Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 75, Issue 6, pp 1225–1232

Protein engineering: opportunities and challenges

Mini-Review

Abstract

The extraordinary properties of natural proteins demonstrate that life-like protein engineering is both achievable and valuable. Rapid progress and impressive results have been made towards this goal using rational design and random techniques or a combination of both. However, we still do not have a general theory on how to specify a structure that is suited to a target function nor can we specify a sequence that folds to a target structure. There is also overreliance on the Darwinian blind search to obtain practical results. In the long run, random methods cannot replace insight in constructing life-like proteins. For the near future, however, in enzyme development, we need to rely on a combination of both.

Keywords

Protein engineering Directed evolution Enzymes 

References

  1. Aharoni A, Gaidukov L, Khersonsky O, McQ Gould S, Roodveldt C, Tawfik DS (2005) The ‘evolvability’ of promiscuous protein functions. Nat Genet 37:73–76Google Scholar
  2. Alexander PA, Rozak DA, Orban J, Bryan PN (2005) Directed evolution of highly homologous proteins with different folds by phage display: implications for the protein folding code. Biochemistry 44:14045–14054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnold (2007) Directed enzyme evolution http://www.che.caltech.edu/groups/fha/directed_evolution.html
  4. Axe D (2004) Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds. J Mol Biol 341:1295–1315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Behe MJ, Snoke DW (2004) Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues. Protein Science 13:2651–2664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bittker JA, Le BV, Liu JM, Liu DR (2004) Directed evolution of protein enzymes using nonhomologous random recombination. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:7011–7016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blanco FJ, Angrand I, Serrano L (1999) Exploring the conformational properties of the sequence space between two proteins with different folds: an experimental study. J Mol Biol 285:741–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bloom JD, Labthavikul ST, Otey CR, Arnold FA (2006) Protein stability promotes evolvability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:5869–5874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bogarad LD, Deem MW (1999) A hierarchical approach to protein molecular evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:2591–2595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bolon DN, Mayo SL (2001) Enzyme-like proteins by computational design. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:14274–14279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bolon DN, Voigt CA, Mayo SL (2002) De novo design of biocatalysts. Curr Opin Chem Biol 6:125–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bommarius AS, Broering JM, Chaparro-Riggers JF, Polizzi KM (2006) High-throughput screening for enhanced protein stability. Curr Opin Biotechnol 17:606–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bornscheuer UT, Kazlauskas RJ (2004) Catalytic promiscuity in biocatalysis: using old enzymes to form new bonds and follow new pathways. Angew Chem Int Ed 43:6032–6040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Butterfoss GL, Kuhlman B (2006) Computer-based design of novel protein structures. Ann Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 35:49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Castle LA, Siehl DL, Gorton R, Patten PA, Chen YH, Bertain S, Cho HJ, Duck N, Wong J, Liu D, Lassner MW (2004) Discovery and directed evolution of a glyphosate tolerance gene. Science 304:1151–1154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chen K, Arnold FH (1993) Tuning the activity of an enzyme for unusual environments: sequential random mutagenesis of Subtilisin E for catalysis in dimethylformamide. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90:5618–5622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cherry JR, Fidantsef AL (2003) Directed evolution of industrial enzymes: an update. Curr Opin Biotechnol 14:438–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chothia C, Lesk AM (1986) The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins. EMBO J 5:823–826Google Scholar
