×

Serwis używa ciasteczek ("cookies") i podobnych technologii m.in. do utrzymania sesji i w celach statystycznych. • Ustawienia przeglądarki dotyczące obsługi ciasteczek można swobodnie zmieniać. • Całkowite zablokowanie zapisu ciasteczek na dysku komputera uniemożliwi logowanie się do serwisu. • Więcej informacji: Polityka cookies OPI PIB

×

Regulamin korzystania z serwisu PBN znajduję się pod adresem: Regulamin serwisu

Szukaj wśród:
Dane publikacji

Comparative modeling for protein structure prediction

Artykuł
Czasopismo : CURRENT OPINION IN STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY   Tom: 16, Zeszyt: 2, Strony: 1-6
2006 angielski
Identyfikatory
-
Abstrakty ( angielski )
-
With the progression of structural genomics projects, comparative modeling remains an increasingly important method of choice. It helps to bridge the gap between the available sequence and structure information by providing reliable and accurate protein models. Comparative modeling based on more than 30% sequence identity is now approaching its natural template-based limits and further improvements require the development of effective refinement techniques capable of driving models toward native structure. For difficult targets, for which the most significant progress in recent years has been observed, optimal template selection and alignment accuracy are still the major problems.
Bibliografia
-
  1. Bradley, P.& Misura, K.M.& Baker, D., "Toward high-resolution de novo structure prediction for small proteins", Science, vol. 309, 2005, p.1868-1871, A review of recent progress in de novo protein structure prediction.
  2. Baker, D.& Sali, A., "Protein structure prediction and structural genomics", Science, vol. 294, 2001, p.93-96
  3. Chothia, C.& Lesk, A.M., "The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins", EMBO J, vol. 5, 1986, p.823-826
  4. Marti-Renom, M.A.& Stuart, A.C.& Fiser, A.& Sanchez, R.& Melo, F.& Sali, A., "Comparative protein structure modeling of genes and genomes", Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct, vol. 29, 2000, p.291-325
  5. Altschul, S.F.& Madden, T.L.& Schaffer, A.A.& Zhang, J.& Zhang, Z.& Miller, W.& Lipman, D.J., "Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs", Nucleic Acids Res, vol. 25, 1997, p.3389-3402
  6. Ginalski, K.& Grishin, N.V.& Godzik, A.& Rychlewski, L., "Practical lessons from protein structure prediction", Nucleic Acids Res, vol. 33, 2005, p.1874-1891, This comprehensive review outlines currently available practical approaches to protein structure prediction, including recent advances in model quality assessment.
  7. Ohlson, T.& Wallner, B.& Elofsson, A., "Profile-profile methods provide improved fold-recognition: a study of different profile-profile alignment methods", Proteins, vol. 57, 2004, p.188-197, An evaluation of different profile-profile alignment methods.
  8. Wang, G.& Dunbrack Jr., R.L., "Scoring profile-to-profile sequence alignments", Protein Sci, vol. 13, 2004, p.1612-1626
  9. Sadreyev, R.I.& Grishin, N.V., "Quality of alignment comparison by COMPASS improves with inclusion of diverse confident homologs", Bioinformatics, vol. 20, 2004, p.818-828
  10. Wrabl, J.O.& Grishin, N.V., "Gaps in structurally similar proteins: towards improvement of multiple sequence alignment", Proteins, vol. 54, 2004, p.71-87
  11. Przybylski, D.& Rost, B., "Improving fold recognition without folds", J Mol Biol, vol. 341, 2004, p.255-269
  12. Bujnicki, J.M.& Elofsson, A.& Fischer, D.& Rychlewski, L., "Structure prediction meta server", Bioinformatics, vol. 17, 2001, p.750-751
  13. Moult, J.& Fidelis, K.& Tramontano, A.& Rost, B.& Hubbard, T., "Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP) - round VI", Proteins, 2005
  14. Kryshtafovych, A.& Venclovas, C.& Fidelis, K.& Moult, J., "Progress over the first decade of CASP experiments", Proteins, vol. 61, suppl 7, 2005, p.225-236, A description of the progress made in protein structure prediction during the course of the CASP experiments.
