Profile-profile methods provide improved fold-recognition: a study of different profile-profile alignment methods

To improve the detection of related proteins, it is often useful to include evolutionary information for both the query and target proteins. One method to include this information is by the use of profile-profile alignments, where a profile from the query protein is compared with the profiles from the target proteins. Profile-profile alignments can be implemented in several fundamentally different ways. The similarity between two positions can be calculated using a dot-product, a probabilistic model, or an information theoretical measure. Here, we present a large-scale comparison of different profile-profile alignment methods. We show that the profile-profile methods perform at least 30% better than standard sequence-profile methods both in their ability to recognize superfamily-related proteins and in the quality of the obtained alignments. Although the performance of all methods is quite similar, profile-profile methods that use a probabilistic scoring function have an advantage as they can create good alignments and show a good fold recognition capacity using the same gap-penalties, while the other methods need to use different parameters to obtain comparable performances.     

Predicting enzyme class from protein structure without alignments

Methods for predicting protein function from structure are becoming more important as the rate at which structures are solved increases more rapidly than experimental knowledge. As a result, protein structures now frequently lack functional annotations. The majority of methods for predicting protein function are reliant upon identifying a similar protein and transferring its annotations to the query protein. This method fails when a similar protein cannot be identified, or when any similar proteins identified also lack reliable annotations. Here, we describe a method that can assign function from structure without the use of algorithms reliant upon alignments. Using simple attributes that can be calculated from any crystal structure, such as secondary structure content, amino acid propensities, surface properties and ligands, we describe each enzyme in a non-redundant set. The set is split according to Enzyme Classification (EC) number. We combine the predictions of one-class versus one-class support vector machine models to make overall assignments of EC number to an accuracy of 35% with the top-ranked prediction, rising to 60% accuracy with the top two ranks. In doing so we demonstrate the utility of simple structural attributes in protein function prediction and shed light on the link between structure and function. We apply our methods to predict the function of every currently unclassified protein in the Protein Data Bank.     

Fast,scalable generation of high‐quality protein multiple sequence alignments using Clustal Omega

Multiple sequence alignments are fundamental to many sequence analysis methods. Most alignments are computed using the progressive alignment heuristic. These methods are starting to become a bottleneck in some analysis pipelines when faced with data sets of the size of many thousands of sequences. Some methods allow computation of larger data sets while sacrificing quality, and others produce high‐quality alignments, but scale badly with the number of sequences. In this paper, we describe a new program called Clustal Omega, which can align virtually any number of protein sequences quickly and that delivers accurate alignments. The accuracy of the package on smaller test cases is similar to that of the high‐quality aligners. On larger data sets, Clustal Omega outperforms other packages in terms of execution time and quality. Clustal Omega also has powerful features for adding sequences to and exploiting information in existing alignments, making use of the vast amount of precomputed information in public databases like Pfam.     

Distinguishing enzyme structures from non-enzymes without alignments

The ability to predict protein function from structure is becoming increasingly important as the number of structures resolved is growing more rapidly than our capacity to study function. Current methods for predicting protein function are mostly reliant on identifying a similar protein of known function. For proteins that are highly dissimilar or are only similar to proteins also lacking functional annotations, these methods fail. Here, we show that protein function can be predicted as enzymatic or not without resorting to alignments. We describe 1178 high-resolution proteins in a structurally non-redundant subset of the Protein Data Bank using simple features such as secondary-structure content, amino acid propensities, surface properties and ligands. The subset is split into two functional groupings, enzymes and non-enzymes. We use the support vector machine-learning algorithm to develop models that are capable of assigning the protein class. Validation of the method shows that the function can be predicted to an accuracy of 77% using 52 features to describe each protein. An adaptive search of possible subsets of features produces a simplified model based on 36 features that predicts at an accuracy of 80%. We compare the method to sequence-based methods that also avoid calculating alignments and predict a recently released set of unrelated proteins. The most useful features for distinguishing enzymes from non-enzymes are secondary-structure content, amino acid frequencies, number of disulphide bonds and size of the largest cleft. This method is applicable to any structure as it does not require the identification of sequence or structural similarity to a protein of known function.     

