Figures
Abstract
Most thermophilic proteins tend to have more salt bridges, and achieve higher thermostability by up-shifting and broadening their protein stability curves. While the stabilizing effect of salt-bridge has been extensively studied, experimental data on how salt-bridge influences protein stability curves are scarce. Here, we used double mutant cycles to determine the temperature-dependency of the pair-wise interaction energy and the contribution of salt-bridges to ΔCp in a thermophilic ribosomal protein L30e. Our results showed that the pair-wise interaction energies for the salt-bridges E6/R92 and E62/K46 were stabilizing and insensitive to temperature changes from 298 to 348 K. On the other hand, the pair-wise interaction energies between the control long-range ion-pair of E90/R92 were negligible. The ΔCp of all single and double mutants were determined by Gibbs-Helmholtz and Kirchhoff analyses. We showed that the two stabilizing salt-bridges contributed to a reduction of ΔCp by 0.8–1.0 kJ mol−1 K−1. Taken together, our results suggest that the extra salt-bridges found in thermophilic proteins enhance the thermostability of proteins by reducing ΔCp, leading to the up-shifting and broadening of the protein stability curves.
Citation: Chan C-H, Yu T-H, Wong K-B (2011) Stabilizing Salt-Bridge Enhances Protein Thermostability by Reducing the Heat Capacity Change of Unfolding. PLoS ONE 6(6): e21624. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624
Editor: Annalisa Pastore, National Institute for Medical Research, Medical Research Council, London, United Kingdom
Received: April 17, 2011; Accepted: June 3, 2011; Published: June 24, 2011
Copyright: © 2011 Chan et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: This work was funded by the General Research Fund of Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (Project no. 476307). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
To survive in the hot habitats, proteins from thermophilic organisms are more thermal stable than their mesophilic homologs. The conformational stability of proteins is defined as the free energy difference between the native and the unfolded states, or the free energy of unfolding (ΔGu). ΔGu varies with temperature as a curve function (i.e. the protein stability curve), which is described by the Gibbs-Helmholtz equation:where Tm is the melting temperature, ΔHm is the enthalpy change of protein unfolding at Tm, and ΔCp is the heat capacity change of unfolding.
Nojima and co-workers pointed out that protein thermostability, or increase in Tm, can in theory be enhanced by: (i) up-shifting, (ii) broadening, and (iii) right-shifting of the protein stability curves [1]. Nussinov and co-workers studied the correlation between different thermodynamic parameters of 5 protein families and showed that thermophilic proteins prefer to increase Tm by up-shifting and broadening of their protein stability curves [2]. In a later study, Razvi and Scholtz systematically compared the protein stability curves of 26 thermo- and mesophilic homologous pairs of proteins. Regardless to the physical origins, they showed that over 70% of thermophilic proteins in their study achieve higher Tm by up-shifting and/or broadening of their protein stability curves as compared with their mesophilic homologous [3]. It is clear that most thermophilic proteins achieve higher thermostability by up-shifting and broadening of their protein stability curves.
The Gibbs-Helmholtz equation predicts that a smaller ΔCp can up-shift and broaden a protein stability curve. For example, the curvature of the protein stability can be defined as the second derivative of the Gibbs-Helmholtz equation:for Ts is the temperature where ΔGu is maximum [2]. A reduction in ΔCp will make the curvature less negative and, therefore, the protein stability curve is broadened. Similarly, it can be shown that a smaller ΔCp can increase the maximum ΔGu: ΔGu(Ts) = ΔHm−ΔCp(Tm−Ts), or in other words, the protein stability curve is up-shifted [2], provided that ΔHm is increased or remains constant.
Consistent with the observation that most thermophilic proteins achieve higher thermostability by up-shifting and broadening of their protein stability curves, thermophilic proteins tend to have a much smaller value of ΔCp than their mesophilic homologs [4]–[11]. For example, we have shown that the thermophilic ribosomal protein L30e from Thermococcus celer has a ΔCp value of ∼5 kJ mol−1 K−1, which is much smaller than the value of ∼10 kJ mol−1 K−1 obtained for the mesophilic L30e from yeast [12].
In thermophilic proteins, one common strategy to enhance thermostability is to have more favorable surface charge-charge interactions. When compared with their mesophilic homologues, thermophilic proteins have more surface charged residues [13] and have an increased number of salt bridge [14]–[16]. The stabilizing role of the electrostatic interaction was first suggested by Perutz and Raidt based on their modeling studies [17], [18], and was experimentally verified by various strategies including optimization of surface charges [19], [20], removal of surface charges [21], [22], addition of new ion pairs [23], [24], and double mutant cycles [23], [25]–[34]. To study the contribution of charge-charge interactions to the thermostability and the reduced ΔCp of thermophilic proteins, our group had systematically removed 26 surface charges on T. celer L30e by single charge-to-alanine substitutions. Most of the mutants results in decreases in Tm [21], indicated that the surface charges are mostly stabilizing in thermophilic protein. In another study, we showed that removal of favorable charge-charge interaction by single charge-to-neutral substitutions increases the ΔCp value [12].
