Prediction of the effect of wild type brazzein and its mutated forms in the position of aspartate 40 on TLR5 using modeling methods based on molecular docking

Jafarian, Vahab; Karimipour, Elahe

Prediction of the effect of wild type brazzein and its mutated forms in the position of aspartate 40 on TLR5 using modeling methods based on molecular docking

Document Type : Original Research

Authors

vahab jafarian ¹

Elahe Karimipour ²

¹ Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran.

² M.Sc. of Biochemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran.

Abstract

Nowadays, the peptides and proteins possessing anti-cancer, anti-allergic and anti-inflammatory properties are used for disease treatment. Brazzein is a sweet protein containing 54 amino acids and according to reports, it has anti-cancer properties based on sequence and structurehas sequence. In this study, the role of position 40 aspartate in the structure and function of wild brazzein protein and mutants as well as the anti-cancer properties of the peptides obtained on the TLR5 receptor were investigated. For this, several models of mutated forms were designed and constructed using Modeller.v.9.20 software. Then, the accuracy of the models and the physico-chemical properties of wild type (WT) and mutants of D40N, D40R and D40Deletion were evaluated using various bioinformatics servers and softwares including ProtParam, ProtScale, SAVES, PIC, ModEval, and PredyFlexy. For predicting anticancer properties, the sequence of WT protein and mutants was examined and compared using ACPred and iACP servers. The quality and analysis of WT protein and mutants binding as a ligand with TLR5 receptor, triggering an anti-cancer signaling pathway, were investigated through molecular docking using HADDOCK software.The results of bioinformatics parameters analysis indicated the possibility of improving the stability of brazzein structure and function, and the probability of increasing the available surface to bind to the receptor. Moreover, based on the results of molecular docking analyses, the ability binding TLR5 receptor was higher in D40R than the other proteins indicating an increased probability in anti-cancer properties of the mutant.

Keywords

Anti-cancer property

molecular docking

Sweet protein

site-directed mutagenesis

thermostability

20.1001.1.23222115.1401.14.1.2.8

Subjects

Bioinformatics

[1] Ming, D., & Hellekant, G. (1994). Brazzein, a new high‐potency thermostable sweet protein from Pentadiplandra brazzeana B. FEBS letters, 355, 106-108.‌
[2] Assadi-Porter, F. M., Maillet, E. L., Radek, J. T., Quijada, J., Markley, J. L., & Max, M. (2010). Key amino acid residues involved in multi-point binding interactions between brazzein, a sweet protein, and the T1R2–T1R3 human sweet receptor. Journal of molecular biology, 398, 584-599.‌
[3] Hellekant, G., & Danilova, V. (2005). Brazzein a small, sweet protein: discovery and physiological overview. Chemical senses, 30, 88.‌
[4] Chung, J. H., Kong, J. N., Choi, H. E., & Kong, K. H. (2018). Antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-allergic activities of the sweet-tasting protein brazzein. Food chemistry, 267, 163-169.‌
[5] Jafari, S. S., Jafarian, V., Khalifeh, K., Ghanavatian, P., & Shirdel, S. A. (2016). The effect of charge alteration and flexibility on the function and structural stability of sweet-tasting brazzein. RSC advances, 6, 59834-59841.‌
[6] Kmiecik, S., Gront, D., Kolinski, M., Wieteska, L., Dawid, A. E., & Kolinski, A. (2016). Coarse-grained protein models and their applications. Chemical reviews, 116, 7898-7936.‌
[7] Jiang, P., Ji, Q., Liu, Z., Snyder, L. A., Benard, L. M., Margolskee, R. F., & Max, M. (2004). The cysteine-rich region of T1R3 determines responses to intensely sweet proteins. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 279, 45068-45075.‌
[8] Singarapu, K. K., Tonelli, M., Markley, J. L., & Assadi‐Porter, F. M. (2016). Structure‐function relationships of brazzein variants with altered interactions with the human sweet taste receptor. Protein Science, 25, 711-719.
[9] Hashimoto, C., Hudson, K. L., & Anderson, K. V. (1988). The Toll gene of Drosophila, required for dorsal-ventral embryonic polarity, appears to encode a transmembrane protein. Cell, 52, 269-279.‌
[10] Lacagnina, M. J., Watkins, L. R., & Grace, P. M. (2018). Toll-like receptors and their role in persistent pain. Pharmacology & therapeutics, 184, 145-158.‌
[11] Ayala‐Cuellar, A. P., Cho, J., & Choi, K. C. (2019). Toll‐like receptors: A pathway alluding to cancer control. Journal of Cellular Physiology, 234, 21707-21715.‌
[12] Hayashi, F., Smith, K. D., Ozinsky, A., Hawn, T. R., Eugene, C. Y., Goodlett, D. R., ... & Aderem, A. (2001). The innate immune response to bacterial flagellin is mediated by Toll-like receptor 5. Nature, 410 , 1099-1103.‌
[13] Maîtrepierre, E., Sigoillot, M., Le Pessot, L., & Briand, L. (2013). An efficient Escherichia coli expression system for the production of a functional N-terminal domain of the T1R3 taste receptor. Bioengineered, 4, 25-29.‌
[14] Kämper, A., Apostolakis, J., Rarey, M., Marian, C. M., & Lengauer, T. (2006). Fully automated flexible docking of ligands into flexible synthetic receptors using forward and inverse docking strategies. Journal of chemical information and modeling, 46, 903-911.‌
[15] Willard, L., Ranjan, A., Zhang, H., Monzavi, H., Boyko, R. F., Sykes, B. D., & Wishart, D. S. (2003). VADAR: a web server for quantitative evaluation of protein structure quality. Nucleic acids research, 31, 3316-3319.‌
[16] Kyte, J., & Doolittle, R. F. (1982). A simple method for displaying the hydropathic character of a protein. Journal of molecular biology, 157, 105-132.
[17] Uziela, K., Menendez Hurtado, D., Shu, N., Wallner, B., & Elofsson, A. (2017). ProQ3D: improved model quality assessments using deep learning. Bioinformatics, 33, 1578-1580.
[18] Schaduangrat, N., Nantasenamat, C., Prachayasittikul, V., & Shoombuatong, W. (2019). ACPred: a computational tool for the prediction and analysis of anticancer peptides. Molecules, 24, 1973.
[19] Lengauer, T., & Rarey, M. (1996). Computational methods for biomolecular docking. Current opinion in structural biology, 6, 402-406.‌