Complex unfolding kinetics of single-domain proteins in the presence of force.
Single-molecule force spectroscopy is providing unique, and sometimes unexpected, insights into the free-energy landscapes of proteins. Despite the complexity of the free-energy landscapes revealed by mechanical probes, forced unfolding experiments are often analyzed using one-dimensional models that predict a logarithmic dependence of the unfolding force on the pulling velocity. We previously found that the unfolding force of the protein filamin at low pulling speed did not decrease logarithmically with the pulling speed. Here we present results from a large number of unfolding simulations of a coarse-grain model of the protein filamin under a broad range of constant forces. These show that a two-path model is physically plausible and produces a deviation from the behavior predicted by one-dimensional models analogous to that observed experimentally. We also show that the analysis of the distributions of unfolding forces (p[F]) contains crucial and exploitable information, and that a proper description of the unfolding of single-domain proteins needs to account for the intrinsic multidimensionality of the underlying free-energy landscape, especially when the applied perturbation is small.
Schlierf
Michael
M
Loomis Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, USA.
Yew
Zu Thur
ZT
Rief
Matthias
M
Paci
Emanuele
E
D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D003285:Contractile Proteins / Q000737:chemistry*; D064448:Filamins; D007700:Kinetics; D008840:Microfilament Proteins / Q000737:chemistry*; D056004:Molecular Dynamics Simulation; D017434:Protein Structure, Tertiary; D058767:Protein Unfolding; D013816:Thermodynamics
D003285:Contractile Proteins; D064448:Filamins; D008840:Microfilament Proteins
Biophys J. 2007 Dec 1;93(11):3989-98
17704164
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Oct 14;105(41):15755-60
18852468
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Jun 20;97(13):7254-9
10860990
Nature. 2003 May 8;423(6936):190-3
12736689
Structure. 2009 Dec 9;17(12):1582-1590
20004162
Biophys J. 2006 Feb 15;90(4):L33-5
16361331
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jun 30;106(26):10534-9
19541635
Nature. 2003 Mar 27;422(6930):446-9
12660787
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Aug 4;106(31):12605-10
19549822
Science. 1978 May 12;200(4342):618-27
347575
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2010 Mar;81(3 Pt 1):031923
20365786
Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2004 Jan;11(1):81-5
14718927
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Apr 1;100(7):3954-9
12655041
Biophys J. 2004 Mar;86(3):1263-9
14990459
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Jun 6;97(12):6521-6
10823892
Phys Rev Lett. 2006 Mar 17;96(10):108101
16605793
Nat Struct Biol. 1997 Jan;4(1):10-9
8989315
J Mol Biol. 2005 Jan 28;345(4):817-26
15588828
Phys Rev Lett. 2010 Jan 29;104(4):048101
20366741
Biophys J. 1997 Apr;72(4):1541-55
9083660
J Chem Phys. 2006 Apr 21;124(15):154909
16674267
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Feb 12;105(6):1885-90
18272500
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2002 May;65(5 Pt 1):051910
12059596
J Phys Chem B. 2008 May 15;112(19):5968-76
18251532
Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct. 2001;30:105-28
11340054
Biophys J. 2009 May 6;96(9):3810-21
19413987
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Aug 3;101(31):11281-6
15277675
J Phys Chem B. 2008 Dec 25;112(51):16902-7
19053698
Nature. 1999 Jan 7;397(6714):50-3
9892352
Cell. 2002 Jun 28;109(7):913-23
12110187
Biophys J. 2010 Apr 7;98(7):1294-301
20371329
Biophys J. 1991 May;59(5):1143-5
1714304
Biophys J. 2003 Jul;85(1):5-15
12829459