Here, we demonstrated that stabilizing salt-bridges enhance the thermostability of proteins by reducing the ΔCp. We used the double-mutant cycle to investigate the effect of pair-wise interaction of two salt bridges (E6/R92 and E62/K46) on protein thermostability and ΔCp. We showed that the two salt-bridges stabilized the T. celer L30e protein by ∼2–5 kJ mol−1, and the stabilizing effect was insensitive to temperature changes from 298–348 K. The contribution of the two salt-bridges to ΔCp was determined independently by Gibbs-Helmholtz and Kirchhoff analyses. Our results showed that each salt-bridge contributed to a reduction of ΔCp by 0.8–1.0 kJ mol−1 K−1. That salt-bridge reduces ΔCp provides a structural basis for the large differences in ΔCp observed between thermophilic and mesophilic proteins.
Results
Design of variants
In this study, we used the double-mutant cycle to investigate how salt-bridges contribute to the thermostability of proteins. We have selected two salt-bridges (E6/R92 and K46/E62), which are located on opposite sides of T. celer L30e (Figure 1). Charged residues were substituted with alanine. For Arg and Lys residues that have long side chain, substitutions to Met were made to mimic their long hydrophobic side chains. As a result, two double-mutant cycles were applied for each salt-bridge. As a negative control, we have also used double-mutant cycles to study the pair-wise interaction between E90 and R92, which have a long separation distance of 10.8 Å. A total of seven single mutants and six double mutants were generated (Table S1).
The separation distances of the salt-bridges E6/R92 and E62/K46, and the control pair E90/R92 are indicated and represented by dashed lines.
Pair-wise Interaction energy between charge residues was determined by double-mutant cycles
Single charge-to-neutral substitutions suffer from the limitation that the residue being substituted may also form other interactions with the rest of the proteins. By canceling out these interactions using the double-mutant-cycle approach, one can estimate the contribution of the pair-wise interaction between the two oppositely charged residues in a salt-bridge [23]. The scheme presented in Figure S1 explains how the pair-wise interaction energy is determined by the double-mutant-cycle approach. For the theoretical background on the use of double-mutant cycle to determine the pair-wise interaction energy of salt-bridges, please refer to the work of Fersht and co-workers [23]. In brief, if pair-wise interaction exists between two oppositely charged residues, the ΔΔGu for removing a negative charge from the wild-type protein (process A) should be smaller than that from M−ve in which the positive charged residues has been substituted in prior (process B) (Figure S1). It is because in addition to the interaction made by the negative charge residue to the rest of the protein, the process A also removes the pair-wise interaction. Similar arguments could be applied to the ΔΔG for process C and D. We obtained the pair-wise interaction energy between the two charge residues (ΔΔGint) by: ΔΔGint = [ΔGu(DM)−ΔGu(M−ve)]−[ΔGu(M+ve)−ΔGu (WT)].
We have determined the free energy of unfolding (ΔGu) of the wild-type T. celer L30e and its variants by urea-induced denaturation at 298 K (Table 1), and calculated the values ΔΔGint for the cycles E6A/R92A(M), E62A/K46A(M), and E90A/R92A(M) (Figure S1). The values of ΔΔGint were in the range of 1.9–3.6 kJ mol−1 for the pairs of charged residues (E6/R92 and E62/K46) involved in salt-bridges. In contrast, the values of ΔΔGint were close to zero for the control pairs (E90/R92). Taken together, our results suggest that the two salt-bridges of E6/R92 and E62/K46 contributed favorably to the stability of L30e.
Salt-bridges are stabilizing and their interaction energies are insensitive to temperature changes
Next we investigated the temperature dependency of the pair-wise interaction energy. The measurement of ΔGu was extended to 308, 318, 328, 338 and 348 K (Table 1). The values of ΔΔGint were determined accordingly and summarized in Table S2 and Figure S2. Within each double-mutant cycle, there is no significant difference among the ΔΔGint values obtained at different temperatures, and between those derived from R/K→A cycles and from R/K→M cycles. On the other hand, the ΔΔGint values for different pairs of charge residues were significantly different from each other. The average values of ΔΔGint for the salt-bridges E6/R92 and E62/K46 were 2.3±0.3 and 3.9±0.3, respectively, while the value for the control pair was 0.6±0.3 kJ mol−1. Our results suggest that the salt-bridges E6/R92 and E62/K46 are stabilizing, and the pair-wise interaction energy appears to be independent of temperatures.
ΔCp is reduced by pair-wise interaction of salt-bridges
Values of ΔGu at temperatures 298–348 K and their Tm values were fitted to the Gibbs-Helmholtz equation to obtain the values of ΔCp (Figure 2 and Table 2). Compared to the wild-type value of 5.3 kJ mol−1 K−1, ΔCp were increased to 5.7–6.8 kJ mol−1 K−1 for substitutions (E6A, E62A, K46A/M, R92A/M) that break a salt-bridge interaction. On the other hand, for the E90A substitution that did not break any salt-bridge, there was no significant change in the value of ΔCp (Table 2). These results suggest that single substitutions that break a salt-bridge would increase the values of ΔCp.
