Are knowledge-based potentials derived from protein structure sets discriminative with respect to amino acid types?

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 225-246

  Sunyaev, Shamil R ^a,b   Eisenhaber, Frank ^a,c   Argos, Patrick ^a   Kuznetsov, Eugene N ^d   Tumanyan, Vladimir G ^b  

^a EUROPEAN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY LABORATORY   (Germany)

^b ENGELHARDT INSTITUTE OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY   (Russian Federation)

^c MAX DELBRÜCK CENTER FOR MOLECULAR MEDICINE   (Germany)

^d TRAPEZNIKOV INSTITUTE OF CONTROL SCIENCES   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Amino acid type discrimination; Environment parameter; Homogeneity; Protein fold description; Protein fold recognition; Residue location parameter; Threading

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID ANALYSIS; AMINO ACID COMPOSITION; ARTICLE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS; THEORY;

AMINO ACIDS; CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL; DATABASES, FACTUAL; MATHEMATICS; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, SECONDARY; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, TERTIARY; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SOLVENTS; TEMPLATES, GENETIC;

EID: 0032525159     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0134(19980515)31:3<225::AID-PROT1>3.0.CO;2-I     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Matsuo, Y., Nishikawa, K. Protein database search and structure prediction by 3D-1D compatibility method. Protein Eng. 7:1163, 1994.
2. Defay, T., Cohen, F.E. Evaluation of current techniques for ab initio protein structure prediction. Proteins 23:431-445, 1995.
3. Eisenhaber, F., Persson, B., Argos, P. Protein structure prediction: Recognition of primary, secondary, and tertiary structural features from amino acid sequence. CRC Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 30:1-94, 1995.
4. Lemer, C.M.-R., Rooman, M.J., Wodak, S.J. Protein structure prediction by threading methods: Evaluation of current techniques. Proteins 23:337-355, 1995.
5. Jones, D.T., Thornton, J.M. Potential energy functions for threading. Curr. Opinion Struct. Biol. 6:210-216, 1996.
6. Bork, P., Gibson, T.J. Applying motif and profile searches. Meth. Enzymol. 266:162-184, 1996.
7. Eisenberg, D. Into the black of the night. Nature Struct. Biol. 4:95-97, 1997.
8. Jones, D.T., Taylor, W.R., Thornton, J.M. Anew approach to protein fold recognition. Nature 358:86-89, 1992.
9. Miller, R.T., Jones, D.T., Thornton, J.M. Protein fold recognition by sequence threading: Tools and assessment techniques. FASEB J. 10:171-178, 1996.
10. Defay, T., Cohen, F.E. Multiple sequence information for threading algorithms. J. Mol. Biol. 262:314-323, 1997.
11. Crippen, G.M. Failures of inverse folding and threading with gapped alignment. Proteins 26:167-171, 1996.
12. Sunyaev, S.R., Kuznetsov, E.N., Rodchenkov, I., Tumanyan, V.G. Protein sequence-structure compatibility criteria in terms of statistical hypothese testing. Protein Eng. 10:635-646, 1997.
13. Godzik, A., Kolinski, A., Skolnick, J. Topology fingerprint approach to the inverse protein folding problem. J. Mol. Biol. 227:227-238, 1992.
14. Munson, P.J., Singh, R.K. Statistical significance of hierarchical multibody potentials based on Delaunay tessallation and their application in sequence-structure alignment. Protein Sci. 6:1467-1481, 1997.
15. Sippl, M.J. Boltzmann's principle, knowledge-based mean-field potentials and protein folding. An approach to the computational determination of protein structures. J. Comp. Aid. Mol. Des. 7:473-501, 1994.
16. Godzik, A., Kolinski, A., Skolnick, J. Are proteins ideal mixtures of amino acids? Analysis of energy parameter sets. Protein Sci. 4:2107-2117, 1995.
17. Rooman, M.J., Wodak, S.J. Are database-derived potentials valid for scoring both forward and inverted protein folding? Protein Eng. 8:849-858, 1995.
