4.3 Article

Quantitative analysis and prediction of curvature in leucine-rich repeat proteins

Journal

PROTEINS-STRUCTURE FUNCTION AND BIOINFORMATICS
Volume 77, Issue 2, Pages 342-358

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/prot.22440

Keywords

leucine-rich repeat proteins; protein structure prediction; analysis of protein structure; bioinformatics; comparative modeling; protein-protein interactions

Funding

  1. BBSRC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Leucine-rich repeat (LRR) proteins form a large and diverse family. They have a wide range of functions most of which involve the formation of protein-protein interactions. All known LRR structures form curved solenoids, although there is large variation in their curvature. It is this curvature that determines the shape and dimensions of the inner space available for ligand binding. Unfortunately, large-scale parameters such as the overall curvature of a protein domain are extremely difficult to predict. Here, we present a quantitative analysis of determinants of curvature of this family. Individual repeats typically range in length between 20 and 30 residues and have a variety of secondary structures on their convex side. The observed curvature of the LRR domains correlates poorly with the lengths of their individual repeats. We have, therefore, developed a scoring function based on the secondary structure of the convex side of the protein that allows prediction of the overall curvature with a high degree of accuracy. We also demonstrate the effectiveness of this method in selecting a suitable template for comparative modeling. We have developed an automated, quantitative protocol that can be used to predict accurately the curvature of leucine-rich repeat proteins of unknown structure from sequence alone. This protocol is available as an online resource at http://www.bioinf.manchester. ac.uk/curlrr/. Proteins 2009; 77:342-358. (C) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available