Structural genomics: Computational methods for structure analysis

Protein Science

Volumn 12, Issue 9, 2003, Pages 1813-1821

  Goldsmith Fischman, Sharon ^a   Honig, Barry ^a  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

Author keywords

Functional analysis; Homology modeling; Structural genomics; Structure alignments

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGY; CALCULATION; GENE CLUSTER; GENETIC SELECTION; GENOMICS; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS;

AMINO ACID MOTIFS; ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATABASES; GENOME; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PHYLOGENY; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEINS; PROTEOME; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 0041510360     PISSN: 09618368     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1110/ps.0242903     Document Type: Review

References (127)

1. Al-Lazikani, B., Sheinerman, F.B., and Honig, B. 2001. Combining multiple structure and sequence alignments to improve sequence detection and alignment: Application to the SH2 domains of Janus kinases. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 98: 14796-14801.
2. Aloy, P., Querol, E., Aviles, F.X., and Sternberg, M.J. 2001. Automated structure-based prediction of functional sites in proteins: Applications to assessing the validity of inheriting protein function from homology in genome annotation and to protein docking. J. Mol. Biol. 311: 395-408.
3. Altschul, S.F., Madden, T.L., Schaffer, A.A., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z., Miller, W., and Lipman, D.J. 1997. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: A new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 25: 3389-3402.
4. Apweiler, R., Attwood, T.K., Bairoch, A., Bateman, A., Birney, E., Biswas, M., Bucher, P., Cerutti, L., Corpet, F., Croning, M.D., et al. 2000. InterPro - An integrated documentation resource for protein families, domains and functional sites. Bioinformatics 16: 1145-1150.
5. Armon, A., Graur, D., and Ben-Tal, N. 2001. ConSurf: An algorithmic tool for the identification of functional regions in proteins by surface mapping of phylogenetic information. J. Mol. Biol. 307: 447-463.
6. Ashburner, M., Ball, C.A., Blake, J.A., Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, J.M., Davis, A.P., Dolinski, K., Dwight, S.S., Eppig, J.T., et al. 2000. Gene ontology: Tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat. Genet. 25: 25-29.
7. Attwood, T.K. and Beck, M.E. 1994. PRINTS - A protein motif fingerprint database. Protein Eng. 7: 841-848.
8. Bateman, A., Birney, E., Cerruti, L., Durbin, R., Etwiller, L., Eddy, S.R., Griffiths-Jones, S., Howe, K.L., Marshall, M., and Sonnhammer, E.L. 2002. The Pfam protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res. 30: 276-280.
9. Bertone, P., Kluger, Y., Lan, N., Zheng, D., Christendat, D., Yee, A., Edwards, A.M., Arrowsmith, C.H., Montelione, G.T., and Gerstein, M. 2001. SPINE: An integrated tracking database and data mining approach for identifying feasible targets in high-throughput structural proteomics. Nucleic Acids Res. 29: 2884-2298.
10. Blake, J.D. and Cohen, F.E. 2001. Pairwise sequence alignment below the twilight zone. J. Mol. Biol. 307: 721-735.
11. Bower, M.J., Cohen, F.E., and Dunbrack Jr., R.L. 1997. Prediction of protein side-chain rotamers from a backbone-dependent rotamer library: A new homology modeling tool. J. Mol. Biol. 267: 1268-1282.
12. Bowie, J.U., Luthy, R., and Eisenberg, D. 1991. A method to identify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional structure. Science 253: 164-170.
13. Bruccoleri, R.E. and Karplus, M. 1990. Conformational sampling using high-temperature molecular dynamics. Biopolymers 29: 1847-1862.
14. Carugo, O. and Pongor, S. 2001. A normalized root-mean-square distance for comparing protein three-dimensional structures. Protein Sci. 10: 1470-1473.
15. Chance, M.R., Bresnick, A.R., Burley, S.K., Jiang, J.S., Lima, C.D., Sali, A., Almo, S.C., Bonanno, J.B., Buglino, J.A., Boulton, S., et al. 2002. Structural genomics: A pipeline for providing structures for the biologist. Protein Sci. 11: 723-738.
