How well can the accuracy of comparative protein structure models be predicted?

Protein Science

Volumn 17, Issue 11, 2008, Pages 1881-1893

  Eramian, David ^a,b   Eswar, Narayanan ^a,b   Shen, Min Yi ^a,b   Sali, Andrej ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; GEOMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; DATABASES, PROTEIN; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, SECONDARY; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, TERTIARY; PROTEINS; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, PROTEIN; SOFTWARE;

EID: 55549141879     PISSN: 09618368     EISSN: 1469896X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1110/ps.036061.108     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Albeck, M.J. and Borgesen, S.E. 1990. ROC-curve analysis. A statistical method for the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Ugeskr. Laeger 152: 1650-1653.
2. 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.
3. Andreeva, A., Howorth, D., Brenner, S.E., Hubbard, T.J., Chothia, C., and Murzin, A.G. 2004. SCOP database in 2004: Refinements integrate structure and sequence family data. Nucleic Acids Res. 32: D226-D229.
4. Apweiler, R., Bairoch, A., Wu, C.H., Barker, W.C., Boeckmann, B., Ferro, S., Gasteiger, E., Huang, H., Lopez, R., Magrane, M., et al. 2004. UniProt: The Universal Protein knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res. 32: D115-D119.
5. Baker, D. and Sali, A. 2001. Protein structure prediction and structural genomics. Science 294: 93-96.
6. Berman, H.M., Westbrook, J., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T.N., Weissig, H., Shindyalov, I.N., and Bourne, P.E. 2000. The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res. 28: 235-242.
7. Bjelic, S. and Aqvist, J. 2004. Computational prediction of structure, substrate binding mode, mechanism, and rate for a malaria protease with a novel type of active site. Biochemistry 43: 14521-14528.
8. Bradley, P., Misura, K.M., and Baker, D. 2005. Toward high-resolution de novo structure prediction for small proteins. Science 309: 1868-1871.
9. Caffrey, C.R., Placha, L., Barinka, C., Hradilek, M., Dostal, J., Sajid, M., McKerrow, J.H., Majer, P., Konvalinka, J., and Vondrasek, J. 2005. Homology modeling and SAR analysis of Schistosoma japonicum cathepsin D (SjCD) with statin inhibitors identify a unique active site steric barrier with potential for the design of specific inhibitors. Biol. Chem. 386: 339-349.
10. Chakravarty, S. and Sanchez, R. 2004. Systematic analysis of added-value in simple comparative models of protein structure. Structure 12: 1461-1470.
11. Chmiel, A.A., Radlinska, M., Pawlak, S.D., Krowarsch, D., Bujnicki, J.M., and Skowronek, K.J. 2005. A theoretical model of restriction endonuclease NlaIV in complex with DNA, predicted by fold recognition and validated by site-directed mutagenesis and circular dichroism spectroscopy. Protein Eng. Des. Sel. 18: 181-189.
12. Chothia, C. and Lesk, A.M. 1986. The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins. EMBO J. 5: 823-826.
13. Colubri, A., Jha, A.K., Shen, M.Y., Sali, A., Berry, R.S., Sosnick, T.R., and Freed, K.F. 2006. Minimalist representations and the importance of nearest neighbor effects in protein folding simulations. J. Mol. Biol. 363: 835-857.
14. Costache, A.D., Pullela, P.K., Kasha, P., Tomasiewicz, H., and Sem, D.S. 2005. Homology-modeled ligand-binding domains of zebra fish estrogen receptors a, b1, and b2: From in silico to in vivo studies of estrogen interactions in Danio rerio as a model system. Mol. Endocrinol 19: 2979-2990.
15. Domingues, F.S., Koppensteiner, W.A., Jaritz, M., Prlic, A., Weichenberger, C., Wiederstein, M., Floeckner, H., Lackner, P., and Sippl, M.J. 1999. Sustained performance of knowledge-based potentials in fold recognition. Proteins Suppl 3: 112-120.
16. Eramian, D., Shen, M.Y., Devos, D., Melo, F., Sali, A., and Marti-Renom, M.A. 2006. A composite score for predicting errors in protein structure models. Protein Sci. 15: 1653-1666.
17. Eswar, N., John, B., Mirkovic, N., Fiser, A., Ilyin, V.A., Pieper, U., Stuart, A.C., Marti-Renom, M.A., Madhusudhan, M.S., Yerkovich, B., et al. 2003. Tools for comparative protein structure modeling and analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 31: 3375-3380.
18. Eswar, N., Webb, B.M., Marti-Renom, M., Madhusudhan, M.S., Eramian, D., Shen, M.Y., Pieper, U., and Sali, A. 2007. Comparative protein structure modeling using MODELLER. Curr. Protoc. Protein Sci. Chapter 2: Unit 2.9.
