Distance-dependent atomic knowledge-based force in protein fold recognition

Proteins: Structure, Function and Bioinformatics

Volumn 80, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 683-690

  Mirzaie, Mehdi ^a,b   Sadeghi, Mehdi ^c  

^a SHAHID BEHESHTI UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^b INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH IN FUNDAMENTAL SCIENCES IPM   (Iran)

^c NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENETIC ENGINEERING AND BIOTECHNOLOGY   (Iran)

Author keywords

3D structure; Decoy set; Interatomic force; Knowledge based potential; Score function

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATOM; ENERGY; FORCE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; KNOWLEDGE BASES; MODELS, CHEMICAL; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEINS; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 84856778743     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: 10970134     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.24011     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Anfisen CB. Principles that govern folding of protein chains. Science 1973; 181: 223-230.
2. Weiner SJ, Kollman PA, Case DA, Singh UC, Ghio C, Alagona G, Profeta S, Weiner P. A new force field for molecular mechanical simulation of nucleic acids and proteins. J Am Chem Soc 1984; 106: 765-784.
3. Weiner SJ, Kollman PA, Nguyen DT, Case DA. An all atom force-field for simulations of proteins and nucleic-acids. J Comput Chem 1986; 7: 230-252.
4. Hornak V, Abel R, Okur A, Strockbine B, Roitberg A, Simmerling C. Comparison of multiple amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters. Proteins 2006; 65: 712-725.
5. Brooks BR, Bruccoleri RE, Olafson BD, States DJ, Swaminathan S, Karplus M. CHARMM: a program for macromolecular energy, minimization and dynamics calculations. J Comp Chem 1983; 4: 187-217.
6. Scott WRP, Hunenberger PH, Tironi IG, Mark AE, Billeter SR, Fennen J, Torda AE, Huber T, Krüger P, van Gunsteren WF. The GROMOS bio molecular simulation program package. Phys Chem 1999; 103: 3596-3607.
7. Jorgensen WL, Maxwell DS, Tirado-Rives J. Development and testing of the OPLS all-atom force field on conformational energetics and properties of organic liquids. J Am Chem Soc 1996; 118: 11225-11236.
8. Mirzaie M, Sadeghi M. Knowledge-based potentials in protein fold recognition. J Paramed Sci 2010; 1: 65-75.
9. Miyazawa S, Jernigan RL. Estimation of effective interresidue contact energies from protein crystal structures: quasi-chemical approximation. Macromole 1985; 18: 534-552.
10. McConkey BJ, Sobolev V, Edelman M. Discrimination of native protein structures using atom-atom contact scoring. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100: 3215.
11. Pokarowski P, Kloczkowski A, Jernigan RL, Kothari NS, Pokarowska M, Kolinski A. Inferring ideal amino acid interaction forms from statistical protein contact potentials. Proteins 2005; 59: 49.
12. Zhang C, Kim SH. Environment-dependent residue contact energies for proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000; 97: 2550.
13. Solis AD, Rackovsky S. Information and discrimination in pairwise contact potentials. Proteins 2008; 71: 1071-1087.
14. Sippl MJ. Boltzmann's principle, knowledge based mean force and protein folding. An approach to the computational determination of protein structures. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1993; 7: 473-501.
15. Melo F, Feytmans E. Assessing protein structures with nonlocal atomic interaction energy. J Mol Biol 1998; 277: 1141-1152.
16. Sippl MJ. Calculation of conformational ensembles from potentials of mean force: an approach to the knowledge-based prediction of local structures in globular proteins. J Mol Biol 1990; 213: 859-883.
17. Tobi D, Elber R. Distance dependent, pair potential for protein folding: results from linear optimization. Proteins 2000; 41: 40-56.
18. Jones DT, Taylor WR, Thornton JM. A new approach to protein fold recognition. Nature 1992; 358: 86-89.
19. Samudrala R, Moult J. An all atom distance dependent conditional probability discriminatory function for protein structure prediction. J Mol Biol 1998; 275: 895-916.
20. Lu H, Skolnick J. A distance dependent atomic knowledge based potential for improved protein structure selection. Proteins 2001; 44: 223-232.
21. Melo F, Feytmans E. Novel knowledge-based mean force potential at atomic level. J Mol Biol 1997; 267: 207.
22. Zhou H, Zhou Y. Distance-scaled, finite ideal-gas reference state improves structure derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction. Protein Sci 2002; 11: 2714-2726.
23. Chi Zhang, Song Liu, Hongyi Zhou, Yaoqi Zhou. An accurate, residue-level, pair potential of mean force for folding and binding based on the distance-scaled, ideal-gas reference state. Protein Sci 2004; 13: 400-411.
