Scores for sequence searches and alignments

Current Opinion in Structural Biology

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 353-360

  Henikoff, Steven ^a  

^a HOWARD HUGHES MEDICAL INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; AMINO ACID SUBSTITUTION; GENETIC CONSERVATION; GENETIC PROCEDURES; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; REVIEW;

EID: 0029937427     PISSN: 0959440X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-440X(96)80055-8     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Dayhoff MO, Schwartz RM, Orcutt BC: A model of evolutionary change in proteins. In Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure, vol 5, suppl 3. Edited by Dayhoff M. Washington, DC: National Biomedical Research Foundation; 1978:345-358.
2. Bork P, Ouzounis C, Sander C: From genome sequences to protein function. Curr Opin Struct Biol 1994, 4:393-403.
3. Brenner S: Phosphotransferase sequence homology. Nature 1987, 329:21.
4. Bairoch A: PROSITE: a dictionary of sites and patterns in proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 1992, 20:2013-2018.
5. Gribskov M, McLachlan AD, Eisenberg D: Profile analysis: detection of distantly related proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1987, 84:4355-4358.
6. Dayhoff MO, Eck RV (Eds): Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure, vol 3. Silver Spring: National Biomedical Research Foundation; 1968.
7. Altschul SF: Amino acid substitution matrices from an information theoretic perspective. J Mol Biol 1991, 219:555-565.
8. Grantham R: Amino acid difference formula to help explain protein evolution. Science 1974, 185:862-864.
9. Miyata T, Miyazawa S, Yasunaga T: Two types of amino acid substitutions in protein evolution. J Mol Evol 1979, 12:219-236.
10. Feng DF, Johnson MS, Doolittle RF: Aligning amino acid sequences: comparison of commonly used methods. J Mol Evol 1985, 21:112-125.
11. Rao JKM: New scoring matrix for amino acid residue exchanges based on residue characteristic physical parameters. Int J Pept Protein Res 1987, 29:276-281.
12. Miyazawa S, Jernigan RL: A new substitution matrix for protein sequence searches based on contact frequencies in protein structures. Protein Eng 1993, 6:267-278.
13. Henikoff S, Henikoff JG: Performance evaluation of amino acid substitution matrices. Proteins 1993, 17:49-61.
14. Jones DT, Taylor WR, Thornton JM: The rapid generation of mutation data matrices from protein sequences. CABIOS 1992, 8:275-282.
15. Wilbur WJ: On the PAM matrix model of protein evolution. Mol Biol Evol 1985, 2:434-447.
16. Benner SA, Cohen MA, Gonnet GH: Amino acid substitution during functionally constrained divergent evolution of protein sequences. Protein Eng 1994, 7:1323-1332.
17. 7. Gonnet GH, Cohen MA, Benner SA: Exhaustive matching of the entire protein sequence database. Science 1992, 256:1443-1445.
18. Henikoff S, Henikoff JG: Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1992, 89:10915-10919.
19. Henikoff S, Henikoff JG: Automated assembly of protein blocks for database searching. Nucleic Acids Res 1991, 19:6565-6572.
20. Risler JL, Delorme MO, Delacroix H, Henaut A: Amino acid substitutions in structurally related proteins. A pattern recognition approach. Determination of a new and efficient scoring matrix. J Mol Biol 1988, 204:1019-1029.
21. Overington J, Donnelly D, Johnson MS, Šali A, Blundell TL: Environment-specific amino acid substitution tables: tertiary templates and prediction of protein folds. Protein Sci 1992, 1:216-226.
22. Johnson MS, Overington JP: A structural basis for sequence comparisons. An evaluation of scoring methodologies. J Mol Biol 1993, 233:716-738.
23. Pearson WR: Comparison of methods for searching protein sequence databases. Protein Sci 1995, 4:1145-1160. Local alignment searching algorithms were tested using several different substitution matrices and gap penalty combinations. Search sensitivity is significantly improved using modern matrices, such as BLOSUM 45-55, with optimized gap penalties. The best overall performance was obtained with the Smith-Waterman algorithm and log-length normalization of alignment scores.
