Evidence for the preferential reuse of sub-domain motifs in primordial protein folds.

A comparison of protein backbones makes clear that not more than approximately 1400 different folds exist, each specifying the three-dimensional topology of a protein domain. Large proteins are composed of specific domain combinations and many domains can accommodate different functions. These findings confirm that the reuse of domains is key for the evolution of multi-domain proteins. If reuse was also the driving force for domain evolution, ancestral fragments of sub-domain size exist that are shared between domains possessing significantly different topologies. For the fully automated detection of putatively ancestral motifs, we developed the algorithm Fragstatt that compares proteins pairwise to identify fragments, that is, instantiations of the same motif. To reach maximal sensitivity, Fragstatt compares sequences by means of cascaded alignments of profile Hidden Markov Models. If the fragment sequences are sufficiently similar, the program determines and scores the structural concordance of the fragments. By analyzing a comprehensive set of proteins from the CATH database, Fragstatt identified 12 532 partially overlapping and structurally similar motifs that clustered to 134 unique motifs. The dissemination of these motifs is limited: We found only two domain topologies that contain two different motifs and generally, these motifs occur in not more than 18% of the CATH topologies. Interestingly, motifs are enriched in topologies that are considered ancestral. Thus, our findings suggest that the reuse of sub-domain sized fragments was relevant in early phases of protein evolution and became less important later on.

An assessment of catalytic residue 3D ensembles for the prediction of enzyme function.

BACKGROUND: The central element of each enzyme is the catalytic site, which commonly catalyzes a single biochemical reaction with high specificity. It was unclear to us how often sites that catalyze the same or highly similar reactions evolved on different, i. e. non-homologous protein folds and how similar their 3D poses are. Both similarities are key criteria for assessing the usability of pose comparison for function prediction. RESULTS: We have analyzed the SCOP database on the superfamily level in order to estimate the number of non-homologous enzymes possessing the same function according to their EC number. 89% of the 873 substrate-specific functions (four digit EC number) assigned to mono-functional, single-domain enzymes were only found in one superfamily. For a reaction-specific grouping (three digit EC number), this value dropped to 35%, indicating that in approximately 65% of all enzymes the same function evolved in two or more non-homologous proteins. For these isofunctional enzymes, structural similarity of the catalytic sites may help to predict function, because neither high sequence similarity nor identical folds are required for a comparison. To assess the specificity of catalytic 3D poses, we compiled the redundancy-free set ENZ_SITES, which comprises 695 sites, whose composition and function are well-defined. We compared their poses with the help of the program Superpose3D and determined classification performance. If the sites were from different superfamilies, the number of true and false positive predictions was similarly high, both for a coarse and a detailed grouping of enzyme function. Moreover, classification performance did not improve drastically, if we additionally used homologous sites to predict function. CONCLUSIONS: For a large number of enzymatic functions, dissimilar sites evolved that catalyze the same reaction and it is the individual substrate that determines the arrangement of the catalytic site and its local environment. These substrate-specific requirements turn the comparison of catalytic residues into a weak classifier for the prediction of enzyme function.