Empirical limits for template‐based protein structure prediction: the CASP5 example

Most protein structure prediction methods use templates to assist in the construction of protein models. In this paper, we analyse the current state of template‐based modelling approaches and reach an estimate of the empirical limits of these methods. Our analysis show that current prediction methods are already reaching these empirical accuracy limits in the easier cases, where finding a close homologue to the native target structure is not a problem. However, we find that even in the absence of alignment errors and using optimal templates, template‐based methods have intrinsic limitations, suggesting that other methodologies, such as ab initio procedures, must be used if accuracy is ultimately to be improved.

[1]  D. Baker,et al.  Prediction of local structure in proteins using a library of sequence-structure motifs. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  M J Sippl,et al.  Assessment of the CASP4 fold recognition category , 2001, Proteins.

[3]  B. Rost,et al.  Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP)—Round 6 , 2005, Proteins.

[4]  Osvaldo Olmea,et al.  MAMMOTH (Matching molecular models obtained from theory): An automated method for model comparison , 2002, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[5]  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.

[6]  D. T. Jones,et al.  A new approach to protein fold recognition , 1992, Nature.

[7]  R Leplae,et al.  Analysis and assessment of comparative modeling predictions in CASP4 , 2001, Proteins.

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

[9]  C Venclovas,et al.  Processing and analysis of CASP3 protein structure predictions , 1999, Proteins.

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

[11]  Adam Zemla,et al.  LGA: a method for finding 3D similarities in protein structures , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[12]  A. Sali,et al.  Protein Structure Prediction and Structural Genomics , 2001, Science.

[13]  J. Greer.  Comparative model-building of the mammalian serine proteases. , 1981, Journal of molecular biology.

[14]  Paul W. Fitzjohn,et al.  Comparative modelling: an essential methodology for protein structure prediction in the post-genomic era. , 2002, Applied bioinformatics.

[15]  U. Hobohm,et al.  Selection of representative protein data sets , 1992, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[16]  Marc A. Martí-Renom,et al.  EVA: continuous automatic evaluation of protein structure prediction servers , 2001, Bioinform..

[17]  M. Levitt,et al.  Small libraries of protein fragments model native protein structures accurately. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[18]  T. A. Jones,et al.  Using known substructures in protein model building and crystallography. , 1986, The EMBO journal.

[19]  A. Lesk,et al.  The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins. , 1986, The EMBO journal.

[20]  Paul W. Fitzjohn,et al.  In silico protein recombination: enhancing template and sequence alignment selection for comparative protein modelling. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[21]  Richard Bonneau,et al.  Ab initio protein structure prediction: progress and prospects. , 2001, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.