Hi Karolina, 

I would suggest you do SAXS. You can compare the
scattering profile you get from your protein in solution to the calculated
profiles of the three possible dimers (or other oligomers) you have in the
crystal structure. This should give you a definitive answer. See for
example this paper where SAXS was used to resolve exactly the same kind of
problem: doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2008.02.020 

Regards, 

Julia 

On Thu, 25
Jul 2013 17:33:57 -0500, Karolina Michalska  wrote:  

Hi all, 

I'm
working with a protein that appears to be a dimer in solution, on SEC in
runs as 24 kDa, while the actual mass of a dimer is 30. And I am trying to
figure out which dimer is the biological one (it is a regulatory protein
but details are uknown). The crystal structure gives me a few options (mol
A and B in ASU plus P6122 symmetry), but none of them is really convincing:
for deltaGdiss PISA goes from -0.4 to 1.5 kcal/mol.  

Theoretically, I
have two compact dimers (1 and 2) and one elongated (3). 

In 1, I have two
hydrophobic helices interacting and four hydrogen bonds, 1550 A2 buried
area (out of 14200 total). This interface applies only to molecule A and
its crystallographic mate, equivalent molecules B are too far from each
other. Moreover, even in the dimer made of mol A there are channel at the
interface. 

Interface 2 is purely hydrophobic, but at least it's
consistent, i.e there are comparable interactions for A-A and B-B pairs,
1850 A2 buried area 

Interface 3 involves non-crystallographic copies,
buried area is 1040 A2. The interacting elements are proline-rich, and
there are four main-chain - main chain hydrogen bonds plus two main-chain -
side chain ones. Formally, these fragments are not classified as
beta-strands, but the association does look like an intermolecular
beta-sheet. This dimer is not consistent with the SEC data though. I'm
assuming that with an elongated shape it would run as a bigger particle
than it actually is, not as a smaller one. 

So I think I can discard first
option but I am still debating on 2 and 3. I'll appreciate your comments on
this. 

Karolina    

 

Reply via email to