Consensus Approaches to Protein Structure Prediction

Machine Learning in Bioinformatics

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 189-208

  Bu, Dongbo ^a,b   Li, Shuaicheng ^a   Gao, Xin ^a   Yu, Libo ^a   Xu, Jinbo ^c   Li, Ming ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b Institute of Computing Technology   (China)

^c TOYOTA TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Classical algorithms for consensus prediction; Consensus approaches to protein structure prediction; Fundamentals of consensus prediction problem

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889791532     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470397428.ch8     Document Type: Chapter

References (43)

1. Braden, C. and Tooze, J. Introduction to Protein Structure. Garland Publishing, New York, 1999.
2. Moult, J., Hubbard, T., Fidelis, K., and Pedersen, J. Critical assessment of methods on protein structure prediction (CASP)-round III. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 37: 2-6, 1999.
3. Moult, J., Fidelis, K., Zemla, A., and Hubbard, T. Critical assessment of methods on protein structure prediction (CASP)-round IV. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 45: 2-7, 2001.
4. Moult, J., Fidelis, K., Zemla, A., and Hubbard, T. Critical assessment of methods on protein structure prediction (CASP)-round V. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 53: 334-339, 2003.
5. Moult, J., Fidelis, F., Rost, B., Hubbard, T., and Tramotano, A. Critical assessment of methods on protein structure prediction (CASP)-round VI. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 61: 3-7, 2003.
6. Bujnicki, J. M., Elofsson, A., Fischer, D., and Rychlewski, L. Livebench-2: large-scale automated evaluation of protein structure prediction servers. Proteins, 5: 184-191, 2001.
7. Rychlewski, L., Fischer, D., and Elofsson, A. Livebench-6: large-scale evaluation of protein structure prediction servers. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 53: 542-547, 2003.
8. Rychlewski, L., and Fischer, D. Livebench-8: the large-scale continuous assessment of automated protein structure prediction. Protein Science, 14: 240-245, 2005.
9. Baker, D. and Sali, A. Protein structure prediction and structural genomics. Science, 294 (5): 93-96, 2001.
10. Berman, H. M.,Westbrook, J., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T. N.,Weissig, H., Shindyalov, I. N., and Bourne, P. E. The protein data bank. Nucleic Acids Research, 28: 235-242, 2000.
11. Bujnicki, J. and Fischer, D. Meta approaches to protein structure prediction. Nucleic Acids and Molecular Biology, 15: 23-34, 2004.
12. Fischer, D. Hybrid fold recognition: combining sequence-derived properties with evolutionary information. In: R. B. ALtman, A. K. Dunker, L. Hunter, and T. E. Klien, Eds, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing, Vol. 5: World Scientific, pp. 116-127, 2000.
13. Ginalski, N. V. G., Godzik, A., and Rychlewski, L. Practical lessons from protein structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Research, 33(6): 1874-1891, 2005.
14. Kelley, L., MacCallum, R., and Sternberg, M. Enhanced genome annotation using structural profiles in the program 3D-PSSM. Journal of Molecular Biology, 299(2): 523-544, 2000.
15. Ginalski, K., Elofsson, A., Fischer, D., and Rychlewski, L. 3D-jury: a simple approach to improve protein structure predictions. Bioinformatics, 19(8): 1015-1018, 2003.
16. Wallner, B., Fang, H., and Elofsson, A. Automatic consensus-based fold recognition using Pcons, Proq, and Pmodeller. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 53: 534-541, 2003.
17. Sasson, I., and Fischer, D. Modeling three-dimensional protein structures for CASP5 using the 3D-SHOTGUN meta-predictors. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 53: 389-394, 2003.
18. Fischer, D. 3DS3 and 3DS5: 3D-SHOTGUN meta-predictors in CAFASP3. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 53: 517-523, 2003.
19. Xu, J., Yu, L., and Li, M. Consensus fold recognition by predicted model quality. Asia-Pacific Bioinformatics Conference (APBC), pp. 73-83, January, 2005.
