Hidden conformations in protein structures

Bioinformatics

Volumn 27, Issue 14, 2011, Pages 1941-1947

  Ashkenazy, Haim ^a,b,c   Unger, Ron ^b   Kliger, Yossef ^a  

^a Compugen LTD ^*  (Israel)

^b BAR ILAN UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^c TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CALMODULIN; PROTEIN;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BIOLOGY; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; FORECASTING; METHODOLOGY; PROTEIN CONFORMATION;

ALGORITHMS; CALMODULIN; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; FORECASTING; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEINS;

EID: 79960142753     PISSN: 13674803     EISSN: 14602059     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr292     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Akke,M. and Chazin,W.J. (2001) An open and shut case. Nat. Struct. Biol., 8, 910-912.
2. Armougom,F. et al. (2006) Expresso: automatic incorporation of structural information in multiple sequence alignments using 3D-Coffee. Nucleic Acids Res., 34, W604-W608.
3. Ashkenazy,H. and Kliger,Y. (2010) Reducing phylogenetic bias in correlated mutation analysis. Protein Eng. Des. Sel., 23, 321-326.
4. Ashkenazy,H. et al. (2009) Optimal data collection for correlated mutation analysis. Proteins, 74, 545-555.
5. Baú,D. et al. (2006) Distill: a suite of web servers for the prediction of one-, two- and three-dimensional structural features of proteins. BMC Bioinformatics, 7, 402.
6. Berman,H.M. et al. (2000) The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res., 28, 235-242.
7. Boehr,D.D. et al. (2006) An NMR perspective on enzyme dynamics. Chem. Rev., 106, 3055-3079.
8. Boehr,D.D. and Wright,P.E. (2008) Biochemistry. How do proteins interact? Science, 320, 1429-1430.
9. Bonanno,J.B. et al. (2005) New York-Structural GenomiX Research Consortium (NYSGXRC): a large scale center for the protein structure initiative. J. Struct. Funct. Genomics, 6, 225-232.
10. Bordoli,L. et al. (2009) Protein structure homology modeling using SWISS-MODEL workspace. Nat. Protoc., 4, 1-13.
11. Burley,S.K. et al. (2008) Contributions to the NIH-NIGMS Protein Structure Initiative from the PSI Production Centers. Structure, 16, 5-11.
12. Bywater,R. (2010) Solving the protein folding problems. Available from Nature Precedings. Availabe at http://hdl.handle.net/10101/npre.2010.4730.1.
13. Chandonia,J.M. and Brenner,S.E. (2006) The impact of structural genomics: expectations and outcomes. Science, 311, 347-351.
14. Cheng,J. (2008) A multi-template combination algorithm for protein comparative modeling. BMC Struct. Biol., 8, 18.
15. Cheng,J. and Baldi,P. (2005) Three-stage prediction of protein beta-sheets by neural networks, alignments and graph algorithms. Bioinformatics, 21 (Suppl. 1), i75-i84.
16. Cheng,J. and Baldi,P. (2006) A machine learning information retrieval approach to protein fold recognition. Bioinformatics, 22, 1456-1463.
17. Cheng,J. and Baldi,P. (2007) Improved residue contact prediction using support vector machines and a large feature set. BMC Bioinformatics, 8, 113.
18. Chou,J.J. et al. (2001) Solution structure of Ca(2+)-calmodulin reveals flexible handlike properties of its domains. Nat. Struct. Biol., 8, 990-997.
19. Dan,A. et al. (2010) Large-scale analysis of secondary structure changes in proteins suggests a role for disorder-to-order transitions in nucleotide binding proteins. Proteins, 78, 236-248.
20. Debe,D.A. et al. (2006) STRUCTFAST: protein sequence remote homology detection and alignment using novel dynamic programming and profile-profile scoring. Proteins, 64, 960-967.
21. Dekker,J.P. et al. (2004)Aperturbation-based method for calculating explicit likelihood of evolutionary co-variance in multiple sequence alignments. Bioinformatics, 20, 1565-1572.
22. Di Lena,P. et al. (2009) On the reconstruction of three-dimensional protein structures from contact maps. Algorithms, 2, 76.
23. Dunn,S.D. et al. (2008) Mutual information without the influence of phylogeny or entropy dramatically improves residue contact prediction. Bioinformatics, 24, 333-340.
24. Dutheil,J. et al. (2005) A model-based approach for detecting coevolving positions in a molecule. Mol. Biol. Evol., 22, 1919-1928.
25. Eswar,N. et al. (2006) Comparative protein structure modeling using Modeller. Curr. Protoc. Bioinformatics, Chapter 5, Unit 5 6.
26. Eyal,E. et al. (2007) A pair-to-pair amino acids substitution matrix and its applications for protein structure prediction. Proteins, 67, 142-153.
27. Ezkurdia,I. et al. (2009) Assessment of domain boundary predictions and the prediction of intramolecular contacts in CASP8. Proteins, 77 (Suppl. 9), 196-209.
28. Fariselli,P. et al. (2001) Progress in predicting inter-residue contacts of proteins with neural networks and correlated mutations. Proteins, 45 (Suppl. 5), 157-162.
