ISPRED4: Interaction sites PREDiction in protein structures with a refining grammar model

Bioinformatics

Volumn 33, Issue 11, 2017, Pages 1656-1663

  Savojardo, Castrense ^a   Fariselli, Piero ^b   Martelli, Pier Luigi ^a   Casadio, Rita ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGY; MACHINE LEARNING; PROCEDURES; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN DOMAIN; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; SOFTWARE;

COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; MACHINE LEARNING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN INTERACTION DOMAINS AND MOTIFS; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, PROTEIN; SOFTWARE;

EID: 85021347047     PISSN: 13674803     EISSN: 14602059     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx044     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Adamczak, R. et al. (2004) Accurate prediction of solvent accessibility using neural networks-based regression. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet., 56, 753-767.
2. Aguilar, D. et al. (2012) Mapping the mutual information network of enzymatic families in the protein structure to unveil functional features. PLoS One, 7, e41430.
3. Altschul, S.F. et al. (1997) Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res., 25, 3389-3402.
4. Aumentado-Armstrong, T.T. et al. (2015) Algorithmic approaches to protein-protein interaction site prediction. Algorithms Mol. Biol., 10, 1-7.
5. Bradford, J.R. and Westhead, D.R. (2005) Improved prediction of protein-protein binding sites using a support vector machines approach. Bioinformatics, 21, 1487-1494.
6. Burger, L. and van Nimwegen, E. (2008) Accurate prediction of protein-protein interactions from sequence alignments using a Bayesian method. Mol. Syst. Biol., 4, 165.
7. Buslje, C.M. et al. (2010) Networks of high mutual information define the structural proximity of catalytic sites: implications for catalytic residue identification. PLoS Comput. Biol., 6, e1000978.
8. Chang, C.C. et al. (2011) LIBSVM. A Library for Support Vector Machines, ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol., 2, 1-27.
9. Chen, H.L. and Zhou, H.X. (2005) Prediction of interface residues in protein-protein complexes by a consensus neural network method: test against NMR data. Proteins, 61, 21-35.
10. Chen, P. and Li, J. (2010) Sequence-based identification of interface residues by an integrative profile combining hydrophobic and evolutionary information. BMC Bioinformatics, 11, 402.
11. De Vries, S.J. and Bonvin, A.M. (2008) How proteins get in touch: interface prediction in the study of biomolecular complexes. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci., 9, 394-406.
12. Dong, Z. et al. (2014) CRF-based models of protein surfaces improve protein-protein interaction site predictions. BMC Bioinformatics, 15, 277.
13. Ekeberg, M. et al. (2013) Improved contact prediction in proteins: using pseudolikelihoods to infer Potts models. Phys. Rev. E, 87, 012707.
14. Esmaielbeiki, R. et al. (2016) Progress and challenges in predicting protein interfaces. Brief. Bioinform., 17, 117-131.
15. Fariselli, P. et al. (2002) Prediction of protein-protein interaction sites in heterocomplexes with neural networks. Eur. J. Biochem., 269, 1356-1361.
16. Fariselli, P. et al. (2009) Grammatical-restrained hidden conditional random fields for bioinformatics applications. Algorithms Mol. Biol., 4, 13.
17. Gallet, X. et al. (2000) A fast method to predict protein interaction sites from sequences. J. Mol. Biol., 302, 917-926.
18. Hopf, T.A. et al. (2014) Sequence co-evolution gives 3D contacts and structures of protein complexes. eLife, 3, e03430.
19. Huang, B. and Schroeder, M. (2008) Using binding site to improve protein-protein docking. Gene, 1-2, 14-21.
20. Indio, V. et al. (2013) The prediction of organelle-targeting peptides in eukaryotic proteins with Grammatical-Restrained Hidden Conditional Random Fields. Bioinformatics, 29, 981-988.
21. Jones, D.T. et al. (2012) PSICOV: precise structural contact prediction using sparse inverse covariance estimation on large multiple sequence alignments. Bioinformatics, 28, 184-190.
22. Jones, S. and Thornton, J.M. (1997) Prediction of protein-protein interaction sites using patch analysis. J. Mol. Biol., 272, 133-143.
23. Jordan, R.A. et al. (2012) Predicting protein-protein interface residues using local surface structural similarity. BMC Bioinformatics, 13, 1-14.
24. Kabsch, W. and Sander, C. (1983) Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers, 22, 2577-2637.
25. Kamisetty, H. et al. (2013) Assessing the utility of coevolution-based residueresidue contact predictions in a sequence-and-structure-rich era. PNAS, 110, 15674-15679.
26. Kidera, A. et al. (1985) Statistical analysis of the physical properties of the 20 naturally occurring amino acids. J. Protein Chem., 4, 23-55.
27. Koike, A. and Takagi, T. (2004) Prediction of protein-protein interaction sites using support vector machines. Protein Eng. Des. Sel., 17, 165-173.
