Protein Family Classification Using Sparse Markov Transducers

In this paper we present a method for classifying proteins into families using sparse Markov transducers (SMTs). Sparse Markov transducers, similar to probabilistic suffix trees, estimate a probability distribution conditioned on an input sequence. SMTs generalize probabilistic suffix trees by allowing for wild-cards in the conditioning sequences. Because substitutions of amino acids are common in protein families, incorporating wildcards into the model significantly improves classification performance. We present two models for building protein family classifiers using SMTs. We also present efficient data structures to improve the memory usage of the models. We evaluate SMTs by building protein family classifiers using the Pfam database and compare our results to previously published results.

[1]  M. Degroot.  Optimal Statistical Decisions , 1970 .

[2]  E. Myers,et al.  Basic local alignment search tool. , 1990, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  M. Miyamoto,et al.  Phylogenetic Analysis of DNA Sequences , 1991 .

[4]  Dana Ron,et al.  The Power of Amnesia , 1993, NIPS.

[5]  David Haussler,et al.  Using Dirichlet Mixture Priors to Derive Hidden Markov Models for Protein Families , 1993, ISMB.

[6]  M. Gribskov,et al.  Profile Analysis , 1970 .

[7]  D. Haussler,et al.  Hidden Markov models in computational biology. Applications to protein modeling. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[8]  M. A. McClure,et al.  Hidden Markov models of biological primary sequence information. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  Sean R. Eddy,et al.  Multiple Alignment Using Hidden Markov Models , 1995, ISMB.

[10]  Frans M. J. Willems,et al.  The context-tree weighting method: basic properties , 1995, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[11]  A G Murzin,et al.  SCOP: a structural classification of proteins database for the investigation of sequences and structures. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[12]  W. Pearson.  Comparison of methods for searching protein sequence databases , 1995, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[13]  Robert E. Schapire,et al.  Predicting Nearly as Well as the Best Pruning of a Decision Tree , 1995, COLT.

[14]  David Haussler,et al.  Dirichlet mixtures: a method for improved detection of weak but significant protein sequence homology , 1996, Comput. Appl. Biosci..

[15]  Amos Bairoch,et al.  The PROSITE database, its status in 1995 , 1996, Nucleic Acids Res..

[16]  Michael Gribskov,et al.  Use of Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Analysis to Evaluate Sequence Matching , 1996, Comput. Chem..

[17]  Petra Mutzel,et al.  Computational Molecular Biology , 1996 .

[18]  Yoram Singer,et al.  Adaptive Mixtures of Probabilistic Transducers , 1995, Neural Computation.

[19]  R. Durbin,et al.  Pfam: A comprehensive database of protein domain families based on seed alignments , 1997, Proteins.

[20]  Michael Gribskov,et al.  Methods and Statistics for Combining Motif Match Scores , 1998, J. Comput. Biol..

[21]  Richard Hughey,et al.  Hidden Markov models for detecting remote protein homologies , 1998, Bioinform..

[22]  Terri K. Attwood,et al.  The PRINTS protein fingerprint database in its fifth year , 1998, Nucleic Acids Res..

[23]  David Haussler,et al.  Using the Fisher Kernel Method to Detect Remote Protein Homologies , 1999, ISMB.

[24]  Golan Yona,et al.  Modeling protein families using probabilistic suffix trees , 1999, RECOMB.

[25]  David Haussler,et al.  A Discriminative Framework for Detecting Remote Protein Homologies , 2000, J. Comput. Biol..

[26]  Alberto Apostolico,et al.  Optimal amnesic probabilistic automata or how to learn and classify proteins in linear time and space , 2000, RECOMB '00.

[27]  Vladimir Vovk,et al.  Predicting nearly as well as the best pruning of a decision tree through dynamic programming scheme , 2001, Theor. Comput. Sci..