Traditional biomolecular structure determination by NMR spectroscopy allows for major errors

One of the major goals of structural genomics projects is to determine the three-dimensional structure of representative members of as many different fold families as possible. Comparative modeling is expected to fill the remaining gaps by providing structural models of homologs of the experimentally determined proteins. However, for such an approach to be successful it is essential that the quality of the experimentally determined structures is adequate. In an attempt to build a homology model for the protein dynein light chain 2A (DLC2A) we found two potential templates, both experimentally determined nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) structures originating from structural genomics efforts. Despite their high sequence identity (96%), the folds of the two structures are markedly different. This urged us to perform in-depth analyses of both structure ensembles and the deposited experimental data, the results of which clearly identify one of the two models as largely incorrect. Next, we analyzed the quality of a large set of recent NMR-derived structure ensembles originating from both structural genomics projects and individual structure determination groups. Unfortunately, a visual inspection of structures exhibiting lower quality scores than DLC2A reveals that the seriously flawed DLC2A structure is not an isolated incident. Overall, our results illustrate that the quality of NMR structures cannot be reliably evaluated using only traditional experimental input data and overall quality indicators as a reference and clearly demonstrate the urgent need for a tight integration of more sophisticated structure validation tools in NMR structure determination projects. In contrast to common methodologies where structures are typically evaluated as a whole, such tools should preferentially operate on a per-residue basis.     

Assessing model accuracy using the homology modeling automatically software

Homology modeling is a powerful technique that greatly increases the value of experimental structure determination by using the structural information of one protein to predict the structures of homologous proteins. We have previously described a method of homology modeling by satisfaction of spatial restraints (Li et al., Protein Sci 1997;6:956-970). The Homology Modeling Automatically (HOMA) web site, , is a new tool, using this method to predict 3D structure of a target protein based on the sequence alignment of the target protein to a template protein and the structure coordinates of the template. The user is presented with the resulting models, together with an extensive structure validation report providing critical assessments of the quality of the resulting homology models. The homology modeling method employed by HOMA was assessed and validated using twenty-four groups of homologous proteins. Using HOMA, homology models were generated for 510 proteins, including 264 proteins modeled with correct folds and 246 modeled with incorrect folds. Accuracies of these models were assessed by superimposition on the corresponding experimentally determined structures. A subset of these results was compared with parallel studies of modeling accuracy using several other automated homology modeling approaches. Overall, HOMA provides prediction accuracies similar to other state-of-the-art homology modeling methods. We also provide an evaluation of several structure quality validation tools in assessing the accuracy of homology models generated with HOMA. This study demonstrates that Verify3D (Luthy et al., Nature 1992;356:83-85) and ProsaII (Sippl, Proteins 1993;17:355-362) are most sensitive in distinguishing between homology models with correct or incorrect folds. For homology models that have the correct fold, the steric conformational energy (including primarily the Van der Waals energy), MolProbity clashscore (Word et al., Protein Sci 2000;9:2251-2259), and the PROCHECK G-factors (Laskowski et al., J Biomol NMR 1996;8:477-486) provide sensitive and consistent methods for assessing accuracy and can distinguish between homology models of higher and lower accuracy. As demonstrated in the accompanying paper (Bhattacharya et al., accompanying paper), combinations of these scores for models generated with HOMA provide a basis for distinguishing low from high accuracy models.     

Towards the high-resolution protein structure prediction. Fast refinement of reduced models with all-atom force field

Background  

Although experimental methods for determining protein structure are providing high resolution structures, they cannot keep the pace at which amino acid sequences are resolved on the scale of entire genomes. For a considerable fraction of proteins whose structures will not be determined experimentally, computational methods can provide valuable information. The value of structural models in biological research depends critically on their quality. Development of high-accuracy computational methods that reliably generate near-experimental quality structural models is an important, unsolved problem in the protein structure modeling.     

