Spatial profiling of protein hydrophobicity: Native vs. decoy structures

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 561-572

  Zhou, Ruhong ^a   Silverman, B David ^a   Royyuru, Ajay K ^a   Athma, Prasanna ^a  

^a IBM T J WATSON RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Globular proteins; Hydrophobic profiling; Hydrophobic ratio; Hydrophobic score; Protein decoys; Second order moment

Indexed keywords

GLOBULAR PROTEIN;

ARTICLE; BAKER DECOY; CALCULATION; DECOY STRUCTURE; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DNA FINGERPRINTING; FORCE; HOLM AND SANDER DECOY; HYDROPHOBICITY; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MOLECULAR MODEL; MOLECULAR SIZE; NONHUMAN; PARK AND LEVITT DECOY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCT RECOVERY; PROTEIN DATABASE; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICS; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHMS; AMINO ACIDS; DATABASES, PROTEIN; HYDROPHOBICITY; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, SECONDARY; PROTEINS; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 0041418222     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.10419     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Lazaridis T, Karplus M. Effective energy functions for protein structure prediction. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2000;10:139.
2. Felts AK, Wallqvist A, Gallicchio E, Levy R. Distinguishing native conformations of proteins from decoys with an effective free energy estimator based on the opls all-atom force field and the surface generalized born solvent model. Proteins 2002, 48, 404.
3. Kihara D, Lu H, Kolinski A, Skolnick J. Touchstone: An ab initio protein structure prediciton method that uses threading-based tertiary restraints. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2001;98:10125.
4. Hao M, Scheraga HA. Designing potential energy functions for protein folding. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 1999;9:184.
5. Bonneau R, Strauss CEM, Baker D. Improving the performance of rosetta using multiple sequence alignment information and global measures of hydrophobic core formation. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics 2001;43:1.
6. Shortle D, Simons KT, Baker D. Clustering of low energy conformations near the native structures of small proteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 1998;95:11158.
7. Huang ES, Subbiah S, Levitt M. Recognizing native folds by the arrangement of hydrophobic residues. J. Mol. Biol. 1995;252:709.
8. Holm L, Sander C. Evaluation of protein models by atomic solvation preference. J. Mol. Biol. 1992;225:93.
9. Jones DT, Thornton JM. Potential energy functions for threading. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 1996;6:210.
10. Silverman DB. Hydrophobic moments of protein structures: Spatially profiling the distribution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci 2001;98:4996.
11. Zhou R, Silverman DB. Detecting native protein folds among large decoy sets with hydrophobic moment profiling. Altman RB, Dunker AK, Hunter L, Lauderdale K, Klein TE, editors. Proceedings of Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Singapore: World Scientific; 2002. p 673-684.
12. Park B, Levitt M. Energy functions that discriminate x-ray and near-native folds from well-constructed decoys. J. Mol. Biol. 1996;258:367.
13. Simons KT, Bonneau R, Ruczinski I, Baker D. Structure prediction of casp iii targets using rosetta. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics 1999;37 S3:171.
14. Kollman PA. personal communication 2001.
15. Eisenberg D, Weiss RM, Terwilliger TC, Wilcox W. Hydrophobic moments and protein structure. Faraday Symp. Chem. Soc. 1982;17:109.
16. Eisenberg D, Weiss RM, Terwilliger TC. The helical hydrophobic moment: a measure of the amphiphilicity of a helix. Nature (London) 1982;299:371.
17. Silverman BD. A two-component model of protein hydrophobicity: Spatially profiling the distribution. J. Theor. Biol. 2002;216:139.
18. Murzin AG, Brenner SE, Hubbard T, Chothia C. Scop: a structural classification of proteins database for the investigation of sequences and structures. J. Mol. Biol. 1995;247:536.
19. Kitchen DB, Hirata F, Westbrook JD, Levy RM, Kofke D, Yarmush M. Conserving energy during molecular dynamics simulations of water, proteins and proteins in water. J. Comp. Chem. 1990;11:1169.
20. Figueirido F, Zhou R, Levy R, Berne BJ. Larger scale simulation of macro-molecules in solution: Combining the periodic fast multipole method with multiple time step integrators. J. Chem. Phys. 1997;106:9835.
21. Bonneau R, Ruczinski I, Tsai J, Baker D. Contact order and ab initio protein structure prediction. Protein Science 2002;11:1937.
22. Jorgensen WL, Maxwell D, Tirado-Rives J. Development and testing of the opls all-atom froce field on conformational energetics and properties of organic liquids. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996;118:11225.
23. Ghosh A, Rapp CS, Friesner RA. Generalized born model based on a surface integral formulation. J. Phys. Chem. 1998;102:10983.
24. Cornell W, Cieplak P, Bayly CI, Gould IR, Merz KM, Ferguson DM, Spellmeyer DC, Fox T, Caldwell JW, Kollman PA. A second generation force field for the simulation of proteins, nucleic acids, and organic molecules. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995;117:5179.
25. Honig B, Nicholls A. Classical electrostatics in biology and chemistry. Science 1995;268:1144.
26. Friedrichs M, Zhou R, Edinger S, Friesner RA. Poisson-Boltzman analytical gradients for molecular modeling calculations. J. Phys. Chem. 1999;103:3057.
27. Pande M, Shrits F.S. Screen savers of the world, unite! Science 2000, 290, 1903.