Overcoming sequence misalignments with weighted structural superposition

An appropriate structural superposition identifies similarities and differences between homologous proteins that are not evident from sequence alignments alone. We have coupled our Gaussian‐weighted RMSD (wRMSD) tool with a sequence aligner and seed extension (SE) algorithm to create a robust technique for overlaying structures and aligning sequences of homologous proteins (HwRMSD). HwRMSD overcomes errors in the initial sequence alignment that would normally propagate into a standard RMSD overlay. SE can generate a corrected sequence alignment from the improved structural superposition obtained by wRMSD. HwRMSD's robust performance and its superiority over standard RMSD are demonstrated over a range of homologous proteins. Its better overlay results in corrected sequence alignments with good agreement to HOMSTRAD. Finally, HwRMSD is compared to established structural alignment methods: FATCAT, secondary‐structure matching, combinatorial extension, and Dalilite. Most methods are comparable at placing residue pairs within 2 Å, but HwRMSD places many more residue pairs within 1 Å, providing a clear advantage. Such high accuracy is essential in drug design, where small distances can have a large impact on computational predictions. This level of accuracy is also needed to correct sequence alignments in an automated fashion, especially for omics‐scale analysis. HwRMSD can align homologs with low‐sequence identity and large conformational differences, cases where both sequence‐based and structural‐based methods may fail. The HwRMSD pipeline overcomes the dependency of structural overlays on initial sequence pairing and removes the need to determine the best sequence‐alignment method, substitution matrix, and gap parameters for each unique pair of homologs. Proteins 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

MUSTANG: a multiple structural alignment algorithm

Multiple structural alignment is a fundamental problem in structural genomics. In this article, we define a reliable and robust algorithm, MUSTANG (MUltiple STructural AligNment AlGorithm), for the alignment of multiple protein structures. Given a set of protein structures, the program constructs a multiple alignment using the spatial information of the C(alpha) atoms in the set. Broadly based on the progressive pairwise heuristic, this algorithm gains accuracy through novel and effective refinement phases. MUSTANG reports the multiple sequence alignment and the corresponding superposition of structures. Alignments generated by MUSTANG are compared with several handcurated alignments in the literature as well as with the benchmark alignments of 1033 alignment families from the HOMSTRAD database. The performance of MUSTANG was compared with DALI at a pairwise level, and with other multiple structural alignment tools such as POSA, CE-MC, MALECON, and MultiProt. MUSTANG performs comparably to popular pairwise and multiple structural alignment tools for closely related proteins, and performs more reliably than other multiple structural alignment methods on hard data sets containing distantly related proteins or proteins that show conformational changes.     

Protein sequence threading: Averaging over structures

Multiple sequence alignments are a routine tool in protein fold recognition, but multiple structure alignments are computationally less cooperative. This work describes a method for protein sequence threading and sequence-to-structure alignments that uses multiple aligned structures, the aim being to improve models from protein threading calculations. Sequences are aligned into a field due to corresponding sites in homologous proteins. On the basis of a test set of more than 570 protein pairs, the procedure does improve alignment quality, although no more than averaging over sequences. For the force field tested, the benefit of structure averaging is smaller than that of adding sequence similarity terms or a contribution from secondary structure predictions. Although there is a significant improvement in the quality of sequence-to-structure alignments, this does not directly translate to an immediate improvement in fold recognition capability.     

PALI-a database of Phylogeny and ALIgnment of homologous protein structures

PALI (release 1.2) contains three-dimensional (3-D) structure-dependent sequence alignments as well as structure-based phylogenetic trees of homologous protein domains in various families. The data set of homologous protein structures has been derived by consulting the SCOP database (release 1.50) and the data set comprises 604 families of homologous proteins involving 2739 protein domain structures with each family made up of at least two members. Each member in a family has been structurally aligned with every other member in the same family (pairwise alignment) and all the members in the family are also aligned using simultaneous super-position (multiple alignment). The structural alignments are performed largely automatically, with manual interventions especially in the cases of distantly related proteins, using the program STAMP (version 4.2). Every family is also associated with two dendrograms, calculated using PHYLIP (version 3.5), one based on a structural dissimilarity metric defined for every pairwise alignment and the other based on similarity of topologically equivalent residues. These dendrograms enable easy comparison of sequence and structure-based relationships among the members in a family. Structure-based alignments with the details of structural and sequence similarities, superposed coordinate sets and dendrograms can be accessed conveniently using a web interface. The database can be queried for protein pairs with sequence or structural similarities falling within a specified range. Thus PALI forms a useful resource to help in analysing the relationship between sequence and structure variation at a given level of sequence similarity. PALI also contains over 653 'orphans' (single member families). Using the web interface involving PSI_BLAST and PHYLIP it is possible to associate the sequence of a new protein with one of the families in PALI and generate a phylogenetic tree combining the query sequence and proteins of known 3-D structure. The database with the web interfaced search and dendrogram generation tools can be accessed at http://pauling.mbu.iisc.ernet. in/ approximately pali.     

