FunFOLD: An improved automated method for the prediction of ligand binding residues using 3D models of proteins

BMC Bioinformatics

Volumn 12, Issue , 2011, Pages

  Roche, Daniel B ^a   Tetchner, Stuart J ^a   McGuffin, Liam J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF READING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURATE PREDICTION; AUTOMATIC APPROACHES; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; FUNCTION PREDICTION; FUNCTIONAL ANNOTATION; LIGAND-BINDING RESIDUES; LIGAND-BINDING SITES; STRUCTURAL SUPERPOSITIONS;

AMINO ACIDS; AUTOMATION; FORECASTING; LIGANDS; PROTEINS;

SOFTWARE TESTING;

PROTEIN;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; BINDING SITE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTER PROGRAM; INTERNET; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY; STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGY;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; BINDING SITES; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; INTERNET; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEINS; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY, AMINO ACID; SOFTWARE; STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGY, PROTEIN;

EID: 79955892164     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-160     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Lopez G, Ezkurdia I, Tress ML. Assessment of ligand binding residue predictions in CASP8. Proteins 2009, 77(Suppl 9):138-146.
2. Schwede T, Sali A, Honig B, Levitt M, Berman HM, Jones D, Brenner SE, Burley SK, Das R, Dokholyan NV, et al. Outcome of a workshop on applications of protein models in biomedical research. Structure 2009, 17(2):151-159. 10.1016/j.str.2008.12.014, 2739730, 19217386.
3. Oh M, Joo K, Lee J. Protein-binding site prediction based on three-dimensional protein modeling. Proteins 2009, 77(Suppl 9):152-156.
4. Lopez G, Valencia A, Tress ML. firestar--prediction of functionally important residues using structural templates and alignment reliability. Nucleic Acids Res 2007, (35 Web Server):W573-577.
5. Talavera D, Laskowski RA, Thornton JM. WSsas: a web service for the annotation of functional residues through structural homologues. Bioinformatics 2009, 25(9):1192-1194. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp116, 19251774.
6. Fischer JD, Mayer CE, Soding J. Prediction of protein functional residues from sequence by probability density estimation. Bioinformatics 2008, 24(5):613-620. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm626, 18174181.
7. Wass MN, Sternberg MJ. ConFunc--functional annotation in the twilight zone. Bioinformatics 2008, 24(6):798-806. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn037, 18263643.
8. Ashkenazy H, Erez E, Martz E, Pupko T, Ben-Tal N. ConSurf 2010: calculating evolutionary conservation in sequence and structure of proteins and nucleic acids. Nucleic Acids Res 2010, 38 Suppl:W529-533.
9. Miguel RN. Sequence patterns derived from the automated prediction of functional residues in structurally-aligned homologous protein families. Bioinformatics 2004, 20(15):2380-2389. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bth255, 15073006.
10. Sankararaman S, Kolaczkowski B, Sjolander K. INTREPID: a web server for prediction of functionally important residues by evolutionary analysis. Nucleic Acids Res (37 Web Server):W390-395.
11. Brylinski M, Skolnick J. A threading-based method (FINDSITE) for ligand-binding site prediction and functional annotation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105(1):129-134. 10.1073/pnas.0707684105, 2224172, 18165317.
12. Brylinski M, Skolnick J. Comparison of structure-based and threading-based approaches to protein functional annotation. Proteins 2010, 78(1):118-134. 2804779, 19731377.
13. Hernandez M, Ghersi D, Sanchez R. SITEHOUND-web: a server for ligand binding site identification in protein structures. Nucleic Acids Res 2009, (37 Web Server):W413-416.
14. Laurie AT, Jackson RM. Q-SiteFinder: an energy-based method for the prediction of protein-ligand binding sites. Bioinformatics 2005, 21(9):1908-1916. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti315, 15701681.
