Quality of alignment comparison by COMPASS improves with inclusion of diverse confident homologs

MOTIVATION: Adding more distant homologs to a multiple alignment and thus increasing its diversity may eventually deteriorate the numerical profile constructed from this alignment. Here, we addressed the question whether such a diversity limit can be reached in the alignments of confident homologs found by PSI-BLAST, and we analyzed the dependence of the quality of the profile-profile comparison made by COMPASS on the sequence diversity within these alignments. RESULTS: Protein families that have a greater number of diverse confident homologs in the current sequence databases provide an increased quality of similarity detection in profile databases, but produce on average less accurate profile-profile alignments with their remote relatives. This lower alignment accuracy cannot be improved when the most distant members of these families are excluded from their profiles. On the contrary, the presence of more diverse members results in more accurate alignments. For families with a high diversity of confident homologs, the lower quality of profile alignments with their remote relatives seems to be an attribute of these families or their alignments, rather than to be caused by the large number of diverse sequences itself. Our results suggest that at any level of profile diversity, one should include in the multiple alignment as many confident sequence homologs as possible in order to produce the most accurate results.     

COACH: profile-profile alignment of protein families using hidden Markov models

MOTIVATION: Alignments of two multiple-sequence alignments, or statistical models of such alignments (profiles), have important applications in computational biology. The increased amount of information in a profile versus a single sequence can lead to more accurate alignments and more sensitive homolog detection in database searches. Several profile-profile alignment methods have been proposed and have been shown to improve sensitivity and alignment quality compared with sequence-sequence methods (such as BLAST) and profile-sequence methods (e.g. PSI-BLAST). Here we present a new approach to profile-profile alignment we call Comparison of Alignments by Constructing Hidden Markov Models (HMMs) (COACH). COACH aligns two multiple sequence alignments by constructing a profile HMM from one alignment and aligning the other to that HMM. RESULTS: We compare the alignment accuracy of COACH with two recently published methods: Yona and Levitt's prof_sim and Sadreyev and Grishin's COMPASS. On two sets of reference alignments selected from the FSSP database, we find that COACH is able, on average, to produce alignments giving the best coverage or the fewest errors, depending on the chosen parameter settings. AVAILABILITY: COACH is freely available from www.drive5.com/lobster     

Enhancing HMM-based protein profile-profile alignment with structural features and evolutionary coupling information

Background

Protein sequence profile-profile alignment is an important approach to recognizing remote homologs and generating accurate pairwise alignments. It plays an important role in protein sequence database search, protein structure prediction, protein function prediction, and phylogenetic analysis.

Results

In this work, we integrate predicted solvent accessibility, torsion angles and evolutionary residue coupling information with the pairwise Hidden Markov Model (HMM) based profile alignment method to improve profile-profile alignments. The evaluation results demonstrate that adding predicted relative solvent accessibility and torsion angle information improves the accuracy of profile-profile alignments. The evolutionary residue coupling information is helpful in some cases, but its contribution to the improvement is not consistent.

Conclusion

Incorporating the new structural information such as predicted solvent accessibility and torsion angles into the profile-profile alignment is a useful way to improve pairwise profile-profile 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.     

PCMA: fast and accurate multiple sequence alignment based on profile consistency

PCMA (profile consistency multiple sequence alignment) is a progressive multiple sequence alignment program that combines two different alignment strategies. Highly similar sequences are aligned in a fast way as in ClustalW, forming pre-aligned groups. The T-Coffee strategy is applied to align the relatively divergent groups based on profile-profile comparison and consistency. The scoring function for local alignments of pre-aligned groups is based on a novel profile-profile comparison method that is a generalization of the PSI-BLAST approach to profile-sequence comparison. PCMA balances speed and accuracy in a flexible way and is suitable for aligning large numbers of sequences. AVAILABILITY: PCMA is freely available for non-commercial use. Pre-compiled versions for several platforms can be downloaded from ftp://iole.swmed.edu/pub/PCMA/.     

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/     

Within the twilight zone: a sensitive profile-profile comparison tool based on information theory

This paper presents a novel approach to profile-profile comparison. The method compares two input profiles (like those that are generated by PSI-BLAST) and assigns a similarity score to assess their statistical similarity. Our profile-profile comparison tool, which allows for gaps, can be used to detect weak similarities between protein families. It has also been optimized to produce alignments that are in very good agreement with structural alignments. Tests show that the profile-profile alignments are indeed highly correlated with similarities between secondary structure elements and tertiary structure. Exhaustive evaluations show that our method is significantly more sensitive in detecting distant homologies than the popular profile-based search programs PSI-BLAST and IMPALA. The relative improvement is the same order of magnitude as the improvement of PSI-BLAST relative to BLAST. Our new tool often detects similarities that fall within the twilight zone of sequence similarity.     

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.     

