Protein structure comparison by probability-based matching of secondary structure elements

MOTIVATION Protein structure comparison (PSC) has been used widely in studies of structural and functional genomics. However, PSC is computationally expensive and as a result almost all of the PSC methods currently in use look only for the optimal alignment and ignore many alternative alignments that are statistically significant and that may provide insight into protein evolution or folding. RESULTS We have developed a new PSC method with efficiency to detect potentially viable alternative alignments in all-against-all database comparisons. The efficiency of the new PSC method derives from the ability to directly home in on a limited number of viable and ranked alignment solutions based on intuitively derived SSE (secondary structure element)-matching probabilities.

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

[2]  C. Sander,et al.  Dali: a network tool for protein structure comparison. , 1995, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[3]  M Levitt,et al.  Comprehensive assessment of automatic structural alignment against a manual standard, the scop classification of proteins , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[4]  R. Lathrop.  The protein threading problem with sequence amino acid interaction preferences is NP-complete. , 1994, Protein engineering.

[5]  Arthur M. Lesk,et al.  Protein Architecture: A Practical Approach , 1991 .

[6]  M. Sippl,et al.  ProSup: a refined tool for protein structure alignment. , 2000, Protein engineering.

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

[8]  A. Godzik.  The structural alignment between two proteins: Is there a unique answer? , 1996, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[9]  C. Orengo.  Classification of protein folds , 1994 .

[10]  P. Koehl,et al.  Protein structure similarities. , 2001, Current opinion in structural biology.

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

[12]  S. Brenner.  A tour of structural genomics , 2001, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[13]  S. Bryant,et al.  Threading a database of protein cores , 1995, Proteins.

[14]  C. Sander,et al.  The FSSP database of structurally aligned protein fold families. , 1994, Nucleic acids research.

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

[16]  William R. Taylor,et al.  A Protein Structure Comparison Methodology , 1996, Comput. Chem..

[17]  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.

[18]  A Elofsson,et al.  Assessing the performance of fold recognition methods by means of a comprehensive benchmark. , 1996, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

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

[20]  P E Bourne,et al.  Protein structure alignment by incremental combinatorial extension (CE) of the optimal path. , 1998, Protein engineering.

[21]  J F Gibrat,et al.  Surprising similarities in structure comparison. , 1996, Current opinion in structural biology.