Protein complexes: Structure prediction challenges for the 21st century

Current Opinion in Structural Biology

Volumn 15, Issue 1 SPEC. ISS., 2005, Pages 15-22

  Aloy, Patrick ^a   Pichaud, Matthieu ^a   Russell, Robert B ^a  

^a EUROPEAN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY LABORATORY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROTEIN;

ANALYTIC METHOD; BINDING AFFINITY; ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; PROTEIN FUNCTION; PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; REVIEW;

EID: 13844255392     PISSN: 0959440X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.sbi.2005.01.012     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. A. Tramontano Of men and machines Nat Struct Biol 10 2003 87 90
2. A. Tramontano, and V. Morea Assessment of homology-based predictions in CASP5 Proteins 53 suppl 6 2003 352 368
3. L.N. Kinch, J.O. Wrabl, S.S. Krishna, I. Majumdar, R.I. Sadreyev, Y. Qi, J. Pei, H. Cheng, and N.V. Grishin CASP5 assessment of fold recognition target predictions Proteins 53 suppl 6 2003 395 409
4. P. Aloy, A. Stark, C. Hadley, and R.B. Russell Predictions without templates: new folds, secondary structure, and contacts in CASP5 Proteins 53 suppl 6 2003 436 456
5. G. Zhang, E.A. Campbell, L. Minakhin, C. Richter, K. Severinov, and S.A. Darst Crystal structure of Thermus aquaticus core RNA polymerase at 3.3 Å resolution Cell 98 1999 811 824
6. P. Cramer, D.A. Bushnell, J. Fu, A.L. Gnatt, B. Maier-Davis, N.E. Thompson, R.R. Burgess, A.M. Edwards, P.R. David, and R.D. Kornberg Architecture of RNA polymerase II and implications for the transcription mechanism Science 288 2000 640 649
7. N. Ban, P. Nissen, J. Hansen, P.B. Moore, and T.A. Steitz The complete atomic structure of the large ribosomal subunit at 2.4 Å resolution Science 289 2000 905 920
8. M.M. Yusupov, G.Z. Yusupova, A. Baucom, K. Lieberman, T.N. Earnest, J.H. Cate, and H.F. Noller Crystal structure of the ribosome at 5.5 Å resolution Science 292 2001 883 896
9. R.B. Russell, F. Alber, P. Aloy, F.P. Davis, D. Korkin, M. Pichaud, M. Topf, and A. Sali A structural perspective on protein-protein interactions Curr Opin Struct Biol 14 2004 313 324
10. A.C. Gavin, M. Bosche, R. Krause, P. Grandi, M. Marzioch, A. Bauer, J. Schultz, J.M. Rick, A.M. Michon, and C.M. Cruciat Functional organization of the yeast proteome by systematic analysis of protein complexes Nature 415 2002 141 147
11. Y. Ho, A. Gruhler, A. Heilbut, G.D. Bader, L. Moore, S.L. Adams, A. Millar, P. Taylor, K. Bennett, and K. Boutilier Systematic identification of protein complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by mass spectrometry Nature 415 2002 180 183
12. U. Pieper, N. Eswar, H. Braberg, M.S. Madhusudhan, F.P. Davis, A.C. Stuart, N. Mirkovic, A. Rossi, M.A. Marti-Renom, and A. Fiser MODBASE, a database of annotated comparative protein structure models, and associated resources Nucleic Acids Res 32 2004 D217 D222
13. M.A. Marti-Renom, A.C. Stuart, A. Fiser, R. Sanchez, F. Melo, and A. Sali Comparative protein structure modeling of genes and genomes Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 29 2000 291 325
14. S.Y. Park, B.D. Beel, M.I. Simon, A.M. Bilwes, and B.R. Crane In different organisms, the mode of interaction between two signaling proteins is not necessarily conserved Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101 2004 11646 11651 Crystal structures show that the mode of interaction between the signaling proteins CheY and CheA-P2 is different in Thermotoga maritima and Escherichia coli. Although these orthologous proteins use roughly the same residues for the interaction, the relative orientations differ by a 180°rotation.
15. C. Chothia, and A.M. Lesk The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins EMBO J 5 1986 823 826
16. C. Sander, and R. Schneider Database of homology-derived protein structures and the structural meaning of sequence alignment Proteins 9 1991 56 68
17. P. Aloy, H. Ceulemans, A. Stark, and R.B. Russell The relationship between sequence and interaction divergence in proteins J Mol Biol 332 2003 989 998 An interaction equivalent of the study published by Chothia and Lesk for single proteins [15]. A plot of similarity of interaction, as measured by studying known three-dimensional structures, reveals how interactions diverge as a function of sequence similarity. Binding modes of interacting protein pairs that share above 30% sequence identity are generally similar. Below this cutoff lies a twilight zone, where the modes of interaction may or may not be similar.
18. L. Lu, H. Lu, and J. Skolnick MULTIPROSPECTOR: an algorithm for the prediction of protein-protein interactions by multimeric threading Proteins 49 2002 350 364
19. C. Chothia One thousand families for the molecular biologist Nature 357 1992 543 544
20. D. Vitkup, E. Melamud, J. Moult, and C. Sander Completeness in structural genomics Nat Struct Biol 8 2001 559 566