24. Vogt G, Etzold T, Argos P: An assessment of amino acid exchange matrices in aligning protein sequences: the twilight zone revisited. J Mol Biol 1995, 249:816-831. Eighty substitution matrices were evaluated using alignment accuracy as a criterion. Several modern log-odds substitution matrices performed well when modified for global alignment and paired with optimized gap penalties.
25. Taylor WR: Motif-biased protein sequence alignment J Comput Biol 1994, 1:297-310. The extreme sensitivity of global alignments to gap penalty choice can be reduced by scoring runs of matches higher than scattered matches.
26. Mott R: Maximum-likelihood estimation of the statistical distribution of Smith-Waterman local sequence similarity scores. Bull Math Biol 1992, 54:59-75.
27. Vingron M, Waterman MS: Sequence alignment and penalty choice: review of concepts, case studies and implications. J Mol Biol 1994, 235:1-12.
28. Bowie JU, Luthy R, Eisenberg D: A method to identify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional structure. Science 1991, 253:164-170.
29. Krogh A, Brown M, Mian IS, Sjolander K, Haussler D: Hidden Markov models in computational biology. J Mol Biol 1994, 235:1501-1531. An iterative method for multiple sequence alignment is described. PSSM parameters, such as gap penalties, are determined in the course of aligning sequences.
30. Baldi P, Chauvin Y, Hunkapiller T, McClure MA: Hidden Markov models of biological primary sequence information. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994, 91:1059-1063.
31. Eddy SR, Mitchison G, Durbin R: Maximum discrimination hidden Markov models of sequence consensus. J Comput Biol 1995, 2:9-24.
32. Tatusov RL, Altschul SF, Koonin EV: Detection of conserved segments in proteins: iterative scanning of sequence databases with alignment blocks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994, 91:12091-12095. PSSMs representing ungapped alignment blocks were iteratively expanded by searching sequence databases. In this context, different methods for calculating PSSM column weights were evaluated. The pseudo-count method based on mixtures of Dirichlet components performed best.
33. Luthy R, Xenarios I, Bucher P: Improving the sensitivity of the sequence profile method. Protein Sci 1994, 3:139-146.
34. Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ: Improved sensitivity of profile searches through the use of sequence weights and gap excision. CABIOS 1994, 10:19-29. Branch-proportional sequence weights were described and found to improve the performance of several PSSMs. Improvements were also obtained by using BLOSUM 62 rather than PAM 250 and by selectively excluding gaps.
35. Dodd IB, Egan JB: Systematic method for the detection of potential lambda Cro-like DNA-binding regions in proteins. J Mol Biol 1987, 194:557-564.
36. Lawrence CE, Altschul SF, Boguski MS, Liu JS, Neuwald AF, Wootton JC: Detecting subtle sequence signals: a Gibbs sampling strategy for multiple alignment Science 1993, 262:208-214.
37. Claverie J-M: Some useful statistical properties of position-weight matrices. J Comput Chem 1994, 18:287-293.
38. Brown MP, Hughey R, Krogh A, Mian IS, Sjolander K, Haussler D: Using Dirichlet mixture priors to derive hidden Markov models for protein families. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Intelligent Biology. Edited by Hunter L, Searls D, Shavlik J. Washington DC: AAAI Press; 1993:47-55.
39. Henikoff S, Henikoff JG: Position-based sequence weights. J Mol Biol 1994, 243:574-578. A simple method is introduced for weighting sequences that is based on the diversity of each position. Performance was evaluated using ungapped alignment blocks to construct PSSMs representing 698 protein families. Position-based, Voronoi and branch-proportional weights outperformed other methods.
40. Sander C, Schneider R: Database of homology-derived protein structures and the structural meaning of sequence alignment. Proteins 1991, 9:56-68.
41. Schneider R, Sander C: The HSSP database of protein structure-sequence alignments. Nucleic Acids Res 1996, 24:201-205.
42. Green P: Ancient conserved regions in gene sequences. Curr Opin Struct Biol 1994, 4:404-41 2.
43. Doolittle RF: The multiplicity of domains in proteins. Annu Rev Biochem 1995, 64:287-314.
44. Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ: CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res 1994, 22:4673-4680. A popular progressive method for multiple sequence alignment was substantially improved by the implementation of several new features, including sequence weights, multiple substitution matrices and residue-specific gap penalties.
45. Taylor WR: An investigation of conservation-biased gap-penalties for multiple protein sequence alignment Gene 1995, 165:GC27-GC35.
46. Altschul SF: A protein alignment scoring system sensitive at all evolutionary distances. J Mol Evol 1993, 36:290-300.
47. Luthy R, Bowie JU, Eisenberg D: Assessment of protein models with three-dimensional profiles. Nature 1992, 356:83-85.
48. Bryant SH, Altschul SF: Statistics of sequence-structure threading. Curr Opin Struct Biol 1995, 5:236-244. A critical review that emphasizes the need for statistical interpretation of threading scores of the type now routinely used for assessing sequence alignments.
49. Moult JT, Pedersen JT, Judson R, Fidelis K: A large-scale experiment to assess protein structure prediction methods. Proteins 1995, 23:ii-iv.
50. Lemer CM-R, Rooman MJ, Wodak SJ: Protein structure prediction by threading methods: evaluation of current techniques. Proteins 1995, 23:337-355.
51. Hubbard TJ, Park J: Fold recognition and ab initio structure predictions using hidden Markov models and beta-strand pair potentials. Proteins 1995, 23:398-402. Structure predictions were based on multiply aligning each unknown sequence with available homologs and using the alignment both to predict secondary structural features and to construct PSSMs. A compatible structure was one with secondary structural features that aligned well with the predicted features and with a sequence that had a high PSSM score. Two out of four structures were correctly identified and the other two were near misses.
52. Heringa J, Argos P: A simple and fast approach to prediction of protein secondary structure from multiply aligned sequences with accuracy above 70%. Protein Sci 1995, 4:2517-2525. Amino acid substitution matrices specific for helix, sheet and coil regions underlie predictions. The performance on multiply aligned sequences is at least as good as that obtained by complex machine-learning approaches.
53. Gracy J, Chiche L, Sallantin J: Improved alignment of weakly homologous protein sequences using structural information. Protein Eng 1994, 6:821-829.
54. Yi TM, Lander ES: Recognition of related proteins by iterative template refinement (ITR). Protein Sci 1994, 3:1315-1328.
55. Hobohm U, Sander C: A sequence property approach to searching protein databases. J Mol Biol 1995, 251:390-399.
56. Cserzo M, Bernassau J-M, Simon I, Maigret B: New alignment strategy for transmembrane proteins. J Mol Biol 1994, 243:388-396.
57. Jones DT, Taylor WR, Thornton JM: A mutation data matrix for transmembrane proteins. FEBS Lett 1994, 339:269-275.
58. Gonnet GH, Cohen MA, Benner SA: Analysis of amino acid substitution during divergent evolution: the 400 by 400 dipeptide substitution matrix. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1994, 199:489-496.
59. Han KF, Baker D: Recurring local sequence motifs in proteins. J Mol Biol 1995, 251:176-186. Cluster analysis identified local sequence motifs shared by multiple protein families. This higher-order sequence information can potentially be used to score alignments for the detection of distant relationships.
60. Nowak R: Bacterial genome sequence bagged. Science 1995, 269:468-470.
61. Henikoff S, Haughn GW, Calvo JM, Wallace JC: A large family of bacterial activator proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1988, 85:6602-6606.
62. Viale AM, Kobayashi H, Akazawa T, Henikoff S: rcbR, a gene coding for a member of the LysR family of transcriptional regulators, is located upstream of the expressed set of ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase genes in the photosynthetic bacterium Chromatium vinosum. J Bacteriol 1991, 173:5224-5229.
63. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ: Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 1990, 215:403-410.
64. Henikoff JG, Henikoff S: Using substitution probabilities to improve position-specific scoring matrices. CABIOS 1996, in press.