On the accuracy of homology modeling and sequence alignment methods applied to membrane proteins

In this study, we investigate the extent to which techniques for homology modeling that were developed for water-soluble proteins are appropriate for membrane proteins as well. To this end we present an assessment of current strategies for homology modeling of membrane proteins and introduce a benchmark data set of homologous membrane protein structures, called HOMEP. First, we use HOMEP to reveal the relationship between sequence identity and structural similarity in membrane proteins. This analysis indicates that homology modeling is at least as applicable to membrane proteins as it is to water-soluble proteins and that acceptable models (with C alpha-RMSD values to the native of 2 A or less in the transmembrane regions) may be obtained for template sequence identities of 30% or higher if an accurate alignment of the sequences is used. Second, we show that secondary-structure prediction algorithms that were developed for water-soluble proteins perform approximately as well for membrane proteins. Third, we provide a comparison of a set of commonly used sequence alignment algorithms as applied to membrane proteins. We find that high-accuracy alignments of membrane protein sequences can be obtained using state-of-the-art profile-to-profile methods that were developed for water-soluble proteins. Improvements are observed when weights derived from the secondary structure of the query and the template are used in the scoring of the alignment, a result which relies on the accuracy of the secondary-structure prediction of the query sequence. The most accurate alignments were obtained using template profiles constructed with the aid of structural alignments. In contrast, a simple sequence-to-sequence alignment algorithm, using a membrane protein-specific substitution matrix, shows no improvement in alignment accuracy. We suggest that profile-to-profile alignment methods should be adopted to maximize the accuracy of homology models of membrane proteins.     

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.     

Alignment of protein sequences using the hydrophobic core scores

Making an alignment of the amino acid sequences is an essential step in the prediction of an unknown protein structure by model building from the known structure of a protein of the same family. To improve the accuracy of the alignments, we introduced the concept of hydrophobic core scores, which restrains putting insertions/deletions in the hydrophobic core regions of the protein. Eight pairs of protein sequences were aligned by this method, and the quality of the alignments were assessed by reference to those obtained by the structural superposition. The introduction of the hydrophobic core scores derived from the knowledge of the tertiary structure of one of each pair resulted in an improvement of the accuracy of the alignments. The quality of the alignment was found to depend on the homology of the protein sequences.     

Structure-dependent sequence alignment for remotely related proteins

MOTIVATION: The quality of a model structure derived from a comparative modeling procedure is dictated by the accuracy of the predicted sequence-template alignment. As the sequence-template pairs are increasingly remote in sequence relationship, the prediction of the sequence-template alignments becomes increasingly problematic with sequence alignment methods. Structural information of the template, used in connection with the sequence relationship of the sequence-template pair, could significantly improve the accuracy of the sequence-template alignment. In this paper, we describe a sequence-template alignment method that integrates sequence and structural information to enhance the accuracy of sequence-template alignments for distantly related protein pairs. RESULTS: The structure-dependent sequence alignment (SDSA) procedure was optimized for coverage and accuracy on a training set of 412 protein pairs; the structures for each of the training pairs are similar (RMSD< approximately 4A) but the sequence relationship is undetectable (average pair-wise sequence identity = 8%). The optimized SDSA procedure was then applied to extend PSI-BLAST local alignments by calculating the global alignments under the constraint of the residue pairs in the local alignments. This composite alignment procedure was assessed with a testing set of 1421 protein pairs, of which the pair-wise structures are similar (RMSD< approximately 4A) but the sequences are marginally related at best in each pair (average pair-wise sequence identity = 13%). The assessment showed that the composite alignment procedure predicted more aligned residues pairs with an average of 27% increase in correctly aligned residues over the standard PSI-BLAST alignments for the protein pairs in the testing set.     

OXBench: A benchmark for evaluation of protein multiple sequence alignment accuracy

Background  

The alignment of two or more protein sequences provides a powerful guide in the prediction of the protein structure and in identifying key functional residues, however, the utility of any prediction is completely dependent on the accuracy of the alignment. In this paper we describe a suite of reference alignments derived from the comparison of protein three-dimensional structures together with evaluation measures and software that allow automatically generated alignments to be benchmarked. We test the OXBench benchmark suite on alignments generated by the AMPS multiple alignment method, then apply the suite to compare eight different multiple alignment algorithms. The benchmark shows the current state-of-the art for alignment accuracy and provides a baseline against which new alignment algorithms may be judged.     

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/.     

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.     

Multiple protein sequence alignment from tertiary structure comparison: assignment of global and residue confidence levels.

