Comparison of intramolecular and intermolecular reactions in protein folding

Abstract

The intrinsic component of the standard free energy change for the formation of a disulfide bond in a protein molecule is compared to that for an analogous chemical reaction. The former reaction, which represents theintramolecular formation of a disulfide bond in a protein molecule from a cysteine group containing a mixed disulfide bond with glutathione, and a free cysteine residue, is a unimolecular reaction. In contrast, its chemical analogue is a bimolecular reaction, and corresponds to theintermolecular disulfide interchange between a mixed disulfide-bonded compound between a cysteine residue and glutathione, and a free cysteine molecule. The difference in the intrinsic free energy of the above two reactions is estimated by two different approaches. First, a theoretical estimate of the magnitude of the difference in free energy of the two reactions (for a standard state of 1 M) is obtained using a gas-phase statistical thermodynamic approach, which indicates that the intramolecular reaction is energetically favored over its intermolecular counterpart by as much as 15.6 kcal/mole. For comparison, an experimentally derived value is also obtained, using experimental data from a study by Konishi et al. of the regeneration of the protein ribonuclease A (RNase A) from its reduced form by reduced and oxidized glutathiones. The intrinsic component of the free energy change of the intramolecular reaction, as it occurs in the protein molecule, is obtained from such experimental data by accounting explicitly for the free energy change (assumed to be solely an entropy change) pertaining to the conformational changes (ring closure) that the protein molecule undergoes in the course of the reaction. On the basis of the value derived from such an experimental approach, the intramolecular reaction is also energetically more favorable as compared to its intermolecular analogue, but only by a difference of 2.3 kcal/mole (for a standard state of 1 M). The large apparent discrepancy between the two values estimated from the theoretical and experimental approaches is rationalized by the postulation of several additional factors not inherent in the gas-phase theoretical estimate, such as dehydration and intramolecular hydrogen-bonding effects, which can largely compensate for the otherwise favorable energetics of the intramolecular reaction.