Values of ΔGu at 298–348 K were obtained by urea-induced denaturation experiments for the variants of L30e in the double-mutant cycles (A) E6A/R92A, (B) E6A/R92M, (C) E62A/K46A, (D) E62A/K46M, (E) E90A/R92A, and (F) E90A/R92M. Values of ΔGu for the wild-type L30e are shown in circles, E→A variants in squares, R/K→A/M variants in diamonds, and the doubly-substituted variants in triangles. Values of ΔGu together with Tm were fitted to the Gibbs-Helmholtz equation to obtain values of ΔCp.
To address the question if the pair-wise interaction of salt-bridges affects the values of ΔCp, we determined the ΔΔCp(int) by double-mutant cycle in an analogy to the determination of the ΔΔGint (Figure 3A). Take the double-mutant cycle of E6A/R92A as an example (Figure 3B). Removal of a negative charge by E6A substitution from the wild-type L30e resulted in an increase of ΔCp for 0.8 kJ mol−1 K−1. On the other hand, the difference in ΔCp between R92A and E6A/R92A was only −0.1 kJ mol−1 K−1. These data suggest that the two substitutions are not independent, and the pair-wise interaction between E6A and R92A affects the ΔCp.
The scheme shown in panel (A) is in analogy to that used to calculate ΔΔGint in Figure S1. (B) ΔΔCp(int) for all six double-mutant cycles analyzed. The substitutions are indicated inside the boxes. The values of ΔΔCp for processes A–D were shown along the arrows, and the values of ΔΔCp(int) were shown in the middle of the cycles. All values are in kJ mol−1 K−1.
Similar to the argument for the determination of ΔΔGint, we have ΔΔCp(int) = [ΔCp(DM)−ΔCp(M−ve)]−[ΔCp(M+ve)−ΔCp(WT)] (Figure 3A). The values of ΔΔCp(int) for the six double-mutant cycles were determined by the double-mutant cycle (Table 3 and Figure 3B). The values of ΔΔCp(int) for the control cycle, E90A/R92A(M), were close to zero (−0.1 to −0.3 kJ mol−1 K−1). In contrast, for the cycles, E6A/R92A(M) and E62A/K46A(M), that involves breakage of a salt-bridge, values of ΔΔCp(int) were from −0.8 to −1.0 kJ mol−1 K−1. The negative values of ΔΔCp(int) strongly suggest that the pair-wise interaction of salt-bridges reduces the ΔCp.
To further confirm the hypothesis that the pair-wise interaction of salt-bridge contributes to the reduction of ΔCp, we have determined the values of ΔCp independently by the Kirchhoff analysis [35]–[37]. Values of Tm and ΔHm at pH 2.5–6.0 for L30e and its variants were obtained by thermal denaturation. ΔCp values for wild-type and variant L30e were derived from the slope of the ΔHm vs. Tm plot (Figure 4), and summarized in Table 2. The ΔCp value for wild-type L30e was 3.9±0.2 kJ mol−1 K−1. For substitutions (E6A, K46A, E62A, R92A) that break a salt-bridge, the ΔCp values were increased to 4.6–4.9 kJ mol−1 K−1 (Table 2). On the other hand, for E90A substitution that did not break any salt-bridge, the ΔCp value was 4.0±0.1 kJ mol−1 K−1, which was similar to that of wild-type L30e.
ΔHm and Tm were obtained at pH 2.6–6.0 by thermal denaturation for the variants of L30e in the double-mutant cycles (A) E6A/R92A, (B) E62A/K46A, and (C) E90A/R92A. Values of ΔHm were plotted as a function of Tm for T. celer L30e and its variants. ΔCp was obtained by the slope of the plot.
We noticed that ΔCp values obtained using the Kirchhoff analysis based on thermal denaturation data were smaller than those using Gibbs-Helmholtz analysis based on chemical-induced denaturation experiments. This observation is consistent with our previous report, in which we pointed out that the systematic differences in ΔCp values were probably due to the thermal denatured state having more residual structures than the chemical-induced denatured state [12].
Regardless of the systematic differences in ΔCp values, the values of ΔΔCp(int) determined by the Kirchhoff analysis were in striking agreement with those obtained by the Gibbs-Helmholtz analysis (Table 3). For the double-mutant cycles involving the breakage of a salt-bridge, the values of ΔΔCp(int) were −0.8±0.4 and −0.9±0.5 kJ mol−1 K−1 for E6A/R92A and E62A/K46A, respectively. In contrast, the ΔΔCp(int) was close to zero for the control cycle E90A/R92A (−0.2±0.4 kJ mol−1 K−1). Taken together, our results suggest that the pair-wise interaction of salt-bridge reduces the ΔCp by ca. 0.8–1.0 kJ mol−1 K−1.