21. P. Aloy, and R.B. Russell Ten thousand interactions for the molecular biologist Nat Biotechnol 22 2004 1317 1321 This study combines interaction data and three-dimensional structures to suggest that, as for protein folds, Nature is apparently restricted to a limited number of interaction types with which to perform a vast set of functions. The authors estimate that most interactions in Nature will conform to one of about 10 000 types, of which we currently know about 2000.
22. Stein A, Russell RB, Aloy P: 3did: interacting domains of known three-dimensional structure. Nucleic Acids Res 2005, in press.
23. P. Aloy, and R.B. Russell Interrogating protein interaction networks through structural biology Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99 2002 5896 5901
24. P. Aloy, and R.B. Russell InterPreTS: protein interaction prediction through tertiary structure Bioinformatics 19 2003 161 162
25. L. Lu, A.K. Arakaki, H. Lu, and J. Skolnick Multimeric threading-based prediction of protein-protein interactions on a genomic scale: application to the Saccharomyces cerevisiae proteome Genome Res 13 2003 1146 1154 In this study, the authors predict the protein interaction network in S. cerevisiae by applying their MULTIPROSPECTOR threading algorithm to the entire proteome. This reveals a network that the authors argue is similar in size and accuracy to those uncovered by genome-scale two-hybrid screens.
26. Kiel C, Wohlgemuth S, Rousseau F, Schymkowitz J, Borg J, Wittinghofer F, Serrano L: Recognizing and defining true Ras binding domains II: in silico prediction based on homology modelling and energy calculations. J Mol Biol 2005, in press.
27. R. Mendez, R. Leplae, L. De Maria, and S.J. Wodak Assessment of blind predictions of protein-protein interactions: current status of docking methods Proteins 52 2003 51 67
28. S.J. Wodak, and R. Mendez Prediction of protein-protein interactions: the CAPRI experiment, its evaluation and implications Curr Opin Struct Biol 14 2004 242 249
29. M. Hothorn, S. Wolf, P. Aloy, S. Greiner, and K. Scheffzek Structural insights into the target specificity of plant invertase and pectin methylesterase inhibitory proteins Plant Cell 16 2004 3437 3447
30. M. Morillas, P. Gomez-Puertas, B. Rubi, J. Clotet, J. Arino, A. Valencia, F.G. Hegardt, D. Serra, and G. Asins Structural model of a malonyl-CoA-binding site of carnitine octanoyltransferase and carnitine palmitoyltransferase I: mutational analysis of a malonyl-CoA affinity domain J Biol Chem 277 2002 11473 11480
31. I. Halperin, H. Wolfson, and R. Nussinov Protein-protein interactions; coupling of structurally conserved residues and of hot spots across interfaces. Implications for docking Structure 12 2004 1027 1038 This study finds that clusters of structurally conserved residues (hot spots) in proteins tend to be coupled across the interface. This suggests that the prediction of hot spots can be used as a filter to complement protein docking experiments.
32. I.M. Nooren, and J.M. Thornton Diversity of protein-protein interactions EMBO J 22 2003 3486 3492 The authors use three-dimensional structures to study the functional diversity of protein-protein interactions and complexes. The authors pay particular attention to the difference between transient interactions and those of a more permanent nature in the cell.
33. C. Bystroff, and D. Baker Prediction of local structure in proteins using a library of sequence-structure motifs J Mol Biol 281 1998 565 577
34. P. Bradley, D. Chivian, J. Meiler, K.M. Misura, C.A. Rohl, W.R. Schief, W.J. Wedemeyer, O. Schueler-Furman, P. Murphy, and J. Schonbrun Rosetta predictions in CASP5: successes, failures, and prospects for complete automation Proteins 53 suppl 6 2003 457 468
35. J.M. Valpuesta, J. Martin-Benito, P. Gomez-Puertas, J.L. Carrascosa, and K.R. Willison Structure and function of a protein folding machine: the eukaryotic cytosolic chaperonin CCT FEBS Lett 529 2002 11 16
36. R. Raijmakers, Y.E. Noordman, W.J. van Venrooij, and G.J. Pruijn Protein-protein interactions of hCsl4p with other human exosome subunits J Mol Biol 315 2002 809 818
37. P. Aloy, F.D. Ciccarelli, C. Leutwein, A.C. Gavin, G. Superti-Furga, P. Bork, B. Boettcher, and R.B. Russell A complex prediction: three-dimensional model of the yeast exosome EMBO Rep 3 2002 628 635
38. W.K. Huh, J.V. Falvo, L.C. Gerke, A.S. Carroll, R.W. Howson, J.S. Weissman, and E.K. O'Shea Global analysis of protein localization in budding yeast Nature 425 2003 686 691 The first genome-wide experiment to uncover protein localization. Using a collection of full-length GFP-tagged proteins for the 6234 annotated open reading frames in yeast, the authors could classify 75% into 22 subcellular localization categories, from the cell periphery to the nucleolus.
39. 6 molecules per cell. This technology provides the perfect framework for monitoring protein abundance dynamically during different cellular events and under different conditions.
40. de Lichtenberg U, Jensen L, Brunak S, Bork P: Dynamic complex formation during the yeast cell cycle. Science 2005, in press.
41. P.J. Kraulis MOLSCRIPT: a program to produce both detailed and schematic plots of protein structures J Appl Crystallogr 24 1991 946 950