4.8 Article

Relationship between side chain structure and 14-helix stability of β3-peptides in water

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 127, 期 1, 页码 167-178

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja0459375

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM065453, R01 GM032136-13, R01 GM065453-04, GM 032136, R01 GM074756, T32 GM008283, GM 08283-11-15, GM 65453, R01 GM032136] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Folded polymers are used in Nature for virtually every vital process. Nonnatural folded polymers, or foldamers, have the potential for similar versatility, and the design and refinement of such molecules is of considerable current interest. Here we report a complete and systematic analysis of the relationship between side chain structure and the 14-helicity of a well-studied class of foldamers, beta(3)-peptides, in water. Our experimental results (1) verify the importance of macrodipole stabilization for maintaining 14-helix structure, (2) provide comprehensive evidence that beta(3)-amino acids branched at the first side chain carbon are 14-helix-stabilizing, (3) suggest a novel role for side chain hydrogen bonding as an additional stabilizing force in beta(3)-peptides containing beta(3)-homoserine or beta(3)-homothreonine, and (4) demonstrate that diverse functionality can be incorporated into a stable 14-helix. Gas- and solution-phase calculations and Monte Carlo simulations recapitulate the experimental trends only in the context of oligomers, yielding insight into the mechanisms behind 14-helix folding. The 14-helix propensities of beta(3)-amino acids differ starkly from the a-helix propensities of analogous alpha-amino acids. This contrast informs current models for alpha-helix folding, and suggests that 14-helix folding is governed by different biophysical forces than is alpha-helix folding. The ability to modulate 14-helix structure through side chain choice will assist rational design of 14-helical beta-peptide ligands for macromolecular targets.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据