18. Ota, M., Nishikawa, K. Performance of a 3D-1D homology search. Protein Eng. 8:950-951, 1995.
19. Skolnick, J., Jaroszewski, L., Kolinski, A., Godzik, A. Derivation and testing of pair potentials for protein folding. When is the quasichemical approximation correct? Protein Sci. 6:676-688, 1997.
20. Bahadur, R.R. Rate of convergence of estimates and test statistics. Ann. Math. Statist. 38:303-324, 1967.
21. Bahadur, R.R. Some limit theorems in statistics. Philadelphia: SIAM, 1971:1-42.
22. Kendall, M., Stuart, A. The Advanced Theory of Statistics. London: Griffen, 1977.
23. Abola, E.E., Bernstein, F.C., Bryant, S.H., Koetzle, T.F., Weng, J. Protein data bank, crystallographic databases: Information content, software systems, scientific applications. In: "Data Commission of the International Union of Crystallography." Allen, F.H., Bergerhoff, G., Sievers, R. (eds.). Bonn/Cambridge/Chester, 1987:107-132.
24. Heringa, J., Sommerfeldt, H., Higgins, D., Argos, P. OBSTRUCT: A program to obtain largest cliques from a protein sequence set according to structural resolution and sequence similarity. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 8:599-600, 1992.
25. Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., Flannery, B.P. Numerical recipes in C. The art of scientific computing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
26. Lee, B., Richards, F.M. The interpretation of protein structures: Estimation of static accessibility. J. Mol. Biol. 55:379-400, 1971.
27. Eisenhaber, F., Argos, P. Improved strategy in analytic surface calculation for molecular systems: Handling of singularities and computational efficiency. J. Comp. Chem. 14:1272-1280, 1993.
28. Eisenhaber, F., Lijnzaad, P., Argos, P., Sander, C., Scharf, M. The double cubic lattice method: Efficient approaches to numerical integration of surface area and volume and for generating dot surfaces of molecular assemblies. J. Comp. Chem. 16:273-284, 1995.
29. Juffer, A., Eisenhaber, F., Hubbard, S.J., Walther, D., Argos, P. Comparison of atomic solvation parameter sets: Applicability and limitations in protein folding and binding. Protein Sci. 4:2499-2509, 1995.
30. Bowie, J.U., Lüthy, R., Eisenberg, D. A method to identify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional stricture. Science 253:164-170, 1991.
31. Vriend, G. WHATIF: A molecular modeling and drug design program. J. Mol. Graph. 8:52-56, 1990.
32. Delarue, M., Koehl, P. Atomic environment energies in proteins defined from statistics of accessible and contact surface areas. J. Mol. Biol. 249:675-690, 1995.
33. Kabsch, W., Sander, C. Dictionary of protein secondary structures: Pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers 22:2577-2637, 1983.
34. Colloch, N., Etchebest, C., Thoreau, E., Henrissat, B., Mornon, J.-P. Comparison of three algorithms for the assignment of secondary structure in proteins: The advantage of a consensus assignment. Protein Eng. 6:377-382, 1993.
35. Bowie, J.U., Clarke, N.D., Pabo, C.O., Sauer, R.T. Identification of protein folds: Matching hydrophobicity patterns of sequence sets with solvent accessibility patterns of known structures. Proteins 7:257-264, 1990.
36. Holbrook, S.R., Muskai, S.M., Kim, S.-H. Predicting surface exposure of amino acids from protein sequence. Protein Eng. 3:659-665, 1990.
37. Wako, H., Blundell, T.L. Use of amino acid environment-dependent substitution tables and conformational propensities in structure prediction from aligned sequences of homologues proteins. I. Solvent accessibility classes. J. Mol. Biol. 238:682-692, 1994.
38. Rost, B., Sander, C. Conservation and prediction of solvent accessibility in protein families. Proteins 20:216-226, 1994.
39. Kocher, J.-P.A., Rooman, M.J., Wodak, S.J. Factors influencing the ability of knowledge-based potentials to identify native sequence-structure matches. J. Mol. Biol. 235:1598-1613, 1994.
