{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028846153846153848, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011675824175824176, 'mean_word_length': 5.253218884120171, '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}}
Terminal sidechain packing of a designed β‐hairpin influences conformation and stability

While end capping in α‐helices is well understood, the concept of capping a β‐hairpin is a relatively recent development; to date, favorable Coulombic interactions are the only example of sidechains at the termini influencing the overall stability of a β‐hairpin. While cross‐strand hydrophobic residues generally provide hairpin stabilization, particular when flanking the turn region, those remote from this location appear to provide little stabilization. While probing for an optimal residue at a hydrogen bond position near the terminus of a designed β‐hairpin a conservative, hydrophobic, V → I mutation was observed to not only result in a significant change in fold population but also effected major changes in the structuring shifts at numerous sites in the peptide. Mutational studies reveal that there is an interaction between the sidechain at this H‐bonded site and the sidechain at the C‐terminal non‐H‐bonded site of the hairpin. This interaction, which appears to be hydrophobic in character, requires a highly twisted hairpin structure. Modifications at the C‐terminal site, for example an E → A mutation (ΔΔGU = 6 kJ/mol), have profound affects on fold structure and stability. The data suggests that this may be a case of hairpin end capping by the formation of a hydrophobic cluster. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Biopolymers 91: 557–564, 2009.