Improved Prediction of Stabilizing Mutations in Proteins by Incorporation of Mutational Effects on Ligand Binding.

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Srivarshini Ganesan, Nidhi Mittal, Akash Bhat, Rachana S Adiga, Ananthakrishnan Ganesan, Deepesh Nagarajan, Raghavan Varadarajan
{"title":"Improved Prediction of Stabilizing Mutations in Proteins by Incorporation of Mutational Effects on Ligand Binding.","authors":"Srivarshini Ganesan, Nidhi Mittal, Akash Bhat, Rachana S Adiga, Ananthakrishnan Ganesan, Deepesh Nagarajan, Raghavan Varadarajan","doi":"10.1002/prot.26738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While many computational methods accurately predict destabilizing mutations, identifying stabilizing mutations has remained a challenge, because of their relative rarity. We tested ΔΔG<sup>0</sup> predictions from computational predictors such as Rosetta, ThermoMPNN, RaSP, and DeepDDG, using 82 mutants of the bacterial toxin CcdB as a test case. On this dataset, the best computational predictor is ThermoMPNN, which identifies stabilizing mutations with a precision of 68%. However, the average increase in T<sub>m</sub> for these predicted mutations was only 1°C for CcdB, and predictions were poorer for a more challenging target, influenza neuraminidase. Using data from multiple previously described yeast surface display libraries and in vitro thermal stability measurements, we trained logistic regression models to identify stabilizing mutations with a precision of 90% and an average increase in T<sub>m</sub> of 3°C for CcdB. When such libraries contain a population of mutants with significantly enhanced binding relative to the corresponding wild type, there is no benefit in using computational predictors. It is then possible to predict stabilizing mutations without any training, simply by examining the distribution of mutational binding scores. This avoids laborious steps of in vitro expression, purification, and stability characterization. When this is not the case, combining data from computational predictors with high-throughput experimental binding data enhances the prediction of stabilizing mutations. However, this requires training on stability data measured in vitro with known stabilized mutants. It is thus feasible to predict stabilizing mutations rapidly and accurately for any system of interest that can be subjected to a binding selection or screen.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.26738","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While many computational methods accurately predict destabilizing mutations, identifying stabilizing mutations has remained a challenge, because of their relative rarity. We tested ΔΔG0 predictions from computational predictors such as Rosetta, ThermoMPNN, RaSP, and DeepDDG, using 82 mutants of the bacterial toxin CcdB as a test case. On this dataset, the best computational predictor is ThermoMPNN, which identifies stabilizing mutations with a precision of 68%. However, the average increase in Tm for these predicted mutations was only 1°C for CcdB, and predictions were poorer for a more challenging target, influenza neuraminidase. Using data from multiple previously described yeast surface display libraries and in vitro thermal stability measurements, we trained logistic regression models to identify stabilizing mutations with a precision of 90% and an average increase in Tm of 3°C for CcdB. When such libraries contain a population of mutants with significantly enhanced binding relative to the corresponding wild type, there is no benefit in using computational predictors. It is then possible to predict stabilizing mutations without any training, simply by examining the distribution of mutational binding scores. This avoids laborious steps of in vitro expression, purification, and stability characterization. When this is not the case, combining data from computational predictors with high-throughput experimental binding data enhances the prediction of stabilizing mutations. However, this requires training on stability data measured in vitro with known stabilized mutants. It is thus feasible to predict stabilizing mutations rapidly and accurately for any system of interest that can be subjected to a binding selection or screen.

通过纳入配体结合的突变效应改进蛋白质稳定突变的预测。
虽然许多计算方法都能准确预测失稳突变,但由于稳定突变相对罕见,因此识别稳定突变仍然是一项挑战。我们以细菌毒素 CcdB 的 82 个突变体为测试案例,测试了 Rosetta、ThermoMPNN、RaSP 和 DeepDDG 等计算预测器的 ΔΔG0 预测结果。在这个数据集上,最好的计算预测器是 ThermoMPNN,它识别稳定突变的精确度高达 68%。然而,对于 CcdB 而言,这些预测突变的 Tm 平均只增加了 1°C,而对于更具挑战性的目标--流感神经氨酸酶,预测结果则更差。利用先前描述的多个酵母表面展示文库的数据和体外热稳定性测量结果,我们训练了逻辑回归模型来识别稳定突变,其精确度为 90%,对 CcdB 的 Tm 平均增加了 3°C。当这些文库中包含的突变体群体与相应的野生型相比具有明显增强的结合力时,使用计算预测器就没有什么好处了。这时,只需检查突变结合得分的分布,就可以预测稳定突变,而无需任何训练。这就避免了体外表达、纯化和稳定性鉴定等费力的步骤。如果情况并非如此,将计算预测器的数据与高通量实验结合数据相结合,就能增强对稳定突变的预测。不过,这需要对已知稳定突变体在体外测得的稳定性数据进行训练。因此,对于任何可以进行结合选择或筛选的相关系统,快速准确地预测稳定突变是可行的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信