16. Chothia, C. and Lesk, A.M. 1987. Canonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulins. J. Mol. Biol. 196: 901-917.
17. Chung, S.Y. and Subbiah, S. 1996. A structural explanation for the twilight zone of protein sequence homology. Structure 4: 1123-1127.
18. Dahiyat, B.I. and Mayo. S.L. 1997. Probing the role of packing specificity in protein design. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 94: 10172-10177.
19. De Maeyer, M., Desmet, J., and Lasters, I. 1997. All in one: A highly detailed rotamer library improves both accuracy and speed in the modelling of sidechains by dead-end elimination. Fold. Des. 2: 53-66.
20. Devos, D. and Valencia, A. 2000. Practical limits of function prediction. Proteins 41: 98-107.
21. Du, X., Choi, I.G., Kim, R., Wang, W., Jancarik, J., Yokota, H., and Kim, S.H. 2000. Crystal structure of an intracellular protease from Pyrococcus horikoshii at 2-A resolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 97: 14079-14084.
22. Dunbrack, R.L. 2002. Rotamer libraries in the 21st century. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 12: 431-440.
23. Eddy, S.R. 1995. Multiple alignment using hidden Markov models. Proc. Int. Conf. Intell. Syst. Mol. Biol. 3: 114-120.
24. -. 1996. Hidden Markov models. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 6: 361-365.
25. Elofsson, A., Fischer, D., Rice, D.W., Le Grand, S.M., and Eisenberg, D. 1996. A study of combined structure/sequence profiles. Fold. Des. 1: 451-461.
26. Falquet, L., Pagni, M., Bucher, P., Hulo, N., Sigrist, C.J., Hofmann, K., and Bairoch, A. 2002. The PROSITE database, its status in 2002. Nucleic Acids Res. 30: 235-238.
27. Fetrow, J.S. and Skolnick, J. 1998. Method for prediction of protein function from sequence using the sequence-to-structure-to-function paradigm with application to glutaredoxins/thioredoxins and T1 ribonucleases. J. Mol. Biol. 281: 949-968.
28. Fetrow, J.S., Siew, N., and Skolnick, J. 1999. Structure-based functional motif identifies a potential disulfide oxidoreductase active site in the serine/threonine protein phosphatase-1 subfamily. FASEB J. 13: 1866-1874.
29. Fischer, D., Rice, D., Bowie, J.U., and Eisenberg, D. 1996. Assigning amino acid sequences to 3-dimensional protein folds. FASEB J., 10: 126-136.
30. Fiser, A., Do, R.K., and Sali, A. 2000. Modeling of loops in protein structures. Protein Sci. 9: 1753-1773.
31. Godzik, A. 1996. The structural alignment between two proteins: Is there a unique answer? Protein Sci. 5: 1325-1338.
32. Gordon, D.B. and Mayo, S.L. 1999. Branch- and-terminate: A combinatorial optimization algorithm for protein design. Struct. Fold. Des. 7: 1089-1098.
33. Gough, J. and Chothia, C. 2002. SUPERFAMILY: HMMs representing all proteins of known structure. SCOP sequence searches, alignments and genome assignments. Nucleic Acids Res. 30: 268-272.
34. Griffiths-Jones, S. and Bateman, A. 2002. The use of structure information to increase alignment accuracy does not aid homologue detection with profile HMMs, Bioinformatics 18: 1243-1249.
35. Haft, D.H., Loftus, B.J., Richardson, D.L., Yang, F., Eisen, J.A., Paulsen, I.T., and White, O. 2001. TIGRFAMs: A protein family resource for the functional identification of proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 29: 41-43.
36. Hargbo, J. and Elofsson, A. 1999. Hidden Markov models that use predicted secondary structures for fold recognition. Proteins 36: 68-76.
37. Harrison, A., Pearl, F., Mott, R., Thornton, J., and Orengo, C. 2002. Quantifying the similarities within fold space. J. Mol. Biol. 323: 909-926.
