Protein structure comparison using iterated double dynamic programming

A protein structure comparison method is described that allows the generation of large populations of high‐scoring alternate alignments. This was achieved by incorporating a random element into an iterative double dynamic programming algorithm. The maximum scores from repeated comparisons of a pair of structures converged on a value that was taken as the global maximum. This lay 15% over the score obtained from the single fixed (unrandomized) calculation. The effect of the gap penalty was observed through the shift of the alignment populations, characterized by their alignment length and root‐mean‐square deviation (RMSD). The best (lowest RMSD) values found in these populations provided a base‐line against which other methods were compared.

[1]  S. B. Needleman,et al.  A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. , 1970, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  M. O. Dayhoff.  A model of evolutionary change in protein , 1978 .

[3]  M. O. Dayhoff,et al.  22 A Model of Evolutionary Change in Proteins , 1978 .

[4]  W R Taylor,et al.  A holistic approach to protein structure alignment. , 1989, Protein engineering.

[5]  W R Taylor,et al.  Protein structure alignment. , 1989, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  C. Orengo,et al.  A rapid method of protein structure alignment. , 1990, Journal of theoretical biology.

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

[8]  T. Blundell,et al.  Definition of general topological equivalence in protein structures. A procedure involving comparison of properties and relationships through simulated annealing and dynamic programming. , 1990, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  W R Taylor,et al.  Visualization of structural similarity in proteins. , 1991, Journal of molecular graphics.

[10]  K. B. Ward,et al.  Crepe-ribbon representation for protein structures: comparison of phospholipases A2. , 1991, Journal of molecular graphics.

[11]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Efficient detection of three-dimensional structural motifs in biological macromolecules by computer vision techniques. , 1991, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[13]  C. Sander,et al.  Evaluation of protein models by atomic solvation preference. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[14]  P Willett,et al.  Identification of tertiary structure resemblance in proteins using a maximal common subgraph isomorphism algorithm. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[16]  P. Willett,et al.  A graph-theoretic approach to the identification of three-dimensional patterns of amino acid side-chains in protein structures. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  W. Taylor,et al.  Secondary structure formation in model polypeptide chains. , 1994, Protein engineering.

[18]  A C May.  Pairwise iterative superposition of distantly related proteins and assessment of the significance of 3-D structural similarity. , 1996, Protein engineering.

[19]  W R Taylor,et al.  SSAP: sequential structure alignment program for protein structure comparison. , 1996, Methods in enzymology.

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

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

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

[23]  Christus,et al.  A General Method Applicable to the Search for Similarities in the Amino Acid Sequence of Two Proteins , 2022 .