19. Fiser, A., Do, R.K., and Sali, A. 2000. Modeling of loops in protein structures. Protein Sci. 9: 1753-1773.
20. Fitzgerald, J.E., Jha, A.K., Colubri, A., Sosnick, T.R., and Freed, K.F. 2007. Reduced Cb statistical potentials can outperform all-atom potentials in decoy identification. Protein Sci. 16: 2123-2139.
21. Gao, X., Bu, D., Li, S.C., Xu, J., and Li, M. 2007. FragQA: Predicting local fragment quality of a sequence-structure alignment. Genome Inform. 19: 27-39.
22. Gatchell, D.W., Dennis, S., and Vajda, S. 2000. Discrimination of near-native protein structures from misfolded models by empirical free energy functions. Proteins 41: 518-534.
23. Ginalski, K., Grishin, N.V., Godzik, A., and Rychlewski, L. 2005. Practical lessons from protein structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res. 33: 1874-1891.
24. Hubbard, S.J., Campbell, S.F., and Thornton, J.M. 1991. Molecular recognition. Conformational analysis of limited proteolytic sites and serine proteinase protein inhibitors. J. Mol. Biol. 220: 507-530.
25. Jaroszewski, L., Li, W., and Godzik, A. 2002. In search for more accurate alignments in the twilight zone. Protein Sci. 11: 1702-1713.
26. Joachims, T. 1999. Making large-scale SVM learning practical. In Advances in kernel methods: Support vector learning (eds. B. Schölkopf et al.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
27. Jones, D.T. 1999. Protein secondary structure prediction based on position-specific scoring matrices. J. Mol. Biol. 292: 195-202.
28. Kabsch, W. and Sander, C. 1983. Dictionary of protein secondary structure: Pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers 22: 2577-2637.
29. Lazaridis, T. and Karplus, M. 1999. Discrimination of the native from misfolded protein models with an energy function including implicit solvation. J. Mol. Biol. 288: 477-487.
30. Lazaridis, T. and Karplus, M. 2000. Effective energy functions for protein structure prediction. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 10: 139-145.
31. Lee, B. and Richards, F.M. 1971. The interpretation of protein structures: Estimation of static accessibility. J. Mol. Biol. 55: 379-400.
32. Lu, M., Dousis, A.D., and Ma, J. 2008. OPUS-PSP: An orientation-dependent statistical all-atom potential derived from side-chain packing. J. Mol. Biol. 376: 288-301.
33. Madhusudhan, M.S., Marti-Renom, M.A., Sanchez, R., and Sali, A. 2006. Variable gap penalty for protein sequence-structure alignment. Protein Eng. Des. Sel. 19: 129-133.
34. Marko, A.C., Stafford, K., and Wymore, T. 2007. Stochastic pairwise alignments and scoring methods for comparative protein structure modeling. J. Chem. Inf. Model 47: 1263-1270.
35. Marti-Renom, M.A., Stuart, A.C., Fiser, A., Sanchez, R., Melo, F., and Sali, A. 2000. Comparative protein structure modeling of genes and genomes. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 29: 291-325.
36. Marti-Renom, M.A., Madhusudhan, M.S., and Sali, A. 2004. Alignment of protein sequences by their profiles. Protein Sci. 13: 1071-1087.
37. McGuffin, L.J. 2007. Benchmarking consensus model quality assessment for protein fold recognition. BMC Bioinformatics 8: 345.
38. McGuffin, L.J. 2008. The ModFOLD server for the quality assessment of protein structural models. Bioinformatics 24: 586-587.
39. McGuffin, L.J. and Jones, D.T. 2003. Improvement of the GenTHREADER method for genomic fold recognition. Bioinformatics 19: 874-881.
40. Melo, F. and Feytmans, E. 1997. Novel knowledge-based mean force potential at atomic level. J. Mol. Biol. 267: 207-222.
41. Melo, F. and Feytmans, E. 1998. Assessing protein structures with a non-local atomic interaction energy. J. Mol. Biol. 277: 1141-1152.
42. Melo, F. and Sali, A. 2007. Fold assessment for comparative protein structure modeling. Protein Sci. 16: 2412-2426.
43. Melo, F., Sanchez, R., and Sali, A. 2002. Statistical potentials for fold assessment. Protein Sci. 11: 430-448.
44. Metz, C.E., Herman, B.A., and Roe, C.A. 1998. Statistical comparison of two ROC-curve estimates obtained from partially paired datasets. Med. Decis. Making 18: 110-121.
