On the question of solution structure vs crystal structure, another
comment worth considering is this:

The crystalline state of a protein can in some cases (eg a large enzyme
with small substrates) be more similar to physiological conditions than
a dilute solution.

If crowding effects are important, the crystalline state, at ~50% (w/v),
is well crowded, unlike typical solution studies that are done at
concentrations more like 1% (w/v) and below.  David Goodsell's
illustrations (http://mgl.scripps.edu/people/goodsell/) may be
illuminating here.

I also find that non-crystallographers need to be told that protein
crystal contacts are weak and tenuous, and I find it useful to show a
cross-section of a crystal, whether showing modelled protein or electron
density of multiple repeats of the unit cell.


Anthony

Anthony Duff    Telephone: 02 9717 3493  Mob: 043 189 1076

-----Original Message-----
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:ccp...@jiscmail.ac.uk] On Behalf Of
Bostjan Kobe
Sent: Friday, 12 December 2008 10:38 AM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] O/T: can a protein which dimerizes in solution
crystallize as a monomer?

I wanted to comment on a couple of things that came up during this
discussion.

1. We use crystallography because it enables us to get structural
information. But we have to be aware that most of the time a crystal
will
not be an exact reflection of the biological environment, which is
usually
what we want to relate our structure to. For this reason, to make any
useful
interpretations of the oligomeric state and how it relates to a
biologically
relevant situation, one needs to complement it with other studies
(hopefully
in a "solution" that better resembles the biological situation).

2. What you find in the asymmetric unit of a crystal does not
necessarily
have anything to do with the biologically relevant oligomeric state
(biological unit). I commonly see researchers confuse the asymmetric
unit
with the biological unit, even in submitted and published papers. To
phrase
it in a different way, crystallographic symmetry often relate subunits
in an
oligomer, and conversely NCS often corresponds to just another
biologically
irrelevant "crystal contact".

3. It is often not trivial to distinguish "crystal contact" from the
oligomeric interface. There is lots of literature on this, and software
and
databases that can help you distinguish between these (using the size of
interface area, but also many other criteria to sort these
interactions). It
is often not going to be possible to do so with any high reliability
without
complementary experiments. Please refer to the references cited in this
recent conference proceeding for extensive literature on this matter:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19021571?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSys
tem2
.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVD
ocSu
m.

Best wishes

Bostjan


On 12/12/08 2:34 AM, "Ethan A Merritt" <merr...@u.washington.edu> wrote:

> On Thursday 11 December 2008, Santarsiero, Bernard D. wrote:
>> In parallel with the discussion around this off-CCP4-topic, are they
any
>> good examples of the opposite case, where the protein is a monomer in
>> solution (as evident from light scattering, MW determination through
>> centrifugation, EPR, etc.) but crystallizes as a dimer or higher
multimer?
> 
> I don't think such a question is entirely well-defined, for two
reasons.
> 
> 1) The monomer/dimer equilibrium in solution may well depend on the
specific
>    conditions (pH, concentration, presence of ligands, temperature,
etc).
>    Unless these conditions are replicated in your crystallization
medium,
>    it is uncertain to what extent the solution measurement is
relevant.
> 
> 2) How extensive an interface is required in order for it to be
considered
>    a dimer/multimer interaction?   In the limiting case of very small
>    interfaces, the entire crystal might be consider a single oligomer,
>    with each lattice-packing contact constituting a monomer:monomer
>    interaction.  That's not a very useful place to set the threshold,
>    but where do you set it - 100 A^2 ?  500 A^2 ? 1000 A^2?
>    Some definition other than surface area?
> 
> That said, I have some interest in the question as a practical matter.
> We have a new structure that is "obviously", but totally unexpectedly,
> a tetramer in the crystal.  In this case the monomer:monomer
interaction
> surface is >1500 A^2. But exactly what criteria would I use to
> argue that this is a real tetramer?  What criteria would I use to
> argue that it is a crystal artifact?   Yes, of course ideally one
would
> go back to the lab and survey for solution measurements that are
> consistent with tetramerization, but that is not always practical,
> and may lead right back to your original question.
> 

---
Bostjan Kobe
ARC Federation Fellow
Professor of Structural Biology
School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences
  and Institute for Molecular Bioscience
Cooper Road
University of Queensland
Brisbane, Queensland 4072
Australia
Phone: +61 7 3365 2132
Fax: +61 7 3365 4699
E-mail: b.k...@uq.edu.au
URL: http://profiles.bacs.uq.edu.au/Bostjan.Kobe.html
Office: Building 76 Room 452
Notice: If you receive this e-mail by mistake, please notify me, and do
not
make any use of its contents. I do not waive any privilege,
confidentiality
or copyright associated with it. Unless stated otherwise, this e-mail
represents only the views of the Sender and not the views of The
University
of Queensland.

Reply via email to