The Construction and Use of Log-Odds Substitution Scores for Multiple Sequence Alignment

Most pairwise and multiple sequence alignment programs seek alignments with optimal scores. Central to defining such scores is selecting a set of substitution scores for aligned amino acids or nucleotides. For local pairwise alignment, substitution scores are implicitly of log-odds form. We now extend the log-odds formalism to multiple alignments, using Bayesian methods to construct “BILD” (“Bayesian Integral Log-odds”) substitution scores from prior distributions describing columns of related letters. This approach has been used previously only to define scores for aligning individual sequences to sequence profiles, but it has much broader applicability. We describe how to calculate BILD scores efficiently, and illustrate their uses in Gibbs sampling optimization procedures, gapped alignment, and the construction of hidden Markov model profiles. BILD scores enable automated selection of optimal motif and domain model widths, and can inform the decision of whether to include a sequence in a multiple alignment, and the selection of insertion and deletion locations. Other applications include the classification of related sequences into subfamilies, and the definition of profile-profile alignment scores. Although a fully realized multiple alignment program must rely upon more than substitution scores, many existing multiple alignment programs can be modified to employ BILD scores. We illustrate how simple BILD score based strategies can enhance the recognition of DNA binding domains, including the Api-AP2 domain in Toxoplasma gondii and Plasmodium falciparum.     

A segment alignment approach to protein comparison

MOTIVATION: Local structure segments (LSSs) are small structural units shared by unrelated proteins. They are extensively used in protein structure comparison, and predicted LSSs (PLSSs) are used very successfully in ab initio folding simulations. However, predicted or real LSSs are rarely exploited by protein sequence comparison programs that are based on position-by-position alignments. RESULTS: We developed a SEgment Alignment algorithm (SEA) to compare proteins described as a collection of predicted local structure segments (PLSSs), which is equivalent to an unweighted graph (network). Any specific structure, real or predicted corresponds to a specific path in this network. SEA then uses a network matching approach to find two most similar paths in networks representing two proteins. SEA explores the uncertainty and diversity of predicted local structure information to search for a globally optimal solution. It simultaneously solves two related problems: the alignment of two proteins and the local structure prediction for each of them. On a benchmark of protein pairs with low sequence similarity, we show that application of the SEA algorithm improves alignment quality as compared to FFAS profile-profile alignment, and in some cases SEA alignments can match the structural alignments, a feat previously impossible for any sequence based alignment methods.     

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.     

On the role of structural information in remote homology detection and sequence alignment: new methods using hybrid sequence profiles

Structural alignments often reveal relationships between proteins that cannot be detected using sequence alignment alone. However, profile search methods based entirely on structural alignments alone have not been found to be effective in finding remote homologs. Here, we explore the role of structural information in remote homolog detection and sequence alignment. To this end, we develop a series of hybrid multidimensional alignment profiles that combine sequence, secondary and tertiary structure information into hybrid profiles. Sequence-based profiles are profiles whose position-specific scoring matrix is derived from sequence alignment alone; structure-based profiles are those derived from multiple structure alignments. We compare pure sequence-based profiles to pure structure-based profiles, as well as to hybrid profiles that use combined sequence-and-structure-based profiles, where sequence-based profiles are used in loop/motif regions and structural information is used in core structural regions. All of the hybrid methods offer significant improvement over simple profile-to-profile alignment. We demonstrate that both sequence-based and structure-based profiles contribute to remote homology detection and alignment accuracy, and that each contains some unique information. We discuss the implications of these results for further improvements in amino acid sequence and structural analysis.     

Protein homology detection by HMM-HMM comparison

MOTIVATION: Protein homology detection and sequence alignment are at the basis of protein structure prediction, function prediction and evolution. RESULTS: We have generalized the alignment of protein sequences with a profile hidden Markov model (HMM) to the case of pairwise alignment of profile HMMs. We present a method for detecting distant homologous relationships between proteins based on this approach. The method (HHsearch) is benchmarked together with BLAST, PSI-BLAST, HMMER and the profile-profile comparison tools PROF_SIM and COMPASS, in an all-against-all comparison of a database of 3691 protein domains from SCOP 1.63 with pairwise sequence identities below 20%.Sensitivity: When the predicted secondary structure is included in the HMMs, HHsearch is able to detect between 2.7 and 4.2 times more homologs than PSI-BLAST or HMMER and between 1.44 and 1.9 times more than COMPASS or PROF_SIM for a rate of false positives of 10%. Approximately half of the improvement over the profile-profile comparison methods is attributable to the use of profile HMMs in place of simple profiles. Alignment quality: Higher sensitivity is mirrored by an increased alignment quality. HHsearch produced 1.2, 1.7 and 3.3 times more good alignments ('balanced' score >0.3) than the next best method (COMPASS), and 1.6, 2.9 and 9.4 times more than PSI-BLAST, at the family, superfamily and fold level, respectively.Speed: HHsearch scans a query of 200 residues against 3691 domains in 33 s on an AMD64 2GHz PC. This is 10 times faster than PROF_SIM and 17 times faster than COMPASS.     

