Learning scoring schemes for sequence alignment from partial examples

When aligning biological sequences, the choice of parameter values for the alignment scoring function is critical. Small changes in gap penalties, for example, can yield radically different alignments. A rigorous way to compute parameter values that are appropriate for aligning biological sequences is through inverse parametric sequence alignment. Given a collection of examples of biologically correct alignments, this is the problem of finding parameter values that make the scores of the example alignments close to those of optimal alignments for their sequences. We extend prior work on inverse parametric alignment to partial examples, which contain regions where the alignment is left unspecified, and to an improved formulation based on minimizing the average error between the score of an example and the score of an optimal alignment. Experiments on benchmark biological alignments show we can find parameters that generalize across protein families and that boost the accuracy of multiple sequence alignment by as much as 25%.     

A comparison of scoring functions for protein sequence profile alignment

MOTIVATION: In recent years, several methods have been proposed for aligning two protein sequence profiles, with reported improvements in alignment accuracy and homolog discrimination versus sequence-sequence methods (e.g. BLAST) and profile-sequence methods (e.g. PSI-BLAST). Profile-profile alignment is also the iterated step in progressive multiple sequence alignment algorithms such as CLUSTALW. However, little is known about the relative performance of different profile-profile scoring functions. In this work, we evaluate the alignment accuracy of 23 different profile-profile scoring functions by comparing alignments of 488 pairs of sequences with identity < or =30% against structural alignments. We optimize parameters for all scoring functions on the same training set and use profiles of alignments from both PSI-BLAST and SAM-T99. Structural alignments are constructed from a consensus between the FSSP database and CE structural aligner. We compare the results with sequence-sequence and sequence-profile methods, including BLAST and PSI-BLAST. RESULTS: We find that profile-profile alignment gives an average improvement over our test set of typically 2-3% over profile-sequence alignment and approximately 40% over sequence-sequence alignment. No statistically significant difference is seen in the relative performance of most of the scoring functions tested. Significantly better results are obtained with profiles constructed from SAM-T99 alignments than from PSI-BLAST alignments. AVAILABILITY: Source code, reference alignments and more detailed results are freely available at http://phylogenomics.berkeley.edu/profilealignment/     

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.     

Optimization of a new score function for the generation of accurate alignments

The accuracy of the alignments of protein sequences depends on the score matrix and gap penalties used in performing the alignment. Most score functions are designed to find homologs in the various databases rather than to generate accurate alignments between known homologs. We describe the optimization of a score function for the purpose of generating accurate alignments, as evaluated by using a coordinate root-mean-square deviation (RMSD)-based merit function. We show that the resulting score matrix, which we call STROMA, generates more accurate alignments than other commonly used score matrices, and this difference is not due to differences in the gap penalties. In fact, in contrast to most of the other matrices, the alignment accuracies with STROMA are relatively insensitive to the choice of gap penalty parameters.     

MUSCLE: a multiple sequence alignment method with reduced time and space complexity

Background  

In a previous paper, we introduced MUSCLE, a new program for creating multiple alignments of protein sequences, giving a brief summary of the algorithm and showing MUSCLE to achieve the highest scores reported to date on four alignment accuracy benchmarks. Here we present a more complete discussion of the algorithm, describing several previously unpublished techniques that improve biological accuracy and / or computational complexity. We introduce a new option, MUSCLE-fast, designed for high-throughput applications. We also describe a new protocol for evaluating objective functions that align two profiles.     

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.     

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.     

MUMMALS: multiple sequence alignment improved by using hidden Markov models with local structural information

We have developed MUMMALS, a program to construct multiple protein sequence alignment using probabilistic consistency. MUMMALS improves alignment quality by using pairwise alignment hidden Markov models (HMMs) with multiple match states that describe local structural information without exploiting explicit structure predictions. Parameters for such models have been estimated from a large library of structure-based alignments. We show that (i) on remote homologs, MUMMALS achieves statistically best accuracy among several leading aligners, such as ProbCons, MAFFT and MUSCLE, albeit the average improvement is small, in the order of several percent; (ii) a large collection (>10000) of automatically computed pairwise structure alignments of divergent protein domains is superior to smaller but carefully curated datasets for estimation of alignment parameters and performance tests; (iii) reference-independent evaluation of alignment quality using sequence alignment-dependent structure superpositions correlates well with reference-dependent evaluation that compares sequence-based alignments to structure-based reference alignments.     

