Quantitative structure-activity analysis correlating Ras/Raf interaction in vitro to Raf activation in vivo

Interactions of the amino acid residue at position 31 of the c-Ha-Ras protein with Raf-1 and RalGDS

The Ras and Rap1A proteins can bind to the Raf and RalGDS families. Ras and Rap1A have Glu and Lys, respectively, at position 31. In the present study, we analyzed the effects of mutating the Glu at position 31 of the c-Ha-Ras protein to Asp, Ala, Arg, and Lys on the interactions with Raf-1 and RalGDS. The Ras-binding domain (RBD) of Raf-1 binds the E31R and E31K Ras mutants less tightly than the wild-type, E31A, and E31D Ras proteins; the introduction of the positively charged Lys or Arg residue at position 31 specifically impairs the binding of Ras with the Raf-1 RBD. On the other hand, the ability of the oncogenic RasG12V protein to activate Raf-1 in HEK293 cells was only partially reduced by the E31R mutation but was drastically impaired by the E31K mutation. Correspondingly, RasG12V(E31K) as well as Rap1A, but not RasG12V(E31R), exhibited abnormally tight binding with the cysteine-rich domain of Raf-1. On the other hand, the E31A, E31R, and E31K mutations, but not the E31D mutation, enhanced the RalGDS RBD-binding activity of Ras, indicating that the negative charge at position 31 of Ras is particularly unfavorable to the interaction with the RalGDS RBD. RasG12V(E31K), RasG12V(E31A), and Rap1A stimulate the RalGDS action more efficiently than the wild-type Ras in the liposome reconstitution assay. All of these results clearly show that the sharp contrast between the characteristics of Ras and Rap1A, with respect to the interactions with Raf-1 and RalGDS, depends on their residues at position 31.

Electrostatic contributions to protein-protein binding affinities: application to Rap/Raf interaction

The challenge of evaluating absolute binding free energies of protein-protein complexes is addressed using the scaled Protein Dipoles Langevin Dipoles (PDLD/S) model in combination with the Linear Response Approximation (LRA). This is done by taking the complex between Rap1A (Rap) and the p21ras binding domain of c-Raf (Raf-RBD) (Nassar et al., Nature 375:554-560, 1995) as a model system. Several formulations and different thermodynamic cycles are explored taking advantage of the LRA method and considering the protein reorganization during complex formation. The performance of different approximations is examined by comparing the calculated and observed absolute binding energies for the native complex and some of its mutants. The evaluation of the contributions of individual residues to the binding free energy, which is referred to here as group contributions is also examined. Special attention is paid to the role of the "dielectric constant," epsilon(in) which is in fact a scaling factor that represents the contributions that are treated implicitly. It is found that explicit consideration of protein relaxation is crucial for obtaining reasonable results with small values of epsilon(in), but it is also found that such a treatment of protein-protein interactions is very challenging and does not always give stable results. This indicates that more advanced explicit calculations should be based on experimentally determined structures of both the complex and the isolated proteins. Nevertheless, it is demonstrated that the qualitative trend of the effect of mutations can be reproduced by considering the effect of protein reorganization implicitly, using epsilon(in) approximately 25 for ionized residues and epsilon(in) approximately 4 for polar residues. Thus, it is concluded that an explicit treatment of solvent relaxation (which is common to current continuum models) does not provide sufficient compensation for turning off the charges of ionized residues on the interaction surface of the Raf-RBD/Rap complex. Representing the missing contribution by large epsilon(in) can, of course, reproduce the observed effect of ionized residues, but now the contribution of uncharged residues will be largely underestimated. Regardless of these conceptual problems, it is established that a very simple nonrelaxed approach, where the relaxation of both the protein and the solvent are considered implicitly, can provide an effective qualitative way for evaluating group contributions, using large and small values for epsilon(in) of ionized and neutral residues, respectively. As much as the actual system studied is concerned we find that more residues than generally assumed play a role in Raf-RBD/Rap interaction. This includes residues that are not located at the protein-protein interaction surface. These residues contribute to the binding energy through direct charge-charge interaction without leading to drastic structural changes. The overall contribution of the surface residues is quite significant since Raf and Rap are positively and negatively charged, respectively, and their charges are distributed along the interaction site between the two proteins.

G proteins, effectors and GAPs: structure and mechanism

G proteins from a diverse family of regulatory GTPases which, in the GTP-bound state, bind to and activate downstream effectors. Structures of Ras homologs bound to effector domains have revealed mechanisms by which G proteins couple GTP binding to effector activation and achieve specificity. Complexes between structurally unrelated GTPase-activating proteins with complementary G proteins suggest common mechanisms by which GTP hydrolysis is stimulated via direct interactions with conformationally labile switch regions of the G protein.