24. Shen M, Sali A. Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures. Protein Sci 2006; 15: 2407-2524.
25. Ferrada E, Vergara IA, Melo F. A knowledge-based potential with an accurate description of local interactions improves discrimination between native and near-native protein conformations. Cell Biochem Biophys 2007; 49: 111-124.
26. Mirzaie M, Eslahchi C, Pezeshk H, Sadeghi M. A distance dependent atomic knowledge based potential and force for discrimination of native structures from decoys. Proteins 2009; 77: 454-463.
27. Rooman MJ, Kocher JPA, Wodak SJ. Prediction of protein backbone conformation based on seven structure assignments. Influence of local interactions. J Mol Biol 1991; 211: 961-979.
28. Fang Q, Shortle D. A consistent set of statistical potentials for quantifying local side-chain and backbone interactions. Proteins 2005; 60: 90.
29. Pohl FM. Empirical protein energy maps. Nat New Biol 1971; 234: 277.
30. Bagci Z, Kloczkowski A, Jernigan RL, Bahar I. The origin and extent of coarse-grained regularities in protein internal packing. Proteins 2003; 53: 56-67.
31. Buchete NV, Straub JE, Thirumalai D. Orientational potentials extracted from protein structures improves native fold recognition. Protein Sci 2004; 13: 862.
32. Buchete NV, Straub JE, Thirumalai D. Continuous anisotropic representation of coarse-grained potentials for proteins by spherical harmonics synthesis. J Mol Graph Model 2004; 22: 441.
33. Mukherjee A, Bhimalapuram P, Bagchi B. Orientation-dependent potential of mean force for protein folding. J Chem Phys 2005; 123: 014901.
34. Misura KM, Morozov AV, Baker D. Analysis of anisotropic side-chain packing in proteins and application to high-resolution structure prediction. J Mol Biol 2004; 342: 651-664.
35. Miyazawa S, Jernigan RL. How effective for fold recognition is a potential of mean force that includes relative orientations between contacting residues in proteins? J Chem Phys 2005; 122: 024901.
36. Wu Y, Lu M, Chen M, Li J, Ma J. OPUS-Ca: a knowledge based potential function requiring only Calpha positions. Protein Sci 2007; 16: 1449-1463.
37. Sippl MJ. Knowledge-based potentials for proteins. Curr Opin Struct Biol 1995; 5: 229-235.
38. Covell DG. Folding protein alpha-carbon chains into compact forms by Monte Carlo methods. Proteins 1992; 14: 409-420.
39. Sun S. Reduced representation model of protein structure prediction: statistical potential and genetic algorithms. Protein Sci 1993; 2: 762-785.
40. Singh RK, Tropsha A, Vaisman II. Delaunay tessellation of proteins:Four body nearest neighbor propensities of amino acid residues. J Comput Biol 1996; 3: 213-221.
41. Munson PJ, Singh RK. Statistical significance of hierarchical multi body potentials based on Delaunay tessellation and their application insequence structure alignment. Protein Sci 1997; 6: 1467-1481.
42. Barber CB, Dobkin DP, Huhdanpaa H. The quickhull algorithm for convex hulls. ACM Trans Math Software 1996; 22: 469-483.
43. Lovell S, Davis I, Arnedall W, de Baker P, Word J, Prisant M, Richardson J, Richardson D. Structure validation by Cα geometry: φ{symbol}, ψ and Cβ deviation. Proteins 2003; 50: 437-450.
44. Ferrada E, Melo F. Nonbonded terms extrapolated from nonlocal knowledge-based energy functions improve error detection in near-native protein structure models. Protein Sci 2007; 16: 1410-1421.
45. Park B, Levitt M. Energy functions that discriminate X-ray and near native folds from well-constructed decoys. J Mol Biol 1996; 258: 367-392.
46. 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.
47. Simons KT, Ruczinski I, Kooperberg C, Fox B A, Bystroff C, Baker D. Improved recognition of native-like protein structures using a combination of sequence-dependent and sequence-independent features of proteins. Proteins 1999; 34: 82-95.
48. Xia Y, Huang ES, Levitt M, Samudrala R. Ab initio construction of protein tertiary structures using a hierarchical approach. J Mol Biol 2000; 300: 171-185.
49. Keasar C, Levitt M. A novel approach to decoy set generation: designing a physical energy function having local minima with native structure characteristics. J Mol Biol 2003; 329: 159-174.
50. John B, Sali A. Comparative protein structure mideling by iterative alighnment, model building and model assessment. Nucleic Acid Res 2003; 31: 3982-3992.
51. Das R, Qian B, Raman S, Vernon R, Thompson J, Bradley P, Khare S, Tyka MD, Bhat D, Chivian D, Kim DE, Sheffler WH, Malmström L, Wollacott AM, Wang C, Andre I, Baker D. Structure prediction for CABP7 targets using extensive all-atom refinement with Rosetta@home. Proteins 2007; 69: 118-128.
52. Wu S, Skolnick J, Zhang Y. Ab initio modeling of small proteins by iterative TASSER simulations. BMC Biol 2007; 5: 17.
53. Zhang J, Zhang Y. A novel side chain orientation dependent potential derived from random walk reference state for protein fold selection and structure prediction. PloS ONE 2010; 5: e15386.