SPServer: split-statistical potentials for the analysis of protein structures and protein–protein interactions

Background Statistical potentials, also named knowledge-based potentials, are scoring functions derived from empirical data that can be used to evaluate the quality of protein folds and protein–protein interaction (PPI) structures. In previous works we decomposed the statistical potentials in different terms, named Split-Statistical Potentials, accounting for the type of amino acid pairs, their hydrophobicity, solvent accessibility and type of secondary structure. These potentials have been successfully used to identify near-native structures in protein structure prediction, rank protein docking poses, and predict PPI binding affinities. Results Here, we present the SPServer, a web server that applies the Split-Statistical Potentials to analyze protein folds and protein interfaces. SPServer provides global scores as well as residue/residue-pair profiles presented as score plots and maps. This level of detail allows users to: (1) identify potentially problematic regions on protein structures; (2) identify disrupting amino acid pairs in protein interfaces; and (3) compare and analyze the quality of tertiary and quaternary structural models. Conclusions While there are many web servers that provide scoring functions to assess the quality of either protein folds or PPI structures, SPServer integrates both aspects in a unique easy-to-use web server. Moreover, the server permits to locally assess the quality of the structures and interfaces at a residue level and provides tools to compare the local assessment between structures. Server address https://sbi.upf.edu/spserver/ .

[1]  Manfred J. Sippl,et al.  Thirty years of environmental health research--and growing. , 1996, Nucleic Acids Res..

[2]  Torsten Schwede,et al.  Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP)—Round XIII , 2019, Proteins.

[3]  Ben M. Webb,et al.  Comparative Protein Structure Modeling Using MODELLER , 2007, Current protocols in protein science.

[4]  Minkyung Baek,et al.  Assessment of protein model structure accuracy estimation in CASP13: Challenges in the era of deep learning , 2019, Proteins.

[5]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Docking and scoring with ICM: the benchmarking results and strategies for improvement , 2012, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[6]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  ZDOCK server: interactive docking prediction of protein-protein complexes and symmetric multimers , 2014, Bioinform..

[7]  Kliment Olechnovic,et al.  VoroMQA web server for assessing three-dimensional structures of proteins and protein complexes , 2019, Nucleic Acids Res..

[8]  Pablo Chacón,et al.  KORP: knowledge-based 6D potential for fast protein and loop modeling , 2019, Bioinform..

[9]  Ben M. Webb,et al.  Comparative Protein Structure Modeling Using MODELLER , 2016, Current protocols in bioinformatics.

[10]  J. Martinou,et al.  Bid Induces the Oligomerization and Insertion of Bax into the Outer Mitochondrial Membrane , 2000, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[11]  Marco Biasini,et al.  Toward the estimation of the absolute quality of individual protein structure models , 2010, Bioinform..

[12]  S. Korsmeyer,et al.  Hematopoietic malignancies demonstrate loss-of-function mutations of BAX. , 1998, Blood.

[13]  Baldomero Oliva,et al.  On the mechanisms of protein interactions: predicting their affinity from unbound tertiary structures , 2017, Bioinform..

[14]  Adam Zemla,et al.  LGA: a method for finding 3D similarities in protein structures , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[15]  Jens Meiler,et al.  ROSETTA3: an object-oriented software suite for the simulation and design of macromolecules. , 2011, Methods in enzymology.

[16]  András Fiser,et al.  New statistical potential for quality assessment of protein models and a survey of energy functions , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[17]  G C P van Zundert,et al.  The HADDOCK2.2 Web Server: User-Friendly Integrative Modeling of Biomolecular Complexes. , 2016, Journal of molecular biology.

[18]  Demis Hassabis,et al.  Improved protein structure prediction using potentials from deep learning , 2020, Nature.

[19]  D. T. Jones,et al.  A new approach to protein fold recognition , 1992, Nature.

[20]  Mieczyslaw Torchala,et al.  The scoring of poses in protein-protein docking: current capabilities and future directions , 2013, BMC Bioinformatics.

[21]  Elisenda Feliu,et al.  On the analysis of protein–protein interactions via knowledge‐based potentials for the prediction of protein–protein docking , 2011, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[22]  Francisco Melo,et al.  ANOLEA: A WWW Server to Assess Protein Structures , 1997, ISMB.

[23]  Yang Zhang,et al.  The I-TASSER Suite: protein structure and function prediction , 2014, Nature Methods.

[24]  Torsten Schwede,et al.  Assessment of model accuracy estimations in CASP12 , 2018, Proteins.

[25]  Oriol Fornes,et al.  On the use of knowledge-based potentials for the evaluation of models of protein-protein, protein-DNA, and protein-RNA interactions. , 2014, Advances in protein chemistry and structural biology.

[26]  Yang Zhang,et al.  Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality , 2004, Proteins.

[27]  A. Sali,et al.  Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[28]  M. Sternberg,et al.  Modelling protein docking using shape complementarity, electrostatics and biochemical information. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[29]  Ruth Nussinov,et al.  PatchDock and SymmDock: servers for rigid and symmetric docking , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[30]  Alexander McPherson,et al.  Advances in Protein Chemistry and Structural Biology , 2010, Advances in Protein Chemistry and Structural Biology.

[31]  Michael J E Sternberg,et al.  The Phyre2 web portal for protein modeling, prediction and analysis , 2015, Nature Protocols.

[32]  Pamela F. Jones,et al.  VORFFIP-Driven Dock: V-D2OCK, a Fast and Accurate Protein Docking Strategy , 2015, PloS one.

[33]  T L Blundell,et al.  FUGUE: sequence-structure homology recognition using environment-specific substitution tables and structure-dependent gap penalties. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[34]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  VERIFY3D: assessment of protein models with three-dimensional profiles. , 1997, Methods in enzymology.

[35]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  Estimation of model accuracy in CASP13 , 2019, Proteins.

[36]  F. Dimaio,et al.  Improving hybrid statistical and physical forcefields through local structure enumeration , 2016, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[37]  Patrick Aloy,et al.  Splitting statistical potentials into meaningful scoring functions: Testing the prediction of near-native structures from decoy conformations , 2009, BMC Structural Biology.

[38]  Carles Pons,et al.  pyDockWEB: a web server for rigid-body protein-protein docking using electrostatics and desolvation scoring , 2013, Bioinform..

[39]  P. Aloy,et al.  Interactome3D: adding structural details to protein networks , 2013, Nature Methods.

[40]  Lei Deng,et al.  PrePPI: a structure-informed database of protein–protein interactions , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..