Integrative Structural Biology in the Era of Accurate Structure Prediction

Characterizing the three-dimensional structure of macromolecules is central to understanding their function. Traditionally, structures of proteins and their complexes have been determined using experimental techniques such as X-ray crystallography, NMR, or cryo-electron microscopy—applied individually or in an integrative manner. Meanwhile, however, computational methods for protein structure prediction have been improving their accuracy, gradually, then suddenly, with the breakthrough advance by AlphaFold2, whose models of monomeric proteins are often as accurate as experimental structures. This breakthrough foreshadows a new era of computational methods that can build accurate models for most monomeric proteins. Here, we envision how such accurate modeling methods can combine with experimental structural biology techniques, enhancing integrative structural biology. We highlight the challenges that arise when considering multiple structural conformations, protein complexes, and polymorphic assemblies. These challenges will motivate further developments, both in modeling programs and in methods to solve experimental structures, towards better and quicker investigation of structure–function relationships.     

3Drefine: Consistent protein structure refinement by optimizing hydrogen bonding network and atomic‐level energy minimization

One of the major limitations of computational protein structure prediction is the deviation of predicted models from their experimentally derived true, native structures. The limitations often hinder the possibility of applying computational protein structure prediction methods in biochemical assignment and drug design that are very sensitive to structural details. Refinement of these low‐resolution predicted models to high‐resolution structures close to the native state, however, has proven to be extremely challenging. Thus, protein structure refinement remains a largely unsolved problem. Critical assessment of techniques for protein structure prediction (CASP) specifically indicated that most predictors participating in the refinement category still did not consistently improve model quality. Here, we propose a two‐step refinement protocol, called 3Drefine, to consistently bring the initial model closer to the native structure. The first step is based on optimization of hydrogen bonding (HB) network and the second step applies atomic‐level energy minimization on the optimized model using a composite physics and knowledge‐based force fields. The approach has been evaluated on the CASP benchmark data and it exhibits consistent improvement over the initial structure in both global and local structural quality measures. 3Drefine method is also computationally inexpensive, consuming only few minutes of CPU time to refine a protein of typical length (300 residues). 3Drefine web server is freely available at http://sysbio.rnet.missouri.edu/3Drefine/ . Proteins 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Protein structure validation by generalized linear model root-mean-square deviation prediction

Large-scale initiatives for obtaining spatial protein structures by experimental or computational means have accentuated the need for the critical assessment of protein structure determination and prediction methods. These include blind test projects such as the critical assessment of protein structure prediction (CASP) and the critical assessment of protein structure determination by nuclear magnetic resonance (CASD-NMR). An important aim is to establish structure validation criteria that can reliably assess the accuracy of a new protein structure. Various quality measures derived from the coordinates have been proposed. A universal structural quality assessment method should combine multiple individual scores in a meaningful way, which is challenging because of their different measurement units. Here, we present a method based on a generalized linear model (GLM) that combines diverse protein structure quality scores into a single quantity with intuitive meaning, namely the predicted coordinate root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) value between the present structure and the (unavailable) "true" structure (GLM-RMSD). For two sets of structural models from the CASD-NMR and CASP projects, this GLM-RMSD value was compared with the actual accuracy given by the RMSD value to the corresponding, experimentally determined reference structure from the Protein Data Bank (PDB). The correlation coefficients between actual (model vs. reference from PDB) and predicted (model vs. "true") heavy-atom RMSDs were 0.69 and 0.76, for the two datasets from CASD-NMR and CASP, respectively, which is considerably higher than those for the individual scores (-0.24 to 0.68). The GLM-RMSD can thus predict the accuracy of protein structures more reliably than individual coordinate-based quality scores.     

Methodologies for target selection in structural genomics

As the number of complete genomes that have been sequenced keeps growing, unknown areas of the protein space are revealed and new horizons open up. Most of this information will be fully appreciated only when the structural information about the encoded proteins becomes available. The goal of structural genomics is to direct large-scale efforts of protein structure determination, so as to increase the impact of these efforts. This review focuses on current approaches in structural genomics aimed at selecting representative proteins as targets for structure determination. We will discuss the concept of representative structures/folds, the current methodologies for identifying those proteins, and computational techniques for identifying proteins which are expected to adopt new structural folds.     

