ModFOLD6: an accurate web server for the global and local quality estimation of 3D protein models

Abstract Methods that reliably estimate the likely similarity between the predicted and native structures of proteins have become essential for driving the acceptance and adoption of three-dimensional protein models by life scientists. ModFOLD6 is the latest version of our leading resource for Estimates of Model Accuracy (EMA), which uses a pioneering hybrid quasi-single model approach. The ModFOLD6 server integrates scores from three pure-single model methods and three quasi-single model methods using a neural network to estimate local quality scores. Additionally, the server provides three options for producing global score estimates, depending on the requirements of the user: (i) ModFOLD6_rank, which is optimized for ranking/selection, (ii) ModFOLD6_cor, which is optimized for correlations of predicted and observed scores and (iii) ModFOLD6 global for balanced performance. The ModFOLD6 methods rank among the top few for EMA, according to independent blind testing by the CASP12 assessors. The ModFOLD6 server is also continuously automatically evaluated as part of the CAMEO project, where significant performance gains have been observed compared to our previous server and other publicly available servers. The ModFOLD6 server is freely available at: http://www.reading.ac.uk/bioinf/ModFOLD/.

[1]  J. Thornton,et al.  AQUA and PROCHECK-NMR: Programs for checking the quality of protein structures solved by NMR , 1996, Journal of biomolecular NMR.

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

[3]  Liam J. McGuffin,et al.  Improvement of 3D protein models using multiple templates guided by single-template model quality assessment , 2012, Bioinform..

[4]  Juergen Haas,et al.  The Protein Model Portal—a comprehensive resource for protein structure and model information , 2013, Database J. Biol. Databases Curation.

[5]  Anna Tramontano,et al.  Assessment of the assessment: Evaluation of the model quality estimates in CASP10 , 2014, Proteins.

[6]  Anna Tramontano,et al.  Methods of model accuracy estimation can help selecting the best models from decoy sets: Assessment of model accuracy estimations in CASP11 , 2016, Proteins.

[7]  Liam J. McGuffin,et al.  Rapid model quality assessment for protein structure predictions using the comparison of multiple models without structural alignments , 2010, Bioinform..

[8]  Liam J. McGuffin,et al.  The ModFOLD4 server for the quality assessment of 3D protein models , 2013, Nucleic Acids Res..

[9]  Daniel B. Roche,et al.  Automated tertiary structure prediction with accurate local model quality assessment using the intfold‐ts method , 2011, Proteins.

[10]  Ian W. Davis,et al.  Structure validation by Cα geometry: ϕ,ψ and Cβ deviation , 2003, Proteins.

[11]  Pascal Benkert,et al.  QMEAN: A comprehensive scoring function for model quality assessment , 2008, Proteins.

[12]  C. Sander,et al.  Errors in protein structures , 1996, Nature.

[13]  David T. Jones,et al.  MetaPSICOV: combining coevolution methods for accurate prediction of contacts and long range hydrogen bonding in proteins , 2014, Bioinform..

[14]  Karolis Uziela,et al.  ProQ2: estimation of model accuracy implemented in Rosetta , 2016, Bioinform..

[15]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  Distance‐scaled, finite ideal‐gas reference state improves structure‐derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction , 2002, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[16]  Jaime Prilusky,et al.  Assessment of CASP8 structure predictions for template free targets , 2009, Proteins.

[17]  Daniel W. A. Buchan,et al.  Scalable web services for the PSIPRED Protein Analysis Workbench , 2013, Nucleic Acids Res..

[18]  Liam J. McGuffin,et al.  The ModFOLD server for the quality assessment of protein structural models , 2008, Bioinform..

[19]  W. Kabsch,et al.  Dictionary of protein secondary structure: Pattern recognition of hydrogen‐bonded and geometrical features , 1983, Biopolymers.

[20]  Liam J. McGuffin,et al.  Benchmarking consensus model quality assessment for protein fold recognition , 2007, BMC Bioinformatics.

[21]  Silvio C. E. Tosatto,et al.  Global and local model quality estimation at CASP8 using the scoring functions QMEAN and QMEANclust , 2009, Proteins.

[22]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  Assessment of global and local model quality in CASP8 using Pcons and ProQ , 2009, Proteins.

[23]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  ProQ3D: improved model quality assessments using deep learning , 2016, Bioinform..

[24]  David T. Jones,et al.  DISOPRED3: precise disordered region predictions with annotated protein-binding activity , 2014, Bioinform..

[25]  Daniel B. Roche,et al.  Assessing the quality of modelled 3D protein structures using the ModFOLD server. , 2014, Methods in molecular biology.

[26]  Jianlin Cheng,et al.  Prediction of global and local quality of CASP8 models by MULTICOM series , 2009, Proteins.

[27]  Liam J. McGuffin,et al.  IntFOLD: an integrated server for modelling protein structures and functions from amino acid sequences , 2015, Nucleic Acids Res..

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

[29]  Liam J. McGuffin.  Prediction of global and local model quality in CASP8 using the ModFOLD server , 2009, Proteins.