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.     

Vorolign--fast structural alignment using Voronoi contacts

Vorolign, a fast and flexible structural alignment method for two or more protein structures is introduced. The method aligns protein structures using double dynamic programming and measures the similarity of two residues based on the evolutionary conservation of their corresponding Voronoi-contacts in the protein structure. This similarity function allows aligning protein structures even in cases where structural flexibilities exist. Multiple structural alignments are generated from a set of pairwise alignments using a consistency-based, progressive multiple alignment strategy. RESULTS: The performance of Vorolign is evaluated for different applications of protein structure comparison, including automatic family detection as well as pairwise and multiple structure alignment. Vorolign accurately detects the correct family, superfamily or fold of a protein with respect to the SCOP classification on a set of difficult target structures. A scan against a database of >4000 proteins takes on average 1 min per target. The performance of Vorolign in calculating pairwise and multiple alignments is found to be comparable with other pairwise and multiple protein structure alignment methods. AVAILABILITY: Vorolign is freely available for academic users as a web server at http://www.bio.ifi.lmu.de/Vorolign     

Novel protein folds and their nonsequential structural analogs

Newly determined protein structures are classified to belong to a new fold, if the structures are sufficiently dissimilar from all other so far known protein structures. To analyze structural similarities of proteins, structure alignment tools are used. We demonstrate that the usage of nonsequential structure alignment tools, which neglect the polypeptide chain connectivity, can yield structure alignments with significant similarities between proteins of known three-dimensional structure and newly determined protein structures that possess a new fold. The recently introduced protein structure alignment tool, GANGSTA, is specialized to perform nonsequential alignments with proper assignment of the secondary structure types by focusing on helices and strands only. In the new version, GANGSTA+, the underlying algorithms were completely redesigned, yielding enhanced quality of structure alignments, offering alignment against a larger database of protein structures, and being more efficient. We applied DaliLite, TM-align, and GANGSTA+ on three protein crystal structures considered to be novel folds. Applying GANGSTA+ to these novel folds, we find proteins in the ASTRAL40 database, which possess significant structural similarities, albeit the alignments are nonsequential and in some cases involve secondary structure elements aligned in reverse orientation. A web server is available at http://agknapp.chemie.fu-berlin.de/gplus for pairwise alignment, visualization, and database comparison.     

Analysis on sliding helices and strands in protein structural comparisons: a case study with protein kinases

Protein structural alignments are generally considered as 'golden standard' for the alignment at the level of amino acid residues. In this study we have compared the quality of pairwise and multiple structural alignments of about 5900 homologous proteins from 718 families of known 3-D structures. We observe shifts in the alignment of regular secondary structural elements (helices and strands) between pairwise and multiple structural alignments. The differences between pairwise and multiple structural alignments within helical and beta-strand regions often correspond to 4 and 2 residue positions respectively. Such shifts correspond approximately to "one turn" of these regular secondary structures. We have performed manual analysis explicitly on the family of protein kinases. We note shifts of one or two turns in helix-helix alignments obtained using pairwise and multiple structural alignments. Investigations on the quality of the equivalent helix-helix, strand-strand pairs in terms of their residue side-chain accessibilities have been made. Our results indicate that the quality of the pairwise alignments is comparable to that of the multiple structural alignments and, in fact, is often better. We propose that pairwise alignment of protein structures should also be used in formulation of methods for structure prediction and evolutionary analysis.     