  19. Cordes MHJ, Burton RE, Walsh NP, McKnight CJ, Sauer RT (2000) An evolutionary bridge to a new protein fold. Nature Struct Biol 7(12):1129–1132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Corey MJ, Corey E (1996) On the failure of de novo-designed peptides as biocatalysts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:11428–11434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Daggett V, Levitt M (1993) Protein unfolding pathways explored through molecular dynamics simulations. J Mol Biol 232:600–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Doi N, Kakukawa K, Oishi Y, Yanagawa H (2005) High solubility of random-sequence proteins consisting of five kinds of primitive amino acids. Prot Eng Des Sel 18:279–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dwyer MA, Looger LL, Hellinga HW (2004) Computational design of a biologically active enzyme. Science 304:1967–1971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eijsink VGH, Gåseidnes S, Synstad B, Bjørk A, Sirevåg R, Van den Burg B, Vriend G (2004) Rational engineering of enzyme stability. J Biotechnol 113:105–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fenel F, Leisola M, Jänis J, Turunen O (2004) A de novo designed N-terminal disulfide bridge stabilizes the Trichoderma reesei endo-1, 4-b-xylanase II. J Biotechnol 108:137–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Flores H, Ellington AD (2005) A modified consensus approach to mutagenesis inverts the cofactor specificity of Bacillus stearothermophilus lactate dehydrogenase. Prot Eng Des Sel 18:369–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fox SW (1980) Metabolic microspheres. Origins and evolution. Naturwissenschaften 67:378–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gould SM, Tawfik DS (2005) Directed evolution of the promiscuous esterase activity of carbonic anhydrase II. Biochem 44:5444–5452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hakulinen N, Turunen O, Jänis J, Leisola M, Rouvinen J (2003) Three-dimensional structures of thermophilic β-1,4-xylanases from Chaetomium thermophilum and Nonomuraea flexuosa. Eur J Biochem 270:1399–1412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hayes RJ, Bentzien J, Ary ML, Hwang MY, Jacinto JM, Vielmetter J, KUndu A, Dahiyat BI (2002) Combining computational and experimental screening for rapid optimization of protein properties. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:15926–15931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hecht MH, Das A, Go A, Bradley LH, Wei Y (2004) De novo proteins from designed combinatorial libraries. Protein Sci 13:1711–1723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hibbert EG, Dalby PA (2005) Directed evolution strategies for improved enzymatic performance. Microbial Cell Fact 4:29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Johannes TW, Zhao H (2006) Directed evolution of enzymes and biosynthetic pathways. Curr Opin Microbiol 9:261–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kaplan J, DeGrado WF (2004) De novo design of catalytic proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:11566–11570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Karimäki J, Parkkinen T, Santa H, Pastinen O, Leisola M, Rouvinen J, Turunen O (2004) Crystallographic, molecular dynamics simulation and site-directed mutagenesis study of the reaction of d-xylose isomerase with l-arabinose. Prot Eng Des Select 17:861–869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Keefe AD, Szostak JW (2001) Functional proteins from a random-sequence library. Nature 410:715–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Khersonsky O, Roodveldt C, Tawfik DS (2006) Enzyme promiscuity: evolutionary and mechanistic aspects. Curr Opin Chem Biol 10:498–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kondrashov FA, Kondrashov AS (2006) Role of selection in fixation of gene duplications. J Theor Biol 239:141–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kuhlman B, Dantas G, Ireton, GC, Varani G, Stoddard BL, Baker D (2003) Design of a novel globular protein fold with atomic-level accuracy. Science 302:1364–1368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lehmann M, Wyss M (2001) Engineering proteins for thermostability: the use of sequence alignments versus rational design and directed evolution. Curr Opin Biotechnol 12:371–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lehmann M, Loch C, Middendorf A, Studer D, Lassen SF, Pasamontes L, van Loon A, Wyss M (2002) The consensus concept for thermostability engineering of proteins: further proof of concept. Prot Eng 15:403–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lo Surdo P, Walsh MA, Sollazo M (2004) A novel ADP- and zinc-binding fold from function-directed in vitro evolution. Nat Struct Mol Biol 11:382–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lynch M, Conery JS (2000) The evolutionary fate and consequences of duplicate genes. Science 290:1151–1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McLachlan AD (1987) Gene duplication and the origin of repetitive protein structures. In: Cold Spring Harbor symposium on quantitative biology, vol. LII. Cold Spring Harbor laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, p. 411–420Google Scholar