  15. Moult, J., "A decade of CASP: progress, bottlenecks and prognosis in protein structure prediction", Curr Opin Struct Biol, vol. 15, 2005, p.285-289, This paper reviews the state of the art in protein structure prediction in the context of a decade of CASP experiments.
  16. Tress, M.& Ezkurdia, I.& Grana, O.& Lopez, G.& Valencia, A., "Assessment of predictions submitted for the CASP6 comparative modelling category", Proteins, vol. 61, suppl 7, 2005, p.27-45, An assessment of the state of the art in comparative modeling from CASP6.
  17. Ginalski, K.& Rychlewski, L., "Protein structure prediction of CASP5 comparative modeling and fold recognition targets using consensus alignment approach and 3D assessment", Proteins, vol. 53, suppl 6, 2003, p.410-417
  18. Venclovas, C.& Margelevicius, M., "Comparative modeling in CASP6 using consensus approach to template selection, sequence-structure alignment and structure assessment", Proteins, vol. 61, suppl 7, 2005, p.99-105, A report from one of the best performing groups in the comparative modeling category of CASP6.
  19. Kolinski, A.& Bujnicki, J.M., "Generalized protein structure prediction based on combination of fold-recognition with de novo folding and evaluation of models", Proteins, vol. 61, suppl 7, 2005, p.84-90
  20. Margelevicius, M.& Venclovas, C., "PSI-BLAST-ISS: an intermediate sequence search tool for estimation of the position-specific alignment reliability", BMC Bioinformatics, vol. 6, 2005, p.185
  21. Luthy, R.& Bowie, J.U.& Eisenberg, D., "Assessment of protein models with three-dimensional profiles", Nature, vol. 356, 1992, p.83-85
  22. Sippl, M.J., "Recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins", Proteins, vol. 17, 1993, p.355-362
  23. Rohl, C.A.& Strauss, C.E.& Chivian, D.& Baker, D., "Modeling structurally variable regions in homologous proteins with Rosetta", Proteins, vol. 55, 2004, p.656-677, A de novo method for modeling structurally variable regions in comparative models based on the Rosetta structure prediction algorithm is described and evaluated.
  24. Fischer, D.& Rychlewski, L.& Dunbrack Jr., R.L.& Ortiz, A.R.& Elofsson, A., "CAFASP3: the third critical assessment of fully automated structure prediction methods", Proteins, vol. 53, suppl 6, 2003, p.503-516
  25. Rychlewski, L.& Fischer, D., "LiveBench-8: the large-scale, continuous assessment of automated protein structure prediction", Protein Sci, vol. 14, 2005, p.240-245, A report on the performance of protein structure prediction servers in the LiveBench-8 experiment.
  26. Koh, I.Y.& Eyrich, V.A.& Marti-Renom, M.A.& Przybylski, D.& Madhusudhan, M.S.& Eswar, N.& Grana, O.& Pazos, F.& Valencia, A.& Sali, A. et al., "EVA: evaluation of protein structure prediction servers", Nucleic Acids Res, vol. 31, 2003, p.3311-3315
  27. Deshpande, N.& Addess, K.J.& Bluhm, W.F.& Merino-Ott, J.C.& Townsend-Merino, W.& Zhang, Q.& Knezevich, C.& Xie, L.& Chen, L.& Feng, Z. et al., "The RCSB Protein Data Bank: a redesigned query system and relational database based on the mmCIF schema", Nucleic Acids Res, vol. 33, 2005, p.D233-D237
  28. Ginalski, K.& Elofsson, A.& Fischer, D.& Rychlewski, L., "3D-Jury: a simple approach to improve protein structure predictions", Bioinformatics, vol. 19, 2003, p.1015-1018
  29. Fischer, D., "3D-SHOTGUN: a novel, cooperative, fold-recognition meta-predictor", Proteins, vol. 51, 2003, p.434-441
  30. Ginalski, K.& von Grotthuss, M.& Grishin, N.V.& Rychlewski, L., "Detecting distant homology with Meta-BASIC", Nucleic Acids Res, vol. 32, 2004, p.W576-W581
  31. Zhou, H.& Zhou, Y., "SPARKS 2 and SP(3) servers in CASP 6", Proteins, 2005
  32. Cozzetto, D.& Tramontano, A., "Relationship between multiple sequence alignments and quality of protein comparative models", Proteins, vol. 58, 2005, p.151-157, The distribution of sequence identity in multiple sequence alignments is demonstrated to be a good estimator of the quality of comparative models.