40. Karlin, S., Zuker, M., Brocchieri, L. Measuring residue associations in protein structures. Possible implications for protein folding. J. Mol. Biol, 239:227-248, 1994.
41. Jones, D.T., Miller, R.T., Thornton, J.M. Successful protein fold recognition by optimal sequence threading validated by rigorous blind testing. Proteins 23:387-397, 1995.
42. Jernigan, R.L., Bahar, I. Structure-derived potentials and protein simulations. Curr. Opinion Struct. Biol. 6:195-209, 1996.
43. Casari, G., Sippl, M.J. Structure-derived hydrophobic potential. Hydrophobic potential derived from X-ray structures of globular proteins are able to identify native folds. J. Mol. Biol. 224:725-732, 1992.
44. Bryant, S.H., Lawrence, C.E. An empirical energy function for threading protein sequence through the folding motif. Proteins 16:92-112, 1993.
45. Bahar, I., Jernigan, R.L. Inter-residue potentials in globular proteins and the dominance of highly specific hydrophilic interactions at close separation. J. Mol. Biol. 266:195-214, 1997.
46. Sippl, M.J. Calculation of conformational ensambles from potentials of mean force. An approach to the knowledge-based prediction of local structures in globular proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 213:859-883, 1990.
47. Chelvanayagam, G., Roy, G., Argos, P. Easy adaptation of protein structure to sequence. Protein Eng. 7:173-184, 1994.
48. Russel, R.B., Barton, G.J. Structural features can be unconserved in proteins with similar folds. An analysis of sidechain to sidechain contacts, secondary structure and accessibility. J. Mol. Biol. 244:332-350, 1994.
49. Laurents, D.V., Subbiah, S., Levitt, M. Different protein sequences can give rise to highly similar folds through different stabilizing interactions. Protein Sci. 3:1938-1944, 1994.
50. Munoz, V., Blanco, F., Serrano, L. The distribution of α-helix propensity along the polypeptide chain is not conserved in proteins from the same family. Protein Sci. 4:1577-1586, 1995.
51. Bryant, S.H. Evaluation of threading specificity and accuracy. Proteins 26:172-185, 1996.
52. Ramirez-Alvarado, M., Serrano, L., Blanco, F.J. Conformational analysis of peptides corresponding to all the secondary-structure elements of protein L B1 domain: Secondary-structure propensities are not conserved in proteins with the same fold. Protein Sci. 6:162-174, 1997.
53. Park, B.H., Huang, E.S., Levitt, M. Factors affecting the ability of energy functions to discriminate correct from incorrect folds. J. Mol. Biol. 266:831-846, 1997.
54. Kabsch, W., Sander, C. On the use of sequence homologies to predict protein structure: Identical pentapeptides can have completely different conformations. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 81:1075-1078, 1984.
55. Argos, P. Analysis of sequence-similar pentapeptides in unrelated protein tertiary structures. J. Mol. Biol. 197:331-348, 1987.
56. Cohen, B.I., Presnell, S.R., Cohen, F.E. Origins of structural diversity within sequentially identical hexapeptides. Protein Sci. 2:2134-2145, 1993.
57. Waterhous, D.V., Johnson, W.C., Jr. Importance of environment in determining secondary structure in proteins. Biochemistry 33:2121-2128, 1994.
58. Minor, D.L., Jr., Kim, P.S. Context-dependent secondary-structure formation of a designed protein sequence. Nature 380:730-734, 1996.
59. Fiser, A., Dosztanyi, Z., Simon, I. The role of long-range interactions in defining the secondary structure of proteins is overestimated. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 13:297-301, 1997.
60. Dunbrack, R.L., Gerloff, D.L., Bower, M., Chen, X., Lichtarge, O., Cohen, F.E. Meeting review: The second meeting on the critical assessment of techniques for protein structure prediction (CASP2). Folding Design 1:R27-R42, 1997.
61. Finkelstein, A.V. Protein structure: What is possible to predict now? Curr. Opinion Struct. Biol. 7:60-71, 1997.
62. Breiman, L. Statistics: With a View Toward Applications. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1973.