Scoring function accuracy for membrane protein structure prediction

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 68, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 67-75

  Gao, Cen ^a   Stern, Harry A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Decoys; Energy functions; Homology modeling; Membrane proteins; Scoring functions; Structure prediction

Indexed keywords

MEMBRANE PROTEIN;

ACCURACY; AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; ATOM; ENERGY; LIPID BILAYER; NONHUMAN; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SCORING SYSTEM; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; MEMBRANE PROTEINS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGY, PROTEIN;

EID: 34249898658     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: 10970134     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.21421     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Wallin E, von Heijne G. Genome-wide analysis of integral membrane proteins from eubacterial, archaean, and eukaryotic organisms. Protein Sci 1998;7:1029-1038.
2. White SH. The progress of membrane protein structure determination. Protein Sci 2004;13:1948-1949.
3. Daggett V, editor. Protein simulations, Vol. 66. San Diego: Elsevier; 2003.
4. Lu H, Skolnick J. A distance-dependent atomic knowledge-based potential for improved protein structure selection. Proteins: Struct Funct Genet 2001;44:223-232.
5. Summa CM, Levitt M, DeGrado WF. An atomic environment potential for use in protein structure prediction. J Mol Biol 2005;352:986-1001.
6. Zhou HY, Zhou YQ. Distance-scaled, finite ideal-gas reference state improves structure-derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction. Protein Sci 2002;11:2714-2726.
7. Simons KT, Kooperberg C, Huang E, Baker D. Assembly of protein tertiary structures from fragments with similar local sequences using simulated annealing and Bayesian scoring functions. J Mol Biol 1997;268:209-225.
8. Samudrala R, Moult J. An all-atom distance-dependent conditional probability discriminatory function for protein structure prediction. J Mol Biol 1998;275:895-916.
9. Narang P, Bhushan K, Bose S, Jayaram B. Protein structure evaluation using an all-atom energy based empirical scoring function. J Biomol Struct Dyn 2006;23:385-406.
10. Jacobson MP, Kaminski GA, Friesner RA, Rapp CS. Force field validation using protein side chain prediction. J Phys Chem B 2002;106:11673-11680.
11. Jorgensen WL, Maxwell DS, Tirado-Rives J. Development and testing of the OPLS all-atom force field on conformational energetics and properties of organic liquids. J Am Chem Soc 1996;118:11225-11236.
12. Sali A, Blundell TL. Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. J Mol Biol 1993;234:779-815.
13. Brooks BR, Bruccoleri RE, Olafson BD, States DJ, Swaminathan S, Karplus M. Charmm - a program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations. J Comput Chem 1983;4:187-217.
14. Kaminski GA, Friesner RA, Tirado-Rives J, Jorgensen WL. Evaluation and reparametrization of the OPLS-AA force field for proteins via comparison with accurate quantum chemical calculations on peptides. J Phys Chem B 2001;105:6474-6487.
15. Pearlman DA, Case DA, Caldwell JW, Ross WS, Cheatham TE, Debolt S, Ferguson D, Seibel G, Kollman P. Amber, a package of computer-programs for applying molecular mechanics, normal-mode analysis, molecular-dynamics and free-energy calculations to simulate the structural and energetic properties of molecules. Comput Phys Commun 1995;91:1-41.
16. Jacobson MP, Pincus DL, Rapp CS, Day TJF, Honig B, Shaw DE, Friesner RA. A hierarchical approach to all-atom protein loop prediction. Proteins: Struct Funct Bioinform 2004;55:351-367.
17. Chothia C, Lesk AM. The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins. EMBO J 1986;5:823-826.
18. Woolf T, Roux B. Molecular dynamics simulation of the gramicidin channel in a phospholipid bilayer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994;91:11631-11635.
19. Berneche S, Nina M, Roux B. Molecular dynamics simulation of melittin in a dimyristoylphosphatidylcholine bilayer membrane. Biophys J 1998;75:1603-1618.
20. Lee AG. Lipid-protein interactions in biological membranes: a structural perspective. Biochim Biophys Acta 2003;1612:1-40.
21. Feller SE. Molecular dynamics simulations of lipid bilayers. Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci 2000;5:217-223.
22. Pitman MC, Grossfield A, Suits F, Feller SE. Role of cholesterol and polyunsaturated chains in lipid-protein interactions: molecular dynamics simulation of rhodopsin in a realistic membrane environment. J Am Chem Soc 2005;127:4576-4577.
23. Grossfield A, Feller SE, Pitman MC. A role for direct interactions in the modulation of rhodopsin by ω-3 polyunsaturated lipids. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006;103:4888-4893.
24. Spassov VZ, Yan L, Szalma S. Introducing an implicit membrane in generalized born/solvent accessibility continuum solvent models. J Phys Chem B 2002;106:8726-8738.