A comparison of position-specific score matrices based on sequence and structure alignments

Sequence comparison methods based on position-specific score matrices (PSSMs) have proven a useful tool for recognition of the divergent members of a protein family and for annotation of functional sites. Here we investigate one of the factors that affects overall performance of PSSMs in a PSI-BLAST search, the algorithm used to construct the seed alignment upon which the PSSM is based. We compare PSSMs based on alignments constructed by global sequence similarity (ClustalW and ClustalW-pairwise), local sequence similarity (BLAST), and local structure similarity (VAST). To assess performance with respect to identification of conserved functional or structural sites, we examine the accuracy of the three-dimensional molecular models predicted by PSSM-sequence alignments. Using the known structures of those sequences as the standard of truth, we find that model accuracy varies with the algorithm used for seed alignment construction in the pattern local-structure (VAST) > local-sequence (BLAST) > global-sequence (ClustalW). Using structural similarity of query and database proteins as the standard of truth, we find that PSSM recognition sensitivity depends primarily on the diversity of the sequences included in the alignment, with an optimum around 30-50% average pairwise identity. We discuss these observations, and suggest a strategy for constructing seed alignments that optimize PSSM-sequence alignment accuracy and recognition sensitivity.     

Evaluation of PSI-BLAST alignment accuracy in comparison to structural alignments

The PSI-BLAST algorithm has been acknowledged as one of the most powerful tools for detecting remote evolutionary relationships by sequence considerations only. This has been demonstrated by its ability to recognize remote structural homologues and by the greatest coverage it enables in annotation of a complete genome. Although recognizing the correct fold of a sequence is of major importance, the accuracy of the alignment is crucial for the success of modeling one sequence by the structure of its remote homologue. Here we assess the accuracy of PSI-BLAST alignments on a stringent database of 123 structurally similar, sequence-dissimilar pairs of proteins, by comparing them to the alignments defined on a structural basis. Each protein sequence is compared to a nonredundant database of the protein sequences by PSI-BLAST. Whenever a pair member detects its pair-mate, the positions that are aligned both in the sequential and structural alignments are determined, and the alignment sensitivity is expressed as the percentage of these positions out of the structural alignment. Fifty-two sequences detected their pair-mates (for 16 pairs the success was bi-directional when either pair member was used as a query). The average percentage of correctly aligned residues per structural alignment was 43.5+/-2.2%. Other properties of the alignments were also examined, such as the sensitivity vs. specificity and the change in these parameters over consecutive iterations. Notably, there is an improvement in alignment sensitivity over consecutive iterations, reaching an average of 50.9+/-2.5% within the five iterations tested in the current study.     

Progressive structure-based alignment of homologous proteins: Adopting sequence comparison strategies

Comparison of multiple protein structures has a broad range of applications in the analysis of protein structure, function and evolution. Multiple structure alignment tools (MSTAs) are necessary to obtain a simultaneous comparison of a family of related folds. In this study, we have developed a method for multiple structure comparison largely based on sequence alignment techniques. A widely used Structural Alphabet named Protein Blocks (PBs) was used to transform the information on 3D protein backbone conformation as a 1D sequence string. A progressive alignment strategy similar to CLUSTALW was adopted for multiple PB sequence alignment (mulPBA). Highly similar stretches identified by the pairwise alignments are given higher weights during the alignment. The residue equivalences from PB based alignments are used to obtain a three dimensional fit of the structures followed by an iterative refinement of the structural superposition. Systematic comparisons using benchmark datasets of MSTAs underlines that the alignment quality is better than MULTIPROT, MUSTANG and the alignments in HOMSTRAD, in more than 85% of the cases. Comparison with other rigid-body and flexible MSTAs also indicate that mulPBA alignments are superior to most of the rigid-body MSTAs and highly comparable to the flexible alignment methods.     

