Protein structure
Protein structure is the three-dimensional arrangement of atoms in an amino acid-chain molecule, and understanding it sits at the heart of modern biology. A chain of amino acids, by itself, tells you relatively little. But fold that chain into a precise shape, and you unlock the difference between an enzyme that drives metabolism and a useless tangle of molecules. That gap between sequence and shape is what structural biology exists to close. How do proteins know which shape to take? What forces guide a flexible chain into something rigid enough to do work? And what happens when that process goes wrong? Those questions run through everything in this story.
Amino acids link together through condensation reactions, and each reaction costs exactly one water molecule. The resulting bond between adjacent amino acids is called a peptide bond. By convention, any chain shorter than 30 amino acids is called a peptide rather than a protein. Longer chains carry a directional identity: one end is called the N-terminus, where a free amino group sits, and the other is the C-terminus. Counting always starts from the N-terminal end.
Frederick Sanger made a discovery that changed how scientists think about proteins: he determined the sequence of amino acids in insulin. That work established that each protein carries a unique sequence, and that sequence encodes both structure and function. Insulin itself is composed of 51 amino acids arranged across two chains. One chain has 31 amino acids; the other has 20.
The primary structure of a protein can be read directly from the gene that encodes it, but not entirely. Post-translational modifications such as phosphorylations and glycosylations are considered part of the primary structure, yet they cannot be read from the gene itself. The identity and order of amino acid residues form the foundation on which every higher level of structure is built.
In 1951, Linus Pauling described two main types of secondary structure: the alpha-helix and the beta-strand, or beta-sheet. These local sub-structures are defined by patterns of hydrogen bonds between groups along the polypeptide backbone. They are constrained to specific values of two angles, called psi and phi, on what is known as the Ramachandran plot. Both forms saturate the hydrogen bond donors and acceptors in the backbone, which stabilizes them.
Above secondary structure sits tertiary structure, the full three-dimensional shape of a single polypeptide chain. Alpha-helices and beta-sheets fold into a compact globular form. Hydrophobic residues are buried away from water in the core, while hydrophilic residues face outward. Salt bridges, hydrogen bonds, and the tight packing of side chains lock the domain in place. Disulfide bonds also contribute, though they are extremely rare in cytosolic proteins because the interior of the cell is generally a reducing environment.
Quaternary structure goes one level further, describing what happens when two or more polypeptide chains assemble into a single functional unit. A unit made of two chains is a dimer; three chains form a trimer; four form a tetramer; five form a pentamer. Hemoglobin is a well-known example of a heterotetramer, assembled from two alpha chains and two beta chains.
Protein folding is the process by which a polypeptide chain collapses from a flexible, unfolded state into its stable, functional three-dimensional form. This native state is generally assumed to be determined by the amino acid sequence alone. That assumption is known as Anfinsen's dogma, a thermodynamic principle holding that the native structure is a unique, stable, and kinetically accessible minimum of free energy.
The forces doing this work include hydrophobic interactions, hydrogen bonding, van der Waals forces, and Coulomb interactions. Hydrophobic collapse is a key step: the number of hydrophobic side-chains exposed to water is minimized, driving them into the protein's core. The result is a globular protein with a hydrophobic interior and a hydrophilic surface.
Not all folding happens after the chain is fully synthesized. In some cases, folding begins co-translationally, while the ribosome is still building the chain. In other cases, specialized helper proteins called chaperones assist the process. The thermodynamic stability of a soluble globular protein is usually measured as the free energy difference between its folded and unfolded states, and that value typically does not exceed 50 kJ/mol.
Myosin, kinesin, and dynein are motor proteins, and each moves cargo through the cell in a different direction or by a different mechanism. Myosin is responsible for muscle contraction. Kinesin carries cargo away from the nucleus along structures called microtubules. Dynein moves cargo toward the nucleus and also drives the beating of motile cilia and flagella. These proteins are possible only because proteins are not rigid objects; they shift between conformational states as they work.
A motile cilium has been described in published literature as a nanomachine composed of perhaps over 600 proteins in molecular complexes, many of which also function independently as nanomachines. Flexible linkers allow mobile protein domains to recruit binding partners and induce long-range changes in shape through a process called allostery.
Some proteins take this flexibility to an extreme. Intrinsically disordered proteins exist and function in a state that lacks a stable tertiary structure. They resist description by any single fixed shape. To model these proteins, researchers use conformational ensembles, collections of multiple possible structures that together represent the protein's behavior. Ensemble files have been generated for proteins including Sic1/Cdc4, p15 PAF, MKK7, Beta-synuclein, and P27.
Around 90% of the protein structures in the Protein Data Bank have been determined by X-ray crystallography. The method works by measuring the three-dimensional density distribution of electrons in a crystallized protein sample, then using that data to infer the coordinates of every atom. Nuclear magnetic resonance techniques account for roughly 7% of known structures.
