i3Drefine Software for Protein 3D Structure Refinement and Its Assessment in CASP10

PLoS ONE

Volumn 8, Issue 7, 2013, Pages

  Bhattacharya, Debswapna ^a   Cheng, Jianlin ^a  

^a University of Missouri   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BIOMETRY; COMPUTER MODEL; COMPUTER PREDICTION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF PROTEIN STRUCTURE PREDICTION; HYDROGEN BOND; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ALGORITHMS; CASPASE 10; HUMANS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEINS; SOFTWARE; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 84880487307     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069648     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Kopp J, Bordoli L, Battey JND, Kiefer F, Schwede T, (2007) Assessment of CASP7 predictions for template-based modeling targets. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 69: 38-56.
2. Keedy DA, Williams CJ, Headd JJ, Arendall WB, Chen VB, et al. (2009) The other 90% of the protein: Assessment beyond the Cαs for CASP8 template-based and high-accuracy models. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 77: 29-49.
3. Mariani V, Kiefer F, Schmidt T, Haas J, Schwede T (2011) Assessment of template based protein structure predictions in CASP9. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics.
4. Cozzetto D, Kryshtafovych A, Fidelis K, Moult J, Rost B, et al. (2009) Evaluation of template-based models in CASP8 with standard measures. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 77: 18-28.
5. Jauch R, Yeo HC, Kolatkar PR, Clarke ND, (2007) Assessment of CASP7 structure predictions for template free targets. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 69: 57-67.
6. Ben-David M, Noivirt-Brik O, Paz A, Prilusky J, Sussman JL, et al. (2009) Assessment of CASP8 structure predictions for template free targets. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 77: 50-65.
7. Floudas C, Fung H, McAllister S, Mönnigmann M, Rajgaria R, (2006) Advances in protein structure prediction and de novo protein design: A review. Chemical Engineering Science 61: 966-988.
8. Kinch L, Yong Shi S, Cong Q, Cheng H, Liao Y, et al. (2011) CASP9 assessment of free modeling target predictions. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics.
9. MacCallum JL, Hua L, Schnieders MJ, Pande VS, Jacobson MP, et al. (2009) Assessment of the protein-structure refinement category in CASP8. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 77: 66-80.
10. MacCallum JL, Pérez A, Schnieders MJ, Hua L, Jacobson MP, et al. (2011) Assessment of protein structure refinement in CASP9. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 79: 74-90.
11. Chen J, Brooks CL, (2007) Can molecular dynamics simulations provide high-resolution refinement of protein structure? Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 67: 922-930.
12. Fan H, Mark AE, (2009) Refinement of homology-based protein structures by molecular dynamics simulation techniques. Protein Science 13: 211-220.
13. Ishitani R, Terada T, Shimizu K, (2008) Refinement of comparative models of protein structure by using multicanonical molecular dynamics simulations. Molecular Simulation 34: 327-336.
14. Lee MR, Tsai J, Baker D, Kollman PA, (2001) Molecular dynamics in the endgame of protein structure prediction. Journal of molecular biology 313: 417-430.
15. Misura K, Baker D, (2005) Progress and challenges in high-resolution refinement of protein structure models. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 59: 15-29.
16. Sellers BD, Zhu K, Zhao S, Friesner RA, Jacobson MP, (2008) Toward better refinement of comparative models: predicting loops in inexact environments. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 72: 959-971.
17. Zhu J, Fan H, Periole X, Honig B, Mark AE, (2008) Refining homology models by combining replica-exchange molecular dynamics and statistical potentials. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 72: 1171-1188.
18. Jagielska A, Wroblewska L, Skolnick J, (2008) Protein model refinement using an optimized physics-based all-atom force field. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105: 8268-8273.
19. Wroblewska L, Jagielska A, Skolnick J, (2008) Development of a physics-based force field for the scoring and refinement of protein models. Biophysical journal 94: 3227-3240.
20. Bhattacharya D, Cheng J (2012) 3Drefine: Consistent protein structure refinement by optimizing hydrogen bonding network and atomic-level energy minimization. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics.
21. Kalisman N, Levi A, Maximova T, Reshef D, Zafriri-Lynn S, et al. (2005) MESHI: a new library of Java classes for molecular modeling. Bioinformatics 21: 3931-3932.
22. Liu DC, Nocedal J, (1989) On the limited memory BFGS method for large scale optimization. Mathematical programming 45: 503-528.
23. Levitt M, Hirshberg M, Sharon R, Daggett V, (1995) Potential energy function and parameters for simulations of the molecular dynamics of proteins and nucleic acids in solution. Computer Physics Communications 91: 215-231.
24. Summa CM, Levitt M, (2007) Near-native structure refinement using in vacuo energy minimization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104: 3177-3182.
25. Zhang J, Liang Y, Zhang Y, (2011) Atomic-level protein structure refinement using fragment-guided molecular dynamics conformation sampling. Structure 19: 1784-1795.
26. Kabsch W, Sander C, (1983) Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers 22: 2577-2637.
27. Zemla A, (2003) LGA: a method for finding 3D similarities in protein structures. Nucleic acids research 31: 3370-3374.
28. Kabsch W, (1976) A solution for the best rotation to relate two sets of vectors. Acta Crystallographica Section A: Crystal Physics, Diffraction, Theoretical and General Crystallography 32: 922-923.
29. Chen VB, Arendall WB, Headd JJ, Keedy DA, Immormino RM, et al. (2009) MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography 66: 12-21.
30. Olechnovič K, Kulberkytė E, Venclovas Č (2012) CAD-score: A new contact area difference-based function for evaluation of protein structural models. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics.
31. Abagyan RA, Totrov MM, (1997) Contact area difference (CAD): a robust measure to evaluate accuracy of protein models. Journal of molecular biology 268: 678-685.