38. Hegyi, H. and Gerstein, M. 1999. The relationship between protein structure and function: A comprehensive survey with application to the yeast genome. J. Mol. Biol. 288: 147-164.
39. Henikoff, S., Henikoff, J.G., and Pietrokovski, S. 1999. Blocks: A non-redundant database of protein alignment blocks derived from multiple compilations. Bioinformatics 15: 471-479.
40. Holm, L. and Sander, C. 1993. Protein structure comparison by alignment of distance matrices. J. Mol. Biol. 233: 123-138.
41. Honig, B. and Nicholls, A. 1995. Classical electrostatics in biology and chemistry. Science 268: 1144-1149.
42. Huang, J.Y. and Brutlag, D.L. 2001. The EMOTIF database. Nucleic Acids Res. 29: 202-204.
43. Hubbard, T.J., Ailey, B., Brenner, S.E., Murzin, A.G., and Chothia, C. 1999. SCOP: A structural classification of proteins database. Nucleic Acids Res. 27: 254-256.
44. Hwang, K.Y., Chung, J.H., Kim, S.H., Han, Y.S., and Cho, Y. 1999. Structure-based identification of a novel NTPase from Methanococcus jannaschii. Nat. Struct. Biol. 6: 691-696.
45. Jacobson, M.P., Friesner, R.A., Xiang, Z., and Honig, B. 2002. On the role of the crystal environment in determining protein side-chain conformations. J. Mol. Biol. 320: 597-608.
46. Jaroszewski, L., Rychlewski, L., Zhang, B., and Godzik, A. 1998. Fold prediction by a hierarchy of sequence, threading, and modeling methods. Protein Sci. 7: 1431-1440.
47. Johnson, M.S., Overington, P.J., and Blundell, T.L. 1993. Alignment and searching for common protein folds using a data bank of structural templates. J. Mol. Biol. 231: 735-752.
48. Jones, D.T. 1997. Progress in protein structure prediction. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 7: 377-387.
49. Jones, D.T., Taylor, W.R., and Thornton, J.M. 1992. A new approach to protein fold recognition. Nature 358: 86-89.
50. Jones, D.T., Tress, M., Bryson, K., and Hadley, C. 1999. Successful recognition of protein folds using threading methods biased by sequence similarity and predicted secondary structure. Proteins Suppl 3: 104-111.
51. Jones, S., and Thornton, J.M. 1997. Prediction of protein-protein interaction sites using patch analysis. J. Mol. Biol. 272: 133-143.
52. Karplus, K., Barrett, C., and Hughey, R. 1998. Hidden Markov models for detecting remote protein homologies. Bioinformatics 14: 846-856.
53. Kasuya, A. and Thornton, J.M. 1999. Three-dimensional structure analysis of PROSITE patterns. J. Mol. Biol. 286: 1673-1691.
54. Kelley, L.A., MacCallum, R.M., and Sternberg, M.J. 2000. Enhanced genome annotation using structural profiles in the program 3D-PSSM. J. Mol. Biol. 299: 499-520.
55. Kolinski, A., Betancourt, M.R., Kihara, D., Rotkiewicz, P., and Skolnick, J. 2001. Generalized comparative modeling (GENECOMP): A combination of sequence comparison, threading, and lattice modeling for protein structure prediction and refinement. Proteins 44: 133-149.
56. Krogh, A., Brown, M., Mian, I.S., Sjolander, K., and Haussler, D. 1994. Hidden Markov models in computational biology. Applications to protein modeling. J. Mol. Biol. 235: 1501-1531.
57. Landgraf, R., Xenarios, I., and Eisenberg, D. 2001. Three-dimensional cluster analysis identifies interfaces and functional residue clusters in proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 307: 1487-1502.
58. Lazaridis, T. and Karplus, M. 2000. Effective energy functions for protein structure prediction. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 10: 139-145.
59. Lee, C. and Subbiah, S. 1991. Prediction of protein side-chain conformation by packing optimization. J. Mol. Biol. 217: 373-388.
60. Leibowitz, N., Fligelman, Z.Y., Nussinov, R., and Wolfson, H.J. 2001. Automated multiple structure alignment and detection of a common substructural motif. Proteins 43: 235-245.