45. Miyazawa, S. and Jernigan, R.L. 1996. Residue-residue potentials with a favorable contact pair term and an unfavorable high packing density term, for simulation and threading. J. Mol. Biol. 256: 623-644.
46. Park, B. and Levitt, M. 1996. Energy functions that discriminate X-ray and near-native folds from well-constructed decoys. J. Mol. Biol. 258: 367-392.
47. Park, B.H., Huang, E.S., and Levitt, M. 1997. Factors affecting the ability of energy functions to discriminate correct from incorrect folds. J. Mol. Biol. 266: 831-846.
48. Pettitt, C.S., McGuffin, L.J., and Jones, D.T. 2005. Improving sequence-based fold recognition by using 3D model quality assessment. Bioinformatics 21: 3509-3515.
49. Pieper, U., Eswar, N., Davis, F.P., Braberg, H., Madhusudhan, M.S., Rossi, A., Marti-Renom, M., Karchin, R., Webb, B.M., Eramian, D., et al. 2006. MODBASE: A database of annotated comparative protein structure models and associated resources. Nucleic Acids Res. 34: D291-D295.
50. Qiu, J., Sheffler, W., Baker, D., and Noble, W.S. 2007. Ranking predicted protein structures with support vector regression. Proteins 71: 1175-1182.
51. Rai, B.K. and Fiser, A. 2006. Multiple mapping method: A novel approach to the sequence-to-structure alignment problem in comparative protein structure modeling. Proteins 63: 644-661.
52. Rost, B. 1999. Twilight zone of protein sequence alignments. Protein Eng. 12: 85-94.
53. Sali, A. and Blundell, T.L. 1993. Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. J. Mol. Biol. 234: 779-815.
54. Samudrala, R. and Levitt, M. 2000. Decoys 'R' Us: A database of incorrect conformations to improve protein structure prediction. Protein Sci. 9: 1399-1401.
55. Sanchez, R., Pieper, U., Melo, F., Eswar, N., Marti-Renom, M.A., Madhusudhan, M.S., Mirkovic, N., and Sali, A. 2000. Protein structure modeling for structural genomics. Nat. Struct. Biol. 7: 986-990.
56. Sauder, J.M., Arthur, J.W., and Dunbrack Jr., R.L. 2000. Large-scale comparison of protein sequence alignment algorithms with structure alignments. Proteins 40: 6-22.
57. Seok, C., Rosen, J.B., Chodera, J.D., and Dill, K.A. 2003. MOPED: Method for optimizing physical energy parameters using decoys. J. Comput. Chem. 24: 89-97.
58. Shen, M.Y. and Sali, A. 2006. Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures. Protein Sci. 15: 2507-2524.
59. Shen, M.Y., Davis, F.P., and Sali, A. 2005. The optimal size of a globular protein domain: A simple sphere-packing model. Chem. Phys. Lett. 405: 224-228.
60. Shortle, D., Simons, K.T., and Baker, D. 1998. Clustering of low-energy conformations near the native structures of small proteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 95: 11158-11162.
61. Siew, N., Elofsson, A., Rychlewski, L., and Fischer, D. 2000. MaxSub: An automated measure for the assessment of protein structure prediction quality. Bioinformatics 16: 776-785.
62. Sippl, M.J. 1993. Recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins. Proteins 17: 355-362.
63. Smith, T.F. and Waterman, M.S. 1981. Identification of common molecular subsequences. J. Mol. Biol. 147: 195-197.
64. Tondel, K. 2004. Prediction of homology model quality with multivariate regression. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44: 1540-1551.
65. Tramontano, A., Leplae, R., and Morea, V. 2001. Analysis and assessment of comparative modeling predictions in CASP4. Proteins Suppl 5: 22-38.
66. Tsai, J., Bonneau, R., Morozov, A.V., Kuhlman, B., Rohl, C.A., and Baker, D. 2003. An improved protein decoy set for testing energy functions for protein structure prediction. Proteins 53: 76-87.
67. Wallner, B. and Elofsson, A. 2003. Can correct protein models be identified? Protein Sci. 12: 1073-1086.
68. Wallner, B. and Elofsson, A. 2006. Identification of correct regions in protein models using structural, alignment, and consensus information. Protein Sci. 15: 900-913.
69. Xu, W., Yuan, X., Xiang, Z., Mimnaugh, E., Marcu, M., and Neckers, L. 2005. Surface charge and hydrophobicity determine ErbB2 binding to the Hsp90 chaperone complex. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 12: 120-126.
70. Zhang, Y. and Skolnick, J. 2004. Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality. Proteins 57: 702-710.
71. Zhou, H. and Zhou, Y. 2002. Distance-scaled, finite ideal-gas reference state improves structure-derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction. Protein Sci. 11: 2714-2726.