Recognizing protein folds by cluster distance geometry

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 60, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 82-89

  Crippen, Gordon M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Distance matrix; Energy minimization; Fold recognition potential; Interresidue contacts; Monomeric proteins; Thermal denaturation; Zero filling

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID; MONOMER; PROTEIN;

ARTICLE; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; CLUSTER DISTANCE GEOMETRY; GEOMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN DATA BANK; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEINS;

EID: 19544366594     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.20488     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Crippen GM, Havel TF. Distance geometry and molecular conformation. New York: Wiley; 1988.
2. Grippen GM. Cluster distance geometry of polypeptide chains. J Comput Chem 2004;25:1305-1312.
3. Grippen GM. Statistical mechanics of protein folding by cluster distance geometry. Biopolymers 2004;75:278-289.
4. Miyazawa S, Jernigan RL. Estimation of effective contact energies from protein crystal structures: quasi-chemical approximation. Macromolecules 1985;18:534-552.
5. Goldstein RA, Luthey-Schulten Z, Wolynes PG. Protein tertiary structure recognition using optimized hamiltonians with local interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1992;89:9029-9033.
6. Maiorov VN, Crippen GM. Contact potential that recognizes the correct folding of globular proteins. J Mol Biol 1992;227:876-888.
7. Sippl MJ. Boltzmann's principle, knowledge-based mean fields and protein folding. An approach to the computational determination f protein structures. J Comput-Aided Mol Design 1993;7:473-501.
8. Hinds DA, Levitt M. Exploring conformational space with a simple lattice model for protein structure. J Mol Biol 1994;243:668-682.
9. Kocher J-PA, Rooman MJ, Wodak SJ. Factors influencing the ability of knowledge-based potentials to identify native sequence-structure matches. J Mol Biol 1994;235:1598-1613.
10. Godzik A, Kolinski A, Skolnick J. Are proteins ideal mixtures of amino acids? Analysis of energy parameter sets. Protein Sci 1995;4:2107-2117.
11. Mirny LA, Shakhnovich EI. How to derive a protein folding potential? A new approach to an old problem. J Mol Biol 1996;264: 1164-1179.
12. Miyazawa S, Jernigan RL. Residue-residue potentials with a favorable contact pair term and an unfavorable high packing density term for simulation and threading. J Mol Biol 1996;256: 623-644.
13. Park B, Levitt M. Energy functions that discriminate x-ray and near native folds from well-constructed decoys. J Mol Biol 1996;258: 367-392.
14. Park BH, Huang ES, Levitt M. Factors affecting the ability of energy functions to discriminate correct from incorrect folds. J Mol Biol 1997;266:831-846.
15. Skolnick J, Jaroszewski L, Kolinski A, Godzik A. Derivation and testing of pair potentials for protein folding. When is the quasichemical approximation correct? Protein Sci 1997;6:676-688.
16. Vendruscolo M, Domany E. Pairwise contact potentials are unsuitable for protein folding. J Chem Phys 1998;109:1101-1108.
17. Samudrala R, Moult J. An all-atom distance dependent conditional probability discriminatory function for protein structure prediction. J Mol Biol 1998;275:895-916.
18. Clementi C, Vendruscolo M, Maritan A, Domany E. Folding Lennard-Jones proteins by a contact potential. Proteins 1999;37: 544-553.
19. Tobi D, Elber R. Distance-dependent pair potential for protein folding: results from linear optimization. Proteins 2000;41:40-46.
20. Tobi D, Shafran G, Linial N, Elber R. On the design and analysis of protein folding potentials. Proteins 2000;40:71-85.
21. Vendruscolo M, Najmanovich R, Domany E. Can a pairwise contact potential stabilize native protein folds against decoys obtained by threading? Proteins 2000;38:134-148.
22. Dombkowski AA, Crippen GM. Disulfide recognition in an optimized threading potential. Protein Eng 2000;13:679-689.
23. Ohkubo YZ, Crippen GM. Potential energy function for continuous state model of globular proteins. J Comput Biol 2000;7:363-379.
24. Crippen GM. Constructing smooth potential functions for protein folding. J Mol Graph Mod 2001;19:87-93.
25. Wang Y, Zhang H, Li W, Scott RA. Discriminating compact nonnative structures from the native structure of globular proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1995;92:709-713.
26. Huang ES, Subbiah S, Tsai J, Levitt M. Using a hydrophobic contact potential to evaluate native and near-native folds generated by molecular dynamics simulations. J Mol Biol 1996;257:716-725.
27. Crippen GM, Ohkubo YZ. Statistical mechanics of protein folding by exhaustive enumeration. Proteins 1998;32:425-437.
28. Micheletti C, Seno F, Banavar JR, Maritan A. Learning effective amino acid interactions through interactive stochastic techniques. Proteins 2001;42:422-431.
29. Chhajer M, Crippen GM. Toward correct protein folding potentials. J Biol Phys 2004;30:171-185.
30. Berman HM, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat TN, Weissig H, Shindyalov IN, Bourne PE. The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res 2000;28:235-242.
31. Molecular Operating Environment (MOE). Version 2004.03. Chemical Computing Group, Inc., http://www.chemcomp.com.
32. Murty K. Linear and combinatorial programming. New York: Wiley; 1976. p 486-493.
33. Lo Conte L, Brenner SE, Hubbard TJP, Chothia C, Murzin A. SCOP database in 2002: refinements accommodate structural genomics. Nucleic Acid Res 2002;30:264-267.
34. Maiorov VN, Crippen GM. Size-independent comparison of protein three-dimensional structures. Proteins 1995;22:273-283.