The role of protein structure in genomics

The genome projects produce an enormous amount of sequence data that needs to be annotated in terms of molecular structure and biological function. These tasks have triggered additional initiatives like structural genomics. The intention is to determine as many protein structures as possible, in the most efficient way, and to exploit the solved structures for the assignment of biological function to hypothetical proteins. We discuss the impact of these developments on protein classification, gene function prediction, and protein structure prediction.

[1]  Yunje Cho,et al.  Structure-based identification of a novel NTPase from Methanococcus jannaschii , 1999, Nature Structural Biology.

[2]  M J Sippl,et al.  Helmholtz free energy of peptide hydrogen bonds in proteins. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  M J Sippl,et al.  Assembly of polypeptide and protein backbone conformations from low energy ensembles of short fragments: Development of strategies and construction of models for myoglobin, lysozyme, and thymosin β4 , 1992, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[4]  S. Brenner.  Errors in genome annotation. , 1999, Trends in genetics : TIG.

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

[6]  B. Barrell,et al.  Life with 6000 Genes , 1996, Science.

[7]  C. Chothia,et al.  Population statistics of protein structures: lessons from structural classifications. , 1997, Current opinion in structural biology.

[8]  W A Koppensteiner,et al.  Characterization of novel proteins based on known protein structures. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  M. Sippl.  Calculation of conformational ensembles from potentials of mean force. An approach to the knowledge-based prediction of local structures in globular proteins. , 1990, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  R. Fleischmann,et al.  Whole-genome random sequencing and assembly of Haemophilus influenzae Rd. , 1995, Science.

[11]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[12]  Michael Levitt,et al.  A brighter future for protein structure prediction , 1999, Nature Structural Biology.

[13]  Andrew Smith.  Genome sequence of the nematode C-elegans: A platform for investigating biology , 1998 .

[14]  K. Volz.  A test case for structure‐based functional assignment: The 1.2 Å crystal structure of the yjgF gene product from Escherichia coli , 2008, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[15]  S. Kim,et al.  Structure-based assignment of the biochemical function of a hypothetical protein: a test case of structural genomics. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  A. Murzin.  How far divergent evolution goes in proteins. , 1998, Current opinion in structural biology.

[17]  W. Pearson.  Effective protein sequence comparison. , 1996, Methods in enzymology.

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

[19]  김삼묘,et al.  “Bioinformatics” 특집을 내면서 , 2000 .

[20]  Miguel A. Andrade-Navarro,et al.  Automated genome sequence analysis and annotation , 1999, Bioinform..

[21]  Thomas L. Madden,et al.  Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. , 1997, Nucleic acids research.

[22]  G. Klebe,et al.  Knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[23]  M. Sippl,et al.  Helmholtz free energies of atom pair interactions in proteins. , 1996, Folding & design.

[24]  A. Sali,et al.  Structural genomics: beyond the Human Genome Project , 1999, Nature Genetics.

[25]  J. Janin,et al.  A soft, mean-field potential derived from crystal contacts for predicting protein-protein interactions. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  J. Skolnick,et al.  Structure‐based functional motif identifies a potential disulfide oxidoreductase active site in the serine/threonine protein phosphatase‐1 subfamily , 1999, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[27]  David C. Jones,et al.  CATH--a hierarchic classification of protein domain structures. , 1997, Structure.

[28]  George D. Rose,et al.  Identifying two ancient enzymes in Archaea using predicted secondary structure alignment , 1999, Nature Structural Biology.

[29]  Richard Bonneau,et al.  Ab initio protein structure prediction of CASP III targets using ROSETTA , 1999, Proteins.

[30]  C Sander,et al.  Mapping the Protein Universe , 1996, Science.

[31]  D T Jones,et al.  A systematic comparison of protein structure classifications: SCOP, CATH and FSSP. , 1999, Structure.

[32]  C Colovos,et al.  The 1.8 A crystal structure of the ycaC gene product from Escherichia coli reveals an octameric hydrolase of unknown specificity. , 1998, Structure.

[33]  L. Kuhn,et al.  The accessory subunit of mtDNA polymerase shares structural homology with aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases: implications for a dual role as a primer recognition factor and processivity clamp. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[34]  David C. Jones,et al.  Contemporary approaches to protein structure classification , 1998, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[35]  M J Sippl,et al.  Who solved the protein folding problem? , 1999, Structure.

[36]  C. Chothia.  One thousand families for the molecular biologist , 1992, Nature.

[37]  A M Lesk,et al.  Comparison of the structures of globins and phycocyanins: Evidence for evolutionary relationship , 1990, Proteins.

[38]  M J Sippl,et al.  Optimum superimposition of protein structures: ambiguities and implications. , 1996, Folding & design.

[39]  B. Rost,et al.  Prediction of protein secondary structure at better than 70% accuracy. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[40]  C. Sander,et al.  Genomic medicine and the future of health care. , 2000, Science.