IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0233509.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting the viability of beta-lactamase: How folding and binding free energies correlate with beta-lactamase fitness

Author

Listed:
  • Jordan Yang
  • Nandita Naik
  • Jagdish Suresh Patel
  • Christopher S Wylie
  • Wenze Gu
  • Jessie Huang
  • F Marty Ytreberg
  • Mandar T Naik
  • Daniel M Weinreich
  • Brenda M Rubenstein

Abstract

One of the long-standing holy grails of molecular evolution has been the ability to predict an organism’s fitness directly from its genotype. With such predictive abilities in hand, researchers would be able to more accurately forecast how organisms will evolve and how proteins with novel functions could be engineered, leading to revolutionary advances in medicine and biotechnology. In this work, we assemble the largest reported set of experimental TEM-1 β-lactamase folding free energies and use this data in conjunction with previously acquired fitness data and computational free energy predictions to determine how much of the fitness of β-lactamase can be directly predicted by thermodynamic folding and binding free energies. We focus upon β-lactamase because of its long history as a model enzyme and its central role in antibiotic resistance. Based upon a set of 21 β-lactamase single and double mutants expressly designed to influence protein folding, we first demonstrate that modeling software designed to compute folding free energies such as FoldX and PyRosetta can meaningfully, although not perfectly, predict the experimental folding free energies of single mutants. Interestingly, while these techniques also yield sensible double mutant free energies, we show that they do so for the wrong physical reasons. We then go on to assess how well both experimental and computational folding free energies explain single mutant fitness. We find that folding free energies account for, at most, 24% of the variance in β-lactamase fitness values according to linear models and, somewhat surprisingly, complementing folding free energies with computationally-predicted binding free energies of residues near the active site only increases the folding-only figure by a few percent. This strongly suggests that the majority of β-lactamase’s fitness is controlled by factors other than free energies. Overall, our results shed a bright light on to what extent the community is justified in using thermodynamic measures to infer protein fitness as well as how applicable modern computational techniques for predicting free energies will be to the large data sets of multiply-mutated proteins forthcoming.