Information on the secondary structure improves the quality of protein sequence alignment

The most popular algorithms employed in the pairwise alignment of protein primary structures (Smith-Watermann (SW) algorithm, FASTA, BLAST, etc.) only analyze the amino acid sequence. The SW algorithm is the most accurate, yielding alignments that agree best with superimpositions of the corresponding spatial structures of proteins. However, even the SW algorithm fails to reproduce the spatial structure alignment when the sequence identity is lower than 30%. The objective of this work was to develop a new and more accurate algorithm taking the secondary structure of proteins into account. The alignments generated by this algorithm and having the maximal weight with the secondary structure considered proved to be more accurate than SW alignments. With sequences having less than 30% identity, the accuracy (i.e., the portion of reproduced positions of a reference alignment obtained by superimposing the protein spatial structures) of the new algorithm is 58 vs. 35% of the SW algorithm. The accuracy of the new algorithm is much the same with secondary structures established experimentally or predicted theoretically. Hence, the algorithm is applicable to proteins with unknown spatial structures. The program is available at ftp://194.149.64.196/STRUSWER/.     

Consistency matrices: quantified structure alignments for sets of related proteins

Comparing two remotely similar structures is a difficult problem: more often than not, resulting structure alignments will show ambiguities and a unique answer usually does not even exist. In addition, alignments in general have a limited information content because every aligned residue is considered equally important. To solve these issues to a certain extent, one can take the perspective of a whole group of similar structures and then evaluate common structural features. Here, we describe a consistency approach that, although not actually performing a multiple structure alignment, does produce the information that one would conceivably want from such an experiment: the key structural features of the group, e.g., a fold, which in this case are projected onto either a pair of proteins or a single protein. Both representations are useful for a number of applications, ranging from the detection of (partially) wrong structure alignments to protein structure classification and fold recognition. To demonstrate some of these applications, the procedure was applied to 195 SCOP folds containing a total of 1802 domains sharing very low sequence similarity.     

A method for simultaneous alignment of multiple protein structures

Here, we present MultiProt, a fully automated highly efficient technique to detect multiple structural alignments of protein structures. MultiProt finds the common geometrical cores between input molecules. To date, most methods for multiple alignment start from the pairwise alignment solutions. This may lead to a small overall alignment. In contrast, our method derives multiple alignments from simultaneous superpositions of input molecules. Further, our method does not require that all input molecules participate in the alignment. Actually, it efficiently detects high scoring partial multiple alignments for all possible number of molecules in the input. To demonstrate the power of MultiProt, we provide a number of case studies. First, we demonstrate known multiple alignments of protein structures to illustrate the performance of MultiProt. Next, we present various biological applications. These include: (1) a partial alignment of hinge-bent domains; (2) identification of functional groups of G-proteins; (3) analysis of binding sites; and (4) protein-protein interface alignment. Some applications preserve the sequence order of the residues in the alignment, whereas others are order-independent. It is their residue sequence order-independence that allows application of MultiProt to derive multiple alignments of binding sites and of protein-protein interfaces, making MultiProt an extremely useful structural tool.     

一个新的多序列比对算法

多序列比对是生物信息学中基础而又重要的序列分析方法.本文提出一种新的多序列比对算法,该算法综合了渐进比对方法和迭代策略,采用加权函数以调整序列的有偏分布,用neighbor-joining方法构建指导树以确定渐进比对的顺序.通过对BAlibASE中142组蛋白质序列比对的测试,验证了本算法的有效性.与Multalin算法比较的结果表明,本算法能有效地提高分歧较大序列的比对准确率.     

Scoring profile-to-profile sequence alignments

Sequence alignment profiles have been shown to be very powerful in creating accurate sequence alignments. Profiles are often used to search a sequence database with a local alignment algorithm. More accurate and longer alignments have been obtained with profile-to-profile comparison. There are several steps that must be performed in creating profile-profile alignments, and each involves choices in parameters and algorithms. These steps include (1) what sequences to include in a multiple alignment used to build each profile, (2) how to weight similar sequences in the multiple alignment and how to determine amino acid frequencies from the weighted alignment, (3) how to score a column from one profile aligned to a column of the other profile, (4) how to score gaps in the profile-profile alignment, and (5) how to include structural information. Large-scale benchmarks consisting of pairs of homologous proteins with structurally determined sequence alignments are necessary for evaluating the efficacy of each scoring scheme. With such a benchmark, we have investigated the properties of profile-profile alignments and found that (1) with optimized gap penalties, most column-column scoring functions behave similarly to one another in alignment accuracy; (2) some functions, however, have much higher search sensitivity and specificity; (3) position-specific weighting schemes in determining amino acid counts in columns of multiple sequence alignments are better than sequence-specific schemes; (4) removing positions in the profile with gaps in the query sequence results in better alignments; and (5) adding predicted and known secondary structure information improves alignments.     