Characterizing the existing and potential structural space of proteins by large-scale multiple loop permutations

Worldwide structural genomics projects are increasing structure coverage of sequence space but have not significantly expanded the protein structure space itself (i.e., number of unique structural folds) since 2007. Discovering new structural folds experimentally by directed evolution and random recombination of secondary-structure blocks is also proved rarely successful. Meanwhile, previous computational efforts for large-scale mapping of protein structure space are limited to simple model proteins and led to an inconclusive answer on the completeness of the existing observed protein structure space. Here, we build novel protein structures by extending naturally occurring circular (single-loop) permutation to multiple loop permutations (MLPs). These structures are clustered by structural similarity measure called TM-score. The computational technique allows us to produce different structural clusters on the same naturally occurring, packed, stable core but with alternatively connected secondary-structure segments. A large-scale MLP of 2936 domains from structural classification of protein domains reproduces those existing structural clusters (63%) mostly as hubs for many nonredundant sequences and illustrates newly discovered novel clusters as islands adopted by a few sequences only. Results further show that there exist a significant number of novel potentially stable clusters for medium-size or large-size single-domain proteins, in particular, > 100 amino acid residues, that are either not yet adopted by nature or adopted only by a few sequences. This study suggests that MLP provides a simple yet highly effective tool for engineering and design of novel protein structures (including naturally knotted proteins). The implication of recovering new-fold targets from critical assessment of structure prediction techniques (CASP) by MLP on template-based structure prediction is also discussed. Our MLP structures are available for download at the publication page of the Web site http://sparks.informatics.iupui.edu.     

Filtering and selection of structural models: combining docking and NMR

It is generally accepted that protein structures are more conserved than protein sequences, and 3D structure determination by computer simulations have become an important necessity in the postgenomic area. Despite major successes no robust, fast, and automated ab initio prediction algorithms for deriving accurate folds of single polypeptide chains or structures of intermolecular complexes exist at present. Here we present a methodology that uses selection and filtering of structural models generated by docking of known substructures such as individual proteins or domains through easily obtainable experimental NMR constraints. In particular, residual dipolar couplings and chemical shift mapping are used. Heuristic inclusion of chemical or biochemical knowledge about point-to-point interactions is combined in our selection strategy with the NMR data and commonly used contact potentials. We demonstrate the approach for the determination of protein-protein complexes using the EIN/HPr complex as an example and for establishing the domain-domain orientation in a chimeric protein, the recently determined hybrid human-Escherichia. coli thioredoxin.     

VoroMQA: Assessment of protein structure quality using interatomic contact areas

In the absence of experimentally determined protein structure many biological questions can be addressed using computational structural models. However, the utility of protein structural models depends on their quality. Therefore, the estimation of the quality of predicted structures is an important problem. One of the approaches to this problem is the use of knowledge‐based statistical potentials. Such methods typically rely on the statistics of distances and angles of residue‐residue or atom‐atom interactions collected from experimentally determined structures. Here, we present VoroMQA (Voronoi tessellation‐based Model Quality Assessment), a new method for the estimation of protein structure quality. Our method combines the idea of statistical potentials with the use of interatomic contact areas instead of distances. Contact areas, derived using Voronoi tessellation of protein structure, are used to describe and seamlessly integrate both explicit interactions between protein atoms and implicit interactions of protein atoms with solvent. VoroMQA produces scores at atomic, residue, and global levels, all in the fixed range from 0 to 1. The method was tested on the CASP data and compared to several other single‐model quality assessment methods. VoroMQA showed strong performance in the recognition of the native structure and in the structural model selection tests, thus demonstrating the efficacy of interatomic contact areas in estimating protein structure quality. The software implementation of VoroMQA is freely available as a standalone application and as a web server at http://bioinformatics.lt/software/voromqa . Proteins 2017; 85:1131–1145. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

InterPred: A pipeline to identify and model protein–protein interactions

Protein–protein interactions (PPI) are crucial for protein function. There exist many techniques to identify PPIs experimentally, but to determine the interactions in molecular detail is still difficult and very time‐consuming. The fact that the number of PPIs is vastly larger than the number of individual proteins makes it practically impossible to characterize all interactions experimentally. Computational approaches that can bridge this gap and predict PPIs and model the interactions in molecular detail are greatly needed. Here we present InterPred, a fully automated pipeline that predicts and model PPIs from sequence using structural modeling combined with massive structural comparisons and molecular docking. A key component of the method is the use of a novel random forest classifier that integrate several structural features to distinguish correct from incorrect protein–protein interaction models. We show that InterPred represents a major improvement in protein–protein interaction detection with a performance comparable or better than experimental high‐throughput techniques. We also show that our full‐atom protein–protein complex modeling pipeline performs better than state of the art protein docking methods on a standard benchmark set. In addition, InterPred was also one of the top predictors in the latest CAPRI37 experiment. InterPred source code can be downloaded from http://wallnerlab.org/InterPred Proteins 2017; 85:1159–1170. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Target selection and determination of function in structural genomics

