Artefacts and biases affecting the evaluation of scoring functions on decoy sets for protein structure prediction

Bioinformatics

Volumn 25, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 1271-1279

  Handl, Julia ^a   Knowles, Joshua ^a   Lovell, Simon C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; CONTROLLED STUDY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SAMPLING ERROR; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL BIOINFORMATICS; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS;

ARTIFACTS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; DATABASES, PROTEIN; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEINS;

EID: 65549163966     PISSN: 13674803     EISSN: 14602059     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp150     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Bonneau,R. et al. (2001) Rosetta in CASP4: Progress in ab initio protein structure prediction. Proteins, S5, 119-126.
2. Eramian,D. et al. (2006) A composite score for predicting errors in protein structure models. Protein Sci., 15, 1653-1666.
3. Fogolari,F. et al. (2005) A decoy set for the thermostable subdomain from chicken villin headpiece. Comparison of different free energy estimators. BMC Bioinformatics, 6, 301.
4. Fujitsuka,Y. et al. (2004) Optimizing physical energy functions for protein folding. Proteins, 55, 88-103.
5. Ginalski,K. et al. (2003) 3D-Jury: A simple approach to improve protein structure prediction. Bioinformatics, 19, 1015-1018.
6. Grossfield,A. et al. (2007) Convergence of molecular dynamics simulations of membrane proteins. Proteins, 67, 31-40.
7. Hess,B. (2002) Convergence and sampling in protein simulations. Phys. Rev. E, 65, 031910.
8. Hsieh,M.J. and Luo,R. (2004) Physical scoring function based on AMBER force field and Poisson-Boltzmann implicit solvent for protein structure prediction. Proteins, 56, 475-486.
9. Hu,C. et al. (2004) Developing optimal non-linear scoring function for protein design. Bioinformatics, 20.
10. Jacobson,M.P. et al. (2004) A hierarchical approach to all-atom protein loop prediction. Proteins, 55, 351-367.
11. Jiang,Z. et al. (2003) How well can we predict native contacts in proteins based on decoy structures and their energies? Proteins, 52, 598-608.
12. Keasar,C. and Levitt,M. (2003) A novel approach to decoy set generation: designing a physical energy function having local minima with native structure characteristics. J. Mol. Biol., 329, 159-174.
13. Krishnamoorthy,B. and Tropsha,A. (2003) Development of a four-body statistical pseudo-potential to discriminate native from non-native protein conformations. Bioinformatics, 19, 1540-1548.
14. Laskowski,RA. et al. (1993) Procheck: A program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures. J. Appl. Cryst., 26, 283-291.
15. 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.
16. Lee,M.C. and Duan,Y. (2004) Distinguish protein decoys by using a scoring function based on a new AMBER force field, short molecular dynamics simulations, and the generalized born solvent model. Proteins, 55, 620-634.
17. Li,X. and Liang,J. (2007) Knowledge-based energy functions for computational studies of proteins. In Xu,Y. et al. (eds), Computational Methods for Protein Structure Prediction and Modeling, Volume 1: Basic Characterization. Biological and Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering. Springer, New York, NY.
18. Likic,V.A. et al. (2005) A statistical approach to the interpretation of molecular dynamics simulations of calmodulin equilibrium dynamics. Protein Sci., 14, 2955-2963.
19. Lu,H. and Skolnick,J. (2001) A distance-dependent atomic knowledge-based potential for improved protein structure selection. Proteins, 44, 223-232.
20. Lundstrom,J. et al. (2001) Peons: A neural-network-based consensus predictor that improves fold recognition. Protein Sci., 10, 2354-2362.
21. Luthy,R. et al. (1992) Assessment of protein models with three-dimensional profiles. Nature, 356, 83-85.
22. Lyman,E. and Zuckerman,D.M. (2007) On the structural convergence of biomolecular simulations by determination of effective sample size. J. Phys. Chem. B, 111, 12876-12882.
23. McConkey,BJ et al. (2003) Discrimination of native protein structures using atom-atom contact scoring. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 3215-3220.
24. McGuffin,L.J. (2007) Benchmarking consensus model quality assessment for protein fold recognition. BMC Bioinformatics, 8, 345.
25. Moult,J. et al. (2007) Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction - round VII. Proteins, 69, 3-9.
26. Paluszewski,M. and Karplus,K. (2008) Model quality assessment using distance constraints from alignments. Proteins, 75, 540-549.
27. 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.
28. Pettitt,C. et al. (2005) Improving sequence-based fold recognition by using 3D model quality assessment. Bioinformatics, 21, 3509-3515.
29. Ponder,J.W. (2004) TINKER: Software tools for molecular design 4.2. Available at http://dasher.wustl.edu/tinker/ (last accessed date October 15, 2008).
30. Samudrala,R. and Levitt,M. (2000) Decoys 'R' Us: A database of incorrect protein conformations to improve protein structure prediction. Protein Sci., 9, 1399-1401.
31. Shortle,D. et al. (1998) Clustering of low-energy conformations near the native structures of small proteins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 95, 11158-11162.
32. Simons,K. et al. (1997) Assembly of protein tertiary structures from fragments with similar local sequences using simulated annealing and Bayesian scoring functions. J. Mol. Biol., 268, 209-225.
33. Steuer,R. (1986) Multiple Criteria Optimization, Theory, Computation, and Application. Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics: Applied Probability and Statistics. Wiley, New York.
34. Tress,M.L. et al. (2003) Predicting reliable regions in protein alignments from sequence profiles. J. Mol. Biol., 330, 705-718.
35. Tsai,J. et al. (2003) An improved protein decoy set for testing energy functions for protein structure prediction. Proteins, 53 76-87.
36. Verma,A. and Wenzel,W. (2007) Protein structure prediction by all-atom free-energy refinement. BMC Struct. Biol., 7, 12.
37. Wang,K. et al. (2004) Improved protein structure selection using decoy-dependent discriminatory functions. BMC Struct. Biol., 4 8.
38. Wang,Y. et al. (1995) Discriminating compact nonnative structures from the native structure of globular proteins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 92, 709-713.
39. Wroblewska,L. and Skolnick,J. (2007) Can a physics-based, all-atom potential find a protein's native structure among misfolded structures? - large scale AMBER benchmarking. J. Comp. Chem., 28, 2059-2066.
40. Yang,J.M. and Chen,C.C. (2004) GEMDOCK: A generic evolutionary method for molecular docking. Proteins, 55, 288-304.
41. Zemla,A. (2003) LGA: A method for finding 3D similarities in protein structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res., 31, 3370-3374.
42. Zhang,C. et al. (2004) An accurate, residue-level, pair potential of mean force for folding and binding based on the distance-scaled, ideal-gas reference state. Protein Sci., 13, 400-411.