In silico protein recombination: Enhancing template and sequence alignment selection for comparative protein modelling

Journal of Molecular Biology

Volumn 328, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 593-608

  Contreras Moreira, Bruno ^a   Fitzjohn, Paul W ^a   Bates, Paul A ^a  

^a IMPERIAL CANCER RESEARCH FUND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Alignment errors; Comparative modelling; Genetic algorithm; Protein structure prediction; Template selection

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; COMPUTER MODEL; CROSSING OVER; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC ALGORITHM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; PROTEIN VARIANT; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS;

EID: 0037414421     PISSN: 00222836     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-2836(03)00309-7     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Chothia C., Lesk A.M. The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins. EMBO J. 5:1986;823-826.
2. Eyrich V.A., Marti-Renom M.A., Przybylski D., Madhusudhan M.S., Fiser A., Pazos F., et al. EVA: continuous automatic evaluation of protein structure prediction servers. Bioinformatics. 17:2001;1242-1243.
3. Contreras-Moreira, B., Fitzjohn, P.W., Bates, P.A. (2002). Comparative modelling: an essential methodology for protein structure prediction in the post-genomic era. Appl. Bioinformatics, 1.
4. Tramontano A., Leplae R., Morea V. Analysis and assessment of comparative modeling predictions in CASP4. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. Suppl. 2001;22-38.
5. Sali A., Blundell T.L. Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. J. Mol. Biol. 234:1993;779-815.
6. Fiser A., Do R.K., Sali A. Modeling of loops in protein structures. Protein Sci. 9:2000;1753-1773.
7. Guex N., Diemand A., Peitsch M.C. Protein modelling for all. Trends Biochem. Sci. 24:1999;364-367.
8. Bates P.A., Sternberg M.J. Model building by comparison at CASP3: using expert knowledge and computer automation. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 37:1999;47-54.
9. Ogata K., Umeyama H. An automatic homology modeling method consisting of database searches and simulated annealing. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 258-272:2000;256-305.
10. Lambert C., Leonard N., De Bolle X., Depiereux E. ESyPred3D: prediction of proteins 3D structures. Bioinformatics. 18:2002;1250-1256.
11. Marti-Renom M.A., Stuart A.C., Fiser A., Sanchez R., Melo F., Sali A. Comparative protein structure modeling of genes and genomes. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 29:2000;291-325.
12. Michalewicz Z. Genetic Algorithms+Data Structures=Evolution Programs. 3rd Edit. 1996;Springer, New York.
13. Unger R., Moult J. Genetic algorithms for protein folding simulations. J. Mol. Biol. 231:1993;75-81.
14. May A.C., Johnson M.S. Protein structure comparisons using a combination of a genetic algorithm, dynamic programming and least-squares minimization. Protein Eng. 7:1994;475-485.
15. Pedersen J.T., Moult J. Ab initio structure prediction for small polypeptides and protein fragments using genetic algorithms. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 23:1995;454-460.
16. Morris G.M., Goodsell D.S., Huey R., Olson A.J. Distributed automated docking of flexible ligands to proteins: parallel applications of AutoDock 2.4. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 10:1996;293-304.
17. Rabow A.A., Scheraga H.A. Improved genetic algorithm for the protein folding problem by use of a Cartesian combination operator. Protein Sci. 5:1996;1800-1815.
18. Xia Y., Levitt M. Roles of mutation and recombination in the evolution of protein thermodynamics. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 99:2002;10382-10387.
19. Riechmann L., Winter G. Novel folded protein domains generated by combinatorial shuffling of polypeptide segments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 97:2000;10068-10073.
20. Broo K., Larsson A.K., Jemth P., Mannervik B. An ensemble of theta class glutathione transferases with novel catalytic properties generated by stochastic recombination of fragments of two mammalian enzymes. J. Mol. Biol. 318:2002;59-70.
21. Bates P.A., Kelley L.A., MacCallum R.M., Sternberg M.J. Enhancement of protein modeling by human intervention in applying the automatic programs 3D-JIGSAW and 3D-PSSM. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. Suppl. 2001;39-46.
22. Venclovas C. Comparative modeling of CASP4 target proteins: combining results of sequence search with three-dimensional structure assessment. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. Suppl. 2001;47-54.
