There have been several studies suggesting that protein structures solved by NMR spectroscopy and X‐ray crystallography show significant differences. To understand the origin of these differences, we assembled a database of high‐quality protein structures solved by both methods. We also find significant differences between NMR and crystal structures—in the root‐mean‐square deviations of the C α atomic positions, identities of core amino acids, backbone, and side‐chain dihedral angles, and packing fraction of core residues. In contrast to prior studies, we identify the physical basis for these differences by modeling protein cores as jammed packings of amino acid‐shaped particles. We find that we can tune the jammed packing fraction by varying the degree of thermalization used to generate the packings. For an athermal protocol, we find that the average jammed packing fraction is identical to that observed in the cores of protein structures solved by X‐ray crystallography. In contrast, highly thermalized packing‐generation protocols yield jammed packing fractions that are even higher than those observed in NMR structures. These results indicate that thermalized systems can pack more densely than athermal systems, which suggests a physical basis for the structural differences between protein structures solved by NMR and X‐ray crystallography.

No abstract

We investigate the structural, vibrational, and mechanical properties of jammed packings of deformable particles with shape degrees of freedom in three dimensions (3D). Each 3D deformable particle is modeled as...

Dense packing of hydrophobic residues in the cores of globular proteins determines their stability. Recently, we have shown that protein cores possess packing fraction φ ≈ 0.56, which is the same as dense, random packing of amino acid-shaped particles. In this article, we compare the structural properties of protein cores and jammed packings of amino acid-shaped particles in much greater depth by measuring their local and connected void regions. We find that the distributions of surface Voronoi cell volumes and local porosities obey similar statistics in both systems. We also measure the probability that accessible, connected void regions percolate as a function of the size of a spherical probe particle and show that both systems possess the same critical probe size. By measuring the critical exponent τ that characterizes the size distribution of connected void clusters at the onset of percolation, we show that void percolation in packings of amino acid-shaped particles and protein cores belong to the same universality class, which is different from that for void percolation in jammed sphere packings. We propose that the connected void regions of proteins are a defining feature of proteins and can be used to differentiate experimentally observed proteins from decoy structures that are generated using computational protein design software. This work emphasizes that jammed packings of amino acid-shaped particles can serve as structural and mechanical analogs of protein cores, and could therefore be useful in modeling the response of protein cores to cavityexpanding and -reducing mutations. * current address

The spongy mesophyll is a complex, porous tissue found in plant leaves that enables carbon capture and provides mechanical stability. Unlike many other biological tissues, which remain confluent throughout development, the spongy mesophyll must develop from an initially confluent tissue into a tortuous network of cells with a large proportion of intercellular airspace. How the airspace in the spongy mesophyll develops while the tissue remains mechanically stable is unknown. Here, we use computer simulations of deformable polygons to develop a purely mechanical model for the development of the spongy mesophyll tissue. By stipulating that cell wall growth and remodelling occurs only near void space, our computational model is able to recapitulate spongy mesophyll development observed in Arabidopsis thaliana leaves. We find that robust generation of pore space in the spongy mesophyll requires a balance of cell growth, adhesion, stiffness and tissue pressure to ensure cell networks become porous yet maintain mechanical stability. The success of this mechanical model of morphogenesis suggests that simple physical principles can coordinate and drive the development of complex plant tissues like the spongy mesophyll.