No major structural changes were observed in the double charge-to-Ala variants
The crystal structures of the E6A/R92A, K46A/E62A, and E90A/R92A variants were determined at resolution ranging from 1.8 to 2.0 Å (Table S3). The structures of all these variants can be superimposable with the wild-type structures (Figure S3). The root-mean-square deviations (r.m.s.d.) between Cα atoms of the wild-type L30e and its variants were <0.5 Å (Table S3), suggesting there were no major structural change in these variants.
Discussion
Whether salt-bridge contributes to protein stability is controversial, and is probably context dependent [23], [30], [38]–[42]. Elcock proposed that salt-bridge should be more stabilizing at high temperatures because the unfavorable desolvation penalty [43]–[45] and the entropic cost of fixing two charged side-chains [33], [46], [47] would decrease with temperatures [48]. Here, we used the double-mutant-cycle approach to study how salt-bridge contributes to the thermostability of proteins. The two salt-bridges, E6/R92 and E62/K46, stabilizes the protein by ∼2–5 kJ mol−1 (Figure S2 and Table S2). That values of ΔΔGint for R/K→A and R/K→M cycles were similar suggests that the stabilization is mainly due to the charge-charge interaction, rather than hydrophobic interaction, between the salt-bridging residues. We showed that the pair-wise interaction energy, ΔΔGint, is insensitive to temperature changes (Figure S2). This observation is consistent with a previous study by Ge and co-workers [26], which showed that the pair-wise interaction energies of salt-bridges in a hyperthermophilic protein Ssh10b at 298 and 353 K were similar. Since the free energy of unfolding is decreasing with temperatures, the more-or-less constant stabilizing effect of salt-bridges should contribute more in proportion to the overall protein stability at high temperatures.
We further demonstrated unambiguously that the stabilizing salt-bridges reduce the heat capacity change of unfolding (ΔCp). We showed that single-substitutions that break a salt-bridge increased the ΔCp value. This observation is consistent with our previous report in that removal of favorable electrostatic interactions by single charge-to-neutral substitutions increases the ΔCp [12]. Using the double-mutant-cycle approach, we determined the values of ΔΔCp(int), which estimates how much the pair-wise interaction between the salt-bridging residues contributes to the heat capacity change of unfolding. For the double-mutant cycles that break a salt-bridge (i.e. E6/R92 and E62/K46), negative values of ΔΔCp(int) suggest that the pair-wise interaction of the salt-bridges reduces the ΔCp by 0.8 to 1.0 kJ mol−1 K−1.
Using guanidine-induced denaturation and Gibbs-Helmholtz analysis, we have previously showed that the ΔCp for the mesophilic L30e from yeast (10.5 kJ mol−1 K−1) was much larger than that for the thermophilic T. celer L30e (5.3 kJ mol−1 K−1) [12]. It is in fact a common observation that thermophilic proteins tend to have smaller values of ΔCp than their mesophilic homologues [4]–[8], [10], [11]. Here, we demonstrated by double-mutant cycle that the pair-wise interaction between the salt-bridging residues reduces the ΔCp, which provide a structural basis of why thermophilic proteins have smaller values of ΔCp. This conclusion is consistent with our previous observation that removal of favorable charge-charge interactions by single substitutions resulted in increases in ΔCp [12]. Using a simple spherical model, Zhou predicted that favorable interaction between two oppositely charge residues should decrease ΔCp [49]. Our experimental results provide unambiguous evidence supporting the conclusion that stabilizing salt-bridge reduces the ΔCp.
The structural basis of why thermophilic proteins have smaller values of ΔCp is controversial. It has been well documented that ΔCp correlates well with the changes in solvent accessible surface area (ΔASA) upon unfolding [50]–[52]. As we have pointed out previously, due to the similarity in their native conformation, homologous proteins tend to bury similar amount of ASA upon folding assuming the denatured states are random coil [12]. To explain the differences in ΔCp between thermophilic and mesophilic proteins, it has been proposed that thermophilic proteins may have more residual structures in their denatured states so that the ΔASA would be smaller than that calculated for a random-coil [53], [54]. However, it is uncertain if the differences in residual structures, if any, can explain the large differences in ΔCp observed. Moreover, Zhou pointed out that the presence of more residual structures may increase the free energy of the denatured state and destabilize the protein, which is counter-intuitive to the fact that thermophilic proteins are more stable than their mesophilic homologs [49]. Apparently, the correlation of ΔCp to ΔASA fails to account for the large differences in ΔCp commonly observed for thermophilic and mesophilic pairs of homologous proteins [8], [9], suggesting that factors other than the hydration effect may also contribute to ΔCp.
Our results showed that the ΔHm for the wild-type protein was slightly higher than that for the variants (Figure 4). Under this condition, having a smaller ΔCp always enhances protein thermostability by up-shifting and broadening the protein stability curve. Figure S4 simulates the shape of the protein stability curve of two hypothetical proteins with ΔCp values of 5.3 and 7.3 kJ mol−1 K−1. The simulation shows that a decrease of ΔCp by 2 kJ mol−1 K−1 shifts the protein stability upward, and increases its maximum stability by ∼10 kJ mol−1. It also broadens the protein stability curve so that the protein remains stable at a wilder range of temperatures. Our previous study also showed T. celer L30e has an up-shifted and broadened protein stability curve when compare with that of the mesophilic yeast homologues [12].