For very large complexes, cryo-electron microscopy offers an alternative. Its resolution has historically been lower than X-ray crystallography or NMR, but it continues to improve, and it is particularly valuable for structures like virus coat proteins and amyloid fibers. Circular dichroism can determine the general secondary structure composition of a sample. Two-dimensional infrared spectroscopy has become a valuable method for studying flexible peptides that resist other approaches.
Once a structure is experimentally determined, the work is not necessarily finished. Molecular dynamic simulations can probe the structure computationally, exploring how it behaves over time. A technique called fast parallel proteolysis, or FASTpp, can probe the structured fraction of a protein and its stability without requiring purification first. Computational prediction methods, including threading and homology modeling, can also build three-dimensional models for proteins whose structures have not been directly measured.
Despite roughly 100,000 different proteins being expressed in eukaryotic systems, the number of distinct structural domains, motifs, and folds is much smaller. The Structural Classification of Proteins database and the CATH database each provide their own independent classification scheme. When two proteins share significant structural similarity, that overlap is treated as evidence of a common evolutionary ancestor.
Domains are independently stable structural units that often fold separately from the rest of the protein. Because of that independence, domains can be transferred between proteins through genetic engineering to create chimera proteins. A combination of a protein tyrosine phosphatase domain and a C2 domain that appears across different proteins has been called a superdomain, on the theory that it evolves as a single unit.
Predictive machine learning approaches to structure work at four levels. The first level predicts secondary structure and solvent accessibility from the sequence alone. The second level maps distances and contact points along the chain. The third level estimates the full atomic coordinates of the protein. The fourth level predicts complexes of multiple proteins together. Progress across all four levels is assessed at the biannual Critical Assessment of Structure Prediction event, which tracks how well computational methods are advancing against known experimental benchmarks.
Common questions
What are the four levels of protein structure?
The four levels of protein structure are primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary. Primary structure is the sequence of amino acids; secondary structure includes local sub-structures such as alpha-helices and beta-sheets; tertiary structure is the full three-dimensional shape of a single polypeptide chain; quaternary structure describes assemblies of two or more chains into a functional unit.
Who determined the amino acid sequence of insulin and why does it matter?
Frederick Sanger determined the amino acid sequence of insulin, establishing that proteins have defining amino acid sequences unique to each protein. Insulin is composed of 51 amino acids arranged in two chains: one chain has 31 amino acids and the other has 20.
What forces drive protein folding into a stable three-dimensional structure?
Protein folding is driven by a combination of hydrophobic interactions, hydrogen bonding, van der Waals forces, and Coulomb interactions. Hydrophobic collapse pushes hydrophobic side-chains into the protein's core and away from water, while hydrophilic side-chains face outward toward the solvent.
What is Anfinsen's dogma in protein folding?
Anfinsen's dogma is the thermodynamic principle that a protein's native three-dimensional structure is uniquely determined by its amino acid sequence. It states that the native structure represents a unique, stable, and kinetically accessible minimum of free energy.
How are protein structures experimentally determined?
Around 90% of structures in the Protein Data Bank have been determined by X-ray crystallography, which maps the electron density of a crystallized protein to infer atomic coordinates. Nuclear magnetic resonance techniques account for roughly 7% of known structures, and cryo-electron microscopy is used for very large complexes such as virus coat proteins and amyloid fibers.
What are intrinsically disordered proteins?
Intrinsically disordered proteins exist and function in a state that lacks a stable tertiary structure, making them impossible to describe with a single fixed three-dimensional form. Conformational ensembles are used to represent their behavior; examples include Sic1/Cdc4, p15 PAF, MKK7, Beta-synuclein, and P27.