The use of structure information to increase alignment accuracy does not aid homologue detection with profile HMMs

MOTIVATION: The best quality multiple sequence alignments are generally considered to derive from structural superposition. However, no previous work has studied the relative performance of profile hidden Markov models (HMMs) derived from such alignments. Therefore several alignment methods have been used to generate multiple sequence alignments from 348 structurally aligned families in the HOMSTRAD database. The performance of profile HMMs derived from the structural and sequence-based alignments has been assessed for homologue detection. RESULTS: The best alignment methods studied here correctly align nearly 80% of residues with respect to structure alignments. Alignment quality and model sensitivity are found to be dependent on average number, length, and identity of sequences in the alignment. The striking conclusion is that, although structural data may improve the quality of multiple sequence alignments, this does not add to the ability of the derived profile HMMs to find sequence homologues. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A list of HOMSTRAD families used in this study and the corresponding Pfam families is available at http://www.sanger.ac.uk/Users/sgj/alignments/map.html Contact: sgj@sanger.ac.uk     

The CLUSTAL_X windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools.

CLUSTAL X is a new windows interface for the widely-used progressive multiple sequence alignment program CLUSTAL W. The new system is easy to use, providing an integrated system for performing multiple sequence and profile alignments and analysing the results. CLUSTAL X displays the sequence alignment in a window on the screen. A versatile sequence colouring scheme allows the user to highlight conserved features in the alignment. Pull-down menus provide all the options required for traditional multiple sequence and profile alignment. New features include: the ability to cut-and-paste sequences to change the order of the alignment, selection of a subset of the sequences to be realigned, and selection of a sub-range of the alignment to be realigned and inserted back into the original alignment. Alignment quality analysis can be performed and low-scoring segments or exceptional residues can be highlighted. Quality analysis and realignment of selected residue ranges provide the user with a powerful tool to improve and refine difficult alignments and to trap errors in input sequences. CLUSTAL X has been compiled on SUN Solaris, IRIX5.3 on Silicon Graphics, Digital UNIX on DECstations, Microsoft Windows (32 bit) for PCs, Linux ELF for x86 PCs, and Macintosh PowerMac.     

Improving accuracy of multiple sequence alignment algorithms based on alignment of neighboring residues

While most of the recent improvements in multiple sequence alignment accuracy are due to better use of vertical information, which include the incorporation of consistency-based pairwise alignments and the use of profile alignments, we observe that it is possible to further improve accuracy by taking into account alignment of neighboring residues when aligning two residues, thus making better use of horizontal information. By modifying existing multiple alignment algorithms to make use of horizontal information, we show that this strategy is able to consistently improve over existing algorithms on a few sets of benchmark alignments that are commonly used to measure alignment accuracy, and the average improvements in accuracy can be as much as 1–3% on protein sequence alignment and 5–10% on DNA/RNA sequence alignment. Unlike previous algorithms, consistent average improvements can be obtained across all identity levels.     

CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice.

The sensitivity of the commonly used progressive multiple sequence alignment method has been greatly improved for the alignment of divergent protein sequences. Firstly, individual weights are assigned to each sequence in a partial alignment in order to down-weight near-duplicate sequences and up-weight the most divergent ones. Secondly, amino acid substitution matrices are varied at different alignment stages according to the divergence of the sequences to be aligned. Thirdly, residue-specific gap penalties and locally reduced gap penalties in hydrophilic regions encourage new gaps in potential loop regions rather than regular secondary structure. Fourthly, positions in early alignments where gaps have been opened receive locally reduced gap penalties to encourage the opening up of new gaps at these positions. These modifications are incorporated into a new program, CLUSTAL W which is freely available.     

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.     

Improving the alignment quality of consistency based aligners with an evaluation function using synonymous protein words

Most sequence alignment tools can successfully align protein sequences with higher levels of sequence identity. The accuracy of corresponding structure alignment, however, decreases rapidly when considering distantly related sequences (<20% identity). In this range of identity, alignments optimized so as to maximize sequence similarity are often inaccurate from a structural point of view. Over the last two decades, most multiple protein aligners have been optimized for their capacity to reproduce structure-based alignments while using sequence information. Methods currently available differ essentially in the similarity measurement between aligned residues using substitution matrices, Fourier transform, sophisticated profile-profile functions, or consistency-based approaches, more recently.In this paper, we present a flexible similarity measure for residue pairs to improve the quality of protein sequence alignment. Our approach, called SymAlign, relies on the identification of conserved words found across a sizeable fraction of the considered dataset, and supported by evolutionary analysis. These words are then used to define a position specific substitution matrix that better reflects the biological significance of local similarity. The experiment results show that the SymAlign scoring scheme can be incorporated within T-Coffee to improve sequence alignment accuracy. We also demonstrate that SymAlign is less sensitive to the presence of structurally non-similar proteins. In the analysis of the relationship between sequence identity and structure similarity, SymAlign can better differentiate structurally similar proteins from non- similar proteins. We show that protein sequence alignments can be significantly improved using a similarity estimation based on weighted n-grams. In our analysis of the alignments thus produced, sequence conservation becomes a better indicator of structural similarity. SymAlign also provides alignment visualization that can display sub-optimal alignments on dot-matrices. The visualization makes it easy to identify well-supported alternative alignments that may not have been identified by dynamic programming. SymAlign is available at http://bio-cluster.iis.sinica.edu.tw/SymAlign/.