Skip to main content
Log in

Computational study of peptide interaction with mutant γ-crystallin with the aim of preventing dimerization

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Structural Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As we know, cataract disease is caused by the aggregation of crystallin proteins, such as α, β, and γ-crystallin, in the lens of the eye. Naturally, when mutations occur in γ-crystallin proteins, its binding affinity to the α-crystallin is increased, the protein with known chaperone role. Mutant γ-crystallin proteins also have a strong affinity to bind to each other and form large oligomers. The presence of these aggregates causes opacity of the lens of the eye and causes cataract disease. In this work, we aim to investigate whether peptides can prevent mutant γ-crystallin proteins from oligomerization/aggregation. Molecular docking and molecular dynamic simulations were used to determine how three putative amyloid-binding octapeptides (RVTWEGKF, RGTFEGRF, and RITFEIKF) bind to the mutant γ-crystallin protein. The results showed that RVTWEGKF had a more favorable binding energy for interaction with the mutant protein than RGTFEGRF and RITFEIKF. Also, in the presence of RVTWEGKF, mutant γ-crystallin is less likely to form protein dimers. Based on these findings, RGTFEGRF is proposed to be tested experimentally as a potential treatment against cataract disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

No datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study. All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its Supplementary Information files.

References

  1. Pi L-H et al (2012) Prevalence of eye diseases and causes of visual impairment in school-aged children in Western China. J Epidemiol 22(1): 37–44

  2. Wu X et al (2016) Prevalence and epidemiological characteristics of congenital cataract: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 6:28564

  3. Fu L, Liang JJ-N (2003) Alteration of protein–protein interactions of congenital cataract crystallin mutants. Investig Ophthalmol Visual Sci 44(3):1155–1159

  4. Hejtmancik JF (2008) Congenital cataracts and their molecular genetics. Sem Cell Dev Biol 19(2)

  5. Scott MH et al (1994) Autosomal dominant congenital cataract: interocular phenotypic variability. Ophthalmology 101(5): 866–871

  6. Ionides A et al (1999) Clinical and genetic heterogeneity in autosomal dominant cataract. Br J Ophthalmol 83(7): 802–808

  7. Shiels A, Hejtmancik JF (2015) Molecular genetics of cataract. Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci 134:203–218

  8. Groenen PJTA et al (1994) Structure and modifications of the junior chaperone α‐crystallin: From lens transparency to molecular pathology. Eur J Biochem 225(1):1–19

  9. Yang Z et al (2013) A R54L mutation of CRYAA associated with autosomal dominant nuclear cataracts in a Chinese family. Curr Eye Res 38(12):1221–1228

  10. Javadiyan S et al (2016) Recurrent mutation in the crystallin alpha A gene associated with inherited paediatric cataract. BMC Res Notes 9(1):83

  11. Laurie KJ et al (2013) Identification of a novel oligomerization disrupting mutation in CRYΑA associated with congenital cataract in a South Australian family. Hum Mutat 34(3):435–438

  12. Kong XD et al (2015) A novel 3-base pair deletion of the CRYAA gene identified in a large Chinese pedigree featuring autosomal dominant congenital perinuclear cataract. Genet Mol Res 14:426–432

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hansen L et al (2007) Genetic heterogeneity in microcornea-cataract: five novel mutations in CRYAA, CRYGD, and GJA8. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 48(9):3937–3944

  14. Khan AO, Aldahmesh MA, Meyer B (2007) Recessive congenital total cataract with microcornea and heterozygote carrier signs caused by a novel missense CRYAA mutation (R54C). Am J Ophthalmol 144(6):949–952

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Santhiya ST et al (2006) Identification of a novel, putative cataract-causing allele in CRYAA (G98R) in an Indian family. Mol Vis 12(6):768–773

  16. Andley UP, Goldman JW (2016) Autophagy and UPR in alpha-crystallin mutant knock-in mouse models of hereditary cataracts. Biochim Biophys Acta (BBA)-Gen Subj 1860(1):234–239

  17. Datiles MB et al (2008) Clinical detection of precataractous lens protein changes using dynamic light scattering. Arch Ophthalmol 126(12):1687–1693

  18. Shiels A, Hejtmancik JF (2007) Genetic origins of cataract. Arch Ophthalmol 125(2):165–173

  19. Litt M et al (1997) Autosomal dominant cerulean cataract is associated with a chain termination mutation in the human β-crystallin gene CRYBB2. Hum Mol Genet 6(5):665–668

  20. Mackay DS et al (2002) A nonsense mutation in CRYBB1 associated with autosomal dominant cataract linked to human chromosome 22q. Am J Hum Genet 71(5):1216–1221

  21. Xi Y-B et al (2014) Cataract-linked mutation R188H promotes βB2-crystallin aggregation and fibrillization during acid denaturation. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 447(2):244–249

  22. Zhou Y et al (2016) A novel CRYBB2 Stopgain mutation causing congenital autosomal dominant cataract in a Chinese family. J Ophthalmol 2016

  23. Shiels A, Bennett TM, Hejtmancik JF (2010) Cat-Map: putting cataract on the map. Mol Vis 16:2007

  24. Ikesugi K et al (2006) Role of the unfolded protein response (UPR) in cataract formation. Exp Eye Res 83(3):508–516

  25. Eskici G, Gur M (2013) Computational design of new peptide inhibitors for amyloid beta (Aβ) aggregation in Alzheimer’s disease: application of a novel methodology. PLoS ONE 8(6):e66178

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Mashiach E, Schneidman-Duhovny D, Andrusier N, Nussinov R, Wolfson HJ (2008) FireDock: a web server for fast interaction refinement in molecular docking. Nucleic Acids Res 36(suppl_2):W229-W232

  27. Brubaker WD, Martin RW (2012) 1 H, 13 C, and 15 N assignments of wild-type human γS-crystallin and its cataract-related variant γS-G18V. Biomol NMR Assign 6(1):63–67

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Maupetit J, Derreumaux P, Tuffery P (2009) PEP-FOLD: an online resource for de novo peptide structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res 37(suppl_2):W498-W503

  29. Schrodinger LLC (2010) The AxPyMOL Molecular Graphics Plugin for Microsoft PowerPoint

  30. Van Der Spoel D et al (2005) GROMACS: fast, flexible, and free. J Comput Chem 26(16):1701–1718

  31. Kaminski GA et al (2001) Evaluation and reparametrization of the OPLS-AA force field for proteins via comparison with accurate quantum chemical calculations on peptides. J Phys Chem B 105(28):6474–6487

  32. Price DJ, Brooks III CL (2004) A modified TIP3P water potential for simulation with Ewald summation. J Chem Phys 121(20):10096–10103

  33. Hess B et al (2008) GROMACS 4: algorithms for highly efficient, load-balanced, and scalable molecular simulation. J Chem Theory Comput 4(3):435–447

  34. Makov G, Payne MC (1995) Periodic boundary conditions in ab initio calculations. Phys Rev B 51(7):4014

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

RM and MFR contributed in resource and funding acquisition. KJ contributed in project administration. AN contributed in project administration, resources and funding acquisition, and validation. EB conceptualized the work and completing the draft; performed data curation, analysis, validation and visualization; and wrote the original draft. All authors reviewed the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ali Najafi or Esmaeil Behmard.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Daryabari, SH., Aghamollaei, H., Jadidi, K. et al. Computational study of peptide interaction with mutant γ-crystallin with the aim of preventing dimerization. Struct Chem 34, 695–702 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11224-022-02015-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11224-022-02015-w

Keywords

Navigation