Valerio Mariacristina, Colosimo Alfredo, Conti Filippo, Giuliani Alessandro, Grottesi Alessandro, Manetti Cesare, Zbilut Joseph P
Department of Chemistry, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy.
Proteins. 2005 Jan 1;58(1):110-8. doi: 10.1002/prot.20306.
In a previous article (Zbilut et al., Biophys J 2003;85:3544-3557), we demonstrated how an aggregation versus folding choice could be approached considering hydrophobicity distribution and charge. In this work, our aim is highlighting the mutual interaction of charge and hydrophobicity distribution in the aggregation process. Use was made of two different peptides, both derived from a transmembrane protein (amyloid precursor protein; APP), namely, Abeta(1-28) and Abeta(1-40). Abeta(1-28) has a much lower aggregation propensity than Abeta(1-40). The results obtained by means of molecular dynamics simulations show that, when submitted to the most "aggregation-prone" environment, corresponding to the isoelectric point and consequently to zero net charge, both peptides acquire their maximum flexibility, but Abeta(1-40) has a definitely higher conformational mobility than Abeta(1-28). The absence of a hydrophobic "tail," which is the most mobile part of the molecule in Abeta(1-40), is the element lacking in Abeta(1-28) for obtaining a "fully aggregating" phenotype. Our results suggest that conformational flexibility, determined by both hydrophobicity and charge effect, is the main mechanistic determinant of aggregation propensity.
在之前的一篇文章中(兹比卢特等人,《生物物理杂志》2003年;85:3544 - 3557),我们展示了如何通过考虑疏水性分布和电荷来探讨聚集与折叠的选择。在这项工作中,我们的目标是突出电荷与疏水性分布在聚集过程中的相互作用。我们使用了两种不同的肽,它们均源自一种跨膜蛋白(淀粉样前体蛋白;APP),即Aβ(1 - 28)和Aβ(1 - 40)。Aβ(1 - 28)的聚集倾向比Aβ(1 - 40)低得多。通过分子动力学模拟获得的结果表明,当处于最“易聚集”的环境中,即对应于等电点且因此净电荷为零时,两种肽都获得了最大的灵活性,但Aβ(1 - 40)的构象流动性明显高于Aβ(1 - 28)。Aβ(1 - 40)分子中最具流动性的部分是疏水“尾巴”,而Aβ(1 - 28)缺乏这一元素,因此无法获得“完全聚集”的表型。我们的结果表明,由疏水性和电荷效应共同决定的构象灵活性是聚集倾向的主要机制决定因素。