Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 57, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 702-710

  Zhang, Yang ^a   Skolnick, Jeffrey ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; MOLECULAR MODEL; PARTICLE SIZE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SCORING SYSTEM; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS;

AUTOMATION; BENCHMARKING; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; DATABASES, PROTEIN; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, TERTIARY; PROTEINS; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGY, PROTEIN;

EID: 10344232638     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.20264     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Zemla A, Venclovas C, Moult J, Fidelis K. Processing and analysis of CASP3 protein structure predictions. Proteins 1999;Suppl 3:22-29.
2. Siew N, Elofsson A, Rychlewski L, Fischer D. MaxSub: an automated measure for the assessment of protein structure prediction quality. Bioinformatics 2000;16(9):776-785.
3. Bowie JU, Luthy R, Eisenberg D. A method to identify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional structure. Science 1991;253:164-170.
4. Jones DT, Taylor WR, Thornton JM. A new approach to protein fold recognition. Nature 1992;358(6381):86-89.
5. Bryant SH, Altschul SF. Statistics of sequence-structure threading. Curr Opin Struct Biol 1995;5(2):236-244.
6. Skolnick J, Kihara D, Zhang Y. Development and large scale benchmark testing of the PROSPECTOR 3.0 threading algorithm. Proteins 2004;56:502-518.
7. Sali A, Blundell TL. Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. J Mol Biol 1993;234(3):779-815.
8. Kolinski A, Skolnick J. Assembly of protein structure from sparse experimental data: an efficient Monte Carlo model. Proteins 1998;32(4):475-494.
9. Zhang Y, Kolinski A, Skolnick J. TOUCHTONE II: A new approach to ab initio protein structure prediction. Biophysics J 2003;85:1145-1164.
10. Fiser A, Do RK, Sali A. Modeling of loops in protein structures. Protein Sci 2000;9(9):1753-1773.
11. Kabsch W. A solution for the best rotation to relate two sets of vectors. Acta Cryst 1976;A 32:922-923.
12. Kabsch W. A discussion of the solution for the best rotation to relate two sets of vectors. Acta Cryst 1978;A 34:827-828.
13. Zemla A. LGA: A method for finding 3D similarities in protein structures. Nucleic Acids Res 2003;31(13):3370-3374.
14. Cristobal S, Zemla A, Fischer D, Rychlewski L, Elofsson A. A study of quality measures for protein threading models. BMC Bioinformatics 2001;2(1):5.
15. Rychlewski L, Fischer D, Elofsson A. LiveBench-6: large-scale automated evaluation of protein structure prediction servers. Proteins 2003;53 Suppl 6:542-547.
16. Moult J, Fidelis K, Zemla A, Hubbard T. Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP)-round V. Proteins 2003;53 Suppl 6:334-339.
17. Berman HM, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat TN, Weissig H, Shindyalov IN, Bourne PE. The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res 2000;28(1):235-242.
18. Levitt M, Gerstein M. A unified statistical framework for sequence comparison and structure comparison. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998;95(11):5913- 5920.
19. Ortiz AR, Strauss CE, Olmea O. MAMMOTH (matching molecular models obtained from theory): an automated method for model comparison. Protein Sci 2002;11(11):2606-2621.
20. Betancourt MR, Skolnick J. Universal similarity measure for comparing protein structures. Biopolymers 2001;59(5):305-309.
21. Carugo O, Pongor S. A normalized root-mean-square distance for comparing protein three-dimensional structures. Protein Sci 2001;10(7):1470-1473.
22. Holm L, Sander C. Dali: a network tool for protein structure comparison. Trends Biochem Sci 1995;20(11):478-480.
23. Reva BA, Finkelstein AV, Skolnick J. What is the probability of a chance prediction of a protein structure with an RMSD of 6 Å? Fold Des 1998;3(2):141-147.
24. Gerstein M, Levitt M. Using iterative dynamic programming to obtain accurate pairwise and multiple alignments of protein structures. Proc Int Conf Intell Syst Mol Biol 1996;4:59-67.
25. Kihara D, Skolnick J. The PDB is a covering set of small protein structures. J Mol Biol 2003;334(4):793-802.
26. Aszodi A, Taylor WR. Homology modelling by distance geometry. Fold Des 1996;1(5):325-334.
27. Brocklehurst SM, Perham RN. Prediction of the three-dimensional structures of the biotinylated domain from yeast pyruvate carboxylase and of the lipoylated H-protein from the pea leaf glycine cleavage system: a new automated method for the prediction of protein tertiary structure. Protein Sci 1993;2(4):626-639.
28. Havel TF, Snow ME. A new method for building protein conformations from sequence alignments with homologues of known structure. J Mol Biol 1991;217(1):1-7.
29. Srinivasan N, Blundell TL. An evaluation of the performance of an automated procedure for comparative modelling of protein tertiary structure. Protein Eng 1993;6(5):501-512.
30. Moult J, Hubbard T, Fidelis K, Pedersen JT. Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP): round III. Proteins 1999;Suppl 3:2-6.
31. Moult J, Fidelis K, Zemla A, Hubbard T. Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP): round IV. Proteins 2001;Suppl 5:2-7.
32. Tramontano A, Morea V. Assessment of homology-based predictions in CASP5. Proteins 2003;53 Suppl 6:352-368.
33. Kinch LN, Wrabl JO, Krishna SS, Majumdar I, Sadreyev RI, Qi Y, Pei J, Cheng H, Grishin NV. CASP5 assessment of fold recognition target predictions. Proteins 2003;53 Suppl 6:395-409.
34. Aloy P, Stark A, Hadley C, Russell RB. Predictions without templates: new folds, secondary structure, and contacts in CASP5. Proteins 2003;53 Suppl 6:436-456.
35. Marti-Renom MA, Stuart AC, Fiser A, Sanchez R, Melo F, Sali A. Comparative protein structure modeling of genes and genomes. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 2000;29:291-325.
36. Zhang Y, Skolnick J. Automated structure prediction of weakly homologous proteins on a genomic scale. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2004;101:7594-7599.