In a survey of 26 protein families where thermodynamics data were available for both mesophilic and thermophilic homologs, Razvi and co-workers found that most protein enhances their thermostability by up-shifting and broadening of the protein stability curves [3]. Since thermophilic proteins tend to have more salt-bridges than their mesophilic homologs [14]–[16], our observation that salt-bridge reduces ΔCp may provide a general mechanism for enhancing thermostability - thermophilic proteins have more stabilizing salt-bridges that reduce the ΔCp, leading to the up-shifting and broadening of the protein stability curve.
Materials and Methods
Site-directed mutagenesis
All site-directed mutagenesis were performed by a two-stage PCR procedure modified from the QuikChange site-directed mutagenesis protocol using the mutagenic primers listed in Table S1 [55]. Wild-type T. celer L30e cloned in expression vector pET3d (Novagen) was used as the template in all polymerase reactions. Mutations introduced were confirmed by DNA sequencing.
Protein expression and purification
All protein samples were expressed and purified as described [21], [56].
Thermal-induced denaturation
20 µM protein samples were dialyzed in 10 mM sodium acetate buffer at pH 5.4 for 16 hours before circular dichroism (CD) measurement. After degassing thoroughly, all protein samples were heated in a securely stoppered 1 mm path-length cuvette from 298 K to 383 K at a heating rate of 1 K min−1. The thermal denaturation was then monitored by molar ellipticity at 222 nm using a JASCO J810 spectropolarimeter equipped with a peltier-type temperature control unit.
The melting temperature (Tm) and enthalpy of unfolding ΔHm were obtained by fitting the thermal denaturation curve to a two-state model (Figure S5):where yobs is the observed molar ellipticity at 222 nm; yn and mn are the y-intercept and slope of the pre-transition baseline; yu and mu are the y-intercept and slope of the post-transition baseline; R is the gas constant; T is the temperature in Kelvin.
Urea-induced denaturation
20 µM protein samples were equilibrated with 0 M–10.2 M urea in 10 mM sodium acetate buffer at pH 5.4 for 30 minutes before CD measurement. Concentration of urea was determined from refractive index measurements [57] using Leica AR200 refractometer. The urea-induced denaturation was monitored by molar ellipticity at 222 nm using a JASCO J810 spectropolarimeter equipped with a peltier-type temperature control unit. The urea-induced denaturation was analyzed by a two-state model [58] (Figure S6):where yobs is the observed molar ellipticity at 222 nm; yn and mn are the y-intercept and slope of the pre-transition baseline; yu and mu are the y-intercept and slope of the post-transition baseline; R is the gas constant; T is the temperature in Kelvin; [D] is the concentration of urea; ΔG(D) is the free energy change of unfolding at [D]. The free energy change of unfolding without denaturant, ΔGu, was obtained by linear extrapolation model [58]: ΔG(D) = ΔGu−m[D], using the average m-value approach [59]. ΔGu at 298 K, 308 K, 318 K, 328 K, 338 K, and 348 K were measured for T. celer L30e and its mutants.
Estimation of ΔCp by Gibbs-Helmholtz analysis
ΔGu at temperatures from 298 K to 348 K and Tm were fitted to the Gibbs-Helmholtz equation to obtain the values of ΔCp. For variants of L30e (E6A, K46M, E6AR92A, and E6AR92M) that exhibited irreversible thermal denaturation, values of apparent Tm were used. The program PRISM (GraphPad Software, La Jolla, USA) was used to estimate the errors in ΔCp due to the uncertainty in ΔGu.
Estimation of ΔCp by Kirchhoff analysis
Thermal-induced denaturation curves were measured for protein samples of T. celer L30e in 10 mM sodium citrate/phosphate buffer at pH 2.5 to 6.0. Tm and ΔHm were obtained from by fitting the data to the two-state model described above. ΔCp values were then obtained from the slope of the ΔHm vs. Tm plot. Only the data obtained from reversible thermal denaturation were included in the Kirchhoff analysis.
Crystal structure determination
Crystals of L30e variants were grown by sitting-drop-vapor-diffusion method at 289 K. 2 µl of 10 mg ml−1 protein sample was mixed with 2 µl of precipitant solution (Table S3). Datasets were acquired and collected at 100 K using an in-house rotating anode X-ray source. The diffraction data were processed, merged, scaled, and reduced with programs (MOSFLM, SCALA, TRUNCATE) from the CCP4 suite [60]. The structures were solved by molecular replacement using PHENIX with the wild-type T. celer L30e crystal structure (PDB code: 1H7M) as the search model. The structures were refined using PHENIX [61], and were validated using WHATCHECK [62] and MOLPROBITY [63], [64].
Supporting Information
Figure S1.