Adaptive Smith–Waterman residue match seeding for protein structural alignment

The POLYFIT rigid‐body algorithm for automated global pairwise and multiple protein structural alignment is presented. Smith–Waterman local alignment is used to establish a set of seed equivalences that are extended using Needleman–Wunsch dynamic programming techniques. Structural and functional interaction constraints provided by evolution are encoded as one‐dimensional residue physical environment strings for alignment of highly structurally overlapped protein pairs. Local structure alignment of more distantly related pairs is carried out using rigid‐body conformational matching of 15‐residue fragments, with allowance made for less stringent conformational matching of metal‐ion and small molecule ligand‐contact, disulphide bridge, and cis‐peptide correspondences. Protein structural plasticity is accommodated through the stepped adjustment of a single empirical distance parameter value in the calculation of the Smith–Waterman dynamic programming matrix. Structural overlap is used both as a measure of similarity and to assess alignment quality. Pairwise alignment accuracy has been benchmarked against that of 10 widely used aligners on the Sippl and Wiederstein set of difficult pairwise structure alignment problems, and more extensively against that of Matt, SALIGN, and MUSTANG in pairwise and multiple structural alignments of protein domains with low shared sequence identity in the SCOP‐ASTRAL 40% compendium. The results demonstrate the advantages of POLYFIT over other aligners in the efficient and robust identification of matching seed residue positions in distantly related protein targets and in the generation of longer structurally overlapped alignment lengths. Superposition‐based application areas include comparative modeling and protein and ligand design. POLYFIT is available on the Web server at http://polyfit.insa‐toulouse.fr . Proteins 2013; 81:1823–1839. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Biological insights from topology independent comparison of protein 3D structures

Comparing and classifying the three-dimensional (3D) structures of proteins is of crucial importance to molecular biology, from helping to determine the function of a protein to determining its evolutionary relationships. Traditionally, 3D structures are classified into groups of families that closely resemble the grouping according to their primary sequence. However, significant structural similarities exist at multiple levels between proteins that belong to these different structural families. In this study, we propose a new algorithm, CLICK, to capture such similarities. The method optimally superimposes a pair of protein structures independent of topology. Amino acid residues are represented by the Cartesian coordinates of a representative point (usually the C(α) atom), side chain solvent accessibility, and secondary structure. Structural comparison is effected by matching cliques of points. CLICK was extensively benchmarked for alignment accuracy on four different sets: (i) 9537 pair-wise alignments between two structures with the same topology; (ii) 64 alignments from set (i) that were considered to constitute difficult alignment cases; (iii) 199 pair-wise alignments between proteins with similar structure but different topology; and (iv) 1275 pair-wise alignments of RNA structures. The accuracy of CLICK alignments was measured by the average structure overlap score and compared with other alignment methods, including HOMSTRAD, MUSTANG, Geometric Hashing, SALIGN, DALI, GANGSTA(+), FATCAT, ARTS and SARA. On average, CLICK produces pair-wise alignments that are either comparable or statistically significantly more accurate than all of these other methods. We have used CLICK to uncover relationships between (previously) unrelated proteins. These new biological insights include: (i) detecting hinge regions in proteins where domain or sub-domains show flexibility; (ii) discovering similar small molecule binding sites from proteins of different folds and (iii) discovering topological variants of known structural/sequence motifs. Our method can generally be applied to compare any pair of molecular structures represented in Cartesian coordinates as exemplified by the RNA structure superimposition benchmark.     

Analysis on sliding helices and strands in protein structural comparisons: A case study with protein kinases

Protein structural alignments are generally considered as ‘golden standard’ for the alignment at the level of amino acid residues. In this study we have compared the quality of pairwise and multiple structural alignments of about 5900 homologous proteins from 718 families of known 3-D structures. We observe shifts in the alignment of regular secondary structural elements (helices and strands) between pairwise and multiple structural alignments. The differences between pairwise and multiple structural alignments within helical and β-strand regions often correspond to 4 and 2 residue positions respectively. Such shifts correspond approximately to “one turn” of these regular secondary structures. We have performed manual analysis explicitly on the family of protein kinases. We note shifts of one or two turns in helix-helix alignments obtained using pairwise and multiple structural alignments. Investigations on the quality of the equivalent helix-helix, strand-strand pairs in terms of their residue side-chain accessibilities have been made. Our results indicate that the quality of the pairwise alignments is comparable to that of the multiple structural alignments and, in fact, is often better. We propose that pairwise alignment of protein structures should also be used in formulation of methods for structure prediction and evolutionary analysis.     

Multiple protein sequence alignment from tertiary structure comparison: assignment of global and residue confidence levels.