  33. DeWeese-Scott, C.& Moult, J., "Molecular modeling of protein function regions", Proteins, vol. 55, 2004, p.942-961, The authors explore the usefulness of comparative models in deducing details of molecular function. They demonstrate that, in general, good insight into ligand binding can be obtained, providing there are no alignment errors.
  34. Chakravarty, S.& Sanchez, R., "Systematic analysis of added-value in simple comparative models of protein structure", Structure, vol. 12, 2004, p.1461-1470, This study justifies the use of comparative models instead of templates to estimate structure-derived properties of proteins, showing that, in general, their added value increases with lower target-template sequence identity.
  35. Chakravarty, S.& Wang, L.& Sanchez, R., "Accuracy of structure-derived properties in simple comparative models of protein structures", Nucleic Acids Res, vol. 33, 2005, p.244-259, In an extension of their previous work [34••], the authors show that the average accuracy of structure-derived properties of comparative models increases with higher target-template sequence identity. They also reveal that, for most properties, the differences observed between NMR and X-ray structures are similar to the errors in models based on templates with ∼40% sequence identity.
  36. Giorgetti, A.& Raimondo, D.& Miele, A.E.& Tramontano, A., "Evaluating the usefulness of protein structure models for molecular replacement", Bioinformatics, vol. 21, 2005, p.ii72-ii76, This study reveals that there is a clear relationship between the quality of comparative models and their suitability for molecular replacement. It also shows that target-template sequence identity is not a good diagnostic for the success of the procedure.
  37. Contreras-Moreira, B.& Ezkurdia, I.& Tress, M.L.& Valencia, A., "Empirical limits for template-based protein structure prediction: the CASP5 example", FEBS Lett, vol. 579, 2005, p.1203-1207, An analysis of the empirical limits of template-based modeling of protein structure suggests that the methodology is approaching its limits for easy comparative modeling and that additional improvements in quality require information not available from template structures.
  38. Zhang, Y.& Skolnick, J., "Automated structure prediction of weakly homologous proteins on a genomic scale", Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, vol. 101, 2004, p.7594-7599
  39. Misura, K.M.& Baker, D., "Progress and challenges in high-resolution refinement of protein structure models", Proteins, vol. 59, 2005, p.15-29
  40. Qian, B.& Ortiz, A.R.& Baker, D., "Improvement of comparative model accuracy by free-energy optimization along principal components of natural structural variation", Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, vol. 101, 2004, p.15346-15351, The authors present a novel approach to refining comparative models by free energy optimization along evolutionarily favored sampling directions. They show that improvement in model quality can be obtained.
  41. Grishin, N.V., "Fold change in evolution of protein structures", J Struct Biol, vol. 134, 2001, p.167-185
  42. Kinch, L.N.& Grishin, N.V., "Evolution of protein structures and functions", Curr Opin Struct Biol, vol. 12, 2002, p.400-408
  43. Grant, A.& Lee, D.& Orengo, C., "Progress towards mapping the universe of protein folds", Genome Biol, vol. 5, 2004, p.107
  44. Yan, Y.& Moult, J., "Protein family clustering for structural genomics", J Mol Biol, vol. 353, 2005, p.744-759
  45. Liu, J.& Hegyi, H.& Acton, T.B.& Montelione, G.T.& Rost, B., "Automatic target selection for structural genomics on eukaryotes", Proteins, vol. 56, 2004, p.188-200
  46. Sanchez, R.& Pieper, U.& Melo, F.& Eswar, N.& Marti-Renom, M.A.& Madhusudhan, M.S.& Mirkovic, N.& Sali, A., "Protein structure modeling for structural genomics", Nat Struct Biol, vol. 7, suppl, 2000, p.986-990
Zacytuj dokument
-