Protein fold recognition by total alignment probability

We present a protein fold‐recognition method that uses a comprehensive statistical interpretation of structural Hidden Markov Models (HMMs). The structure/fold recognition is done by summing the probabilities of all sequence‐to‐structure alignments. The optimal alignment can be defined as the most probable, but suboptimal alignments may have comparable probabilities. These suboptimal alignments can be interpreted as optimal alignments to the “other” structures from the ensemble or optimal alignments under minor fluctuations in the scoring function. Summing probabilities for all alignments gives a complete estimate of sequence‐model compatibility. In the case of HMMs that produce a sequence, this reflects the fact that due to our indifference to exactly how the HMM produced the sequence, we should sum over all possibilities. We have built a set of structural HMMs for 188 protein structures and have compared two methods for identifying the structure compatible with a sequence: by the optimal alignment probability and by the total probability. Fold recognition by total probability was 40% more accurate than fold recognition by the optimal alignment probability. Proteins 2000;40:451–462. © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  Van Nostrand,et al.  Error Bounds for Convolutional Codes and an Asymptotically Optimum Decoding Algorithm , 1967 .

[2]  B. Lee,et al.  The interpretation of protein structures: estimation of static accessibility. , 1971, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  G J Williams,et al.  The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures. , 1978, Archives of biochemistry and biophysics.

[4]  M S Waterman,et al.  Identification of common molecular subsequences. , 1981, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[6]  R. Jernigan,et al.  Estimation of effective interresidue contact energies from protein crystal structures: quasi-chemical approximation , 1985 .

[7]  Lawrence R. Rabiner,et al.  A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition , 1989, Proc. IEEE.

[8]  M. E. Welch,et al.  Bayesian analysis of time series and dynamic models , 1990 .

[9]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  A method to identify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional structure. , 1991, Science.

[10]  A. Godzik,et al.  Topology fingerprint approach to the inverse protein folding problem. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[11]  S. Bryant,et al.  An empirical energy function for threading protein sequence through the folding motif , 1993, Proteins.

[12]  Collin M. Stultz,et al.  Protein classification by stochastic modeling and optimal filtering of amino-acid sequences. , 1994, Mathematical Biosciences.

[13]  M J Sippl,et al.  Knowledge-based potentials for proteins. , 1995, Current opinion in structural biology.

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

[15]  D. Fischer,et al.  Protein fold recognition using sequence‐derived predictions , 1996, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[16]  G. Barton,et al.  Protein fold recognition by mapping predicted secondary structures. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  R. Jernigan,et al.  Residue-residue potentials with a favorable contact pair term and an unfavorable high packing density term, for simulation and threading. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[18]  R. Jernigan,et al.  Structure-derived potentials and protein simulations. , 1996, Current opinion in structural biology.

[19]  W. Taylor,et al.  Multiple sequence threading: an analysis of alignment quality and stability. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[20]  B. Rost,et al.  Protein fold recognition by prediction-based threading. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[21]  A. Godzik,et al.  Derivation and testing of pair potentials for protein folding. When is the quasichemical approximation correct? , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[22]  M Levitt,et al.  Competitive assessment of protein fold recognition and alignment accuracy , 1997, Proteins.

[23]  Temple F. Smith,et al.  A homology identification method that combines protein sequence and structure information , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[24]  D. Haussler,et al.  Sequence comparisons using multiple sequences detect three times as many remote homologues as pairwise methods. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[25]  R. Lathrop,et al.  A Bayes-optimal sequence-structure theory that unifies protein sequence-structure recognition and alignment , 1998, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[26]  Temple F. Smith,et al.  Analysis and algorithms for protein sequence–structure alignment , 1998 .

[27]  P K Maini,et al.  Pattern formation in a generalized chemotactic model , 1998, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[28]  R Thiele,et al.  Protein threading by recursive dynamic programming. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[29]  David C. Jones,et al.  GenTHREADER: an efficient and reliable protein fold recognition method for genomic sequences. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[30]  A. Murzin.  Structure classification‐based assessment of CASP3 predictions for the fold recognition targets , 1999, Proteins.