The first crucial step in any structural genomics project is the selection and prioritization of target proteins for structure determination. There may be a number of selection criteria to be satisfied, including that the proteins have novel folds, that they be representatives of large families for which no structure is known, and so on. The better the selection at this stage, the greater is the value of the structures obtained at the end of the experimental process. This value can be further enhanced once the protein structures have been solved if the functions of the given proteins can also be determined. Here we describe the methods used at either end of the experimental process: firstly, sensitive sequence comparison techniques for selecting a high-quality list of target proteins, and secondly the various computational methods that can be applied to the eventual 3D structures to determine the most likely biochemical function of the proteins in question.     

Structural quality of unrefined models in protein docking

Structural characterization of protein‐protein interactions is essential for understanding life processes at the molecular level. However, only a fraction of protein interactions have experimentally resolved structures. Thus, reliable computational methods for structural modeling of protein interactions (protein docking) are important for generating such structures and understanding the principles of protein recognition. Template‐based docking techniques that utilize structural similarity between target protein‐protein interaction and cocrystallized protein‐protein complexes (templates) are gaining popularity due to generally higher reliability than that of the template‐free docking. However, the template‐based approach lacks explicit penalties for intermolecular penetration, as opposed to the typical free docking where such penalty is inherent due to the shape complementarity paradigm. Thus, template‐based docking models are commonly assumed to require special treatment to remove large structural penetrations. In this study, we compared clashes in the template‐based and free docking of the same proteins, with crystallographically determined and modeled structures. The results show that for the less accurate protein models, free docking produces fewer clashes than the template‐based approach. However, contrary to the common expectation, in acceptable and better quality docking models of unbound crystallographically determined proteins, the clashes in the template‐based docking are comparable to those in the free docking, due to the overall higher quality of the template‐based docking predictions. This suggests that the free docking refinement protocols can in principle be applied to the template‐based docking predictions as well. Proteins 2016; 85:39–45. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Prediction of protein loop geometries in solution

The ability to determine the structure of a protein in solution is a critical tool for structural biology, as proteins in their native state are found in aqueous environments. Using a physical chemistry based prediction protocol, we demonstrate the ability to reproduce protein loop geometries in experimentally derived solution structures. Predictions were run on loops drawn from (1)NMR entries in the Protein Databank (PDB), and from (2) the RECOORD database in which NMR entries from the PDB have been standardized and re-refined in explicit solvent. The predicted structures are validated by comparison with experimental distance restraints, a test of structural quality as defined by the WHAT IF structure validation program, root mean square deviation (RMSD) of the predicted loops to the original structural models, and comparison of precision of the original and predicted ensembles. Results show that for the RECOORD ensembles, the predicted loops are consistent with an average of 95%, 91%, and 87% of experimental restraints for the short, medium and long loops respectively. Prediction accuracy is strongly affected by the quality of the original models, with increases in the percentage of experimental restraints violated of 2% for the short loops, and 9% for both the medium and long loops in the PDB derived ensembles. We anticipate the application of our protocol to theoretical modeling of protein structures, such as fold recognition methods; as well as to experimental determination of protein structures, or segments, for which only sparse NMR restraint data is available.     

Ab initio protein structure assembly using continuous structure fragments and optimized knowledge-based force field

Ab initio protein folding is one of the major unsolved problems in computational biology owing to the difficulties in force field design and conformational search. We developed a novel program, QUARK, for template-free protein structure prediction. Query sequences are first broken into fragments of 1-20 residues where multiple fragment structures are retrieved at each position from unrelated experimental structures. Full-length structure models are then assembled from fragments using replica-exchange Monte Carlo simulations, which are guided by a composite knowledge-based force field. A number of novel energy terms and Monte Carlo movements are introduced and the particular contributions to enhancing the efficiency of both force field and search engine are analyzed in detail. QUARK prediction procedure is depicted and tested on the structure modeling of 145 nonhomologous proteins. Although no global templates are used and all fragments from experimental structures with template modeling score >0.5 are excluded, QUARK can successfully construct 3D models of correct folds in one-third cases of short proteins up to 100 residues. In the ninth community-wide Critical Assessment of protein Structure Prediction experiment, QUARK server outperformed the second and third best servers by 18 and 47% based on the cumulative Z-score of global distance test-total scores in the FM category. Although ab initio protein folding remains a significant challenge, these data demonstrate new progress toward the solution of the most important problem in the field.     