28. Lafferty, J. et al. (2001) Conditional random fields: probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data. In: Proceedings of the ICML01, Williams College, Williamstown, MA, USA, pp. 282-289.
29. Li, M.H. et al. (2007) Protein-protein interaction site prediction based on conditional random fields. Bioinformatics, 23, 597-604.
30. Li, B.Q. et al. (2012) Prediction of protein-protein interaction sites by random forest algorithm with mRMR and IFS. PLoS One, 77, e43927.
31. Li, N. et al. (2008) Prediction of protein-protein binding site by using core interface residue and support vector machine. BMC Bioinformatics, 9, 553.
32. Liu, B. et al. (2009) Prediction of protein binding sites in protein structures using hidden Markov support vector machine. BMC Bioinformatics, 10, 381.
33. Marks, D.S. et al. (2011) Protein 3D structure computed from evolutionary sequence variation. PLoS One, 6, e28766.
34. Mihel, J. et al. (2008) PSAIA - protein structure and interaction analyzer. BMC Struct. Biol., 8, 21.
35. Morcos, F. et al. (2011) Direct-coupling analysis of residue coevolution captures native contacts across many protein families. PNAS, 108, E1293-E1301.
36. Ofran, Y. and Rost, B. (2007) ISIS: interaction sites identified from sequence. Bioinformatics, 23, 13-16.
37. Ovchinnikov, S. et al. (2014) Robust and accurate prediction of residue-residue interactions across protein interfaces using evolutionary information. eLife, 3, e02030.
38. Pazos, F. et al. (1997) Correlated mutations contain information about protein-protein interaction. J. Mol. Biol., 271, 511-523.
39. Pintar, A. et al. (2002) CX, an algorithm that identifies protruding atoms in proteins. Bioinformatics, 18, 980-984.
40. Pintar, A. et al. (2003) DPX: for the analysis of protein core. Bioinformatics, 19, 313-314.
41. Porollo, A. and Meller, J. (2007) Prediction-based fingerprints of protein-protein interactions. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet., 66, 630-645.
42. Rost, B. and Sander, C. (1993) Conservation and prediction of solvent accessibility in protein families. Proteins, 20, 216-226.
43. Remmert, M. et al. (2011) HHblits: lightning-fast iterative protein sequence searching by HMM-HMMalignment. Nat. Methods, 9, 173-175.
44. Res, I. et al. (2005) An evolution based classifier for prediction of protein interfaces without using protein structures. Bioinformatics, 21, 2496-2501.
45. Sander, C. and Schneider, R. (1991) Database of homology-derived protein structures and the structural meaning of sequence alignment. Proteins, 9, 56-68.
46. Savojardo, C. et al. (2011) Improving the prediction of disulfide bonds in Eukaryotes with machine learning methods and protein subcellular localization. Bioinformatics, 27, 2224-2230.
47. Savojardo, C. et al. (2012) Machine-learning methods to predict protein interaction sites in folded proteins. In: Biganzoli, E. et al. (eds.) Computational Intelligence Methods for Bioinformatics and Biostatistics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 7548, p. 127-135.
48. Savojardo, C. et al. (2013) BETAWARE: a machine-learning tool to detect and predict transmembrane beta-barrel proteins in prokaryotes. Bioinformatics, 29, 504-505.
49. Sikić, M. et al. (2009) Prediction of protein-protein interaction sites in sequences and 3D structures by random forests. PLoS Comput. Biol., 5, e1000278.
50. Sudha, G. et al. (2014) An overview of recent advances in structural bioinformatics of protein-protein interactions and a guide to their principles. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol., 116, 141-150.
51. Suzek, B.E. et al. (2015) UniRef clusters: a comprehensive and scalable alternative for improving sequence similarity searches. Bioinformatics, 31, 926-932.
52. Tatusov, R.L. et al. (1994) Detection of conserved segments in proteins: iterative scanning of sequence databases with alignment blocks. PNAS, 91, 12091-12095.
53. Vreven, T. et al. (2015) Updates to the Integrated Protein-Protein Interaction Benchmarks: Docking Benchmark Version 5 and Affinity Benchmark Version 2. J. Mol. Biol., 427, 3031-3041.
54. Weigt, M. et al. (2009) Identification of direct residue contacts in protein-protein interaction by message passing. PNAS, 106, 67-72.
55. Xue, L.C. et al. (2011) HomPPI: a class of sequence homology based protein-protein interface prediction methods. BMC Bioinformatics, 12, 244.
56. Xue, L.C. et al. (2015) Computational prediction of protein interfaces: a review of data driven methods. FEBS Lett., 589, 3516-3526.
57. Yan, C. et al. (2004) A two-stage classifier for identification of protein-protein interface residues. Bioinformatics, 20, i371-i378.
58. Zemla, A. et al. (1999) A modified definition of Sov, a segment-based measure for protein secondary structure prediction assessment. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet., 34, 220-223.
59. Zhang, Q.C. et al. (2011) PredUs: a web server for predicting protein interfaces using structural neighbors. Nucleic Acids Res., 39, 283-287.
60. Zhou, H.X. and Qin, S. (2007) Interaction-site prediction for protein complexes: a critical assessment. Bioinformatics, 23, 2203-2209.