Protein structure prediction by threading methods: Evaluation of current techniques

This paper evaluates the results of a protein structure prediction contest. The predictions were made using threading procedures, which employ techniques for aligning sequences with 3D structures to select the correct fold of a given sequence from a set of alternatives. Nine different teams submitted 86 predictions, on a total of 21 target proteins with little or no sequence homology to proteins of known structure. The 3D structures of these proteins were newly determined by experimental methods, but not yet published or otherwise available to the predictors. The predictions, made from the amino acid sequence alone, thus represent a genuine test of the current performance of threading methods. Only a subset of all the predictions is evaluated here. It corresponds to the 44 predictions submitted for the 11 target proteins seen to adopt known folds. The predictions for the remaining 10 proteins were not analyzed, although weak similarities with known folds may also exist in these proteins. We find that threading methods are capable of identifying the correct fold in many cases, but not reliably enough as yet. Every team predicts correctly a different set of targets, with virtually all targets predicted correctly by at least one team. Also, common folds such as TIM barrels are recognized more readily than folds with only a few known examples. However, quite surprisingly, the quality of the sequence-structure alignments, corresponding to correctly recognized folds, is generally very poor, as judged by comparison with the corresponding 3D structure alignments. Thus, threading can presently not be relied upon to derive a detailed 3D model from the amino acid sequence. This raises a very intriguing question: how is fold recognition achieved? Our analysis suggests that it may be achieved because threading procedures maximize hydrophobic interactions in the protein core, and are reasonably good at recognizing local secondary structure. © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Threading a database of protein cores

We present an analysis of 10 blind predictions prepared for a recent conference, “Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction.”¹ The sequences of these proteins are not detectably similar to those of any protein in the structure database then available, but we attempted, by a threading method, to recognize similarity to known domain folds. Four of the 10 proteins, as we subsequently learned, do indeed show significant similarity to then-known structures. For 2 of these proteins the predictions were accurate, in the sense that a similar structure was at or near the top of the list of threading scores, and the threading alignment agreed well with the corresponding structural alignment. For the best predicted model mean alignment error relative to the optimal structural alignment was 2.7 residues, arising entirely from small “register shifts” of strands or helices. In the analysis we attempt to identify factors responsible for these successes and failures. Since our threading method does not use gap penalties, we may readily distinguish between errors arising from our prior definition of the “cores” of known structures and errors arising from inherent limitations in the threading potential. It would appear from the results that successful substructure recognition depends most critically on accurate definition of the “fold” of a database protein. This definition must correctly delineate substructures that are, and are not, likely to be conserved during protein evolution. © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

The WWWH of remote homolog detection: the state of the art

The detection of remote homolog pairs of proteins using computational methods is a pivotal problem in structural bioinformatics, aiming to compute protein folds on the basis of information in the database of known structures. In the last 25 years, several methods have been developed to tackle this problem, based on different approaches including sequence-sequence alignments and/or structure comparison. In this article, we will briefly discuss When, Why, Where and How (WWWH) to perform remote homology search, reviewing some of the most widely adopted computational approaches. The specific aim is highlighting the basic criteria implemented by different research groups and commenting on the status of the art as well as on still-open questions.     

Assessment of a protein fold recognition method that takes into account four physicochemical properties: Side-chain packing,solvation, hydrogen-bonding,and local conformation

A protein fold recognition method was tested by the blind prediction of the structures of a set of proteins. The method evaluates the compatibility of an amino acid sequence with a three-dimensional structure using the four evaluation functions: side-chain packing, solvation, hydrogen-bonding, and local conformation functions. The structures of 14 proteins containing 19 sequences were predicted. The predictions were compared with the experimental structures. The experimental results showed that 9 of the 19 target sequences have known folds or portions of known folds. Among them, the folds of Klebsiella aerogenes urease β subunit (KAUB) and pyruvate phosphate dikinase domain 4 (PPDK4) were successfully recognized; our method predicted that KAUB and PPDK4 would adopt the folds of macromomycin (Ig-fold) and phosphoribosylanthra-nilate isomerase:indoleglycerol-phosphate synthase (TIM barrel), respectively, and the experimental structure revealed that they actually adopt the predicted folds. The predictions for the other targets were not successful, but they often gave secondary structural patterns similar to those of the experimental structures. © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.