1.1. Uncharacterized Protein Segments Are a Source of Functional Novelty
Over the past decade, we have observed a massive increase in the amount of information describing protein sequences from a variety of organisms.1,2 While this may reflect the diversity in sequence space, and possibly also in function space,3 a large proportion of the sequences lacks any useful function annotation.4,5 Often these sequences are annotated as putative or hypothetical proteins, and for the majority their functions still remain unknown.6,7 Suggestions about potential protein function, primarily molecular function, often come from computational analysis of their sequences. For instance, homology detection allows for the transfer of information from well-characterized protein segments to those with similar sequences that lack annotation of molecular function.8−10 Other aspects of function, such as the biological processes proteins participate in, may come from genetic- and disease-association studies, expression and interaction network data, and comparative genomics approaches that investigate genomic context.11−17 Characterization of unannotated and uncharacterized protein segments is expected to lead to the discovery of novel functions as well as provide important insights into existing biological processes. In addition, it is likely to shed new light on molecular mechanisms of diseases that are not yet fully understood. Thus, uncharacterized protein segments are likely to be a large source of functional novelty relevant for discovering new biology.

/pdf/classification-of-intrinsically-disordered-regions-and-2mev7glgpx.pdf

Classification of intrinsically disordered regions and proteins.

Classification of Intrinsically Disordered Regions and Proteins

Johnny Habchi,†,‡ Peter Tompa,* Sonia Longhi,†,‡,* and Vladimir N. Uversky* †Aix-Marseille Universite,́ Architecture et Fonction des Macromolećules Biologiques (AFMB), UMR 7257, 13288, Marseille, France ‡CNRS, Architecture et Fonction des Macromolećules Biologiques (AFMB), UMR 7257, 13288, Marseille, France VIB Department of Structural Biology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Ixelles, Belgium Institute of Enzymology, Research Centre for Natural Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, H-1113, Hungary Department of Molecular Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida 33620, United States Institute for Biological Instrumentation, Russian Academy of Sciences, Pushchino, Moscow Region, Russia

/pdf/introducing-protein-intrinsic-disorder-4fu2ss4mcf.pdf

Introducing Protein Intrinsic Disorder.

It has long been axiomatic that a protein’s structure determines its function. Intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) and disordered protein regions (IDRs) defy this structure–function paradigm. They do not exhibit stable secondary and/or tertiary structures and exist as dynamic ensembles of interconverting conformers with preferred, nonrandom orientations.1-4 The concept of IDPs and IDRs as functional biological units was initially met with skepticism. For a long time, disorder, intuitively implying chaos, had no place in our perception of orchestrated molecular events controlling cell biology.

Over the past years, however, this notion has changed. Aided by findings that structural disorder constitutes an ubiquitous and abundant biological phenomenon in organisms of all phyla,5-7 and that it is often synonymous with function,8-11 disorder has become an integral part of modern protein biochemistry. Disorder thrives in eukaryotic signaling pathways12 and functions as a prominent player in many regulatory processes.13-15 Disordered proteins and protein regions determine the underlying causes of many neurodegenerative disorders and constitute the main components of amyloid fibrils.16 They further contribute to many forms of cancer, diabetes and to cardiovascular and metabolic diseases.17,18

Research into disordered proteins produced significant findings and established important new concepts. On the structural side, novel experimental and computational approaches identified and described disordered protein ensembles3,19,20 and led to terms such as secondary structure propensities, residual structural features, and transient long-range contacts.1,21 The discovery of coupled folding-and-binding reactions defined the paradigm of disorder-to-order transitions22 and high-resolution insights into the architectures of amyloid fibrils were obtained.23,24 On the biological side, we learned about the unexpected intracellular stability of disordered proteins, their roles in integrating post-translational protein modifications in cell signaling and about their functions in regulatory processes ranging from transcription to cell fate decisions.15,25,26 One open question remaining to be addressed is how these in vitro structural insights relate to biological in vivo effects. How do complex intracellular environments modulate the in vivo properties of disordered proteins and what are the implications for their biological functions (Figure 1)?27-29



Figure 1

Intracellular complexity. (A) Left: Cryo-electron tomography slice of a mammalian cell. Middle: Close-up view of cellular structures colored according to their identities: Right: Three-dimensional surface representation of the same region. Yellow, endoplasmic ...



