Team:Slovenia/Orthogonal coiled-coils.html
From 2009.igem.org
(2 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
One of the main challenges we were faced with was to ensure '''exclusivity''' of the pairing. Our selected heterodimeric coiled-coil-forming segments had to satisfy the following requirements:<br> | One of the main challenges we were faced with was to ensure '''exclusivity''' of the pairing. Our selected heterodimeric coiled-coil-forming segments had to satisfy the following requirements:<br> | ||
- | *any coiled-coil-forming segment must form coiled-coil with exactly one segment | + | *any coiled-coil-forming segment must form coiled-coil with exactly one segment, |
- | *any other combination is forbidden/significantly disfavored <br><br> | + | *any other combination is forbidden/significantly disfavored. <br><br> |
In this way selected system of coiled-coil forming segments is called '''orthogonal'''.<br> | In this way selected system of coiled-coil forming segments is called '''orthogonal'''.<br> | ||
Additionally we have to ensure that selected proteins are not too long (in order to avoid bending as well as decreased energetic difference between desired and undesired pairs) but still have approximately the same length to form symmetrical structures if not otherwise required by some special design.<br> | Additionally we have to ensure that selected proteins are not too long (in order to avoid bending as well as decreased energetic difference between desired and undesired pairs) but still have approximately the same length to form symmetrical structures if not otherwise required by some special design.<br> | ||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
To '''predict''' coiled-coil interactions we examined two algorithms (see Hagemann et al., 2009; Fong et al., 2006) and in the end chose to follow Hageman et al.<br> | To '''predict''' coiled-coil interactions we examined two algorithms (see Hagemann et al., 2009; Fong et al., 2006) and in the end chose to follow Hageman et al.<br> | ||
There are '''many factors that affect stability''': hydrophobic burial, propensity, solubility, electrostatic interaction of flanking residues and others. This algorithm considers three factors: '''core''', '''electrostatic''' and '''propensity''' which seem to have the key role in CC formation.<br> | There are '''many factors that affect stability''': hydrophobic burial, propensity, solubility, electrostatic interaction of flanking residues and others. This algorithm considers three factors: '''core''', '''electrostatic''' and '''propensity''' which seem to have the key role in CC formation.<br> | ||
- | The calculation is shown in following scheme (shown on a fictional protein pair)(''Figure 1'') | + | The calculation is shown in following scheme (shown on a fictional protein pair) (''Figure 1''). |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
First we calculated the interaction energy between all possible pairs of 8 different heptads. The interaction of coiled-coil segment is additive, therefore the interaction between larger coiled-coil segments, composed of several heptads could be deduced from the interacting contributions of all heptads. Next we generated a table where we calculated the interaction energy between all possible combinations of coiled-coil-forming segments composed of four heptads in both parallel and antiparallel orientation. | First we calculated the interaction energy between all possible pairs of 8 different heptads. The interaction of coiled-coil segment is additive, therefore the interaction between larger coiled-coil segments, composed of several heptads could be deduced from the interacting contributions of all heptads. Next we generated a table where we calculated the interaction energy between all possible combinations of coiled-coil-forming segments composed of four heptads in both parallel and antiparallel orientation. | ||
<br><br> | <br><br> | ||
- | Then we prepared another algorithm (download and abstract follow [https://2009.igem.org/Team:Slovenia/Software link]) to pick the best set of orthogonal pairs from the generated table which was selected to maximize the difference between the least stable desired pair and most stable undesired pair in the selected set. Predicted temperature difference between the least stable desired pair and most stable undesired pair was predicted to be more than 70 | + | Then we prepared another algorithm (download and abstract follow [https://2009.igem.org/Team:Slovenia/Software link]) to pick the best set of orthogonal pairs from the generated table which was selected to maximize the difference between the least stable desired pair and most stable undesired pair in the selected set. Predicted temperature difference between the least stable desired pair and most stable undesired pair was predicted to be more than 70 °C. |
<br><br> | <br><br> | ||
As a result of this approach we found '''a system of 8 orthogonal designed peptides''': P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7 and P8, which form four pairs: '''P1+P2''', '''P3+P4''', '''P5+P6''' and '''P7+P8'''.<br> | As a result of this approach we found '''a system of 8 orthogonal designed peptides''': P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7 and P8, which form four pairs: '''P1+P2''', '''P3+P4''', '''P5+P6''' and '''P7+P8'''.<br> |
Latest revision as of 02:09, 22 October 2009
|
De novo design of orthogonal coiled-coil forming segments
In this way selected system of coiled-coil forming segments is called orthogonal. Figure 1 We extended this algorithm to pairs with different lenghts and register as well as antiparallel peptides. Complete algorithm (in C, easily applicable to C++/Matlab/Mathematica): link and in Excel (just for pairs of with set register): link Identification of a set of orthogonal coiled-coil pairs
Figure 2 Figure 2 above shows our approach: First we calculated the interaction energy between all possible pairs of 8 different heptads. The interaction of coiled-coil segment is additive, therefore the interaction between larger coiled-coil segments, composed of several heptads could be deduced from the interacting contributions of all heptads. Next we generated a table where we calculated the interaction energy between all possible combinations of coiled-coil-forming segments composed of four heptads in both parallel and antiparallel orientation. Then we prepared another algorithm (download and abstract follow link) to pick the best set of orthogonal pairs from the generated table which was selected to maximize the difference between the least stable desired pair and most stable undesired pair in the selected set. Predicted temperature difference between the least stable desired pair and most stable undesired pair was predicted to be more than 70 °C. As a result of this approach we found a system of 8 orthogonal designed peptides: P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7 and P8, which form four pairs: P1+P2, P3+P4, P5+P6 and P7+P8. In the following chart we can see theoretically predicted melting temperatures (higher the temperature, the more stable the coiled-coil). Figure 3 |