Potential for dramatic improvement in sequence alignment against structures of remote homologous proteins by extracting structural information from multiple structure alignment

A novel method has been developed for acquiring the correct alignment of a query sequence against remotely homologous proteins by extracting structural information from profiles of multiple structure alignment. A systematic search algorithm combined with a group of score functions based on sequence information and structural information has been introduced in this procedure. A limited number of top solutions (15,000) with high scores were selected as candidates for further examination. On a test-set comprising 301 proteins from 75 protein families with sequence identity less than 30%, the proportion of proteins with completely correct alignment as first candidate was improved to 39.8% by our method, whereas the typical performance of existing sequence-based alignment methods was only between 16.1% and 22.7%. Furthermore, multiple candidates for possible alignment were provided in our approach, which dramatically increased the possibility of finding correct alignment, such that completely correct alignments were found amongst the top-ranked 1000 candidates in 88.3% of the proteins. With the assistance of a sequence database, completely correct alignment solutions were achieved amongst the top 1000 candidates in 94.3% of the proteins. From such a limited number of candidates, it would become possible to identify more correct alignment using a more time-consuming but more powerful method with more detailed structural information, such as side-chain packing and energy minimization, etc. The results indicate that the novel alignment strategy could be helpful for extending the application of highly reliable methods for fold identification and homology modeling to a huge number of homologous proteins of low sequence similarity. Details of the methods, together with the results and implications for future development are presented.     

Improving the quality of twilight-zone alignments

Several recent publications illustrated advantages of using sequence profiles in recognizing distant homologies between proteins. At the same time, the practical usefulness of distant homology recognition depends not only on the sensitivity of the algorithm, but also on the quality of the alignment between a prediction target and the template from the database of known proteins. Here, we study this question for several supersensitive protein algorithms that were previously compared in their recognition sensitivity (Rychlewski et al., 2000). A database of protein pairs with similar structures, but low sequence similarity is used to rate the alignments obtained with several different methods, which included sequence-sequence, sequence-profile, and profile-profile alignment methods. We show that incorporation of evolutionary information encoded in sequence profiles into alignment calculation methods significantly increases the alignment accuracy, bringing them closer to the alignments obtained from structure comparison. In general, alignment quality is correlated with recognition and alignment score significance. For every alignment method, alignments with statistically significant scores correlate with both correct structural templates and good quality alignments. At the same time, average alignment lengths differ in various methods, making the comparison between them difficult. For instance, the alignments obtained by FFAS, the profile-profile alignment algorithm developed in our group are always longer that the alignments obtained with the PSI-BLAST algorithms. To address this problem, we develop methods to truncate or extend alignments to cover a specified percentage of protein lengths. In most cases, the elongation of the alignment by profile-profile methods is reasonable, adding fragments of similar structure. The examples of erroneous alignment are examined and it is shown that they can be identified based on the model quality.     

Comparative Analysis of Nucleic Acid and Protein Primary Structures

The review considers the original works on the primary structure of biopolymers carried out from 1983 to 2003. Most works were supported by the Russian program Human Genome and earlier similar Russian programs. Little-known publications of 1983–1993 and recent unpublished results are described in detail. In the field of genome comparisons, these concern the OWEN hierarchic algorithm aligning syntenic regions of two genome sequences. The resulting global alignment is obtained as an ordered chain of local similarities. Alignment of megabase sequences takes several minutes. The concept of local similarity conflicts is generalized to multiple comparisons. New algorithms aligning protein sequences are described and compared with the Smith–Waterman algorithm, which is now most accurate. The ANCHOR hierarchic algorithm generates alignments of much the same accuracy and is twice as rapid as the Smith–Waterman one. The STRSWer algorithm takes into account the secondary structures of proteins under study. With the secondary structures predicted using the PSI-PRED software for pairs of proteins having 10–30% similarity, the average accuracy of alignments generated by STRSWer is 15% higher than that achieved with the Smith–Waterman algorithm.     

Sequence variations within protein families are linearly related to structural variations

It is commonly believed that similarities between the sequences of two proteins infer similarities between their structures. Sequence alignments reliably recognize pairs of protein of similar structures provided that the percentage sequence identity between their two sequences is sufficiently high. This distinction, however, is statistically less reliable when the percentage sequence identity is lower than 30% and little is known then about the detailed relationship between the two measures of similarity. Here, we investigate the inverse correlation between structural similarity and sequence similarity on 12 protein structure families. We define the structure similarity between two proteins as the cRMS distance between their structures. The sequence similarity for a pair of proteins is measured as the mean distance between the sequences in the subsets of sequence space compatible with their structures. We obtain an approximation of the sequence space compatible with a protein by designing a collection of protein sequences both stable and specific to the structure of that protein. Using these measures of sequence and structure similarities, we find that structural changes within a protein family are linearly related to changes in sequence similarity.     