An algorithm is presented for the accurate and rapid generation of multiple protein sequence alignments from tertiary structure comparisons. A preliminary multiple sequence alignment is performed using sequence information, which then determines an initial superposition of the structures. A structure comparison algorithm is applied to all pairs of proteins in the superimposed set and a similarity tree calculated. Multiple sequence alignments are then generated by following the tree from the branches to the root. At each branchpoint of the tree, a structure-based sequence alignment and coordinate transformations are output, with the multiple alignment of all structures output at the root. The algorithm encoded in STAMP (STructural Alignment of Multiple Proteins) is shown to give alignments in good agreement with published structural accounts within the dehydrogenase fold domains, globins, and serine proteinases. In order to reduce the need for visual verification, two similarity indices are introduced to determine the quality of each generated structural alignment. Sc quantifies the global structural similarity between pairs or groups of proteins, whereas Pij' provides a normalized measure of the confidence in the alignment of each residue. STAMP alignments have the quality of each alignment characterized by Sc and Pij' values and thus provide a reproducible resource for studies of residue conservation within structural motifs.     

Development and validation of a consistency based multiple structure alignment algorithm

SUMMARY: We introduce an algorithm that uses the information gained from simultaneous consideration of an entire group of related proteins to create multiple structure alignments (MSTAs). Consistency-based alignment (CBA) first harnesses the information contained within regions that are consistently aligned among a set of pairwise superpositions in order to realign pairs of proteins through both global and local refinement methods. It then constructs a multiple alignment that is maximally consistent with the improved pairwise alignments. We validate CBA's alignments by assessing their accuracy in regions where at least two of the aligned structures contain the same conserved sequence motif. RESULTS: CBA correctly aligns well over 90% of motif residues in superpositions of proteins belonging to the same family or superfamily, and it outperforms a number of previously reported MSTA algorithms.     

Alignment of protein sequences by their profiles

The accuracy of an alignment between two protein sequences can be improved by including other detectably related sequences in the comparison. We optimize and benchmark such an approach that relies on aligning two multiple sequence alignments, each one including one of the two protein sequences. Thirteen different protocols for creating and comparing profiles corresponding to the multiple sequence alignments are implemented in the SALIGN command of MODELLER. A test set of 200 pairwise, structure-based alignments with sequence identities below 40% is used to benchmark the 13 protocols as well as a number of previously described sequence alignment methods, including heuristic pairwise sequence alignment by BLAST, pairwise sequence alignment by global dynamic programming with an affine gap penalty function by the ALIGN command of MODELLER, sequence-profile alignment by PSI-BLAST, Hidden Markov Model methods implemented in SAM and LOBSTER, pairwise sequence alignment relying on predicted local structure by SEA, and multiple sequence alignment by CLUSTALW and COMPASS. The alignment accuracies of the best new protocols were significantly better than those of the other tested methods. For example, the fraction of the correctly aligned residues relative to the structure-based alignment by the best protocol is 56%, which can be compared with the accuracies of 26%, 42%, 43%, 48%, 50%, 49%, 43%, and 43% for the other methods, respectively. The new method is currently applied to large-scale comparative protein structure modeling of all known sequences.     

Automated multiple structure alignment and detection of a common substructural motif

While a number of approaches have been geared toward multiple sequence alignments, to date there have been very few approaches to multiple structure alignment and detection of a recurring substructural motif. Among these, none performs both multiple structure comparison and motif detection simultaneously. Further, none considers all structures at the same time, rather than initiating from pairwise molecular comparisons. We present such a multiple structural alignment algorithm. Given an ensemble of protein structures, the algorithm automatically finds the largest common substructure (core) of C(alpha) atoms that appears in all the molecules in the ensemble. The detection of the core and the structural alignment are done simultaneously. Additional structural alignments also are obtained and are ranked by the sizes of the substructural motifs, which are present in the entire ensemble. The method is based on the geometric hashing paradigm. As in our previous structural comparison algorithms, it compares the structures in an amino acid sequence order-independent way, and hence the resulting alignment is unaffected by insertions, deletions and protein chain directionality. As such, it can be applied to protein surfaces, protein-protein interfaces and protein cores to find the optimally, and suboptimally spatially recurring substructural motifs. There is no predefinition of the motif. We describe the algorithm, demonstrating its efficiency. In particular, we present a range of results for several protein ensembles, with different folds and belonging to the same, or to different, families. Since the algorithm treats molecules as collections of points in three-dimensional space, it can also be applied to other molecules, such as RNA, or drugs.     

