Improving threading algorithms for remote homology modeling by combining fragment and template comparisons

Proteins: Structure, Function and Bioinformatics

Volumn 78, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 2041-2048

  Zhou, Hongyi ^a   Skolnick, Jeffrey ^a  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

PROSPECTOR; Protein structure prediction; Quality assessment prediction; SPARKS; Threading

Indexed keywords

PROTEIN;

AB INITIO CALCULATION; ALGORITHM; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; COMPUTER MODEL; FRAGMENT COMPARISON AND TEMPLATE COMPARISON; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MOLECULAR MODEL; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN QUALITY; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SCORING SYSTEM; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS; BIOLOGY; CHEMISTRY; PROCEDURES; PROTEIN DATABASE; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; DATABASES, PROTEIN; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PROTEINS; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, PROTEIN; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY, AMINO ACID;

EID: 77953581940     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: 10970134     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.22717     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Baker D, Sali A. Protein structure prediction and structural genomics. Science 2001; 294: 93-96. (Pubitemid 32952955)
2. Skolnick J, Fetrow J, Kolinski A. Structural genomics and its importance for gene function analysis. Nat Biotechnol 2000; 18: 283-287. (Pubitemid 30159478)
3. Wang G, Jin Y, Dunbrack RJ. Assessment of fold recognition predictions in CASP6. Proteins 2005;61(Suppl. 7): 46-66. (Pubitemid 43069958)
4. Kopp J, Bordoli L, Battey JN, Kiefer F, Schwede T. Assessment of CASP7 predictions for template-based modeling targets. Proteins 2007; 69: 38-56. (Pubitemid 350210112)
5. Godzik A. Fold recognition methods. Methods Biochem Anal 2003; 44: 525-546.
6. Zhou H, Zhou Y. Single-body residue-level knowledge-based energy score combined with sequence-profile and secondary structure information for fold recognition. Proteins 2004; 55: 1005-1013. (Pubitemid 38702957)
7. Zhou H, Zhou Y. Fold recognition by combining sequence profiles derived from evolution and from depth-dependent structural alignment of fragments. Proteins 2005; 58: 321-328. (Pubitemid 40076048)
8. Skolnick J, Kihara D, Zhang Y. Development and large scale benchmark testing of the PROSPECTOR 3.0 threading algorithm. Proteins 2004; 56: 502-518. (Pubitemid 38924963)
9. Karplus K, Barrett C, Hughey R. Hidden markov models for detecting remote protein homologies. Bioinformatics 1998; 14: 846-856. (Pubitemid 29041540)
10. Jones DT. GenTHREADER: an efficient and reliable protein fold recognition method for genomic sequences. J Mol Biol 1999; 287: 797-815.
11. Xu Y, Xu D, Olman V. A practical method for interpretation of threading scores: an application of neural networks. Stat Sin Spec Issue Bioinformatics 2002; 12: 159-177.
12. Xu J, Li M, Kim D, Xu Y. RAPTOR: optimal protein threading by linear programming. J Bioinformatics Comput Biol 2003; 1: 95-117.
13. Xu J. Fold recognition by predicted alignment accuracy. IEEE/ACM Trans comput Biol Bioinformatics 2005; 2: 157-165. (Pubitemid 41049916)
14. Cheng J, Baldi P. A machining learning information retrieval approach to protein fold recognition. Bioinformatics 2006; 22: 1456-1463. (Pubitemid 43985316)
15. Ginalski K, Elofsson A, Fischer D, Rychlewski L. 3D-jury: a simple approach to improve protein structure predictions. Bioinformatics 2003; 19: 1015-1018. (Pubitemid 36675823)
16. Fischer D. 3D-SHOTGUN: a novel, cooperative, fold-recognition meta-predictor. Proteins 2003; 51: 434-441.
17. Wallner B, Elofsson A. Identification of correct regions in protein models using structural, alignment, and consensus information. Protein Sci 2005; 15: 900-913.
18. Wallner B, Fang H, Elosson A. Automatic consensus-based fold recognition using Pcons. Pro Q, and Pmodeller. Proteins: Struct Funct Genet Suppl 2003; 6: 534-541.
19. Lundsröm J, Rychlewski L, Bunnicki J, Elofsson A. Pcons: a neuralnetwork-based consensus predictor that improves fold recognition. Protein Sci 2001; 10: 2354-2362. (Pubitemid 32988651)
20. Wang Z, Tegge A, Cheng J. Evaluating the absolute quality of a single protein model using structural features and support vector machines. Proteins 2009; 75: 638-647.
21. McGuffin L. ModFOLD server for the quality assessment of protein structural models. Bioinformatics 2008; 24: 586-587.
22. Eramian D, Shen MY, Devos D, Melo F, Sali A, Marti-Renom MA. A composite score for predicting errors in protein structure models. Protein Sci 2006; 15: 1653-1666.
23. Zhou H, Skolnick J. Protein model quality assessment prediction by combining fragment comparisons and a consensus Cα contact potential. Proteins 2007; 71: 1211-1218. (Pubitemid 351564047)
24. Paluszewski M, Karplus K. Model quality assessment using distance constraints from alignments. Proteins 2009; 75: 540-549.
25. Benkert P, Tosatto S, Schomburg D. QMEAN: a comprehensive scoring function for model quality assessment. Proteins 2008; 71: 261-277.
26. Cheng J, Wang Z, Tegge A, Eickholt J. Prediction of global and local quality of CASP8 models by MULTICOM series. Proteins 2009; 77(Suppl. 9): 181-184.
27. Zhang Y, Arakaki A, Skolnick J. TASSER: an automated method for the prediction of protein tertiary structures in CASP6. Proteins 2005; 61(Suppl. 7): 91-98.
28. Zhou H, Skolnick J. Ab initio protein structure prediction using chunk-TASSER. Biophys J 2007; 93: 1510-1518. (Pubitemid 47403296)
29. Simons KT, Strauss C, Baker D. Prospects for ab initio protein structural genomics. J Mol Biol 2001; 306: 1191-1199. (Pubitemid 33030014)
30. Zhou H, Skolnick J. Protein structure prediction by pro-sp3TASSER. Biophys J 2009; 96: 2119-2127.
31. Zhou H, Pandit S, Skolnick J. Performance of the Pro-sp3-TASSER server in CASP8. Proteins 2009; 77: 123-127.
32. Zhou H, Pandit SB, Lee S, Borreguerro J, Chen H, Wroblewska L, Skolnick J. Analysis of TASSER based CASP7 protein structure prediction results. Proteins 2007; 69(S8): 90-97.
33. Zhou H, Zhou Y. SPARKS 2 and SP3 servers in CASP6. Proteins 2005; 61(Suppl. 7): 152-156.
34. Zhang Y, Skolnick J. Automated structure prediction of weakly homologous proteins on genomic scale. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2004; 101: 7594-7599.
35. Misura KM, Chivian D, Rohl CA, Kim DE, Baker D. Physically realistic homology models built with ROSETTA can be more accurate than their templates. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2004; 103: 5361-6366.
36. Zhang Y, Skolnick J. A scoring function for the automated assessment of protein structure template quality. Proteins 2004; 57: 702-710.
37. Zhang Y, Skolnick J. TM-align: a protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score. Nucleic Acids Res 2005; 33: 2302-2309.
38. Sali A, Blundell TL. Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. J Mol Biol 1993; 234: 779-815.
39. 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.
40. Zhang Y, Skolnick J. SPICKER: a clustering approach to identify near-native protein fold. J Comput Chem 2004; 25: 865-871.