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. Brunger A.T. X-ray crystallography and NMR reveal complementary views of structure and dynamics. Nature Struct. Biol. 4 Suppl. 1997;862-865.
25. Montelione G.T., Zheng D., Huang Y.J., Gunsalus K.C., Szyperski T. Protein NMR spectroscopy in structural genomics. Nature Struct. Biol. 7 Suppl. 2000;982-985.
26. Needleman S.B., Wunsch C.D. A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 48:1970;443-453.
27. Saqi M.A., Sternberg M.J. A simple method to generate non-trivial alternate alignments of protein sequences. J. Mol. Biol. 219:1991;727-732.
28. Robson B., Osguthorpe D.J. Refined models for computer simulation of protein folding. Applications to the study of conserved secondary structure and flexible hinge points during the folding of pancreatic trypsin inhibitor. J. Mol. Biol. 132:1979;19-51.
29. Holm L., Sander C. Evaluation of protein models by atomic solvation preference. J. Mol. Biol. 225:1992;93-105.
30. Koehl P., Levitt M. De novo protein design. I. In search of stability and specificity. J. Mol. Biol. 293:1999;1161-1181.
31. Hubbard S.J., Thornton J.M. NACCESS, Computer Program. 1993;Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University College, London.
32. Eisenberg D., McLachlan A.D. Solvation energy in protein folding and binding. Nature. 319:1986;199-203.
33. 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.
34. Zhang X., Shaw A., Bates P.A., Newman R.H., Gowen B., Orlova E., et al. Structure of the AAA ATPase p97. Mol. Cell. 6:2000;1473-1484.
35. Wriggers W., Chacon P. Modeling tricks and fitting techniques for multiresolution structures. Structure (Cambridge). 9:2001;779-788.
36. Elcock A.H. Modeling supramolecular assemblages. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 12:2002;154-160.
37. Aloy P., Ciccarelli F.D., Leutwein C., Gavin A.C., Superti-Furga G., Bork P., et al. A complex prediction: three-dimensional model of the yeast exosome. EMBO Rep. 3:2002;628-635.
38. Zagrovic B., Snow C.D., Shirts M.R., Pande V.S. Simulation of folding of a small alpha-helical protein in atomistic detail using worldwide-distributed computing. J. Mol. Biol. 323:2002;927-937.
39. Lundstrom J., Rychlewski L., Bujnicki J., Elofsson A. Pcons: a neural-network-based consensus predictor that improves fold recognition. Protein Sci. 10:2001;2354-2362.
40. Janardhan A., Vajda S. Selecting near-native conformations in homology modeling: the role of molecular mechanics and solvation terms. Protein Sci. 7:1998;1772-1780.
41. Elofsson A. A study on protein sequence alignment quality. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 46:2002;330-339.
42. de Groot B.L., van Aalten D.M., Scheek R.M., Amadei A., Vriend G., Berendsen H.J. Prediction of protein conformational freedom from distance constraints. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 29:1997;240-251.
43. Taylor W.R. Defining linear segments in protein structure. J. Mol. Biol. 310:2001;1135-1150.
44. Brenner S.E., Koehl P., Levitt M. The ASTRAL compendium for protein structure and sequence analysis. Nucl. Acids Res. 28:2000;254-256.
45. Berman H.M., Westbrook J., Feng Z., Gilliland G., Bhat T.N., Weissig H., et al. The Protein Data Bank. Nucl. Acids Res. 28:2000;235-242.
46. Russell R.B., Barton G.J. Multiple protein sequence alignment from tertiary structure comparison: assignment of global and residue confidence levels. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 14:1992;309-323.
47. Gerstein M., Levitt M. Using iterative dynamic programming to obtain accurate pair-wise and multiple alignments of protein structures. Proc. Int. Conf. Intell. Syst. Mol. Biol. 4:1996;59-67.
48. Kabsch W., Sander C. Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers. 22:1983;2577-2637.
49. Jones D.T. Protein secondary structure prediction based on position-specific scoring matrices. J. Mol. Biol. 292:1999;195-202.
50. Gotoh O. An improved algorithm for matching biological sequences. J. Mol. Biol. 162:1982;705-708.
51. Saqi M.A., Bates P.A., Sternberg M.J. Towards an automatic method of predicting protein structure by homology: an evaluation of suboptimal sequence alignments. Protein Eng. 5:1992;305-311.
52. Taylor W.R., Orengo C.A. Protein structure alignment. J. Mol. Biol. 208:1989;1-22.
53. Sonnhammer E.L.L., Eddy S.R., Durbin R. Pfam: a comprehensive database of protein domain families based on seed alignments. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet. 28:1997;405-420.
54. Sayle R.A., Milner-White E.J. RASMOL: biomolecular graphics for all. Trends Biochem. Sci. 20:1995;37-376.
55. Kraulis P.J. MOLSCRIPT: a program to produce both detailed and schematic plots of protein structures. J. Appl. Crystallog. 24:1991;946-950.