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.     

Accurate detection of very sparse sequence motifs.

Protein sequence alignments are more reliable the shorter the evolutionary distance. Here, we align distantly related proteins using many closely spaced intermediate sequences as stepping stones. Such transitive alignments can be generated between any two proteins in a connected set, whether they are direct or indirect sequence neighbors in the underlying library of pairwise alignments. We have implemented a greedy algorithm, MaxFlow, using a novel consistency score to estimate the relative likelihood of alternative paths of transitive alignment. In contrast to traditional profile models of amino acid preferences, MaxFlow models the probability that two positions are structurally equivalent and retains high information content across large distances in sequence space. Thus, MaxFlow is able to identify sparse and narrow active-site sequence signatures which are embedded in high-entropy sequence segments in the structure based multiple alignment of large diverse enzyme superfamilies. In a challenging benchmark based on the urease superfamily, MaxFlow yields better reliability and double coverage compared to available sequence alignment software. This promises to increase information returns from functional and structural genomics, where reliable sequence alignment is a bottleneck to transferring the functional or structural characterization of model proteins to entire protein superfamilies.     

Progressive combinatorial algorithm for multiple structural alignments: application to distantly related proteins

MALECON is a progressive combinatorial procedure for multiple alignments of protein structures. It searches a library of pairwise alignments for all three-protein alignments in which a specified number of residues is consistently aligned. These alignments are progressively expanded to include additional proteins and more spatially equivalent residues, subject to certain criteria. This action involves superimposing the aligned proteins by their hitherto equivalent residues and searching for additional Calpha atoms that lie close in space. The performance of MALECON is illustrated and compared with several extant multiple structure alignment methods by using as test the globin homologous superfamily, the OB and the Jellyrolls folds. MALECON gives better definitions of the common structural features in the structurally more diverse proteins of the OB and Jellyrolls folds, but it yields comparable results for the more similar globins. When no consistent multiple alignments can be derived for all members of a protein group, our procedure is still capable of automatically generating consistent alignments and common core definitions for subgroups of the members. This finding is illustrated for proteins of the OB fold and SH3 domains, believed to share common structural features, and should be very instrumental in homology modeling and investigations of protein evolution.     

Structure alignment of membrane proteins: Accuracy of available tools and a consensus strategy

Protein structure alignment methods are used for the detection of evolutionary and functionally related positions in proteins. A wide array of different methods are available, but the choice of the best method is often not apparent to the user. Several studies have assessed the alignment accuracy and consistency of structure alignment methods, but none of these explicitly considered membrane proteins, which are important targets for drug development and have distinct structural features. Here, we compared 13 widely used pairwise structural alignment methods on a test set of homologous membrane protein structures (called HOMEP3). Each pair of structures was aligned and the corresponding sequence alignment was used to construct homology models. The model accuracy compared to the known structures was assessed using scoring functions not incorporated in the tested structural alignment methods. The analysis shows that fragment‐based approaches such as FR‐TM‐align are the most useful for aligning structures of membrane proteins. Moreover, fragment‐based approaches are more suitable for comparison of protein structures that have undergone large conformational changes. Nevertheless, no method was clearly superior to all other methods. Additionally, all methods lack a measure to rate the reliability of a position within a structure alignment. To solve both of these problems, we propose a consensus‐type approach, combining alignments from four different methods, namely FR‐TM‐align, DaliLite, MATT, and FATCAT. Agreement between the methods is used to assign confidence values to each position of the alignment. Overall, we conclude that there remains scope for the improvement of structural alignment methods for membrane proteins. Proteins 2015; 83:1720–1732. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

