Water Dynamics at Protein–Protein Interfaces: Molecular Dynamics Study of Virus–Host Receptor Complexes

• Published in: The journal of physical chemistry. B 2014-12, Vol.118 (51), p.14795-14807
• Main Authors: Dutta, Priyanka, Botlani, Mohsen, Varma, Sameer
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Allosteric Regulation; Crystallography, X-Ray; Density; Dynamic tests; Dynamics; Host-Pathogen Interactions; Interstitials; Mathematical models; Molecular dynamics; Molecular Dynamics Simulation; Nipah virus; Protein Binding; Proteins; Proteins - chemistry; Solvents; Virus Physiological Phenomena; Water - chemistry
• ISSN: 1520-6106; 1520-5207
• DOI: 10.1021/jp5089096

The dynamical properties of water at protein–water interfaces are unlike those in the bulk. Here we utilize molecular dynamics simulations to study water dynamics in interstitial regions between two proteins. We consider two natural protein–protein complexes, one in which the Nipah virus G protein binds to cellular ephrin B2 and the other in which the same G protein binds to ephrin B3. While the two complexes are structurally similar, the two ephrins share only a modest sequence identity of ∼50%. X-ray crystallography also suggests that these interfaces are fairly extensive and contain exceptionally large amounts of waters. We find that while the interstitial waters tend to occupy crystallographic sites, almost all waters exhibit residence times of less than hundred picoseconds in the interstitial region. We also find that while the differences in the sequence of the two ephrins result in quantitative differences in the dynamics of interstitial waters, the trends in the shifts with respect to bulk values are similar. Despite the high wetness of the protein–protein interfaces, the dynamics of interstitial waters are considerably slower compared to the bulkthe interstitial waters diffuse an order of magnitude slower and have 2–3 fold longer hydrogen bond lifetimes and 2–1000 fold slower dipole relaxation rates. To understand the role of interstitial waters, we examine how implicit solvent models compare against explicit solvent models in producing ephrin-induced shifts in the G conformational density. Ephrin-induced shifts in the G conformational density are critical to the allosteric activation of another viral protein that mediates fusion. We find that in comparison with the explicit solvent model, the implicit solvent model predicts a more compact G–B2 interface, presumably because of the absence of discrete waters at the G–B2 interface. Simultaneously, we find that the two models yield strikingly different induced changes in the G conformational density, even for those residues whose conformational densities in the apo state are unaffected by the treatment of the bulk solvent. Together, these results show that the explicit treatment of interstitial water molecules is necessary for a proper description of allosteric transitions.