Coupling energies (ΔΔGint) were determined by double-mutant cycles. (A) The scheme explaining how ΔΔGint are calculated from values of ΔGu for wild-type (WT), single-mutants (M+ve and M−ve), and double-mutant (DM) by the double-mutant cycle analysis. (B) ΔΔGint for all six double-mutant cycles analyzed. The substitutions are indicated inside the boxes. The values of ΔΔGu for processes A–D were shown along the arrows, and the values of ΔΔGint were shown in the middle of the cycles. All values are in kJ mol−1.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624.s001
(PDF)
Figure S2.
Temperature dependency of the coupling energy. Values of ΔΔGint derived from double-mutant cycles (A) E6A/R92A(M) (circles), (B) E62A/K46A(M) (squares), and (C) E90A/R92A(M) (diamonds) at temperatures 298 K to 348 K are shown. Values of ΔΔGint derived from the R/K→A cycles are represented by filled symbols, and those from the R/K→M cycles by open symbols.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624.s002
(PDF)
Figure S3.
Crystal structures of variants of T. celer L30e. Crystal structures of E6A/R92A (red), E62A/K46A (green), and E90A/R92A (blue) are superimposable to the wild-type T. celer L30e (black).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624.s003
(PDF)
Figure S4.
Reduced ΔCp up-shifts and broadens the protein stability curve. The protein stability curve of a hypothetical protein with ΔCp = 7.3 kJ mol−1 K−1, Tm = 356 K, ΔHm = 382 kJ mol−1 was simulated using the Gibbs-Helmholtz equation (dashed line). Keeping ΔHm and Ts (temperature for maximum stability) constant, the protein stability curve with a reduced value of ΔCp = 5.3 kJ mol−1 K−1 was simulated as the solid line.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624.s004
(PDF)
Figure S5.
Thermal denaturation of wild-type T. celer L30e at different pH. The thermal denaturation curves of wild-type T. celer L30e in 10 mM citrate/phosphate buffer at pH ranging from 2.5 to 6.0 were shown.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624.s005
(PDF)
Figure S6.
Urea-induced denaturation of wild-type T. celer L30e at different temperatures. The 52-point urea-induced denaturation curves of wild-type T. celer L30e in 10 mM sodium acetate buffer, pH 5.4 at temperatures ranging from 298 K to 348 K were shown.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624.s006
(PDF)
Table S1.
Oligonucleotide primers used in the mutagenesis.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624.s007
(DOC)
Table S2.
ΔΔGint at 298–348 K determined by double-mutant cycles.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624.s008
(DOC)
Table S3.
Statistics for crystal structure determination of E6A/R92A, E62A/K46A, E90A/R92A.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021624.s009
(DOC)
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: C-HC K-BW. Performed the experiments: C-HC T-HY. Analyzed the data: C-HC T-HY K-BW. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: K-BW. Wrote the paper: C-HC K-BW.
References
- 1. Nojima H, Ikai A, Oshima T, Noda H (1977) Reversible thermal unfolding of thermostable phosphoglycerate kinase. J Mol Biol 116: 429–442.
- 2. Kumar S, Tsai CJ, Nussinov R (2001) Thermodynamic differences among homologous thermophilic and mesophilic proteins. Biochemistry 40: 14152–14165.
- 3. Razvi A, Scholtz JM (2006) Lessons in stability from thermophilic proteins. Protein Sci 15: 1569–1578.
- 4. Beadle BM, Baase WA, Wilson DB, Gilkes NR, Shoichet BK (1999) Comparing the thermodynamic stabilities of a related thermophilic and mesophilic enzyme. Biochemistry 38: 2570–2576.
- 5. Deutschman WA, Dahlquist FW (2001) Thermodynamic basis for the increased thermostability of CheY from the hyperthermophile Thermotoga maritima. Biochemistry 40: 13107–13113.
- 6. Filimonov VV, Azuaga AI, Viguera AR, Serrano L, Mateo PL (1999) A thermodynamic analysis of a family of small globular proteins: SH3 domains. Biophys Chem 77: 195–208.
- 7. Grattinger M, Dankesreiter A, Schurig H, Jaenicke R (1998) Recombinant phosphoglycerate kinase from the hyperthermophilic bacterium Thermotoga maritima: catalytic, spectral and thermodynamic properties. J Mol Biol 280: 525–533.
- 8. Hollien J, Marqusee S (1999) A thermodynamic comparison of mesophilic and thermophilic ribonucleases H. Biochemistry 38: 3831–3836.
- 9. Motono C, Oshima T, Yamagishi A (2001) High thermal stability of 3-isopropylmalate dehydrogenase from Thermus thermophilus resulting from low DeltaC(p) of unfolding. Protein Eng 14: 961–966.
- 10. Nojima H, Ikai A, Oshima T, Noda H (1977) Reversible thermal unfolding of thermostable phosphoglycerate kinase. Thermostability associated with mean zero enthalpy change. J Mol Biol 116: 429–442.
- 11. Uchiyama S, Hasegawa J, Tanimoto Y, Moriguchi H, Mizutani M, et al. (2002) Thermodynamic characterization of variants of mesophilic cytochrome c and its thermophilic counterpart. Protein Eng 15: 455–462.