Here, we attempt to answer these questions by reviewing the physical and biological properties of intracellular environments in relation to structural and functional parameters of disordered proteins. Specifically, we discuss how IDPs may experience in vivo environments differently to ordered proteins. To this end, we provide a description of the compositional and physical parameters of the cellular milieu and their effects on ordered and disordered proteins (section 2). We evaluate how biological processes may act differently on ordered and disordered proteins (section 3) and discuss how combined physical and biological contributions modulate the intracellular aggregation behavior of IDPs (section 4). Finally, we review theoretical and experimental approaches to study the structural and functional properties of disordered proteins in cells (section 5).

Physicochemical properties of cells and their effects on intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs).

While the crucial role of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) in the cell cycle is now recognized, deciphering their molecular mode of action at the structural level still remains highly challenging and requires a combination of many biophysical approaches. Among them, small angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) has been extremely successful in the last decade and has become an indispensable technique for addressing many of the fundamental questions regarding the activities of IDPs. After introducing some experimental issues specific to IDPs and in relation to the latest technical developments, this article presents the interest of the theory of polymer physics to evaluate the flexibility of fully disordered proteins. The different strategies to obtain 3-dimensional models of IDPs, free in solution and associated in a complex, are then reviewed. Indeed, recent computational advances have made it possible to readily extract maximum information from the scattering curve with a special emphasis on highly flexible systems, such as multidomain proteins and IDPs. Furthermore, integrated computational approaches now enable the generation of ensembles of conformers to translate the unique flexible characteristics of IDPs by taking into consideration the constraints of more and more various complementary experiment. In particular, a combination of SAXS with high-resolution techniques, such as x-ray crystallography and NMR, allows us to provide reliable models and to gain unique structural insights about the protein over multiple structural scales. The latest neutron scattering experiments also promise new advances in the study of the conformational changes of macromolecules involving more complex systems.

How Random are Intrinsically Disordered Proteins? A Small Angle Scattering Perspective

Intrinsically unfolded proteins (IUPs) do not obey the golden rule of structural biology, 3D structure = function, as they manifest their inherent functions without resorting to three-dimensional structures. Absence of a compact globular topology in these proteins strongly implies that their ligand recognition processes should involve factors other than spatially well-defined binding pockets. Heteronuclear multidimensional (HetMulD) NMR spectroscopy assisted with a stable isotope labeling technology is a powerful tool for quantitatively investigating detailed structural features in IUPs. In particular, it allows us to delineate the presence and locations of pre-structured motifs (PreSMos) on a per-residue basis. PreSMos are the transient local structural elements that presage target-bound conformations and act as specificity determinants for IUP recognition by target proteins. Here, we present a brief chronicle of HetMulD NMR studies on IUPs carried out over the past two decades along with a discussion on the functional significance of PreSMos in IUPs.

Understanding Pre-Structured Motifs (PreSMos) in Intrinsically Unfolded Proteins

The eIF4E–binding protein 1 (4EBP1) has long been known to be completely unstructured without any secondary structures, which contributed significantly to the proposal of the induced fit mechanism for target binding of intrinsically disordered proteins. We show here that 4EBP1 is not completely unstructured, but contains a pre-structured helix.

/pdf/a-pre-structured-helix-in-the-intrinsically-disordered-4ebp1-5q9cmnmnug.pdf

A pre-structured helix in the intrinsically disordered 4EBP1.

p53 is an important tumor-suppressor protein deactivation of which by mdm2 results in cancers. A SUMO-specific protease 4 (SUSP4) was shown to rescue p53 from mdm2-mediated deactivation, but the mechanism is unknown. The discovery by NMR spectroscopy of a "p53 rescue motif" in SUSP4 that disrupts p53-mdm2 binding is presented. This 29-residue motif is pre-populated with two transient helices connected by a hydrophobic linker. The helix at the C-terminus binds to the well-known p53-binding pocket in mdm2 whereas the N-terminal helix serves as an affinity enhancer. The hydrophobic linker binds to a previously unidentified hydrophobic crevice in mdm2. Overall, SUSP4 appears to use two synergizing modules, the p53 rescue motif described here and a globular-structured SUMO-binding catalytic domain, to stabilize p53. A p53 rescue motif peptide exhibits an anti-tumor activity in cancer cell lines expressing wild-type p53. A pre-structures motif in the intrinsically disordered proteins is thus important for target recognition.

Ye-Jin Cho

Papers

Understanding Pre-Structured Motifs (PreSMos) in Intrinsically Unfolded Proteins

A pre-structured helix in the intrinsically disordered 4EBP1.

The Mechanism of p53 Rescue by SUSP4.