Guiding conformation space search with an all-atom energy potential

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 73, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 958-972

  Brunette, T J ^a   Brock, Oliver ^a  

^a Biologically Inspired Neural and Dynamical Systems Laboratory   (United States)

Author keywords

Active learning; Conformational space search; Monte Carlo; Multiple energy functions; Protein structure prediction; Rosetta

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; ENERGY TRANSFER; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; PROTEIN SECONDARY STRUCTURE; STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGY; THERMODYNAMICS;

PROTEIN;

MODELS, MOLECULAR; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, SECONDARY; PROTEINS; STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGY, PROTEIN; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 58149277688     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: 10970134     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.22123     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Protein Data Bank. http://www.pdb.org.
2. Bradley P, Chivian D, Meiler J, Misura KMS, Rohl CA, Schief WR, Wedemeyer WJ, Schueler-Furmann O, Murphy P, Schonbrun J, Strauss CEM, Baker D. Rosetta predictions in CASP5: successes, failures and prospects for complete automation. Proteins: Struct Func Bioinform 2003;53(Suppl. 6):457-468. (Pubitemid 37352204)
3. Venclovas Č, Zemla A, Fidelis K, Mould J. Assessment of progress over the casp experiments. Proteins: Struct Funct Bioinform 2003; 53(Suppl. 6):585-595.
4. Petrey D, Honig B. Protein structure prediction: inroads to biology. Mol Cell 2005;20:811-819. (Pubitemid 41814871)
5. Chivian D, Kim DE, Malmström L, Schonbrun J, Rohl C, Baker D. Prediction of CASP6 structures using automated robetta protocols. Proteins: Struct Funct Bioinform 2005;61(Suppl. 7):157-166. (Pubitemid 43069970)
6. Zhang Y, Arakaki AK, Skolnick J. TASSER: an automated method for the prediction of protein tertiary structure in CASP6. Proteins: Struct Funct Bioinform 2005;61(Suppl. 7):91-98. (Pubitemid 43069961)
7. Moult J. A decade of CASP: progress, bottleneck and prognosis in protein structure prediciton. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2005;15:285-289. (Pubitemid 40826447)
8. Kryshtafovych A, Venclovas Č, Fidelis K, Moult J. Progress over the first decade of casp experiments. Proteins: Struct Funct Bioinform 2005;61(Suppl. 7):225-236.
9. Hung L-H, Ngan S-C, Samudrala R. De novo protein structure prediction. In: Xu Y, Xu D, Liang J, editors. Computational methods for protein structure prediction and modeling, Vol.2. New York: Springer; 2007. pp. 43-64.
10. Bradley P, Misura KMS, Baker D. Toward high-resolution de novo structure prediction for small proteins. Science 2005;309:1868-1971. (Pubitemid 41325099)
11. Levinthal C. Are there pathways for protein folding? J de Chim Phys 1968;65:44-45.
12. Metropolis N, Ulam S. The monte carlo method. J Am Stat Associ 1949;44:335-341.
13. Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt CD, Jr., Vecchi MP. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 1983;220:671-680.
14. Okamoto Y. Protein folding problem as studied by new simulation algorithms. Rec Res Dev Pure Appl Chem 1998;1:1-22.
15. Li Z, Scheraga HA. Monte carlominimization approach to the multiple- minima problem in protein folding. Proc Nati Acad Sci 1987; 84:6611-6615.
16. Wales D, Doye J. Global optimization by basin-hopping and the lowest energy structures of lennard-jones clusters containing up to 110 atoms. J Phys Chem A 1997;101:5111-5116. (Pubitemid 127578169)
17. Frantz DD, Freeman DL, Doll JD. Reducing quasi-ergodic behavior in Monte Carlo simulations by J-walking: applications to atomic clusters. J Chem Phys 1990;93:2769-2784.
