Abstract
Members of the same protease family show different substrate specificity, even if they share identical folds, depending on the physiological processes they are part of. Here, we investigate the key factors for subpocket and global specificity of factor Xa, elastase, and granzyme B which despite all being serine proteases and sharing the chymotrypsin-fold show distinct substrate specificity profiles. We determined subpocket interaction potentials with GRID for static X-ray structures and an in silico generated ensemble of conformations. Subpocket interaction potentials determined for static X-ray structures turned out to be insufficient to explain serine protease specificity for all subpockets. Therefore, we generated conformational ensembles using molecular dynamics simulations. We identified representative binding site conformations using distance-based hierarchical agglomerative clustering and determined subpocket interaction potentials for each representative conformation of the binding site. Considering the differences in subpocket interaction potentials for these representative conformations as well as their abundance allowed us to quantitatively explain subpocket specificity for the nonprime side for all three example proteases on a molecular level. The methods to identify key regions determining subpocket specificity introduced in this study are directly applicable to other serine proteases, and the results provide starting points for new strategies in rational drug design.