25. Im W, Feig M, Brooks CL. III. An implicit membrane generalized born theory for the study of structure, stability, and interactions of membrane proteins. Biophys J 2003;85:2900-2918.
26. Zhang Y, DeVries ME, Skolnick J. Structure modeling of all identified G protein&8211;coupled receptors in the human genome. PLoS Comput Biol 2006;2:e13.
27. Patny A, Desai PV, Avery MA. Homology modeling of G-protein-coupled receptors and implications in drug design. Curr Med Chem 2006;13:1667-1691.
28. Yarov-Yarovoy V, Schonbrun J, Baker D. Multipass membrane protein structure prediction using Rosetta. Proteins 2006;62:1010-1025.
29. Zhang Y, Sham YY, Rajamani R, Gao JL, Portoghese PS. Homology modeling and molecular dynamics simulations of the μ opioid receptor in a membrane-aqueous system. Chembiochem 2005;6:853-859.
30. Hurwitz N, Pellegrini-Calace M, Jones DT. Towards genome-scale structure prediction for transmembrane proteins. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2006;361:465-475.
31. Law RJ, Capener C, Baaden M, Bond PJ, Campbell J, Patargias G, Arinaminpathy Y, Sansom MSP. Membrane protein structure quality in molecular dynamics simulation. J Mol Graph Model 2005;24:157-165.
32. Reddy CS, Vijayasarathy K, Srinivas E, Sastry GM, Sastry GN. Homology modeling of membrane proteins: a critical assessment. Comput Biol Chem 2006;30:120-126.
33. Forrest LR, Woolf TB. Discrimination of native loop conformations in membrane proteins: decoy library design and evaluation of effective energy scoring functions. Proteins: Struct Funct Genet 2003;52:492-509.
34. Schueler-Furman O, Wang C, Bradley P, Misura K, Baker D. Progress on modeling of protein structures and interactions. Science 2005;310:638-642.
35. Forrest LR, Tang CL, Honig B. On the accuracy of homology modeling and sequence alignment methods applied to membrane proteins. Biophys J 2006;91:508-517.
36. Fiser A, Do RKG, Sali A. Modeling of loops in protein structures. Protein Sci 2000;9:1753-1773.
37. Bates PA, Kelley LA, MacCallum RM, Sternberg MJE. Enhancement of protein modeling by human intervention in applying the automatic programs 3D-JIGSAW and 3D-PSSM. Proteins: Struct Funct Genet 2001:39-46.
38. Wallner B, Elofsson A. All are not equal: a benchmark of different homology modeling programs. Protein Sci 2005;14:1315-1327.
39. Nayeem A, Sitkoff D, Rrystek S. A comparative study of available software for high-accuracy homology modeling: from sequence alignments to structural models. Protein Sci 2006;15:808-824.
40. Jacobson M, Sali A. Comparative protein structure modeling and its applications to drug discovery. Annual Reports in Medicinal Chemistry, Vol 39; 2004. pp 259-276.
41. Jayasinghe S, Hristova K, White SH. MPtopo: a database of membrane protein topology. Protein Sci 2001;10:455-458.
42. MAESTRO. Version 7.5. Portland, OR: Schrödinger LLC; 2006.
43. Ponder JW, Richards FM. An Efficient newton-like method for molecular mechanics energy minimization of large molecules. J Comput Chem 1987;8:1016-1024.
44. Kundrot CE, Ponder JW, Richards FM. Algorithms for calculating excluded volume and its derivatives as a function of molecular-conformation and their use in energy minimization. J Comput Chem 1991;12:402-409.
45. Humphrey W, Dalke A, Schulten K. VMD: visual molecular dynamics. J Mol Graph 1996;14:33-38, 27-28.
46. Altschul S, Madden T, Schaffer A, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman D. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 1997;25:3389-3402.
47. Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ. Clustal-W - improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res 1994;22:4673-4680.
48. Shindyalov I, Bourne P. Protein structure alignment by incremental combinatorial extension (CE) of the optimal path. Protein Eng 1998;11:739-747.
49. Ghosh A, Rapp CS, Friesner RA. Generalized born model based on a surface integral formulation. J Phys Chem B 1998;102:10983-10990.
50. MacKerell AD, Bashford D, Bellott M, Dunbrack RL, Evanseck JD, Field MJ, Fischer S, Gao J, Guo H, Ha S, Joseph-McCarthy D, Kuchnir L, Kuczera K, Lau FTK, Mattos C, Michnick S, Ngo T, Nguyen DT, Prodhom B, Reiher WE, Roux B, Schlenkrich M, Smith JC, Stote R, Straub J, Watanabe M, Wiorkiewicz-Kuczera J, Yin D, Karplus M. All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins. J Phys Chem B 1998;102:3586-3616.
51. Qiu D, Shenkin PS, Hollinger FP, Still WC. The GB/SA continuum model for solvation. A fast analytical method for the calculation of approximate Born radii. J Phys Chem A 1997;101:3005-3014.
52. Simons KT, Ruczinski I, Kooperberg C, Fox BA, Bystroff C, Baker D. Improved recognition of native-like protein structures using a combination of sequence-dependent and sequence-independent features of proteins. Proteins: Struct Funct Genet 1999;34:82-95.
53. Baker D, Sali A. Protein structure prediction and structural genomics Science 2001;294:93-96.