Comprehensive evaluation of protein structure alignment methods: scoring by geometric measures

We report the largest and most comprehensive comparison of protein structural alignment methods. Specifically, we evaluate six publicly available structure alignment programs: SSAP, STRUCTAL, DALI, LSQMAN, CE and SSM by aligning all 8,581,970 protein structure pairs in a test set of 2930 protein domains specially selected from CATH v.2.4 to ensure sequence diversity. We consider an alignment good if it matches many residues, and the two substructures are geometrically similar. Even with this definition, evaluating structural alignment methods is not straightforward. At first, we compared the rates of true and false positives using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with the CATH classification taken as a gold standard. This proved unsatisfactory in that the quality of the alignments is not taken into account: sometimes a method that finds less good alignments scores better than a method that finds better alignments. We correct this intrinsic limitation by using four different geometric match measures (SI, MI, SAS, and GSAS) to evaluate the quality of each structural alignment. With this improved analysis we show that there is a wide variation in the performance of different methods; the main reason for this is that it can be difficult to find a good structural alignment between two proteins even when such an alignment exists. We find that STRUCTAL and SSM perform best, followed by LSQMAN and CE. Our focus on the intrinsic quality of each alignment allows us to propose a new method, called "Best-of-All" that combines the best results of all methods. Many commonly used methods miss 10-50% of the good Best-of-All alignments. By putting existing structural alignments into proper perspective, our study allows better comparison of protein structures. By highlighting limitations of existing methods, it will spur the further development of better structural alignment methods. This will have significant biological implications now that structural comparison has come to play a central role in the analysis of experimental work on protein structure, protein function and protein evolution.     

Using Evolutionary Trees in Protein Secondary Structure Prediction and Other Comparative Sequence Analyses

Previously proposed methods for protein secondary structure prediction from multiple sequence alignments do not efficiently extract the evolutionary information that these alignments contain. The predictions of these methods are less accurate than they could be, because of their failure to consider explicitly the phylogenetic tree that relates aligned protein sequences. As an alternative, we present a hidden Markov model approach to secondary structure prediction that more fully uses the evolutionary information contained in protein sequence alignments. A representative example is presented, and three experiments are performed that illustrate how the appropriate representation of evolutionary relatedness can improve inferences. We explain why similar improvement can be expected in other secondary structure prediction methods and indeed any comparative sequence analysis method.     

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.     

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.     

Structural similarity to link sequence space: new potential superfamilies and implications for structural genomics

The current pace of structural biology now means that protein three-dimensional structure can be known before protein function, making methods for assigning homology via structure comparison of growing importance. Previous research has suggested that sequence similarity after structure-based alignment is one of the best discriminators of homology and often functional similarity. Here, we exploit this observation, together with a merger of protein structure and sequence databases, to predict distant homologous relationships. We use the Structural Classification of Proteins (SCOP) database to link sequence alignments from the SMART and Pfam databases. We thus provide new alignments that could not be constructed easily in the absence of known three-dimensional structures. We then extend the method of Murzin (1993b) to assign statistical significance to sequence identities found after structural alignment and thus suggest the best link between diverse sequence families. We find that several distantly related protein sequence families can be linked with confidence, showing the approach to be a means for inferring homologous relationships and thus possible functions when proteins are of known structure but of unknown function. The analysis also finds several new potential superfamilies, where inspection of the associated alignments and superimpositions reveals conservation of unusual structural features or co-location of conserved amino acids and bound substrates. We discuss implications for Structural Genomics initiatives and for improvements to sequence comparison methods.     

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.     