15. Wass MN, Kelley LA, Sternberg MJ. 3DLigandSite: predicting ligand-binding sites using similar structures. Nucleic Acids Res 2010, 38 Suppl:W469-473.
16. Karypis G. YASSPP: better kernels and coding schemes lead to improvements in protein secondary structure prediction. Proteins 2006, 64(3):575-586. 10.1002/prot.21036, 16763996.
17. Sodhi JS, Bryson K, McGuffin LJ, Ward JJ, Wernisch L, Jones DT. Predicting metal-binding site residues in low-resolution structural models. J Mol Biol 2004, 342(1):307-320. 10.1016/j.jmb.2004.07.019, 15313626.
18. Huang B, Schroeder M. LIGSITEcsc: predicting ligand binding sites using the Connolly surface and degree of conservation. BMC Struct Biol 2006, 6:19. 10.1186/1472-6807-6-19, 1601958, 16995956.
19. Andersson CD, Chen BY, Linusson A. Mapping of ligand-binding cavities in proteins. Proteins 2010, 78(6):1408-1422. 2957484, 20034113.
20. Soro S, Tramontano A. The prediction of protein function at CASP6. Proteins 2005, 61(Suppl 7):201-213.
21. Lopez G, Rojas A, Tress M, Valencia A. Assessment of predictions submitted for the CASP7 function prediction category. Proteins 2007, 69(Suppl 8):165-174.
22. Wass MN, Sternberg MJ. Prediction of ligand binding sites using homologous structures and conservation at CASP8. Proteins 2009, 77(Suppl 9):147-151. 2814558, 19626715.
23. Ginalski K, Elofsson A, Fischer D, Rychlewski L. 3D-Jury: a simple approach to improve protein structure predictions. Bioinformatics 2003, 19(8):1015-1018. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg124, 12761065.
24. Kelley LA, Sternberg MJ. Protein structure prediction on the Web: a case study using the Phyre server. Nat Protoc 2009, 4(3):363-371. 10.1038/nprot.2009.2, 19247286.
25. Ortiz AR, Strauss CE, Olmea O. MAMMOTH (matching molecular models obtained from theory): an automated method for model comparison. Protein Sci 2002, 11(11):2606-2621. 2373724, 12381844.
26. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schaffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 1997, 25(17):3389-3402. 10.1093/nar/25.17.3389, 146917, 9254694.
27. CASP9 function prediction assessment. , http://www.predictioncenter.org/casp9/doc/presentations/CASP9_FN.pdf
28. McGuffin LJ, Roche DB. Rapid model quality assessment for protein structure predictions using the comparison of multiple models without structural alignments. Bioinformatics 2010, 26(2):182-188. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp629, 19897565.
29. Zhang Y, Skolnick J. TM-align: a protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score. Nucleic Acids Res 2005, 33(7):2302-2309. 10.1093/nar/gki524, 1084323, 15849316.
30. Lopez G, Valencia A, Tress M. FireDB--a database of functionally important residues from proteins of known structure. Nucleic Acids Res 2007, (35 Database):D219-223.
31. Xu J, Zhang Y. How significant is a protein structure similarity with TM-score = 0.5?. Bioinformatics 2010, 26(7):889-895. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq066, 2913670, 20164152.
32. CASP downloads. , http://predictioncenter.org/download_area/
33. Roche DB, Buenavista MT, Tetchner SJ, McGuffin LJ. The IntFOLD server: an integrated web resource for protein fold recognition, 3D model quality assessment, intrinsic disorder prediction, domain prediction and ligand binding site prediction. Nucleic Acids Res 2011,
34. Pearson WR, Lipman DJ. Improved tools for biological sequence comparison. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1988, 85(8):2444-2448. 10.1073/pnas.85.8.2444, 280013, 3162770.
35. Matthews BW. Comparison of the predicted and observed secondary structure of T4 phage lysozyme. Biochim Biophys Acta 1975, 405(2):442-451.
36. Roche DB, Tetchner SJ, McGuffin LJ. The binding site distance test score: a robust method for the assessment of predicted protein binding sites. Bioinformatics 2010, 26(22):2920-2921. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq543, 20861025.
37. McGuffin LJ. Prediction of global and local model quality in CASP8 using the ModFOLD server. Proteins 2009, 77(Suppl 9):185-190.
38. McGuffin LJ. Intrinsic disorder prediction from the analysis of multiple protein fold recognition models. Bioinformatics 2008, 24(16):1798-1804. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn326, 18579567.