61. Levitt, M. and Chothia, C. 1976. Structural patterns in globular proteins. Nature 261: 552-558.
62. Levitt, M., Gerstein. M., Huang, E., Subbiah, S., and Tsai, J. 1997. Protein folding: The endgame. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 66: 549-579.
63. Lichtarge, O. and Sowa, M.E. 2002. Evolutionary predictions of binding surfaces and interactions. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 12: 21-27.
64. Lichtarge, O., Bourne, J.R., and Cohen, F.E. 1996. An evolutionary trace method defines binding surfaces common to protein families. J. Mol. Biol. 257: 342-358.
65. Looger, L.L. and Hellinga, H.W. 2001. Generalized dead-end elimination algorithms make large-scale protein side-chain structure prediction tractable: Implications for protein design and structural genomics. J. Mol. Biol. 307: 429-445.
66. Luthy, R., Bowie, J.U., and Eisenberg, D. 1992. Assessment of protein models with three-dimensional profiles. Nature 356: 83-85.
67. Madabushi, S., Yao, H., Marsh, M., Kristensen, D.M., Philippi, A., Sowa, M.E., and Lichtarge, O. 2002. Structural clusters of evolutionary trace residues are statistically significant and common in proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 316: 139-154.
68. Madej, T., Gibrat, J.F., and Bryant, S.H. 1995. Threading a database of protein cores. Proteins 23: 356-369.
69. Martin, A.C. and Thornton, J.M. 1996. Structural families in loops of homologous proteins: Automatic classification, modelling and application to antibodies. J. Mol. Biol. 263: 800-815.
70. Martin. A.C., Orengo, C.A., Hutchinson, E.G., Jones, S., Karmirantzou, M., Laskowski, R.A., Mitchell, J.B., Taroni, C., and Thornton, J.M. 1998. Protein folds and functions. Structure 6: 875-884.
71. Matsuo, Y. and Bryant, S.H. 1999. Identification of homologous core structures. Proteins 35: 70-79.
72. Mirny, L.A. and Shakhnovich, E.I. 1999. Universally conserved positions in protein folds: Reading evolutionary signals about stability, folding kinetics and function. J. Mol. Biol. 291: 177-196.
73. Mizuguchi, K., Deane, C.M., Blundell, T.L., and Overington, J.P. 1998. HOMSTRAD: A database of protein structure alignments for homologous families. Protein Sci. 7: 2469-2471.
74. Murray, D. and Honig, B. 2002. Electrostatic control of the membrane targeting of C2 domains. Mol. Cell 9:145-154.
75. Nayal, M., Hitz, B.C., and Honig, B. 1999. GRASS: A server for the graphical representation and analysis of structures. Protein Sci. 8: 676-679.
76. Nicholls, A., Sharp, K.A., and Honig, B. 1991. Protein folding and association: Insights from the interfacial and thermodynamic properties of hydrocarbons. Proteins 11: 281-296.
77. Nussinov, R. and Wolfson, H.J. 1991. Efficient detection of three-dimensional structural motifs in biological macromolecules by computer vision techniques. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 88: 10495-10499.
78. Ogata, K., Ohya, M., and Umeyama, H. 1998. Amino acid similarity matrix for homology modeling derived from structural alignment and optimized by the Monte Carlo method. J. Mol. Graph. Model 16: 178-189, 254.
79. Orengo, C.A. and Taylor, W.R. 1996. SSAP: Sequential structure alignment program for protein structure comparison. Methods Enzymol. 266: 617-635.
80. Orengo, C.A., Michie, A.D., Jones, S., Jones, D.T., Swindells, M.B., and Thornton, J.M. 1997. CATH - A hierarchic classification of protein domain structures. Structure 5: 1093-1108.
81. Ortiz, A.R., Strauss, C.E.M., and Olema, O. 2002. MAMMOTH (matching moleular molecular models obtained from theory): An automated method for model comparison. Protein Sci. 11: 2606-2621.