29. Fleishman,S.J. et al. (2004) An evolutionarily conserved network of amino acids mediates gating in voltage-dependent potassium channels. J. Mol. Biol., 340, 307-318.
30. Flores,S. et al. (2006) The Database of Macromolecular Motions: new features added at the decade mark. Nucleic Acids Res., 34, D296-D301.
31. Gao,X. et al. (2009) Improving consensus contact prediction via server correlation reduction. BMC Struct. Biol., 9, 28.
32. Ginalski,K. et al. (2003) ORFeus: detection of distant homology using sequence profiles and predicted secondary structure. Nucleic Acids Res., 31, 3804-3807.
33. Gobel,U. et al. (1994) Correlated mutations and residue contacts in proteins. Proteins, 18, 309-317.
34. Grana,O. et al. (2005) CASP6 assessment of contact prediction. Proteins, 61 (Suppl. 7), 214-224.
35. Guo,Q. et al. (2004) Structural and kinetic analyses of the interaction of anthrax adenylyl cyclase toxin with reaction products cAMP and pyrophosphate. J. Biol. Chem., 279, 29427-29435.
36. Holm,L. and Sander,C. (1993) Protein structure comparison by alignment of distance matrices. J. Mol. Biol., 233, 123-138.
37. Horner,D.S. et al. (2008) Correlated substitution analysis and the prediction of amino acid structural contacts. Brief Bioinform., 9, 46-56.
38. Izarzugaza,J.M. et al. (2007) Assessment of intramolecular contact predictions for CASP7. Proteins, 69, 152-158.
39. Jaroszewski,L. et al. (2005) FFAS03: a server for profile-profile sequence alignments. Nucleic Acids Res., 33, W284-W288.
40. Karplus,K. et al. (1998) Hidden Markov models for detecting remote protein homologies. Bioinformatics, 14, 846-856.
41. Kass,I. and Horovitz,A. (2002) Mapping pathways of allosteric communication in GroEL by analysis of correlated mutations. Proteins, 48, 611-617.
42. Katoh,K. et al. (2005) MAFFTversion 5: improvement in accuracy of multiple sequence alignment. Nucleic Acids Res., 33, 511-518.
43. Katoh,K. et al. (2002) MAFFT: a novel method for rapid multiple sequence alignment based on fast Fourier transform. Nucleic Acids Res., 30, 3059-3066.
44. Katoh,K. and Toh,H. (2008) Recent developments in the MAFFT multiple sequence alignment program. Brief Bioinform., 9, 286-298.
45. Kliger,Y. (2010) Computational approaches to therapeutic peptide discovery. Biopolymers, 94, 701-710.
46. Kliger,Y. et al. (2009) Peptides modulating conformational changes in secreted chaperones: from in silico design to preclinical proof of concept. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 106, 13797-13801.
47. Kopp,J. et al. (2007) Assessment of CASP7 predictions for template-based modeling targets. Proteins, 69 (Suppl. 8), 38-56.
48. Kosloff,M. and Kolodny,R. (2008) Sequence-similar, structure-dissimilar protein pairs in the PDB. Proteins, 71, 891-902.
49. Krebs,W.G. and Gerstein,M. (2000) The morph server: a standardized system for analyzing and visualizing macromolecular motions in a database framework. Nucleic Acids Res., 28, 1665-1675.
50. Lange,O.F. et al. (2008) Recognition dynamics up to microseconds revealed from an RDC-derived ubiquitin ensemble in solution. Science, 320, 1471-1475.
51. Larsson,P. et al. (2008) Using multiple templates to improve quality of homology models in automated homology modeling. Protein Sci., 17, 990-1002.
52. Latek,D. and Kolinski,A. (2008) Contact prediction in protein modeling: scoring, folding and refinement of coarse-grained models. BMC Struct. Biol., 8, 36.
53. Levitt,M. (2007) Growth of novel protein structural data. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 104, 3183-3188.
54. Martin,L.C. et al. (2005) Using information theory to search for co-evolving residues in proteins. Bioinformatics, 21, 4116-4124.
55. Michino,M. and Brooks,C.L. III. (2009) Predicting structurally conserved contacts for homologous proteins using sequence conservation filters. Proteins, 77, 448-453.
56. Miller,C.S. and Eisenberg,D. (2008) Using inferred residue contacts to distinguish between correct and incorrect protein models. Bioinformatics, 24, 1575-1582.
57. Misura,K.M. et al. (2006) Physically realistic homology models built with ROSETTA can be more accurate than their templates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 103, 5361-5366.
58. Moult,J. et al. (2009) Critical assessment of methods of protein structure predictio-round VIII. Proteins, 77 (Suppl. 9), 1-4.
59. Nair,R. et al. (2009) Structural genomics is the largest contributor of novel structural leverage. J. Struct. Funct. Genomics, 10, 181-191.
60. Ninio,M. et al. (2007) Phylogeny reconstruction: increasing the accuracy of pairwise distance estimation using Bayesian inference of evolutionary rates. Bioinformatics, 23, e136-e141.
61. O'Sullivan,O. et al. (2004) 3DCoffee: combining protein sequences and structures within multiple sequence alignments. J. Mol. Biol., 340, 385-395.