  45. Meier S, Jensen PR, David CN, Chapman J, Holstein TW, Grzesiek S, Ozbek S (2007) Continuous molecular evolution of protein-domain structures by single amino acid changes. Curr Biol 17:173–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Morley KL, Kazlauskas RJ (2005) Improving enzyme properties: when are closer mutations better? Trends Biotechnol 23:231–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ohno S (1970) Evolution by gene duplication. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Ohta T (2002) Near-neutrality in evolution of genes and gene regulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:16134–16137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Orencia MC, Yoon JS, Ness JE, Stemmer WPC, Stevens RC (2001) Predicting the emergence of antibiotic resistance by directed evolution and structural analysis. Nature Struct Biol 8:238–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Palackal N, Brennan Y, Callen WN, Dupree P, Frey G, Goubet F, Hazlewood GP, Healey S, Kang YE, Kretz KA, Lee E, Tan X, Tomlinson GL, Verruto J, Wong VW, Mathur EJ, Short JM, Robertson DE, Steer BA (2004) An evolutionary route to xylanase process fitness. Protein Sci 13:494–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Park HS, Nam SH, Lee JK, Yoon CN, Mannervik B, Benkovic SJ, Kim HS (2006) Design and evolution of new catalytic activity with an existing protein scaffold. Science 311:535–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pastinen O, Visuri K, Schoemaker H, Leisola M (1999) Novel reactions of xylose isomerase from Streptomyces rubiginosus. Enzyme Microb Technol 25:695–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Peisajovich SG, Rockah L, Tawfik DS (2006) Evolution of new protein topologies through multistep gene rearrangements. Nat Genet 38:168–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pikkemaat MG, Linssen ABM, Berendsen HJC, Janssen DB (2002) Molecular dynamics simulations as a tool for improving protein stability. Prot Eng 15:185–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pleiss J (2006) The promise of synthetic biology. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 73:735–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Poelwijk FJ, Kiviet DJ, Weinreich DM, Tans SJ (2007) Empirical fitness landscapes reveal accessible evolutionary paths. Nature 445:383–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Riechmann L, Winter G (2000) Novel folded protein domains generated by combinatorial shuffling of polypeptide segments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:10068–10073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Roberts RW, Szostak JW (1997) RNA-peptide fusions for the in vitro selection of peptides and proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:12297–12302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rubin-Pitel SB, Zhao H (2006) Recent advances in biocatalysis by directed enzyme evolution. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 9:247–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Shiu SH, Byrnes JK, Pan R, Zhang P, Li WH (2006) Role of positive selection in the retention of duplicate genes in mammalian genomes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:2232–2236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stemmer WP (1994) Rapid evolution of a protein in vitro by DNA shuffling. Nature 370:389–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sterner R, Höcker B (2005) Catalytic versatility, stability, and evolution of the (β/α)8-barrel enzyme fold. Chem Rev 105:4038–4055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Taylor SV, Walter KU, Kast P, Hilvert D (2001) Searching sequence space for protein catalysts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:10596–10601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. van Loo B, Spelberg JH, Kingma J, Sonke T, Wubbolts MG, Janssen DB (2004) Directed evolution of epoxide hydrolase from A. radiobacter toward higher enantioselectivity by error-prone PCR and DNA shuffling. Chem Biol 11:981–990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Voigt CA, Mayo SL, Arnold FH, Wang Z-G (2001) Computational method to reduce the search space for directed protein evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:3778–3783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Walter KU, Vamvaca K, Hilvert D (2005) An active enzyme constructed from a 9-amino acid alphabet. J Biol Chem 280:37742–37746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wei Y, Liu T, Sazinsky SL, Moffet DA, Pelczer I, Hecht MH (2003) Stably folded de novo proteins from a designed combinatorial library. Protein Sci 12:92–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Williams JC, Zeelen JP, Neubauer G, Vriend G, Backmann J, Michels PAM, Lambeir, A-M, Wierenga RK (1999) Structural and mutagenesis studies of leishmania triosephosphate isomerase: a point mutation can convert a mesophilic enzyme into a superstable enzyme without losing catalytic power. Prot Eng 12:243–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wong TS, Zhurina D, Schwaneberg U (2006) The diversity challenge in directed protein evolution. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 9:271–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yoshikuni Y, Ferrin TE, Keasling JD (2006) Designed divergent evolution of enzyme function. Nature 440:1078–1082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Xiong H, Fenel F, Leisola M, Turunen O (2004) Engineering the thermostability of Trichoderma reesei endo-1,4-β-xylanase II by combination of disulfide bridges. Extremophiles 8:393–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Bioprocess EngineeringHelsinki University of TechnologyEspooFinland

Personalised recommendations