82. Panchenko, A.R., Marchler-Bauer, A., and Bryant, S.H. 2000. Combination of threading potentials and sequence profiles improves fold recognition. J. Mol. Biol. 296: 1319-1331.
83. Pawlowski, K., Jaroszewski, L., Rychlewski, L., and Godzik, A. 2000. Sensitive sequence comparison as protein function predictor. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 5: 42-53.
84. Pearson, W.R. and Lipman, D.J. 1988. Improved tools for biological sequence comparison. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 85: 2444-2448.
85. Pei, J. and Grishin, N.V. 2001. AL2CO: Calculation of positional conservation in a protein sequence alignment. Bioinformatics 17: 700-712.
86. Petrey, D. and Honig, B. 2000. Free energy determinants of tertiary structure and the evaluation of protein models. Protein Sci. 9: 2181-2191.
87. Ponder, J.W., and Richards, F.M. 1987. Tertiary templates for proteins. Use of packing criteria in the enumeration of allowed sequences for different structural classes. J. Mol. Biol. 193: 775-791.
88. Prlic, A., Domingues, F.S., and Sippl, M.J. 2000. Structure-derived substitution matrices for alignment of distantly related sequences. Protein Eng. 13: 545-550.
89. Rapp, C.S. and Friesner, R.A. 1999. Prediction of loop geometries using a generalized born model of solvation effects. Proteins 35: 173-183.
90. Reddy, B.V., Li, W.W., Shindyalov, I.N., and Bourne, P.E. 2001. Conserved key amino acid positions (CKAAPs) derived from the analysis of common substructures in proteins. Proteins 42: 148-163.
91. Reva, B., Finkelstein, A., and Topiol, S. 2002. Threading with chemostructural restrictions method for predicting fold and functionally significant residues: Application to dipeptidylpeptidase IV (DPP-IV). Proteins 47: 180-193.
92. Rice, D.W., Fischer, D., Weiss, R., and Eisenberg, D. 1997. Fold assignments for amino acid sequences of the CASP2 experiment. Proteins Suppl 1: 113-122.
93. Richardson, J.S. 1981. The anatomy and taxonomy of protein structure. Adv. Protein Chem. 34: 167-339.
94. Rost, B. 1997. Protein structures sustain evolutionary drift. Fold. Des. 2: S19-S24.
95. -. 2002. Enzyme function less conserved than anticipated. J. Mol. Biol. 318: 595-608.
96. Rost, B., Schneider, R., and Sander, C. 1997. Protein fold recognition by prediction-based threading. J. Mol. Biol. 270: 471-480.
97. Russell, R.B., Sasieni, P.D., and Sternberg. M.J. 1998. Supersites within superfolds. Binding site similarity in the absence of homology. J. Mol. Biol. 282: 903-918.
98. Sali, A. and Blundell, T.L. 1993. Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. J. Mol. Biol. 234: 779-815.
99. Samudrala, R. and Moult, J. 1998. An all-atom distance-dependent conditional probability discriminatory function for protein structure prediction. J. Mol. Biol. 275: 895-916.
100. Sanchez, R. and Sali, A. 1997. Advances in comparative protein-structure modelling. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 7: 206-214.
101. Schmitt, S., Kuhn, D., and Klebe, G. 2002. A new method to detect related function among proteins independent of sequence and fold homology. J. Mol. Biol. 323: 387-406.
102. Schultz, J., Copley, R.R., Doerks, T., Ponting, C.P., and Bork, P. 2000. SMART: A web-based tool for the study of genetically mobile domains. Nucleic Acids Res. 28: 231-234.
103. Servant, F., Bru, C., Carrere, S., Courcelle, E., Gouzy, J., Peyruc, D., and Kahn, D. 2002. ProDom: Automated clustering of homologous domains. Brief Bioinform. 3: 246-251.
104. Sheinerman, F.B. and Honig, B. 2002. On the role of electrostatic interactions in the design of protein-protein interfaces. J. Mol. Biol. 318: 161-177.
105. Shi, J., Blundell, T.L., and Mizuguchi, K. 2001. FUGUE: Sequence-structure homology recognition using environment-specific substitution tables and structure-dependent gap penalties. J. Mol. Biol. 310: 243-257.
