The accuracy of NMR protein structures in the Protein Data Bank

AlphaFold2 Can Predict Single-Mutation Effects

AlphaFold2 (AF) is a promising tool, but is it accurate enough to predict single mutation effects? Here, we report that the localized structural deformation between protein pairs differing by only 1-3 mutations-as measured by the effective strain-is correlated across 3901 experimental and AF-predicted structures. Furthermore, analysis of ∼11 000 proteins shows that the local structural change correlates with various phenotypic changes. These findings suggest that AF can predict the range and magnitude of single-mutation effects on average, and we propose a method to improve precision of AF predictions and to indicate when predictions are unreliable.

Improved methodology for protein NMR structure calculation using hydrogen bond restraints and ANSURR validation: The SH2 domain of SH2B1

Protein structures calculated using NMR data are less accurate and less well-defined than they could be. Here we use the program ANSURR to show that this deficiency is at least in part due to a lack of hydrogen bond restraints. We describe a protocol to introduce hydrogen bond restraints into the structure calculation of the SH2 domain from SH2B1 in a systematic and transparent way and show that the structures generated are more accurate and better defined as a result. We also show that ANSURR can be used as a guide to know when the structure calculation is good enough to stop.

Mapping the conformational landscape of the stimulatory heterotrimeric G protein

Heterotrimeric G proteins serve as membrane-associated signaling hubs, in concert with their cognate G-protein-coupled receptors. Fluorine nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy was employed to monitor the conformational equilibria of the human stimulatory G-protein α subunit (G_sα) alone, in the intact G_sαβ₁γ₂ heterotrimer or in complex with membrane-embedded human adenosine A_2A receptor (A_2AR). The results reveal a concerted equilibrium that is strongly affected by nucleotide and interactions with the βγ subunit, the lipid bilayer and A_2AR. The α1 helix of G_sα exhibits significant intermediate timescale dynamics. The α4β6 loop and α5 helix undergo membrane/receptor interactions and order-disorder transitions respectively, associated with G-protein activation. The αN helix adopts a key functional state that serves as an allosteric conduit between the βγ subunit and receptor, while a significant fraction of the ensemble remains tethered to the membrane and receptor upon activation.

Core packing of well‐defined X‐ray and NMR structures is the same

Numerous studies have investigated the differences and similarities between protein structures determined by solution NMR spectroscopy and those determined by X-ray crystallography. A fundamental question is whether any observed differences are due to differing methodologies or to differences in the behavior of proteins in solution versus in the crystalline state. Here, we compare the properties of the hydrophobic cores of high-resolution protein crystal structures and those in NMR structures, determined using increasing numbers and types of restraints. Prior studies have reported that many NMR structures have denser cores compared with those of high-resolution X-ray crystal structures. Our current work investigates this result in more detail and finds that these NMR structures tend to violate basic features of protein stereochemistry, such as small non-bonded atomic overlaps and few Ramachandran and sidechain dihedral angle outliers. We find that NMR structures solved with more restraints, and which do not significantly violate stereochemistry, have hydrophobic cores that have a similar size and packing fraction as their counterparts determined by X-ray crystallography at high resolution. These results lead us to conclude that, at least regarding the core packing properties, high-quality structures determined by NMR and X-ray crystallography are the same, and the differences reported earlier are most likely a consequence of methodology, rather than fundamental differences between the protein in the two different environments.