20. Cristobal, S., Zemla, A., Fischer, D., Rychlewski, L., and Elofsson, A. A study of quality measures for protein threading models. BMC Bioinformatics4, 2(5): 1471-2105, 2001.
21. Lancial, G. and Istrail, S. Protein Structure Comparison: Algorithms and Applications, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2003.
22. Zhang, Y. and Skolnick, J. Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 57(4): 702-710, 2004.
23. Zemla, A., Venclovas, E., Moult, J., and Fidelis, K. Processing and analysis of CASP3 protein structure predictions. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 37: 22-29, 1999.
24. Siew, N., Elofsson, A., Rychlewski, L., and Fischer, D. Maxsub: an automated measure for the assessment of protein structure prediction quality. Bioinformatics, 16(9): 776-785, 2000.
25. Levitt, M. and Gerstein, M. A unified statistical framework for sequence comparison and structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 95: 5913-5920, 1998.
26. Zhang, Y. and Skolnick, J. TM-align: a protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score. Nucleic Acids Research, 33(7): 2302-2309, 2005.
27. Holm, L. and Sander, C. Protein structure comparison by alignment of distance matrices. Journal of Molecular Biology, 233(1): 123-138, 1993.
28. Subbiah, S., Laurents, D. V., and Levitt, M. Structural similarity of DNA-binding domains of bacteriophage repressors and the globin core. Current Biology, 3: 141-148, 1993.
29. Luthy, R., Bowie, J. U., and Eisenberg, D. Assessment of protein models with threedimensional profiles. Nature, 356(6364): 83-85, 1992.
30. Colovos, C. and Yeates, T. O. Verification of protein structures: patterns of nonbonded atomic interactions. Protein Science, 2: 1511-1519, 1993.
31. Sippl, M. J. Recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins. Proteins: Structure Function and Genetics, 17: 355-362, 1993.
32. Wallner, B. and Elofsson, A. Identification of correct regions in protein models using structural, alignment, and consensus information. Protein Science, 15: 900-913, 2006.
33. Silvio C. E. Tosatto. The victor/FRST function for model quality esitmation. Journal of Computational Biology, 12(10): 1316-1327, 2005.
34. Hooft, R. W. W., Vriend, G., Sander, C., and Abola, E. E. Errors in protein structures. Nature, 381: 272-272, 1996.
35. Laskowski, R. A., Macarthur, M. W., Moss, D. S., and Thornton, J. M. PROCHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures. Journal of Applied Crystallography, 26: 283-291, 1993.
36. Fischer, D., Elofsson, A., Rychlewski, L., Pazos, F.,Valencia, A., Rost, B., Ortiz, A. R., and Dunbrack, R. L. CAFASP2: the second critical assessment of fully automated structure prediction methods. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 1: 171-183, 2001.
37. Murzin, A. G., Brenner, S. E., Hubbard, T., and Chothia, C. SCOP: a structural classification of proteins database for the investigation of sequences and structures. Journal of Molecular Biology, 247: 536-540, 1995.
38. Juan, D., Grana, O., Pazos, F., Fariselli, P., Casadio, R., and Valencia, A. A neural network approach to evaluate fold recognition results. Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics, 50(4): 600-608, 2003.
39. Taylor, P. D., Attwood, T. K., and Flower, D. R. Nucleic Acids Research, 31(13): 3698-3700, 2003.
40. Simons, K. T., Strauss, C., and Baker,D. Prospects for ab initio protein structural genomics. Journal of Molecule Biology, 306: 1191-1199, 2001.
41. Yunbo, C. A. O., Jun, X. U., Tie-Yan, L. I. U., Hang, L. I., Yalou, H., and Hsiao-Wuen, H. Adapting ranking SVM to document retrieval. In: E. N. Efthimiadis, S. T. Dumais, D. Hawking, and Jarvelin, K.Eds, SIGIR 2006: Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR, 2006.
42. Bura, E., and Cook, R. D. Rank estimation in reduced-rank regression. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 87(1): 159-176, 2003.
43. Zhang,Y., and Skolnick, J. Automated structure prediction of weakly homologous proteins on a genomic scale. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(20): 7594-7599, 2004.