18. Xu H, Berne BJ. Multicanonical jump walking: a method for efficiently sampling rough energy landscapes. J Chem Phys 1999;110: 10299-10306.
19. Swendsen RH, Wang J-S. Replica Monte Carlo simulation of spinglasses. Phys Rev Lett 1986;57:2607-2609.
20. Peila J, Kostrowicki J, Scheraga HA. The multiple-minima problem in the conformational analysis of molecules. Deformation of the potential energy hypersurface by the diffusion equation method. J Phys Chem B 1989;93:263-287. (Pubitemid 19133458)
21. Zhang Y, Kihara D, Skolnick J. Local energy landscape flattening: parallel hyperbolic Monte Carlo sampling of protein folding. Proteins: Struct Func Genet 2002;48:192-201. (Pubitemid 34743409)
22. Pappu RV, Hart RK, Ponder JW. Analysis and application of potential energy smoothing and search methods for global optimization. J Phys Chem B 1998;102:9725-9742. (Pubitemid 128591379)
23. Hart RK, Pappu RV, Ponder J. Exploring the similarities between potential smoothing and simulated annealing. J Comput Chem 2000; 21:531-552.
24. Rohl CA, Strauss CEM, Misura KMS, Baker D. Protein structure prediction using Rosetta. Meth Enzymo 2004;383:66-93. (Pubitemid 38401787)
25. Holland JH. Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. Ann Arbor, USA: The University of Michigan Press; 1975.
26. Glover F, Laguna F. Tabu search. New York; Kluwer: 1997.
27. Ulrich HE, Hansmann LTW. Global optimization by energy landscape paving. PRL 2002;88:068105.
28. Paluszewski M, Hamelryck T, Winter P. Reconstructing protein structure from solvent exposure using tabu search. Algorithms Mole Biol 2006;1:1-14. (Pubitemid 46736700)
29. Lee J, Scheraga HA, Rackovsky S. New optimization method for conformational energy calculations of polypeptides: conformational space annealing. J Comput Chem 1997;18:1222-1232. (Pubitemid 127650577)
30. Pillardy J, Czaplewski C, Wedemeyer WJ, Scheraga HA. Conformation- family monte carlo (CFMC): an efficient computational method for identifying the low-energy states of a macromolecule. Helvet Chim Acta 2000;83:2214-2230. (Pubitemid 30784641)
31. Russell S, Norvig P. Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. 2nd ed. New York: Prentice Hall; 2002.
32. Boyan JA. Learning evaluation functions for global optimization. Technical Report CMU-CS-98-152, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 1998.
33. Bonet JSD, Isbell CL, Jr., Viola P. MIMIC: fining optima by estimating probability densities. In: Mozer MC, Jordan MI, Petsche T, editors. Advances in neural information processing systems, Vol.9. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1997. p 424.
34. MacKay D. Information-based objective functions for active data selection. Neural Comput 1992;4:590-604.
35. Cohn DA, Ghahramani Z, Jordan MI. Active learning with statistical models. J Artif Intellig Res 1996;4:129-145.
36. Bonneau R, Strauss CEM, Rohl CA, Chivian D, Bradley P, Malmström L, Robertson T, Baker D. De novo prediction of three-dimensional structures for major protein families. J Mol Biol 2002;322:65-78. (Pubitemid 36132671)
37. Zhang Y, Skolnick J. SPICKER: a clustering approach to identify near-native protein folds. J Comput Chem 2004;25:865-871.
38. Moult J, Hubbard T, Fidelis K, Pedersen JT. Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP): round III. Proteins: Struct Funct Genet 1999;37(Suppl. 3):2-6. (Pubitemid 29463509)
39. Moult J, Fidelis K, Zemla A, Hubbard T. Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP): round IV. Proteins: Struct Funct Bioinform 2001;45(Suppl. 5):2-7. (Pubitemid 34113162)
40. Moult J, Fidelis K, Zemla A, Hubbard T. Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP)-Round V. Proteins: Struct Funct Genet 2003;53(Suppl. 6):334-339. (Pubitemid 37352192)
41. Zemla A. LGA: a method for finding 3D similarities in protein structure. Nucleic Acids Res 2003;31:3370-3374. (Pubitemid 37442162)
42. Kabsch W, Sander C. Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers 1983;22:2577-2637.