All sources
43 references cited across the entry
- 1bookOrganic and Biological ChemistryStoker HS — Cengage Learning — 1 January 2015
- 2journalProtein length in eukaryotic and prokaryotic proteomesBrocchieri L, Karlin S — 2005-06-10
- 3journalThe amino-acid sequence in the phenylalanyl chain of insulin. I. The identification of lower peptides from partial hydrolysatesSanger F, Tuppy H — September 1951
- 4journalChemistry of insulin; determination of the structure of insulin opens the way to greater understanding of life processesSanger F — May 1959
- 5journalThe structure of proteins; two hydrogen-bonded helical configurations of the polypeptide chainPauling L, Corey RB, Branson HR — April 1951
- 6journalNew classification of supersecondary structures of sandwich-like proteins uncovers strict patterns of strand assemblageChiang YS, Gelfand TI, Kister AE, Gelfand IM — September 2007
- 7journalA periodic table of coiled-coil protein structuresMoutevelis E, Woolfson DN — January 2009
- 8journalInteractions between nascent proteins translated by adjacent ribosomes drive homomer assemblyBertolini M, Fenzl K, Kats I, Wruck F, Tippmann F, Schmitt J, Auburger JJ, Tans S, Bukau B, Kramer G — January 2021
- 9journalSuperdomains in the protein structure hierarchy: The case of PTP-C2Haynie DT, Xue B — May 2015
- 10journalEstimating the total number of protein foldsGovindarajan S, Recabarren R, Goldstein RA — June 1999
- 11bookProtein Structure and DiseasesBu Z, Callaway DJ — Academic Press — 2011
- 12journalHidden alternative structures of proline isomerase essential for catalysisFraser JS, Clarkson MW, Degnan SC, Erion R, Kern D, Alber T — December 2009
- 13bookBiochemistryVoet D, Voet JG — John Wiley & Sons — 2011
- 14journalStructure and function of mammalian ciliaSatir P, Christensen ST — June 2008
- 15inlineProtein Ensemble Database
- 16journalComputational approaches for inferring the functions of intrinsically disordered proteinsVaradi M, Vranken W, Guharoy M, Tompa P — 2015-01-01
- 17journalStructure/function implications in a dynamic complex of the intrinsically disordered Sic1 with the Cdc4 subunit of an SCF ubiquitin ligaseMittag T, Marsh J, Grishaev A, Orlicky S, Lin H, Sicheri F, Tyers M, Forman-Kay JD — March 2010
- 18journalp15PAF is an intrinsically disordered protein with nonrandom structural preferences at sites of interaction with other proteinsDe Biasio A, Ibáñez de Opakua A, Cordeiro TN, Villate M, Merino N, Sibille N, Lelli M, Diercks T, Bernadó P, Blanco FJ — February 2014
- 19journalStructure and dynamics of the MKK7-JNK signaling complexKragelj J, Palencia A, Nanao MH, Maurin D, Bouvignies G, Blackledge M, Jensen MR — March 2015
- 20journalA relationship between the transient structure in the monomeric state and the aggregation propensities of α-synuclein and β-synucleinAllison JR, Rivers RC, Christodoulou JC, Vendruscolo M, Dobson CM — November 2014
- 21journalDisordered p27Kip1 exhibits intrinsic structure resembling the Cdk2/cyclin A-bound conformationSivakolundu SG, Bashford D, Kriwacki RW — November 2005
- 22journalFolding at the birth of the nascent chain: coordinating translation with co-translational foldingGong Zhang et al. — February 2011
- 23journalNature and Regulation of Protein Folding on the RibosomeChristopher A. Waudby et al. — 2019-11-01
- 24journalThe formation and stabilization of protein structureC B Anfinsen — 1 July 1972
- 25journalDominant forces in protein foldingKen A. Dill — 1990-08-07
- 26journalForces contributing to the conformational stability of proteinsC. Nick Pace et al. — January 1996
- 27journalProtein structure and function at low temperaturesJaenicke R — January 1990
- 28journalA three-dimensional model of the myoglobin molecule obtained by x-ray analysisKendrew JC, Bodo G, Dintzis HM, Parrish RG, Wyckoff H, Phillips DC — March 1958
- 29webPDB Statistics2022-10-01
- 30bookAdvances in Protein ChemistrySamuel Krimm et al. — 1986
- 31journalIdentifying residual structure in intrinsically disordered systems: a 2D IR spectroscopic study of the GVGXPGVG peptideLessing J, Roy S, Reppert M, Baer M, Marx D, Jansen TL, Knoester J, Tokmakoff A — March 2012
- 32journalTwo-dimensional infrared population transfer spectroscopy for enhancing structural markers of proteinsJansen TL, Knoester J — March 2008
- 33journalDetermining biophysical protein stability in lysates by a fast proteolysis assay, FASTppMinde DP, Maurice MM, Rüdiger SG — 2012
- 34journalMolecular Dynamics Simulations, Challenges and Opportunities: A Biologist's ProspectiveKumari I, Sandhu P, Ahmed M, Akhter Y — August 2017
- 35journalProtein structure databasesLaskowski RA — June 2011
- 36journalSCOP: a structural classification of proteins database for the investigation of sequences and structuresMurzin AG, Brenner SE, Hubbard T, Chothia C — April 1995
- 37journalCATH--a hierarchic classification of protein domain structuresOrengo CA, Michie AD, Jones S, Jones DT, Swindells MB, Thornton JM — August 1997
- 38journalCross-over between discrete and continuous protein structure space: insights into automatic classification and networks of protein structuresPascual-García A, Abia D, Ortiz AR, Bastolla U — March 2009
- 39journalDali server: conservation mapping in 3DHolm L, Rosenström P — July 2010
- 40journalProgress and challenges in protein structure predictionZhang Y — June 2008
- 41journalProtein structure prediction via deep learning: an in-depth reviewMeng Y, Zhang Z, Zhou C, Tang X, Hu X, Tian G, Yang J, Yao Y — 2025
- 42journalMachine Learning Methods for Protein Structure PredictionJianlin Cheng et al. — 2008
- 43journalMachine learning solutions for predicting protein–protein interactionsRita Casadio et al. — November 2022