Identifying sequence-structure pairs undetected by sequence alignments

We examine how effectively simple potential functions previously developed can identify compatibilities between sequences and structures of proteins for database searches. The potential function consists of pairwise contact energies, repulsive packing potentials of residues for overly dense arrangement and short-range potentials for secondary structures, all of which were estimated from statistical preferences observed in known protein structures. Each potential energy term was modified to represent compatibilities between sequences and structures for globular proteins. Pairwise contact interactions in a sequence-structure alignment are evaluated in a mean field approximation on the basis of probabilities of site pairs to be aligned. Gap penalties are assumed to be proportional to the number of contacts at each residue position, and as a result gaps will be more frequently placed on protein surfaces than in cores. In addition to minimum energy alignments, we use probability alignments made by successively aligning site pairs in order by pairwise alignment probabilities. The results show that the present energy function and alignment method can detect well both folds compatible with a given sequence and, inversely, sequences compatible with a given fold, and yield mostly similar alignments for these two types of sequence and structure pairs. Probability alignments consisting of most reliable site pairs only can yield extremely small root mean square deviations, and including less reliable pairs increases the deviations. Also, it is observed that secondary structure potentials are usefully complementary to yield improved alignments with this method. Remarkably, by this method some individual sequence-structure pairs are detected having only 5-20% sequence identity.     

MAP2: multiple alignment of syntenic genomic sequences

We describe a multiple alignment program named MAP2 based on a generalized pairwise global alignment algorithm for handling long, different intergenic and intragenic regions in genomic sequences. The MAP2 program produces an ordered list of local multiple alignments of similar regions among sequences, where different regions between local alignments are indicated by reporting only similar regions. We propose two similarity measures for the evaluation of the performance of MAP2 and existing multiple alignment programs. Experimental results produced by MAP2 on four real sets of orthologous genomic sequences show that MAP2 rarely missed a block of transitively similar regions and that MAP2 never produced a block of regions that are not transitively similar. Experimental results by MAP2 on six simulated data sets show that MAP2 found the boundaries between similar and different regions precisely. This feature is useful for finding conserved functional elements in genomic sequences. The MAP2 program is freely available in source code form at http://bioinformatics.iastate.edu/aat/sas.html for academic use.     

A database and tools for 3-D protein structure comparison and alignment using the Combinatorial Extension (CE) algorithm

The database reported here is derived using the Combinatorial Extension (CE) algorithm which compares pairs of protein polypeptide chains and provides a list of structurally similar proteins along with their structure alignments. Using CE, structure-structure alignments can provide insights into biological function. When a protein of known function is shown to be structurally similar to a protein of unknown function, a relationship might be inferred; a relationship not necessarily detectable from sequence comparison alone. Establishing structure-structure relationships in this way is of great importance as we enter an era of structural genomics where there is a likelihood of an increasing number of structures with unknown functions being determined. Thus the CE database is an example of a useful tool in the annotation of protein structures of unknown function. Comparisons can be performed on the complete PDB or on a structurally representative subset of proteins. The source protein(s) can be from the PDB (updated monthly) or uploaded by the user. CE provides sequence alignments resulting from structural alignments and Cartesian coordinates for the aligned structures, which may be analyzed using the supplied Compare3D Java applet, or downloaded for further local analysis. Searches can be run from the CE web site, http://cl.sdsc.edu/ce.html, or the database and software downloaded from the site for local use.     

Protein fold recognition by total alignment probability

We present a protein fold-recognition method that uses a comprehensive statistical interpretation of structural Hidden Markov Models (HMMs). The structure/fold recognition is done by summing the probabilities of all sequence-to-structure alignments. The optimal alignment can be defined as the most probable, but suboptimal alignments may have comparable probabilities. These suboptimal alignments can be interpreted as optimal alignments to the "other" structures from the ensemble or optimal alignments under minor fluctuations in the scoring function. Summing probabilities for all alignments gives a complete estimate of sequence-model compatibility. In the case of HMMs that produce a sequence, this reflects the fact that due to our indifference to exactly how the HMM produced the sequence, we should sum over all possibilities. We have built a set of structural HMMs for 188 protein structures and have compared two methods for identifying the structure compatible with a sequence: by the optimal alignment probability and by the total probability. Fold recognition by total probability was 40% more accurate than fold recognition by the optimal alignment probability. Proteins 2000;40:451-462.     

