{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023582766439909298, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014965986394557823, 'mean_word_length': 5.06043956043956, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Structural Disorder and Induced Folding of the WWC Family Proteins

The WWC family consists of three proteins‐ KIBRA/WWC1, WWC2, and WWC3. Each protein contains two WW domains which recognize proline‐rich sequences of the type PPxY (P is proline, Y is tyrosine, x is any amino acid). WW domains are named for two conserved tryptophans spaced 23 residues apart and adopt a three‐stranded antiparallel beta sheet fold. The WWC proteins are “atypical” in that, the second WW domain (WW2) contains an isoleucine rather than a conserved tryptophan. Recent studies of the KIBRA WW domains shows that this substitution leads to unfolding of the WW2 domains. However, the domain undergoes binding‐induced folding when bound to some partners but remains largely unfolded when bound to others. High sequence similarity of the WW domains in the WWC family suggests that unfolding and binding induced folding of the WW2 domain may be conserved in this family, but it is unclear why some partners induce folding of the WW2 domain while others do not. Our working hypothesis is that partners which contain PPxY motifs in close proximity will bind the WWC proteins with relatively high affinity and induce folding of the WW2 domain. In this study, we test this hypothesis with two binding partners, Large Tumor Suppressor 1 (LATS1), a kinase and tumor suppressor, and Synaptopodin (SYNPO), a synaptic and podocyte protein. We demonstrate by isothermal titration calorimetry that wildtype LATS1 and SYNPO which have two PPxY motifs each, separated by 194 and 15 residues respectively, bound KIBRA and WWC3 with modest micromolar binding affinities. However, mutant LATS1 (LATS1‐VA) and SYNPO (SYNPO_AA) constructs in which the PPxY motifs are separated by two amino acids, bound KIBRA and WWC3 with 20 to 180‐fold enhanced affinity. Using solution magnetic resonance spectroscopy, we demonstrated that the WW2 domain of KIBRA and WWC3 remain unfolded when bound to wildtype LATS1 and SYNPO, while the enhanced binding of the mutants LATS1_VA and SYNPO_AA is accompanied by folding of the WW2 domain. The structural heterogeneity of the WW2 domain may be an important for modulating binding to diverse PPxY motif partners.