- 12. Lee CF, Allen MD, Bycroft M, Wong KB (2005) Electrostatic interactions contribute to reduced heat capacity change of unfolding in a thermophilic ribosomal protein l30e. J Mol Biol 348: 419–431.
- 13. Fukuchi S, Nishikawa K (2001) Protein surface amino acid compositions distinctively differ between thermophilic and mesophilic bacteria. J Mol Biol 309: 835–843.
- 14. Kumar S, Tsai CJ, Nussinov R (2000) Factors enhancing protein thermostability. Protein Eng 13: 179–191.
- 15. Szilagyi A, Zavodszky P (2000) Structural differences between mesophilic, moderately thermophilic and extremely thermophilic protein subunits: results of a comprehensive survey. Structure 8: 493–504.
- 16. Vogt G, Argos P (1997) Protein thermal stability: hydrogen bonds or internal packing? Fold Des 2: S40–46.
- 17. Perutz MF (1978) Electrostatic effects in proteins. Science 201: 1187–1191.
- 18. Perutz MF, Raidt H (1975) Stereochemical basis of heat stability in bacterial ferredoxins and in haemoglobin A2. Nature 255: 256–259.
- 19. Gribenko AV, Patel MM, Liu J, McCallum SA, Wang C, et al. (2009) Rational stabilization of enzymes by computational redesign of surface charge-charge interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 2601–2606.
- 20. Schweiker KL, Zarrine-Afsar A, Davidson AR, Makhatadze GI (2007) Computational design of the Fyn SH3 domain with increased stability through optimization of surface charge charge interactions. Protein Sci 16: 2694–2702.
- 21. Lee CF, Makhatadze GI, Wong KB (2005) Effects of charge-to-alanine substitutions on the stability of ribosomal protein L30e from Thermococcus celer. Biochemistry 44: 16817–16825.
- 22. Takano K, Tsuchimori K, Yamagata Y, Yutani K (2000) Contribution of salt bridges near the surface of a protein to the conformational stability. Biochemistry 39: 12375–12381.
- 23. Serrano L, Horovitz A, Avron B, Bycroft M, Fersht AR (1990) Estimating the contribution of engineered surface electrostatic interactions to protein stability by using double-mutant cycles. Biochemistry 29: 9343–9352.
- 24. Vetriani C, Maeder DL, Tolliday N, Yip KS, Stillman TJ, et al. (1998) Protein thermostability above 100 degreesC: a key role for ionic interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 95: 12300–12305.
- 25. Blasie CA, Berg JM (1997) Electrostatic interactions across a beta-sheet. Biochemistry 36: 6218–6222.
- 26. Ge M, Xia XY, Pan XM (2008) Salt bridges in the hyperthermophilic protein Ssh10b are resilient to temperature increases. J Biol Chem 283: 31690–31696.
- 27. Ibarra-Molero B, Zitzewitz JA, Matthews CR (2004) Salt-bridges can stabilize but do not accelerate the folding of the homodimeric coiled-coil peptide GCN4-p1. J Mol Biol 336: 989–996.
- 28. Lassila KS, Datta D, Mayo SL (2002) Evaluation of the energetic contribution of an ionic network to beta-sheet stability. Protein Sci 11: 688–690.
- 29. Luisi DL, Snow CD, Lin JJ, Hendsch ZS, Tidor B, et al. (2003) Surface salt bridges, double-mutant cycles, and protein stability: an experimental and computational analysis of the interaction of the Asp 23 side chain with the N-terminus of the N-terminal domain of the ribosomal protein l9. Biochemistry 42: 7050–7060.
- 30. Makhatadze GI, Loladze VV, Ermolenko DN, Chen X, Thomas ST (2003) Contribution of surface salt bridges to protein stability: guidelines for protein engineering. J Mol Biol 327: 1135–1148.
- 31. Marqusee S, Sauer RT (1994) Contributions of a hydrogen bond/salt bridge network to the stability of secondary and tertiary structure in lambda repressor. Protein Sci 3: 2217–2225.
- 32. Spek EJ, Bui AH, Lu M, Kallenbach NR (1998) Surface salt bridges stabilize the GCN4 leucine zipper. Protein Sci 7: 2431–2437.
- 33. Strop P, Mayo SL (2000) Contribution of surface salt bridges to protein stability. Biochemistry 39: 1251–1255.
- 34. Tissot AC, Vuilleumier S, Fersht AR (1996) Importance of two buried salt bridges in the stability and folding pathway of barnase. Biochemistry 35: 6786–6794.
- 35. Baldwin RL (1986) Temperature dependence of the hydrophobic interaction in protein folding. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 83: 8069–8072.
- 36. Murphy KP, Privalov PL, Gill SJ (1990) Common features of protein unfolding and dissolution of hydrophobic compounds. Science 247: 559–561.
- 37. Privalov PL, Gill SJ (1988) Stability of protein structure and hydrophobic interaction. Adv Protein Chem 39: 191–234.
- 38. Erwin CR, Barnett BL, Oliver JD, Sullivan JF (1990) Effects of engineered salt bridges on the stability of subtilisin BPN'. Protein Eng 4: 87–97.
