Improving fold recognition without folds

The most reliable way to align two proteins of unknown structure is through sequence-profile and profile-profile alignment methods. If the structure for one of the two is known, fold recognition methods outperform purely sequence-based alignments. Here, we introduced a novel method that aligns generalised sequence and predicted structure profiles. Using predicted 1D structure (secondary structure and solvent accessibility) significantly improved over sequence-only methods, both in terms of correctly recognising pairs of proteins with different sequences and similar structures and in terms of correctly aligning the pairs. The scores obtained by our generalised scoring matrix followed an extreme value distribution; this yielded accurate estimates of the statistical significance of our alignments. We found that mistakes in 1D structure predictions correlated between proteins from different sequence-structure families. The impact of this surprising result was that our method succeeded in significantly out-performing sequence-only methods even without explicitly using structural information from any of the two. Since AGAPE also outperformed established methods that rely on 3D information, we made it available through. If we solved the problem of CPU-time required to apply AGAPE on millions of proteins, our results could also impact everyday database searches.     

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.     

Architecture of the herpes simplex virus major capsid protein derived from structural bioinformatics

The dispositions of 39 alpha helices of greater than 2.5 turns and four beta sheets in the major capsid protein (VP5, 149 kDa) of herpes simplex virus type 1 were identified by computational and visualization analysis from the 8.5A electron cryomicroscopy structure of the whole capsid. The assignment of helices in the VP5 upper domain was validated by comparison with the recently determined crystal structure of this region. Analysis of the spatial arrangement of helices in the middle domain of VP5 revealed that the organization of a tightly associated bundle of ten helices closely resembled that of a domain fold found in the annexin family of proteins. Structure-based sequence searches suggested that sequences in both the N and C-terminal portions of the VP5 sequence contribute to this domain. The long helices seen in the floor domain of VP5 form an interconnected network within and across capsomeres. The combined structural and sequence-based informatics has led to an architectural model of VP5. This model placed in the context of the capsid provides insights into the strategies used to achieve viral capsid stability.     

Bioinformatics methods to predict protein structure and function. A practical approach

Protein structure prediction by using bioinformatics can involve sequence similarity searches, multiple sequence alignments, identification and characterization of domains, secondary structure prediction, solvent accessibility prediction, automatic protein fold recognition, constructing three-dimensional models to atomic detail, and model validation. Not all protein structure prediction projects involve the use of all these techniques. A central part of a typical protein structure prediction is the identification of a suitable structural target from which to extrapolate three-dimensional information for a query sequence. The way in which this is done defines three types of projects. The first involves the use of standard and well-understood techniques. If a structural template remains elusive, a second approach using nontrivial methods is required. If a target fold cannot be reliably identified because inconsistent results have been obtained from nontrivial data analyses, the project falls into the third type of project and will be virtually impossible to complete with any degree of reliability. In this article, a set of protocols to predict protein structure from sequence is presented and distinctions among the three types of project are given. These methods, if used appropriately, can provide valuable indicators of protein structure and function.     

A contact energy function considering residue hydrophobic environment and its application in protein fold recognition

The three-dimensional （3D） structure prediction of proteins ：is an important task in bioinformatics. Finding energy functions that can better represent residue-residue and residue-solvent interactions is a crucial way to improve the prediction accu- racy. The widely used contact energy functions mostly only consider the contact frequency between different types of residues; however, we find that the contact frequency also relates to the residue hydrophobic environment. Accordingly, we present an improved contact energy function to integrate the two factors, which can reflect the influence of hydrophobic interaction on the stabilization of protein 3D structure more effectively. Furthermore, a fold recognition （threading） approach based on this energy function is developed. The testing results obtained with 20 randomly selected proteins demonstrate that, compared with common contact energy functions, the proposed energy function can improve the accuracy of the fold template prediction from 20% to 50%, and can also improve the accuracy of the sequence-template alignment from 35% to 65%.