Statistics of local multiple alignments

SUMMARY: BLAST statistics have been shown to be extremely useful for searching for significant similarity hits, for amino acid and nucleotide sequences. Although these statistics are well understood for pairwise comparisons, there has been little success developing statistical scores for multiple alignments. In particular, there is no score for multiple alignment that is well founded and treated as a standard. We extend the BLAST theory to multiple alignments. Following some simple assumptions, we present and justify a significance score for multiple segments of a local multiple alignment. We demonstrate its usefulness in distinguishing high and moderate quality multiple alignments from low quality ones, with supporting experiments on orthologous vertebrate promoter sequences.     

Multiple sequence alignment using an exhaustive and greedy algorithm

We describe an exhaustive and greedy algorithm for improving the accuracy of multiple sequence alignment. A simple progressive alignment approach is employed to provide initial alignments. The initial alignment is then iteratively optimized against an objective function. For any working alignment, the optimization involves three operations: insertions, deletions and shuffles of gaps. The optimization is exhaustive since the algorithm applies the above operations to all eligible positions of an alignment. It is also greedy since only the operation that gives the best improving objective score will be accepted. The algorithms have been implemented in the EGMA (Exhaustive and Greedy Multiple Alignment) package using Java programming language, and have been evaluated using the BAliBASE benchmark alignment database. Although EGMA is not guaranteed to produce globally optimized alignment, the tests indicate that EGMA is able to build alignments with high quality consistently, compared with other commonly used iterative and non-iterative alignment programs. It is also useful for refining multiple alignments obtained by other methods.     

PSAR: measuring multiple sequence alignment reliability by probabilistic sampling

Multiple sequence alignment, which is of fundamental importance for comparative genomics, is a difficult problem and error-prone. Therefore, it is essential to measure the reliability of the alignments and incorporate it into downstream analyses. We propose a new probabilistic sampling-based alignment reliability (PSAR) score. Instead of relying on heuristic assumptions, such as the correlation between alignment quality and guide tree uncertainty in progressive alignment methods, we directly generate suboptimal alignments from an input multiple sequence alignment by a probabilistic sampling method, and compute the agreement of the input alignment with the suboptimal alignments as the alignment reliability score. We construct the suboptimal alignments by an approximate method that is based on pairwise comparisons between each single sequence and the sub-alignment of the input alignment where the chosen sequence is left out. By using simulation-based benchmarks, we find that our approach is superior to existing ones, supporting that the suboptimal alignments are highly informative source for assessing alignment reliability. We apply the PSAR method to the alignments in the UCSC Genome Browser to measure the reliability of alignments in different types of regions, such as coding exons and conserved non-coding regions, and use it to guide cross-species conservation study.     

A pairwise alignment algorithm which favors clusters of blocks.

Pairwise sequence alignments aim to decide whether two sequences are related and, if so, to exhibit their related domains. Recent works have pointed out that a significant number of true homologous sequences are missed when using classical comparison algorithms. This is the case when two homologous sequences share several little blocks of homology, too small to lead to a significant score. On the other hand, classical alignment algorithms, when detecting homologies, may fail to recognize all the significant biological signals. The aim of the paper is to give a solution to these two problems. We propose a new scoring method which tends to increase the score of an alignment when "blocks" are detected. This so-called Block-Scoring algorithm, which makes use of dynamic programming, is worth being used as a complementary tool to classical exact alignments methods. We validate our approach by applying it on a large set of biological data. Finally, we give a limit theorem for the score statistics of the algorithm.     

A polynomial time solvable formulation of multiple sequence alignment.