GEFs, GAPs, GDIs and effectors: taking a closer (3D) look at the regulation of Ras-related GTP-binding proteins

Cell biology depends on the interactions of macromolecules, such as protein-DNA, protein-protein or protein-nucleotide interactions. GTP-binding proteins are no exception to the rule. They regulate cellular processes as diverse as protein biosynthesis and intracellular membrane trafficking. Recently, a large number of genes encoding GTP-binding proteins and the proteins that interact with these molecular switches have been cloned and expressed. The 3D structures of some of these have also been elucidated.

Discrimination of amino acids mediating Ras binding from noninteracting residues affecting raf activation by double mutant analysis

The contribution of residues outside the Ras binding domain of Raf (RafRBD) to Ras-Raf interaction and Ras-dependent Raf activation has remained unresolved. Here, we utilize a double mutant approach to identify complementary interacting amino acids that are involved in Ras-Raf interaction and activation. Biochemical analysis demonstrates that Raf-Arg59 and Raf-Arg67 from RafRBD are interacting residues complementary to Ras-Glu37 located in the Ras effector region. Raf-Arg59 and Raf-Arg67 also mediate interaction with Ras-Glu37 in Ras-dependent Raf activation. The characteristics observed here can be used as criteria for a role of residues from other regions of Raf in Ras-Raf interaction and activation. We developed a quantitative two-hybrid system as a tool to investigate the effect of point mutations on protein-protein interactions that elude biochemical analysis of bacterially expressed proteins. This assay shows that Raf-Ser257 in the RafCR2 domain does not contribute to Ras-Raf interaction and that the Raf-S257L mutation does not restore Raf binding to Ras-E37G. Yet, Raf-S257L displays high constitutive kinase activity and further activation by Ras-G12V/E37G is still impaired as compared with activation by Ras-G12V. This strongly suggests that the RafCR2 domain is an independent domain involved in the control of Raf activity and a common mechanism for constitutively activating mutants may be the interference with the inactive ground state of the kinase.

Dynamic and equilibrium studies on the interaction of Ran with its effector, RanBP1

Ran, a small nuclear GTP-binding protein, is one of the most abundant Ras-related proteins in eucaryotic cells. Ran is essential for nucleo-cytoplasmatic transport and is primarily localized in the nucleus and at the nuclear pore complex. Here, we characterize the kinetics and equilibrium of the interaction between Ran and RanBP1 by two independent biophysical approaches: fluorescence spectroscopy using analogues of guanine nucleotides and surface plasmon resonance in the BIAcore system. Both approaches result in kinetic and equilibrium data which are in good agreement with each other. Affinities of RanBP1 for Ran in the GTP-bound state were in the nanomolar range, while Ran.GDP bound RanBP1 with a dissociation constant around 10 microM. Interestingly, the difference in affinity of RanBP1 for Ran.GDP was mostly due to a dramatic increase of the dissociation rate constant. Mutant Ran protein lacking the last five amino acids of the C-terminus (RanDeltaC) is unable to facilitate nuclear import in vitro and does not bind to RanBP1. Here, we show that RanBP1 binds RanDeltaC.mGppNHp with KD values around 10 microM, as is the case for its association with full-length Ran.GDP. The loss of affinity of RanBP1 for the triphosphate form of RanDeltaC was a result of both a decrease of the association rate and a moderately increased dissociation of the RanDeltaC.RanBP1 complex. Circular dichroism spectra indicate significant changes in the secondary structure of either Ran.GppNHp, RanBP1, or both proteins upon forming a stable complex with each other.

Identification and characterization of mutations in Ha-Ras that selectively decrease binding to cRaf-1

The oncoprotein Ras transforms cells by binding to one or more effector proteins. Effector proteins have been identified by their ability to bind to Ras in the GTP but not GDP form, and by their requirement for the Ras effector domain for binding. The best understood Ras effectors are serine/threonine kinases of the Raf family, but other candidate Ras effectors, including a Ral guanine nucleotide dissociation stimulator and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3 kinase) have also been identified. To investigate the mechanism of binding of cRaf-1 to Ras, and to investigate the roles of other candidate Ras effectors in transformation, we have isolated and characterized mutants of activated Ras with decreased binding to cRaf-1 relative to other candidate effectors. Examination of these mutants indicates that surface-exposed residues of Ras outside the minimal effector domain interact differentially with cRaf-1 and other Ras-binding proteins, and that fibroblast transformation correlates with cRaf-1 binding and mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase activation. Furthermore, activation of PI3 kinase can occur in the absence of significant MAP kinase activation, suggesting that PI3 kinase activation is a primary effect of Ras.

