Scanning mutagenesis of the putative transmembrane segments of Kir2.1, an inward rectifier potassium channel

Structural models of inward rectifier K+ channels incorporate four identical or homologous subunits, each of which has two hydrophobic segments (M1 and M2) which are predicted to span the membrane as α helices. Since hydrophobic interactions between proteins and membrane lipids are thought to be generally of a nonspecific nature, we attempted to identify lipid-contacting residues in Kir2.1 as those which tolerate mutation to tryptophan, which has a large hydrophobic side chain. Tolerated mutations were defined as those which produced measurable inwardly rectifying currents in Xenopus oocytes. To distinguish between water-accessible positions and positions adjacent to membrane lipids or within the protein interior we also mutated residues in M1 and M2 individually to aspartate, since an amino acid with a charged side chain should not be tolerated at lipid-facing or interior positions, due to the energy cost of burying a charge in a hydrophobic environment. Surprisingly, 17 out of 20 and 17 out of 22 non-tryptophan residues in M1 and M2, respectively, tolerated being mutated to tryptophan. Moreover, aspartate was tolerated at 15 out of 22 and 15 out of 21 non-aspartate M1 and M2 positions respectively. Periodicity in the pattern of tolerated vs. nontolerated mutations consistent with α helices or β strands did not emerge convincingly from these data. We consider the possibility that parts of M1 and M2 may be in contact with water.

Crystal structures of the vitamin D receptor complexed to superagonist 20-epi ligands

The crystal structures of the ligand-binding domain (LBD) of the vitamin D receptor complexed to 1α,25(OH)2D3 and the 20-epi analogs, MC1288 and KH1060, show that the protein conformation is identical, conferring a general character to the observation first made for retinoic acid receptor (RAR) that, for a given LBD, the agonist conformation is unique, the ligands adapting to the binding pocket. In all complexes, the A- to D-ring moieties of the ligands adopt the same conformation and form identical contacts with the protein. Differences are observed only for the 17β-aliphatic chains that adapt their conformation to anchor the 25-hydroxyl group to His-305 and His-397. The inverted geometry of the C20 methyl group induces different paths of the aliphatic chains. The ligands exhibit a low-energy conformation for MC1288 and a more strained conformation for the two others. KH1060 compensates this energy cost by additional contacts. Based on the present data, the explanation of the superagonist effect is to be found in higher stability and longer half-life of the active complex, thereby excluding different conformations of the ligand binding domain.

Free energy of burying hydrophobic residues in the interface between protein subunits

We have obtained an experimental estimate of the free energy change associated with variations at the interface between protein subunits, a subject that has raised considerable interest since the concept of accessible surface area was introduced by Lee and Richards [Lee, B. & Richards, F. M. (1971) J. Mol. Biol. 55, 379–400]. We determined by analytical ultracentrifugation the dimer–tetramer equilibrium constant of five single and three double mutants of human Hb. One mutation is at the stationary α1β1 interface, and all of the others are at the sliding α1β2 interface where cleavage of the tetramer into dimers and ligand-linked allosteric changes are known to occur. A surprisingly good linear correlation between the change in the free energy of association of the mutants and the change in buried hydrophobic surface area was obtained, after corrections for the energetic cost of losing steric complementarity at the αβ dimer interface. The slope yields an interface stabilization free energy of −15 ± 1.2 cal/mol upon burial of 1 Å2 of hydrophobic surface, in very good agreement with the theoretical estimate given by Eisenberg and McLachlan [Eisenberg, D. & McLachlan, A. D. (1986) Nature (London) 319, 199–203].