A study on protein sequence alignment quality

One of the most central methods in bioinformatics is the alignment of two protein or DNA sequences. However, so far large-scale benchmarks examining the quality of these alignments are scarce. On the other hand, recently several large-scale studies of the capacity of different methods to identify related sequences has led to new insights about the performance of fold recognition methods. To increase our understanding about fold recognition methods, we present a large-scale benchmark of alignment quality. We compare alignments from several different alignment methods, including sequence alignments, hidden Markov models, PSI-BLAST, CLUSTALW, and threading methods. For most methods, the alignment quality increases significantly at about 20% sequence identity. The difference in alignment quality between different methods is quite small, and the main difference can be seen at the exact positioning of the sharp rise in alignment quality, that is, around 15-20% sequence identity. The alignments are improved by using structural information. In general, the best alignments are obtained by methods that use predicted secondary structure information and sequence profiles obtained from PSI-BLAST. One interesting observation is that for different pairs many different methods create the best alignments. This finding implies that if a method that could select the best alignment method for each pair existed, a significant improvement of the alignment quality could be gained.     

Refining multiple sequence alignments with conserved core regions

Accurate multiple sequence alignments of proteins are very important to several areas of computational biology and provide an understanding of phylogenetic history of domain families, their identification and classification. This article presents a new algorithm, REFINER, that refines a multiple sequence alignment by iterative realignment of its individual sequences with the predetermined conserved core (block) model of a protein family. Realignment of each sequence can correct misalignments between a given sequence and the rest of the profile and at the same time preserves the family's overall block model. Large-scale benchmarking studies showed a noticeable improvement of alignment after refinement. This can be inferred from the increased alignment score and enhanced sensitivity for database searching using the sequence profiles derived from refined alignments compared with the original alignments. A standalone version of the program is available by ftp distribution (ftp://ftp.ncbi.nih.gov/pub/REFINER) and will be incorporated into the next release of the Cn3D structure/alignment viewer.     

Definition of the tempo of sequence diversity across an alignment and automatic identification of sequence motifs: Application to protein homologous families and superfamilies

It is often possible to identify sequence motifs that characterize a protein family in terms of its fold and/or function from aligned protein sequences. Such motifs can be used to search for new family members. Partitioning of sequence alignments into regions of similar amino acid variability is usually done by hand. Here, I present a completely automatic method for this purpose: one that is guaranteed to produce globally optimal solutions at all levels of partition granularity. The method is used to compare the tempo of sequence diversity across reliable three-dimensional (3D) structure-based alignments of 209 protein families (HOMSTRAD) and that for 69 superfamilies (CAMPASS). (The mean alignment length for HOMSTRAD and CAMPASS are very similar.) Surprisingly, the optimal segmentation distributions for the closely related proteins and distantly related ones are found to be very similar. Also, optimal segmentation identifies an unusual protein superfamily. Finally, protein 3D structure clues from the tempo of sequence diversity across alignments are examined. The method is general, and could be applied to any area of comparative biological sequence and 3D structure analysis where the constraint of the inherent linear organization of the data imposes an ordering on the set of objects to be clustered.     

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.     

A Shannon entropy-based filter detects high- quality profile-profile alignments in searches for remote homologues

Detection of homologous proteins with low-sequence identity to a given target (remote homologues) is routinely performed with alignment algorithms that take advantage of sequence profile. In this article, we investigate the efficacy of different alignment procedures for the task at hand on a set of 185 protein pairs with similar structures but low-sequence similarity. Criteria based on the SCOP label detection and MaxSub scores are adopted to score the results. We investigate the efficacy of alignments based on sequence-sequence, sequence-profile, and profile-profile information. We confirm that with profile-profile alignments the results are better than with other procedures. In addition, we report, and this is novel, that the selection of the results of the profile-profile alignments can be improved by using Shannon entropy, indicating that this parameter is important to recognize good profile-profile alignments among a plethora of meaningless pairs. By this, we enhance the global search accuracy without losing sensitivity and filter out most of the erroneous alignments. We also show that when the entropy filtering is adopted, the quality of the resulting alignments is comparable to that computed for the target and template structures with CE, a structural alignment program.     

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.