Predicting reliable regions in protein alignments from sequence profiles

For applications such as comparative modelling one major issue is the reliability of sequence alignments. Reliable regions in alignments can be predicted using sub-optimal alignments of the same pair of sequences. Here we show that reliable regions in alignments can also be predicted from multiple sequence profile information alone.Alignments were created for a set of remotely related pairs of proteins using five different test methods. Structural alignments were used to assess the quality of the alignments and the aligned positions were scored using information from the observed frequencies of amino acid residues in sequence profiles pre-generated for each template structure. High-scoring regions of these profile-derived alignment scores were a good predictor of reliably aligned regions.These profile-derived alignment scores are easy to obtain and are applicable to any alignment method. They can be used to detect those regions of alignments that are reliably aligned and to help predict the quality of an alignment. For those residues within secondary structure elements, the regions predicted as reliably aligned agreed with the structural alignments for between 92% and 97.4% of the residues. In loop regions just under 92% of the residues predicted to be reliable agreed with the structural alignments. The percentage of residues predicted as reliable ranged from 32.1% for helix residues to 52.8% for strand residues.This information could also be used to help predict conserved binding sites from sequence alignments. Residues in the template that were identified as binding sites, that aligned to an identical amino acid residue and where the sequence alignment agreed with the structural alignment were in highly conserved, high scoring regions over 80% of the time. This suggests that many binding sites that are present in both target and template sequences are in sequence-conserved regions and that there is the possibility of translating reliability to binding site prediction.     

Refinement by shifting secondary structure elements improves sequence alignments

Constructing a model of a query protein based on its alignment to a homolog with experimentally determined spatial structure (the template) is still the most reliable approach to structure prediction. Alignment errors are the main bottleneck for homology modeling when the query is distantly related to the template. Alignment methods often misalign secondary structural elements by a few residues. Therefore, better alignment solutions can be found within a limited set of local shifts of secondary structures. We present a refinement method to improve pairwise sequence alignments by evaluating alignment variants generated by local shifts of template‐defined secondary structures. Our method SFESA is based on a novel scoring function that combines the profile‐based sequence score and the structure score derived from residue contacts in a template. Such a combined score frequently selects a better alignment variant among a set of candidate alignments generated by local shifts and leads to overall increase in alignment accuracy. Evaluation of several benchmarks shows that our refinement method significantly improves alignments made by automatic methods such as PROMALS, HHpred and CNFpred. The web server is available at http://prodata.swmed.edu/sfesa . Proteins 2015; 83:411–427. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Fast structure alignment for protein databank searching.

A fast method is described for searching and analyzing the protein structure databank. It uses secondary structure followed by residue matching to compare protein structures and is developed from a previous structural alignment method based on dynamic programming. Linear representations of secondary structures are derived and their features compared to identify equivalent elements in two proteins. The secondary structure alignment then constrains the residue alignment, which compares only residues within aligned secondary structures and with similar buried areas and torsional angles. The initial secondary structure alignment improves accuracy and provides a means of filtering out unrelated proteins before the slower residue alignment stage. It is possible to search or sort the protein structure databank very quickly using just secondary structure comparisons. A search through 720 structures with a probe protein of 10 secondary structures required 1.7 CPU hours on a Sun 4/280. Alternatively, combined secondary structure and residue alignments, with a cutoff on the secondary structure score to remove pairs of unrelated proteins from further analysis, took 10.1 CPU hours. The method was applied in searches on different classes of proteins and to cluster a subset of the databank into structurally related groups. Relationships were consistent with known families of protein structure.     

PROMALS3D: a tool for multiple protein sequence and structure alignments

Although multiple sequence alignments (MSAs) are essential for a wide range of applications from structure modeling to prediction of functional sites, construction of accurate MSAs for distantly related proteins remains a largely unsolved problem. The rapidly increasing database of spatial structures is a valuable source to improve alignment quality. We explore the use of 3D structural information to guide sequence alignments constructed by our MSA program PROMALS. The resulting tool, PROMALS3D, automatically identifies homologs with known 3D structures for the input sequences, derives structural constraints through structure-based alignments and combines them with sequence constraints to construct consistency-based multiple sequence alignments. The output is a consensus alignment that brings together sequence and structural information about input proteins and their homologs. PROMALS3D can also align sequences of multiple input structures, with the output representing a multiple structure-based alignment refined in combination with sequence constraints. The advantage of PROMALS3D is that it gives researchers an easy way to produce high-quality alignments consistent with both sequences and structures of proteins. PROMALS3D outperforms a number of existing methods for constructing multiple sequence or structural alignments using both reference-dependent and reference-independent evaluation methods.