Evolution of protein sequences and structures

Journal of Molecular Biology

Volumn 291, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 977-995

  Wood, Todd C ^a   Pearson, William R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Alignment; DALI; Sequence similarity; Smith Waterman; Structural similarity

Indexed keywords

MUTANT PROTEIN; PROTEIN;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; MOLECULAR MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FAMILY; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY;

EID: 0033609902     PISSN: 00222836     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.1999.2972     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Alexandrov N. N. SARFing the PDB. Protein Eng. 9:1996;727-732.
2. Altschul S. F., Gish W. Local alignment statistics. Methods Enzymol. 266:1996;460-480.
3. Altschul S. F., Gish W., Miller W., Myers E. W., Lipman D. J. A basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol. 215:1990;403-410.
4. Altschul S. F., Boguski M. S., Gish W., Wootton J. C. Issues in searching molecular sequence databases. Nature Genet. 6:1994;119-129.
5. Altschul S. F., Madden T. L., Schaffer A. A., Zhang J., Zhang Z., Miller W., Lipman D. J. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucl. Acids Res. 25:1997;3389-3402.
6. Bairoch A., Apweiler R. The Swiss-Prot protein sequence data bank and its new supplement TrEMBL. Nucl. Acids Res. 24:1996;21-25.
7. Bowie J. U., Reidhaar-Olson J. F., Lim W. A., Sauer R. T. Deciphering the message in protein sequences: tolerance to amino acid substitutions. Science. 247:1990;1306-1310.
8. Brenner S. E., Chothia C., Hubbard T. J. Assessing sequence comparison methods with reliable structurally identified distant evolutionary relationships. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 95:1998;6073-6078.
9. Chothia C., Lesk A. M. The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins. EMBO J. 5:1986;823-826.
10. Chothia C., Lesk A. M. The evolution of protein structures. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 52:1987;399-405.
11. Felsenstein J. PHYLIP - phylogeny inference package (version 3.2). Cladistics. 5:1989;164-166.
12. Flores T. P., Orengo C. A., Moss D. S., Thornton J. M. Comparison of conformational characteristics in structurally similar protein pairs. Protein Sci. 2:1993;1811-1826.
13. Gu X., Zhang J. A simple method for estimating the parameter of substitution rate variation among sites. Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:1997;1106-1113.
14. Henikoff S., Henikoff J. G. Amino acid substitutions matrices from protein blocks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 89:1992;10915-10919.
15. Holm L., Sander C. Protein structure comparison by alignment of distance matrices. J. Mol. Biol. 233:1993;123-138.
16. Kabsch W., Holmes K. C. The actin fold. FASEB J. 9:1995;167-174.
17. Langley C. H., Fitch W. M. An examination of the constancy of the rate of molecular evolution. J. Mol. Evol. 3:1974;161-177.
18. Lattman E. E., Rose G. D. Protein folding-what's the question? Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 90:1993;439-441.
19. Levitt M., Gerstein M. A unified statistical framework for sequence comparison and structure comparison. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 95:1998;5913-5920.
20. Matsumura M., Becktel W. J., Matthews B. W. Hydrophobic stabilization in T4 lysozyme determined directly by multiple substitutions of Ile 3. Nature. 334:1988;406-410.
21. Matthews B. W. Genetic and structural analysis of the protein stability problem. Biochemistry. 26:1987;6885-6888.
22. Mott R. Maximum-likelihood estimation of the statistical distribution of Smith-Waterman local sequence similarity scores. Bull. Math. Biol. 54:1992;59-75.
23. Murzin A. G., Brenner S. E., Hubbard T., Chothia C. SCOP: a structural classification of proteins database for the investigation of sequences and structures. J. Mol. Biol. 247:1995;536-540.
24. Pearson W. R. Comparison of methods for searching protein sequence databases. Protein Sci. 4:1995;1145-1160.
25. Pearson W. R. Effective protein sequence comparison. Methods Enzymol. 266:1996;227-258.
26. Pearson W. R. Empirical statistical estimates for sequence similarity searches. J. Mol. Biol. 276:1998;71-84.
27. Pearson W. R., Lipman D. J. Improved tools for biological sequence comparison. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 85:1988;2444-2448.
28. Russell R. B., Saqi M. A., Sayle R. A., Bates P. A., Sternberg M. J. Recognition of analogous and homologous protein folds: analysis of sequence and structure conservation. J. Mol. Biol. 269:1997;423-439.
29. Sandberg W. S., Terwilliger T. C. Influence of interior packing and hydrophobicity on the stability of a protein. Science. 245:1989;54-57.
30. Sander C., Schneider R. Database of homology-derived protein structures and the structural meaning of sequence alignment. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 9:1991;56-68.
31. Schwartz R. M., Dayhoff M. Matrices for detecting distant relationships. Dayhoff M. Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure. 1978;353-358 National Biomedical Research Foundation, Silver Spring.
32. Smith T. F., Waterman M. S. Identification of common molecular subsequences. J. Mol. Biol. 147:1981;195-197.
33. Swindells M. B. Detecting structural similarities: a user's guide. Methods Enzymol. 266:1996;643-653.
34. Thomas P. J., Qu B. H., Pedersen P. L. Defective protein folding as a basis of human disease. Trends Biochem. Sci. 20:1995;456-459.
35. Thompson J. D., Higgins D. G., Gibson T. J. CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucl. Acids Res. 22:1994;4673-4680.
36. Wood T. C. Theory and Application of Protein Homology, PhD Thesis. 1999;University of Virginia, Charlottesville.