Team:EPF-Lausanne/Results

From 2009.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
m (Differential Analysis)
m (Mutations)
Line 113: Line 113:
<br> see [https://2009.igem.org/Team:EPF-Lausanne/Information_&_references#LOV2_.26_LOVTAP_references here] for more information.
<br> see [https://2009.igem.org/Team:EPF-Lausanne/Information_&_references#LOV2_.26_LOVTAP_references here] for more information.
-
We ran two other simulations after mutating the LOV domain at these residues and we discovered a much better stability of the cystein due to I427F.
+
We ran two other simulations after mutating the LOV domain at these residues and we discovered a much better stability of the cystein due to I427F. In this configuration, the cystein points toward the FMN in 57,2%, which is almost twice better as in the wild type protein!
<br><br>
<br><br>

Revision as of 18:01, 21 October 2009






                                               




Results of Modeling



Not to forget: Summary of Modeling results + links to the important results



Click on each title below to access the results.

Fusion of the LOV domain and the trpR DNA-binding domain

The first step in our computational study of the LOV domain was to fuse the 2 domains of interest in VMD, namely the LOV domain and the TrpR DNA-binding domain. It allowed to visualize the different proteins tried by Sosnick. The working protein, that we call LovTAP is the result of the fusion at PHE22 of TrpR.



Dark State simulation

This is where we run a long simulation on the dark state system and analyze the output.

In the analysis, we tried to achieve the following goals:

  • find a structural change in the Jα helix based on the simulation
  • find residues showing different comportment in dark and light state



Light state simulation

The light state corresponds to the photoactivated state of the LOV domain, and here are gathered results concerning the light state from a 60ns simulation starting after previous equilibration.


We mainly focused on an analysis of dihedral angles to understand the movement of useful residues.



Differential Analysis

Now that the two states are well-characterized, we want to confront the two visions of the protein. This part is thus devoted to the comparison of the two states.

After a detailed analysis based on both previous simulation, we were able to determine that the stability of the Cystein 450 is highly correlated with the creation of the covalent bound to the FMN.



Mutations

Our final goal is to find a way to make the protein more stable, or to increase its affinity: that's why we imagined some ponctual mutations on some particular residues to do so.
We picked the more mobile residues in the beta sheet, closest to the CYS450, and see if they can improve the overall stability. Here is a list of the mutations planned:

  • ILE427 mutated in PHE
  • ILE427 mutated in LEU
  • LEU453 mutated in ALA
  • LEU453 mutated in GLY

These were based on studies made by :

  1. Zoltowski: Mechanism-based tuning of a LOV domain photoreceptor
  2. Christie, Steric Interactions Stabilize the Signaling State of the LOV2 Domain of Phototropin 1


see here for more information.

We ran two other simulations after mutating the LOV domain at these residues and we discovered a much better stability of the cystein due to I427F. In this configuration, the cystein points toward the FMN in 57,2%, which is almost twice better as in the wild type protein!



Validation of the equilibration

This part brings together results validating our equilibration. This one is composed of 3 different steps:

  • first a minimization, where we try to find a minimum of energy. In fact, it is essential to find a stable point on the potential energy surface in order to begin dynamics. At a minimum on the potential energy surface, the net force on each atom vanishes.

Constraints are imposed during minimization.
To minimize we need a function (provided by the forcefield) and a starting set of coordinates. The magnitude of the first derivative can be used to determine the direction and magnitude of a step (i.e. change in the coordinates) required to approach a minimum configuration. To reach the minimum the structure must be successively updated by changing the coordinates (taking a step) and checking for convergence. Each complete cycle of differentiation and stepping is known as a minimization iteration.

  • a second step composed with a heating of our protein allows to increase the temperature from 5 to 300K.


  • finally, we do an equilibration. This equilibration stage is required because the input structure is typically not within the equilibrium phase space of the simulation conditions, particularly in systems as complex as proteins, which can lead to false trajectories in protein dynamics.


The equilibration can itself be divided into 3 phases: - an NPT - an NVT - again an NPT
The aim of doing a minimization followed by an equilibration simulation is to generate a trajectory for the system, which will be analysed further.


This part gathers together plots confirming that our minimization-heating-equilibration were correct, and that we followed with a good file of trajectories.