Since traditional multiple alignment formulations are NP-hard, heuristics are commonly employed to find acceptable alignments with no guaranteed performance bound. This causes a substantial difficulty in understanding what the resulting alignment means and in assessing the quality of these alignments. We propose an alternative formulation of multiple alignment based on the idea of finding a multiple alignment of k sequences which preserves k - 1 pairwise alignments as specified by edges of a given tree. Although it is well known that such a preserving alignment always exists, it did not become a mainstream method for multiple alignment since it seems that a lot of information is lost from ignoring pairwise similarities outside the tree. In contrast, by using pairwise alignments that incorporate consistency information from other sequences, we show that it is possible to obtain very good accuracy with the preserving alignment formulation. We show that a reasonable objective function to use is to find the shortest preserving alignment, and, by a reduction to a graph-theoretic problem, that the problem of finding the shortest preserving multiple alignment can be solved in polynomial time. We demonstrate the success of this approach on three sets of benchmark multiple alignments by using consistency-based pairwise alignments from the first stage of two of the best performing progressive alignment algorithms TCoffee and ProbCons and replace the second heuristic progressive step of these algorithms by the exact preserving alignment step. We apply this strategy to TCoffee and show that our approach outperforms TCoffee on two of the three test sets. We apply the strategy to a variant of ProbCons with no iterative refinements and show that our approach achieves similar or better accuracy except on one test set. We also compare our performance to ProbCons with iterative refinements and show that our approach achieves similar or better accuracy on many subcategories even without further refinements. The most important advantage of the preserving alignment formulation is that we are certain that we can solve the problem in polynomial time without using a heuristic. A software program implementing this approach (PSAlign) is available at http://faculty.cs.tamu.edu/shsze/psalign.     

How well does the HoT score reflect sequence alignment accuracy?

Multiple sequence alignment is an essential tool in many areas of biological research, and the accuracy of an alignment can strongly affect the accuracy of a downstream application such as phylogenetic analysis, identification of functional motifs, or polymerase chain reaction primer design. The heads or tails (HoT) method (Landan G, Graur D. 2007. Heads or tails: a simple reliability check for multiple sequence alignments. Mol Biol Evol. 24:1380-1383.) assesses the consistency of an alignment by comparing the alignment of a set of sequences with the alignment of the same set of sequences written in reverse order. This study shows that HoT scores and the alignment accuracies are positively correlated, so alignments with higher HoT scores are preferable. However, HoT scores are overestimates of alignment accuracy in general, with the extent of overestimation depending on the method used for multiple sequence alignment.     

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.     

Homology modeling using parametric alignment ensemble generation with consensus and energy-based model selection

The accuracy of a homology model based on the structure of a distant relative or other topologically equivalent protein is primarily limited by the quality of the alignment. Here we describe a systematic approach for sequence-to-structure alignment, called ‘K*Sync’, in which alignments are generated by dynamic programming using a scoring function that combines information on many protein features, including a novel measure of how obligate a sequence region is to the protein fold. By systematically varying the weights on the different features that contribute to the alignment score, we generate very large ensembles of diverse alignments, each optimal under a particular constellation of weights. We investigate a variety of approaches to select the best models from the ensemble, including consensus of the alignments, a hydrophobic burial measure, low- and high-resolution energy functions, and combinations of these evaluation methods. The effect on model quality and selection resulting from loop modeling and backbone optimization is also studied. The performance of the method on a benchmark set is reported and shows the approach to be effective at both generating and selecting accurate alignments. The method serves as the foundation of the homology modeling module in the Robetta server.     

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.     

An expectation maximization algorithm for training hidden substitution models

We derive an expectation maximization algorithm for maximum-likelihood training of substitution rate matrices from multiple sequence alignments. The algorithm can be used to train hidden substitution models, where the structural context of a residue is treated as a hidden variable that can evolve over time. We used the algorithm to train hidden substitution matrices on protein alignments in the Pfam database. Measuring the accuracy of multiple alignment algorithms with reference to BAliBASE (a database of structural reference alignments) our substitution matrices consistently outperform the PAM series, with the improvement steadily increasing as up to four hidden site classes are added. We discuss several applications of this algorithm in bioinformatics.     

Ancestral sequence alignment under optimal conditions

Background  

Multiple genome alignment is an important problem in bioinformatics. An important subproblem used by many multiple alignment approaches is that of aligning two multiple alignments. Many popular alignment algorithms for DNA use the sum-of-pairs heuristic, where the score of a multiple alignment is the sum of its induced pairwise alignment scores. However, the biological meaning of the sum-of-pairs of pairs heuristic is not obvious. Additionally, many algorithms based on the sum-of-pairs heuristic are complicated and slow, compared to pairwise alignment algorithms.