A strategy for the rapid multiple alignment of protein sequences. Confidence levels from tertiary structure comparisons

An algorithm is presented for the multiple alignment of protein sequences that is both accurate and rapid computationally. The approach is based on the conventional dynamic-programming method of pairwise alignment. Initially, two sequences are aligned, then the third sequence is aligned against the alignment of both sequences one and two. Similarly, the fourth sequence is aligned against one, two and three. This is repeated until all sequences have been aligned. Iteration is then performed to yield a final alignment. The accuracy of sequence alignment is evaluated from alignment of the secondary structures in a family of proteins. For the globins, the multiple alignment was on average 99% accurate compared to 90% for pairwise comparison of sequences. For the alignment of immunoglobulin constant and variable domains, the use of many sequences yielded an alignment of 63% average accuracy compared to 41% average for individual variable/constant alignments. The multiple alignment algorithm yields an assignment of disulphide connectivity in mammalian serotransferrin that is consistent with crystallographic data, whereas pairwise alignments give an alternative assignment.     

Seventy-five percent accuracy in protein secondary structure prediction

In this study we present an accurate secondary structure prediction procedure by using a query and related sequences. The most novel aspect of our approach is its reliance on local pairwise alignment of the sequence to be predicted with each related sequence rather than utilization of a multiple alignment. The residue-by-residue accuracy of the method is 75% in three structural states after jack-knife tests. The gain in prediction accuracy compared with the existing techniques, which are at best 72%, is achieved by secondary structure propensities based on both local and long-range effects, utilization of similar sequence information in the form of carefully selected pairwise alignment fragments, and reliance on a large collection of known protein primary structures. The method is especially appropriate for large-scale sequence analysis efforts such as genome characterization, where precise and significant multiple sequence alignments are not available or achievable. Proteins 27:329–335, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

MATRAS: A program for protein 3D structure comparison

The recent accumulation of large amounts of 3D structural data warrants a sensitive and automatic method to compare and classify these structures. We developed a web server for comparing protein 3D structures using the program Matras (http://biunit.aist-nara.ac.jp/matras). An advantage of Matras is its structure similarity score, which is defined as the log-odds of the probabilities, similar to Dayhoff's substitution model of amino acids. This score is designed to detect evolutionarily related (homologous) structural similarities. Our web server has three main services. The first one is a pairwise 3D alignment, which is simply align two structures. A user can assign structures by either inputting PDB codes or by uploading PDB format files in the local machine. The second service is a multiple 3D alignment, which compares several protein structures. This program employs the progressive alignment algorithm, in which pairwise 3D alignments are assembled in the proper order. The third service is a 3D library search, which compares one query structure against a large number of library structures. We hope this server provides useful tools for insights into protein 3D structures.     

MUSTA--a general, efficient, automated method for multiple structure alignment and detection of common motifs: application to proteins.

Here we present an algorithm designed to carry out multiple structure alignment and to detect recurring substructural motifs. So far we have implemented it for comparison of protein structures. However, this general method is applicable to comparisons of RNA structures and to detection of a pharmacophore in a series of drug molecules. Further, its sequence order independence permits its application to detection of motifs on protein surfaces, interfaces, and binding/active sites. While there are many methods designed to carry out pairwise structure comparisons, there are only a handful geared toward the multiple structure alignment task. Most of these tackle multiple structure comparison as a collection of pairwise structure comparison tasks. The multiple structural alignment algorithm presented here automatically finds the largest common substructure (core) of atoms that appears in all the molecules in the ensemble. The detection of the core and the structural alignment are done simultaneously. The algorithm begins by finding small substructures that are common to all the proteins in the ensemble. One of the molecules is considered the reference; the others are the source molecules. The small substructures are stored in special arrays termed combinatorial buckets, which define sets of multistructural alignments from the source molecules that coincide with the same small set of reference atoms (C(alpha)-atoms here). These substructures are initial small fragments that have congruent copies in each of the proteins. The substructures are extended, through the processing of the combinatorial buckets, by clustering the superpositions (transformations). The method is very efficient.