106. Shindyalov, I.N. and Bourne, P.E. 1998. Protein structure alignment by incremental combinatorial extension (CE) of the optimal path. Protein Eng. 11: 739-747.
107. -. 2000. An alternative view of protein fold space. Proteins 38: 247-260.
108. Simons, K.T., Ruczinski, I., Kooperberg, C., Fox, B.A., Bystroff, C., and Baker, D. 1999. Improved recognition of native-like protein structures using a combination of sequence-dependent and sequence-independent features of proteins. Proteins 34: 82-95.
109. Sippl, M.J. 1993. Recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins. Proteins 17: 355-362.
110. -. 1995. Knowledge-based potentials for proteins. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 5: 229-235.
111. Swindells, M.B., Orengo, C.A., Jones, D.T., Hutchinson, E.G., and Thornton, J.M. 1998. Contemporary approaches to protein structure classification. Bioessays 20: 884-891.
112. Teichmann, S.A., Murzin, A.G., and Chothia, C. 2001. Determination of protein function, evolution and interactions by structural genomics. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 11: 354-363.
113. Todd, A.E., Orengo, C.A., and Thornton, J.M. 2001. Evolution of function in protein superfamilies, from a structural perspective. J. Mol. Biol. 307: 1113-1143.
114. Tramontano, A. 1998. Homology modeling with low sequence identity. Methods 14: 293-300.
115. Vasquez, M. 1996. Modeling side-chain conformation. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 6: 217-221.
116. Venclovas, C. 2001. Comparative modeling of CASP4 target proteins: Combining results of sequence search with three-dimensional structure assessment. Proteins Suppl 5: 47-54.
117. Vitkup, D., Melamud, E., Moult, J., and Sander, C. 2001. Completeness in structural genomics. Nat. Struct. Biol. 8: 59-66.
118. Volz, K. 1999. A test case for structure-based functional assignment: The 1.2 A crystal structure of the yjgF gene product from Escherichia coli. Protein Sci. 8: 2428-2437.
119. Wallace, A.C., Laskowski, R.A., and Thornton, J.M. 1996. Derivation of 3D coordinate templates for searching structural databases: Application to Ser-His-Asp catalytic triads in the serine proteinases and lipases. Protein Sci. 5: 1001-1013.
120. Wallace, A.C., Borkakoti, N., and Thornton, J.M. 1997. TESS: A geometric hashing algorithm for deriving 3D coordinate templates for searching structural databases. Application to enzyme active sites. Protein Sci. 6: 2308-2323.
121. Wilson, C.A., Kreychman, J., and Gerstein, M. 2000. Assessing annotation transfer for genomics: Quantifying the relations between protein sequence, structure and function through traditional and probabilistic scores. J. Mol. Biol. 297: 233-249.
122. Xiang, Z. and Honig, B. 2001. Extending the accuracy limits of prediction for side-chain conformations. J. Mol. Biol. 311: 421-430.
123. Xiang, Z., Soto. C.S., and Honig, B. 2002. Evaluating conformational free energies: The colony energy and its application to the problem of loop prediction. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99: 7432-7437.
124. Yang, A.S. and Honig, B. 2000a. An integrated approach to the analysis and modeling of protein sequences and structures. I. Protein structural alignment and a quantitative measure for protein structural distance. J. Mol. Biol. 301: 665-678.
125. -. 2000b. An integrated approach to the analysis and modeling of protein sequences and structures. II. On the relationship between sequence and structural similarity for proteins that are not obviously related in sequence. J. Mol. Biol. 301: 679-689.
126. -. 2000c. An integrated approach to the analysis and modeling of protein sequences and structures. III. A comparative study of sequence conservation in protein structural families using multiple structural alignments. J. Mol. Biol. 301: 691-711.
127. Zarembinski, T.I., Hung, L.W., Mueller-Dieckmann, J.H., Kim, K.K., Yokota, H., Kim, R., and Kim, S.H. 1998. Structure-based assignment of the biochemical function of a hypothetical protein: A test case of structural genomics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 95: 15189-15193.