Suggested Citation

  • Jordan Yang & Nandita Naik & Jagdish Suresh Patel & Christopher S Wylie & Wenze Gu & Jessie Huang & F Marty Ytreberg & Mandar T Naik & Daniel M Weinreich & Brenda M Rubenstein, 2020. "Predicting the viability of beta-lactamase: How folding and binding free energies correlate with beta-lactamase fitness," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-26, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233509
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233509
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233509
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233509&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0233509?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shimon Bershtein & Michal Segal & Roy Bekerman & Nobuhiko Tokuriki & Dan S. Tawfik, 2006. "Robustness–epistasis link shapes the fitness landscape of a randomly drifting protein," Nature, Nature, vol. 444(7121), pages 929-932, December.
    2. Nobuhiko Tokuriki & Dan S. Tawfik, 2009. "Chaperonin overexpression promotes genetic variation and enzyme evolution," Nature, Nature, vol. 459(7247), pages 668-673, June.
    3. Po-Ssu Huang & Scott E. Boyken & David Baker, 2016. "The coming of age of de novo protein design," Nature, Nature, vol. 537(7620), pages 320-327, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas W. Linsky & Kyle Noble & Autumn R. Tobin & Rachel Crow & Lauren Carter & Jeffrey L. Urbauer & David Baker & Eva-Maria Strauch, 2022. "Sampling of structure and sequence space of small protein folds," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    2. Manhart, Michael & Haldane, Allan & Morozov, Alexandre V., 2012. "A universal scaling law determines time reversibility and steady state of substitutions under selection," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 66-76.
    3. Zachary R Sailer & Sarah H Shafik & Robert L Summers & Alex Joule & Alice Patterson-Robert & Rowena E Martin & Michael J Harms, 2020. "Inferring a complete genotype-phenotype map from a small number of measured phenotypes," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-27, September.
    4. Agnese I. Curatolo & Ofer Kimchi & Carl P. Goodrich & Ryan K. Krueger & Michael P. Brenner, 2023. "A computational toolbox for the assembly yield of complex and heterogeneous structures," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Biao Ruan & Yanan He & Yingwei Chen & Eun Jung Choi & Yihong Chen & Dana Motabar & Tsega Solomon & Richard Simmerman & Thomas Kauffman & D. Travis Gallagher & John Orban & Philip N. Bryan, 2023. "Design and characterization of a protein fold switching network," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Noelia Ferruz & Steffen Schmidt & Birte Höcker, 2022. "ProtGPT2 is a deep unsupervised language model for protein design," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    7. Pengfei Tian & Robert B Best, 2020. "Exploring the sequence fitness landscape of a bridge between protein folds," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-19, October.
    8. Steven Schulz & Sébastien Boyer & Matteo Smerlak & Simona Cocco & Rémi Monasson & Clément Nizak & Olivier Rivoire, 2021. "Parameters and determinants of responses to selection in antibody libraries," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-24, March.
    9. Julia Skokowa & Birte Hernandez Alvarez & Murray Coles & Malte Ritter & Masoud Nasri & Jérémy Haaf & Narges Aghaallaei & Yun Xu & Perihan Mir & Ann-Christin Krahl & Katherine W. Rogers & Kateryna Maks, 2022. "A topological refactoring design strategy yields highly stable granulopoietic proteins," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    10. Anton Kocheturov & Panos M. Pardalos & Athanasia Karakitsiou, 2019. "Massive datasets and machine learning for computational biomedicine: trends and challenges," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 276(1), pages 5-34, May.
    11. Baran Hashemi & Nikolai Hartmann & Sahand Sharifzadeh & James Kahn & Thomas Kuhr, 2024. "Ultra-high-granularity detector simulation with intra-event aware generative adversarial network and self-supervised relational reasoning," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Fatima A. Davila-Hernandez & Biao Jin & Harley Pyles & Shuai Zhang & Zheming Wang & Timothy F. Huddy & Asim K. Bera & Alex Kang & Chun-Long Chen & James J. Yoreo & David Baker, 2023. "Directing polymorph specific calcium carbonate formation with de novo protein templates," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    13. Jingzhi Lou & Weiwen Liang & Lirong Cao & Inchi Hu & Shi Zhao & Zigui Chen & Renee Wan Yi Chan & Peter Pak Hang Cheung & Hong Zheng & Caiqi Liu & Qi Li & Marc Ka Chun Chong & Yexian Zhang & Eng-kiong , 2024. "Predictive evolutionary modelling for influenza virus by site-based dynamics of mutations," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-11, December.
    14. Fabian Sesterhenn & Che Yang & Jaume Bonet & Johannes T. Cramer & Xiaolin Wen & Yimeng Wang & Chi I. Chiang & Luciano Andres Abriata & Iga Kucharska & Giacomo Castoro & Sabrina S. Vollers & Marie Gall, 2020. "De novo protein design enables the precise induction of RSV-neutralizing antibodies," Post-Print hal-02677103, HAL.
    15. SM Bargeen Alam Turzo & Justin T. Seffernick & Amber D. Rolland & Micah T. Donor & Sten Heinze & James S. Prell & Vicki H. Wysocki & Steffen Lindert, 2022. "Protein shape sampled by ion mobility mass spectrometry consistently improves protein structure prediction," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    16. Smrithi Krishnan R & Kalyanashis Jana & Amina H. Shaji & Karthika S. Nair & Anjali Devi Das & Devika Vikraman & Harsha Bajaj & Ulrich Kleinekathöfer & Kozhinjampara R. Mahendran, 2022. "Assembly of transmembrane pores from mirror-image peptides," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    17. Shunshi Kohyama & Béla P. Frohn & Leon Babl & Petra Schwille, 2024. "Machine learning-aided design and screening of an emergent protein function in synthetic cells," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.
    18. Shuangjia Zheng & Tao Zeng & Chengtao Li & Binghong Chen & Connor W. Coley & Yuedong Yang & Ruibo Wu, 2022. "Deep learning driven biosynthetic pathways navigation for natural products with BioNavi-NP," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    19. Sasha B. Ebrahimi & Devleena Samanta, 2023. "Engineering protein-based therapeutics through structural and chemical design," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    20. Steve O'Hagan & Joshua Knowles & Douglas B Kell, 2012. "Exploiting Genomic Knowledge in Optimising Molecular Breeding Programmes: Algorithms from Evolutionary Computing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-14, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233509. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.