Ras-binding domains: predicting function versus folding

Ras interacts with a number of effector molecules to achieve its prolific signalling. Based on iterative sequence profile and motif searches of databases a novel family of Ras-binding domains was recently identified (Ponting and Benjamin, Trends Biochem. Sci. 21: 422-425, 1996). Among them the rat unconventional myosin and Rho-GTPase-activating protein myr 5 was predicted to contain a Ras-binding domain at its N-terminus. Here we report that direct binding experiments between the proposed Ras-binding domain of myr 5 and Ras failed to demonstrate any interaction. Molecular modelling suggests that this domain in myr 5 adopts a similar folding topology as the Ras-binding domain of Raf kinase. However, unlike the Ras-binding domain of Raf kinase, the myr 5 domain lacks the positive surface charges necessary for binding the negatively charged Ras contact site. This result exemplifies the functional diversity of similar structures and suggests that the identified Ras-binding motif does not reliably predict Ras-binding domains.

Three-dimensional structure of the Ras-interacting domain of RalGDS

The Ras-interacting domains of the the protein-kinase Raf and the Ral guanine nucleotide dissociation stimulator, RalGDS, lack extensive sequence similarity, but their overall three-dimensional structures are very similar to each other. Mutational analysis indicated that three residues in the RalGDS domain are critical for its interaction with Ras.

Mammalian Raf-1 is activated by mutations that restore Raf signaling in Drosophila

An interaction with the Ras proto-oncogene product is a requirement for Raf-1 activation in many signaling cascades. The significance of this interaction is demonstrated by the fact that a mutation preventing the Ras-Raf interaction severely impairs the function of both mammalian (Raf-1) and Drosophila (D-Raf) Raf proteins. In D-Raf, however, dominant intragenic mutations have been identified that suppress the effect of the Ras-binding site (RBS) mutation. To address the mechanism by which these mutations restore Raf signaling, we have introduced the suppressor mutations into the analogous residues of mammalian Raf-1. Here, we show that rather than compensating for the RBS mutation by restoring the Ras-Raf-1 interaction, the suppressor mutations increase the enzymatic and biological activity of Raf-1, allowing Raf-1 to signal in the absence of Ras binding. Surprisingly, we find that while one of the suppressor mutations (P181L) increases the basal kinase activity of Raf-1, it also abolishes the ability of wild-type Raf-1 to become activated by Ras. This mutation occurs in the cysteine-rich domain (CRD) of Raf-1 and demonstrates the importance of this region for a productive Ras-Raf interaction. Finally, we present evidence that the most activating suppressor mutation (G498S) increases Raf-1 activity by introducing a novel phosphorylation site into the L12 activation loop of the Raf-1 kinase domain.

The complexity of Raf-1 regulation

The activation of the serine/threonine kinase Raf-1 is proving to be an intricate multistep process. Recent advances in elucidating how Raf-1 becomes activated in response to signaling events have emphasized the role of phosphorylation and protein interactions in Raf-1 regulation. The picture clearly emerging is that Raf-1 activity can be regulated by multiple mechanisms.

G protein mechanisms: insights from structural analysis

This review is concerned with the structures and mechanisms of a superfamily of regulatory GTP hydrolases (G proteins). G proteins include Ras and its close homologs, translation elongation factors, and heterotrimeric G proteins. These proteins share a common structural core, exemplified by that of p21ras (Ras), and significant sequence identity, suggesting a common evolutionary origin. Three-dimensional structures of members of the G protein superfamily are considered in light of other biochemical findings about the function of these proteins. Relationships among G protein structures are discussed, and factors contributing to their low intrinsic rate of GTP hydrolysis are considered. Comparison of GTP- and GDP-bound conformations of G proteins reveals how specific contacts between the gamma-phosphate of GTP and the switch II region stabilize potential effector-binding sites and how GTP hydrolysis results in collapse (or reordering) of these surfaces. A GTPase-activating protein probably binds to and stabilizes the conformation of its cognate G protein that recognizes the transition state for hydrolysis, and may insert a catalytic residue into the G protein active site. Inhibitors of nucleotide release, such as the beta gamma subunit of a heterotrimeric G protein, bind selectively to and stabilize the GDP-bound state. Release factors, such as the translation elongation factor, Ts, also recognize the switch regions and destabilize the Mg(2+)-binding site, thereby promoting GDP release. G protein-coupled receptors are expected to operate by a somewhat different mechanism, given that the GDP-bound form of many G protein alpha subunits does not contain bound Mg2+.

Ras/Rap effector specificity determined by charge reversal

Members of the Ras subfamily of small GTP-binding proteins have been shown to be promiscuous towards a variety of putative effector molecules such as the protein kinase c-Raf and the Ral-specific guanine nucleotide exchange factor (Ral-GEF). To address the question of specificity of interactions we have introduced the mutations E30D and K31E into Rap and show biochemically, by X-ray structure analysis and by transfection in vivo that the identical core effector region of Ras and Rap (residues 32-40) is responsible for molecular recognition, but that residues outside this region are responsible for the specificity of the interaction. The major determinant for the switch in specificity is the opposite charge of residue 31--Lys in Rap, Glu in Ras--which creates a favourable complementary interface for the Ras-Raf interaction.