- 39. Horovitz A, Serrano L, Avron B, Bycroft M, Fersht AR (1990) Strength and co-operativity of contributions of surface salt bridges to protein stability. J Mol Biol 216: 1031–1044.
- 40. Lam SY, Yeung RC, Yu TH, Sze KH, Wong KB (2011) A rigidifying salt-bridge favors the activity of thermophilic enzyme at high temperatures at the expense of low-temperature activity. PLoS Biol 9: e1001027.
- 41. Sali D, Bycroft M, Fersht AR (1991) Surface electrostatic interactions contribute little of stability of barnase. J Mol Biol 220: 779–788.
- 42. Sun DP, Sauer U, Nicholson H, Matthews BW (1991) Contributions of engineered surface salt bridges to the stability of T4 lysozyme determined by directed mutagenesis. Biochemistry 30: 7142–7153.
- 43. Fersht AR, Serrano L (1993) Principles of protein stability derived from protein engineering experiments. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 3: 75–83.
- 44. Hendsch ZS, Tidor B (1994) Do salt bridges stabilize proteins? A continuum electrostatic analysis. Protein Sci 3: 211–226.
- 45. Matthews BW (1993) Structural and genetic analysis of protein stability. Annu Rev Biochem 62: 139–160.
- 46. Hendsch ZS, Jonsson T, Sauer RT, Tidor B (1996) Protein stabilization by removal of unsatisfied polar groups: computational approaches and experimental tests. Biochemistry 35: 7621–7625.
- 47. Waldburger CD, Schildbach JF, Sauer RT (1995) Are buried salt bridges important for protein stability and conformational specificity? Nat Struct Biol 2: 122–128.
- 48. Elcock AH (1998) The stability of salt bridges at high temperatures: implications for hyperthermophilic proteins. J Mol Biol 284: 489–502.
- 49. Zhou HX (2002) Toward the physical basis of thermophilic proteins: linking of enriched polar interactions and reduced heat capacity of unfolding. Biophys J 83: 3126–3133.
- 50. Murphy KP, Freire E (1992) Thermodynamics of structural stability and cooperative folding behavior in proteins. Adv Protein Chem 43: 313–361.
- 51. Myers JK, Pace CN, Scholtz JM (1995) Denaturant m values and heat capacity changes: relation to changes in accessible surface areas of protein unfolding. Protein Sci 4: 2138–2148.
- 52. Spolar RS, Livingstone JR, Record MT Jr (1992) Use of liquid hydrocarbon and amide transfer data to estimate contributions to thermodynamic functions of protein folding from the removal of nonpolar and polar surface from water. Biochemistry 31: 3947–3955.
- 53. Robic S, Berger JM, Marqusee S (2002) Contributions of folding cores to the thermostabilities of two ribonucleases H. Protein Sci 11: 381–389.
- 54. Robic S, Guzman-Casado M, Sanchez-Ruiz JM, Marqusee S (2003) Role of residual structure in the unfolded state of a thermophilic protein. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100: 11345–11349.
- 55. Wang W, Malcolm BA (1999) Two-stage PCR protocol allowing introduction of multiple mutations, deletions and insertions using QuikChange Site-Directed Mutagenesis. Biotechniques 26: 680–682.
- 56. Wong KB, Lee CF, Chan SH, Leung TY, Chen YW, et al. (2003) Solution structure and thermal stability of ribosomal protein L30e from hyperthermophilic archaeon Thermococcus celer. Protein Sci 12: 1483–1495.
- 57. Pace CN (1986) Determination and analysis of urea and guanidine hydrochloride denaturation curves. Methods Enzymol 131: 266–280.
- 58. Santoro MM, Bolen DW (1988) Unfolding free energy changes determined by the linear extrapolation method. 1. Unfolding of phenylmethanesulfonyl alpha-chymotrypsin using different denaturants. Biochemistry 27: 8063–8068.
- 59. Itzhaki LS, Otzen DE, Fersht AR (1995) The structure of the transition state for folding of chymotrypsin inhibitor 2 analysed by protein engineering methods: evidence for a nucleation-condensation mechanism for protein folding. J Mol Biol 254: 260–288.
- 60. Collaborative Computational Project N (1994) The CCP4 suite: programs for protein crystallography. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 50: 760–763.
- 61. Adams PD, Afonine PV, Bunkoczi G, Chen VB, Davis IW, et al. (2010) PHENIX: a comprehensive Python-based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 66: 213–221.
- 62. Hooft RW, Vriend G, Sander C, Abola EE (1996) Errors in protein structures. Nature 381: 272.
- 63. Chen VB, Arendall WB 3rd, Headd JJ, Keedy DA, Immormino RM, et al. (2010) MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 66: 12–21.
- 64. Davis IW, Leaver-Fay A, Chen VB, Block JN, Kapral GJ, et al. (2007) MolProbity: all-atom contacts and structure validation for proteins and nucleic acids. Nucleic Acids Res 35: W375–383.