Identification of correct regions in protein models using structural, alignment, and consensus information

In this study we present two methods to predict the local quality of a protein model: ProQres and ProQprof. ProQres is based on structural features that can be calculated from a model, while ProQprof uses alignment information and can only be used if the model is created from an alignment. In addition, we also propose a simple approach based on local consensus, Pcons‐local. We show that all these methods perform better than state‐of‐the‐art methodologies and that, when applicable, the consensus approach is by far the best approach to predict local structure quality. It was also found that ProQprof performed better than other methods for models based on distant relationships, while ProQres performed best for models based on closer relationship, i.e., a model has to be reasonably good to make a structural evaluation useful. Finally, we show that a combination of ProQprof and ProQres (ProQlocal) performed better than any other nonconsensus method for both high‐ and low‐quality models. Additional information and Web servers are available at: http://www.sbc.su.se/∼bjorn/ProQ/.

[1]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  MaxSub: an automated measure for the assessment of protein structure prediction quality , 2000, Bioinform..

[2]  Daniel Fischer,et al.  3D‐SHOTGUN: A novel, cooperative, fold‐recognition meta‐predictor , 2003, Proteins.

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

[4]  Ralf Zimmer,et al.  Improving Profile-Profile Alignments via Log Average Scoring , 2001, WABI.

[5]  M. Levitt,et al.  Energy functions that discriminate X-ray and near native folds from well-constructed decoys. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  Profile–profile methods provide improved fold‐recognition: A study of different profile–profile alignment methods , 2004, Proteins.

[7]  Roland L Dunbrack,et al.  Scoring profile‐to‐profile sequence alignments , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[8]  M. Sippl.  Recognition of errors in three‐dimensional structures of proteins , 1993, Proteins.

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

[10]  T. Yeates,et al.  Verification of protein structures: Patterns of nonbonded atomic interactions , 1993, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[11]  M. Karplus,et al.  Discrimination of the native from misfolded protein models with an energy function including implicit solvation. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[12]  L. Holm,et al.  Exhaustive enumeration of protein domain families. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[13]  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.

[14]  Ceslovas Venclovas,et al.  Progress over the first decade of CASP experiments , 2005, Proteins.

[15]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  A study of quality measures for protein threading models , 2001, BMC Bioinformatics.

[16]  D T Jones,et al.  Protein secondary structure prediction based on position-specific scoring matrices. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  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.

[18]  Charles L. Brooks,et al.  Identifying native‐like protein structures using physics‐based potentials , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[19]  Marcin Feder,et al.  A “FRankenstein's monster” approach to comparative modeling: Merging the finest fragments of Fold‐Recognition models and iterative model refinement aided by 3D structure evaluation , 2003, Proteins.

[20]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  3D-Jury: A Simple Approach to Improve Protein Structure Predictions , 2003, Bioinform..

[21]  Alfonso Valencia,et al.  Predicting reliable regions in protein alignments from sequence profiles. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[23]  A. Godzik,et al.  Comparison of sequence profiles. Strategies for structural predictions using sequence information , 2008, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[24]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  CAFASP3: The third critical assessment of fully automated structure prediction methods , 2003, Proteins.

[25]  C. Sander,et al.  Protein structure comparison by alignment of distance matrices. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  S. Knudsen,et al.  Prediction of human mRNA donor and acceptor sites from the DNA sequence. , 1991, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  Jakub Pas,et al.  Application of 3D‐Jury, GRDB, and Verify3D in fold recognition , 2003, Proteins.

[28]  E S Huang,et al.  Factors affecting the ability of energy functions to discriminate correct from incorrect folds. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[29]  Anthony K. Felts,et al.  Distinguishing native conformations of proteins from decoys with an effective free energy estimator based on the OPLS all‐atom force field and the surface generalized born solvent model , 2002, Proteins.

[30]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  Assessment of protein models with three-dimensional profiles , 1992, Nature.

[31]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  Pcons5: combining consensus, structural evaluation and fold recognition scores , 2005, Bioinform..

[32]  M. Sippl.  Calculation of conformational ensembles from potentials of mena force , 1990 .

[33]  M. Sternberg,et al.  Enhanced genome annotation using structural profiles in the program 3D-PSSM. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[34]  D Fischer,et al.  CAFASP‐1: Critical assessment of fully automated structure prediction methods , 1999, Proteins.

[35]  S. Brunak,et al.  SHORT COMMUNICATION Identification of prokaryotic and eukaryotic signal peptides and prediction of their cleavage sites , 1997 .

[36]  G. S. Mudholkar.  Fisher's z‐Transformation , 2006 .

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

[38]  M. Levitt,et al.  Structural similarity of DNA-binding domains of bacteriophage repressors and the globin core , 1993, Current Biology.

[39]  J Lundström,et al.  Pcons: A neural‐network–based consensus predictor that improves fold recognition , 2001, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[40]  T. Blundell,et al.  Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[41]  Heekuck Oh,et al.  Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition , 1993, Adv. Comput..

[42]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  CAFASP2: The second critical assessment of fully automated structure prediction methods , 2001, Proteins.

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

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

[45]  B. Honig,et al.  Free energy determinants of tertiary structure and the evaluation of protein models , 2000, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[46]  A. Elofsson,et al.  Can correct protein models be identified? , 2003, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[47]  Adam Zemla,et al.  Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP)‐round V , 2005, Proteins.

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

[49]  P. Argos,et al.  Knowledge‐based protein secondary structure assignment , 1995, Proteins.

[50]  G. Heijne,et al.  ChloroP, a neural network‐based method for predicting chloroplast transit peptides and their cleavage sites , 1999, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[51]  Chris Sander,et al.  Removing near-neighbour redundancy from large protein sequence collections , 1998, Bioinform..

[52]  J. Hermans,et al.  Free energies of protein decoys provide insight into determinants of protein stability , 2001, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[53]  S Vajda,et al.  Discrimination of near‐native protein structures from misfolded models by empirical free energy functions , 2000, Proteins.

[54]  M. Levitt,et al.  A unified statistical framework for sequence comparison and structure comparison. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[55]  M Vendruscolo,et al.  Can a pairwise contact potential stabilize native protein folds against decoys obtained by threading? , 2000, Proteins.

[56]  D Fischer,et al.  LiveBench‐2: Large‐scale automated evaluation of protein structure prediction servers , 2001, Proteins.

[57]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  All are not equal: A benchmark of different homology modeling programs , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.