62. Olmea,O. and Valencia,A. (1997) Improving contact predictions by the combination of correlated mutations and other sources of sequence information. Fold Des., 2, S25-S32.
63. Ortiz,A.R. et al. (2002) MAMMOTH (matching molecular models obtained from theory): an automated method for model comparison. Protein Sci., 11, 2606-2621.
64. Paluszewski,M. and Karplus,K. (2009) Model quality assessment using distance constraints from alignments. Proteins, 75, 540-549.
65. Pollastri,G. et al. (2007) Distill: a machine learning approach to ab initio protein structure prediction. In Bandyopadhyay,S. et al. (eds), World Scientific, pp. 153-183.
66. Porto,M. et al. (2004) Reconstruction of protein structures from a vectorial representation. Phys. Rev. Lett., 92, 218101.
67. Punta,M. and Rost,B. (2005) PROFcon: novel prediction of long-range contacts. Bioinformatics, 21, 2960-2968.
68. Rychlewski,L. et al. (2000) Comparison of sequence profiles. Strategies for structural predictions using sequence information. Protein Sci., 9, 232-241.
69. Sali,A. and Blundell,T.L. (1993) Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. J. Mol. Biol., 234, 779-815.
70. Sathyapriya,R. et al. (2009) Defining an essence of structure determining residue contacts in proteins. PLoS Comput. Biol., 5, e1000584.
71. Shackelford,G. and Karplus,K. (2007) Contact prediction using mutual information and neural nets. Proteins, 69 (Suppl. 8), 159-164.
72. Shen,Y. et al. (2004) Structure of anthrax edema factor-calmodulin-adenosine 5′-(alpha,beta-methylene)-triphosphate complex reveals an alternative mode ofATP binding to the catalytic site. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 317, 309-314.
73. Sobolev,V. et al. (1999) Automated analysis of interatomic contacts in proteins. Bioinformatics, 15, 327-332.
74. Soding,J. (2005) Protein homology detection by HMM-HMM comparison. Bioinformatics, 21, 951-960.
75. Stajich,J.E. et al. (2002) The Bioperl toolkit: Perl modules for the life sciences. Genome Res., 12, 1611-1618.
76. Stehr,B.H. and Lappe,M. (2008) Prediction of native contacts, 3D structures and model quality using consensus contacts. In 8th CommunityWide Experiment on the Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction, Abstracts, pp. 108-109.
77. Tegge,A.N. et al. (2009) NNcon: improved protein contact map prediction using 2D-recursive neural networks. Nucleic Acids Res., 37, W515-W518.
78. Tokuriki,N. and Tawfik,D.S. (2009) Protein dynamism and evolvability. Science, 324, 203-207.
79. Tress,M.L. et al. (2009) Target domain definition and classification in CASP8. Proteins, 77 (Suppl. 9), 10-17.
80. Tress,M.L. and Valencia,A. (2010) Predicted residue-residue contacts can help the scoring of 3D models. Proteins, 78, 1980-1991.
81. Vassura,M. et al. (2007) Fault tolerance for large scale protein 3D reconstruction from contact maps. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., 4645, 25.
82. Vassura,M. et al. (2008a) FT-COMAR: fault tolerant three-dimensional structure reconstruction from protein contact maps. Bioinformatics, 24, 1313.
83. Vassura,M. et al. (2008b) Reconstruction of 3D structures from protein contact maps. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinformatics, 5, 357-367.
84. Vendruscolo,M. and Domany,E. (2000) Protein folding using contact maps. Vitam. Horm., 58, 171-212.
85. Vendruscolo,M. et al. (1997) Recovery of protein structure from contact maps. Fold Des., 2, 295-306.
86. Walsh,I. et al. (2009) Ab initio and template-based prediction of multi-class distance maps by two-dimensional recursive neural networks. BMC Struct. Biol., 9, 5.
87. Wu,S. and Zhang,Y. (2007) LOMETS: a local meta-threading-server for protein structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res., 35, 3375-3382.
88. Wu,S. and Zhang,Y. (2008a) A comprehensive assessment of sequence-based and template-based methods for protein contact prediction. Bioinformatics, 24, 924-931.
89. Wu,S. and Zhang,Y. (2008b) MUSTER: Improving protein sequence profile-profile alignments by using multiple sources of structure information. Proteins, 72, 547-556.
90. Wu,S. and Zhang,Y. (2008c) Protein residue contact prediction by SVMSEQ and LOMETS servers. In 8th Community Wide Experiment on the Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction, Abstracts, pp. 114-115.
91. Zaki,M. (2003) Mining data in Bioinformatics. In Handbook of Data Mining. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 573-597.
92. Zemla,A. (2003) LGA: amethod for finding 3D similarities in protein structures. Nucleic Acids Res., 31, 3370-3374.
93. Zhang,Y. et al. (2007) Between order and disorder in protein structures: analysis of ′dual personality' fragments in proteins. Structure, 15, 1141-1147.