Does lack of secondary structure imply intrinsic disorder in proteins? A sequence analysis

Intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs)/protein regions (IDPRs) lack unique three-dimensional structure at the level of secondary and/or tertiary structure and are represented as an ensemble of interchanging conformations. To investigate the role of presence/absence of secondary structures in promoting intrinsic disorder in proteins, a comparative sequence analysis of IDPs, IDPRs and proteins with minimal secondary structures (less than 5%) is required. A sequence analysis reveals proteins with minimal secondary structure content have high mean net positive charge, low mean net hydrophobicity and low sequence complexity. Interestingly, analysis of the relative local electrostatic interactions reveal that an increase in the relative repulsive interactions between amino acids separated by three or four residues lead to either loss of secondary structure or intrinsic disorder. IDPRs show increase in both local negative-negative and positive-positive repulsive interactions. While IDPs show a marked increase in the local negative-negative interactions, proteins with minimal secondary structure depict an increase in the local positive-positive interactions. IDPs and IDPRs are enriched in D, E and Q residues, while proteins with minimal secondary structure are depleted of these residues. Proteins with minimal secondary structures have higher content of G and C, while IDPs and IDPRs are depleted of these residues. These results confirm that proteins with minimal secondary structure have a distinctly different propensity for charge, hydrophobicity, specific amino acids and local electrostatic interactions as compared to IDPs/IDPRs. Thus we conclude that lack of secondary structure may be a necessary but not a sufficient condition for intrinsic disorder in proteins.