结构基因组学研究与核磁共振

各种生物的基因组DNA测序计划的完成,将结构生物学带入了结构基因组学时代.结构基因组学是对所有基因组产物结构的系统性测定,它运用高通量的选择、表达、纯化以及结构测定和计算分析手段,为基因组的每个蛋白质产物提供实验测定的结构或较好的理论模型,这将加速生命科学各个领域的研究.生物信息学、基因工程、结构测定技术等的发展为结构基因组学研究提供了保证.近年来核磁共振在技术方法上的进展,使其成为结构基因组学高通量结构分析中的一个关键方法.     

Recent developments in structural proteomics for protein structure determination

The major challenges in structural proteomics include identifying all the proteins on the genome-wide scale, determining their structure-function relationships, and outlining the precise three-dimensional structures of the proteins. Protein structures are typically determined by experimental approaches such as X-ray crystallography or nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. However, the knowledge of three-dimensional space by these techniques is still limited. Thus, computational methods such as comparative and de novo approaches and molecular dynamic simulations are intensively used as alternative tools to predict the three-dimensional structures and dynamic behavior of proteins. This review summarizes recent developments in structural proteomics for protein structure determination; including instrumental methods such as X-ray crystallography and NMR spectroscopy, and computational methods such as comparative and de novo structure prediction and molecular dynamics simulations.     

CONFOLD: Residue‐residue contact‐guided ab initio protein folding

Predicted protein residue–residue contacts can be used to build three‐dimensional models and consequently to predict protein folds from scratch. A considerable amount of effort is currently being spent to improve contact prediction accuracy, whereas few methods are available to construct protein tertiary structures from predicted contacts. Here, we present an ab initio protein folding method to build three‐dimensional models using predicted contacts and secondary structures. Our method first translates contacts and secondary structures into distance, dihedral angle, and hydrogen bond restraints according to a set of new conversion rules, and then provides these restraints as input for a distance geometry algorithm to build tertiary structure models. The initially reconstructed models are used to regenerate a set of physically realistic contact restraints and detect secondary structure patterns, which are then used to reconstruct final structural models. This unique two‐stage modeling approach of integrating contacts and secondary structures improves the quality and accuracy of structural models and in particular generates better β‐sheets than other algorithms. We validate our method on two standard benchmark datasets using true contacts and secondary structures. Our method improves TM‐score of reconstructed protein models by 45% and 42% over the existing method on the two datasets, respectively. On the dataset for benchmarking reconstructions methods with predicted contacts and secondary structures, the average TM‐score of best models reconstructed by our method is 0.59, 5.5% higher than the existing method. The CONFOLD web server is available at http://protein.rnet.missouri.edu/confold/ . Proteins 2015; 83:1436–1449. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The Protein Model Portal

Structural Genomics has been successful in determining the structures of many unique proteins in a high throughput manner. Still, the number of known protein sequences is much larger than the number of experimentally solved protein structures. Homology (or comparative) modeling methods make use of experimental protein structures to build models for evolutionary related proteins. Thereby, experimental structure determination efforts and homology modeling complement each other in the exploration of the protein structure space. One of the challenges in using model information effectively has been to access all models available for a specific protein in heterogeneous formats at different sites using various incompatible accession code systems. Often, structure models for hundreds of proteins can be derived from a given experimentally determined structure, using a variety of established methods. This has been done by all of the PSI centers, and by various independent modeling groups. The goal of the Protein Model Portal (PMP) is to provide a single portal which gives access to the various models that can be leveraged from PSI targets and other experimental protein structures. A single interface allows all existing pre-computed models across these various sites to be queried simultaneously, and provides links to interactive services for template selection, target-template alignment, model building, and quality assessment. The current release of the portal consists of 7.6 million model structures provided by different partner resources (CSMP, JCSG, MCSG, NESG, NYSGXRC, JCMM, ModBase, SWISS-MODEL Repository). The PMP is available at and from the PSI Structural Genomics Knowledgebase.