduction of IDP folding penalty may prove useful in the rational design of helix‐stabilized inhibitors of IDP‐target interactions.StatementThe α‐helical binding motifs are ubiquitous among the intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs). Upon binding their targets, they undergo a disorder‐to‐order transition, which is accompanied by a significant folding penalty whose magnitude is generally not known. Here, we use recently developed statistical‐thermodynamic model to estimate the folding penalties for 30 IDPs and clarify the roles of IDP pre‐folding and bound‐state dynamics in reducing the folding penalty.

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.