Advertisement

Insilico Characterization of the Mutational Hotspot Regions of the Enzyme Protease and an Insight to the Effect of These Mutations on the Stability of the Protein

  • Sunitha Panigrahi
  • Syed Rizwan Hasan Razvi
  • Syeda Rabia Mariyam
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology book series (BRIEFSAPPLSCIENCES)

Abstract

The current work is an Insilco extension of our previous Microbiology work entitled “Comparative assessment of Protease enzyme production by wild and UV irradiated mutant strains of Bacillus larvae”, In the above mentioned paper an analysis was made on the Effect of UV irradiation on the enzyme producing ability of the bacteria. The current work aims to analyze the possible mutational regions present in the gene sequence of the protease so as to understand the regions which could be the sites for evolutionary change in the protein. The complete work involves Conservation studies based on the MSA between the protease enzymes of various bacterial species and analyzing there phylogenetic relationship. Identification of the functional domains within the protein and the prediction of disorder sites for the same. From among the disordered sites most potential site has been identified using RONN. The effect of mutations at the potential site on the stability of the protein and the tolerance level were analyzed. The work concludes with the identification of the potential mutational hot spots and the possible effect on the protein due to the expected mutations.

Keywords

Characterization Mutational hotspots UV irradiation MSA Conservation Domain analysis 

References

  1. 1.
    Gupta R, Beg QK, Lorenz P (2002) Bacterial alkaline proteases: molecular approaches and industrial applications. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 59:15–32. doi: 10.1007/s00253-002-0975-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhunia B, Basak B, Dey A (2012) A review on production of serine alkaline protease by Bacillus spp. J Biochem Tech 3(4):448–457. ISSN: 0974-2328Google Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Larkin MA, Blackshields G, Brown NP, Chenna R, McGettigan PA, McWilliam H, Valentin F, Wallace IM, Wilm A, Lopez R, Thompson JD, Gibson TJ, Higgins DG (2007) ClustalW and ClustalX version 2. Bioinformatics 23(21):2947–2948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Literature reference (Pubmed ID: 9672036): Subramaniam S (1998) The biology workbench–a seamless database and analysis environment for the biologist. Proteins 32:1–2. http://workbench.sdsc.edu
  7. 7.
    Schultz J, Milpetz F, Bork P, Ponting CP (1998) SMART, a simple modular architecture research tool: identification of signaling domains. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95(11):5857–64. doi: 10.1073/pnas.95.11.5857.PMC34487.PMID9600884
  8. 8.
    Linding R, Jensen LJ, Diella F, Bork P, Gibson TJ, Russell RB (2003) Protein disorder prediction: implications for structural proteomics. Structure 11(11):4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sapay N, Guermeur Y, Deleage G (2006) Prediction of amphipathic in-plane membrane anchors in monotopic proteins using a SVM classifier. BMC Bioinformatics 7(1):255Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    I MUTANT 2.0—Support vector machines based predictor of protein stability changes upon single point mutation from the protein sequence and structure (developed by Capriotti E, Fariselli P, Casadio R). http://gpcr2.biocomp.unibo.it/~emidio/I-Mutant2.0/IMutant2.0_Details.html

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sunitha Panigrahi
    • 1
  • Syed Rizwan Hasan Razvi
    • 1
  • Syeda Rabia Mariyam
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BiotechnologySt. Mary’s CollegeYousufgudaIndia
  2. 2.Department of BiotechnologySt. Ann’s CollegeMehdipatnamIndia

Personalised recommendations