An algorithm is presented for the accurate and rapid generation of multiple protein sequence alignments from tertiary structure comparisons. A preliminary multiple sequence alignment is performed using sequence information, which then determines an initial superposition of the structures. A structure comparison algorithm is applied to all pairs of proteins in the superimposed set and a similarity tree calculated. Multiple sequence alignments are then generated by following the tree from the branches to the root. At each branchpoint of the tree, a structure-based sequence alignment and coordinate transformations are output, with the multiple alignment of all structures output at the root. The algorithm encoded in STAMP (STructural Alignment of Multiple Proteins) is shown to give alignments in good agreement with published structural accounts within the dehydrogenase fold domains, globins, and serine proteinases. In order to reduce the need for visual verification, two similarity indices are introduced to determine the quality of each generated structural alignment. Sc quantifies the global structural similarity between pairs or groups of proteins, whereas Pij' provides a normalized measure of the confidence in the alignment of each residue. STAMP alignments have the quality of each alignment characterized by Sc and Pij' values and thus provide a reproducible resource for studies of residue conservation within structural motifs.     

Analysis and prediction of functional sub-types from protein sequence alignments

The increasing number and diversity of protein sequence families requires new methods to define and predict details regarding function. Here, we present a method for analysis and prediction of functional sub-types from multiple protein sequence alignments. Given an alignment and set of proteins grouped into sub-types according to some definition of function, such as enzymatic specificity, the method identifies positions that are indicative of functional differences by comparison of sub-type specific sequence profiles, and analysis of positional entropy in the alignment. Alignment positions with significantly high positional relative entropy correlate with those known to be involved in defining sub-types for nucleotidyl cyclases, protein kinases, lactate/malate dehydrogenases and trypsin-like serine proteases. We highlight new positions for these proteins that suggest additional experiments to elucidate the basis of specificity. The method is also able to predict sub-type for unclassified sequences. We assess several variations on a prediction method, and compare them to simple sequence comparisons. For assessment, we remove close homologues to the sequence for which a prediction is to be made (by a sequence identity above a threshold). This simulates situations where a protein is known to belong to a protein family, but is not a close relative of another protein of known sub-type. Considering the four families above, and a sequence identity threshold of 30 %, our best method gives an accuracy of 96 % compared to 80 % obtained for sequence similarity and 74 % for BLAST. We describe the derivation of a set of sub-type groupings derived from an automated parsing of alignments from PFAM and the SWISSPROT database, and use this to perform a large-scale assessment. The best method gives an average accuracy of 94 % compared to 68 % for sequence similarity and 79 % for BLAST. We discuss implications for experimental design, genome annotation and the prediction of protein function and protein intra-residue distances.     

Core column prediction for protein multiple sequence alignments

Background

In a computed protein multiple sequence alignment, the coreness of a column is the fraction of its substitutions that are in so-called core columns of the gold-standard reference alignment of its proteins. In benchmark suites of protein reference alignments, the core columns of the reference alignment are those that can be confidently labeled as correct, usually due to all residues in the column being sufficiently close in the spatial superposition of the known three-dimensional structures of the proteins. Typically the accuracy of a protein multiple sequence alignment that has been computed for a benchmark is only measured with respect to the core columns of the reference alignment. When computing an alignment in practice, however, a reference alignment is not known, so the coreness of its columns can only be predicted.

Results

We develop for the first time a predictor of column coreness for protein multiple sequence alignments. This allows us to predict which columns of a computed alignment are core, and hence better estimate the alignment’s accuracy. Our approach to predicting coreness is similar to nearest-neighbor classification from machine learning, except we transform nearest-neighbor distances into a coreness prediction via a regression function, and we learn an appropriate distance function through a new optimization formulation that solves a large-scale linear programming problem. We apply our coreness predictor to parameter advising, the task of choosing parameter values for an aligner’s scoring function to obtain a more accurate alignment of a specific set of sequences. We show that for this task, our predictor strongly outperforms other column-confidence estimators from the literature, and affords a substantial boost in alignment accuracy.

     

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.     

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.     

SSALN: an alignment algorithm using structure-dependent substitution matrices and gap penalties learned from structurally aligned protein pairs

In template-based modeling of protein structures, the generation of the alignment between the target and the template is a critical step that significantly affects the accuracy of the final model. This paper proposes an alignment algorithm SSALN that learns substitution matrices and position-specific gap penalties from a database of structurally aligned protein pairs. In addition to the amino acid sequence information, secondary structure and solvent accessibility information of a position are used to derive substitution scores and position-specific gap penalties. In a test set of CASP5 targets, SSALN outperforms sequence alignment methods such as a Smith-Waterman algorithm with BLOSUM50 and PSI_BLAST. SSALN also generates better alignments than PSI_BLAST in the CASP6 test set. LOOPP server prediction based on an SSALN alignment is ranked the best for target T0280_1 in CASP6. SSALN is also compared with several threading methods and sequence alignment methods on the ProSup benchmark. SSALN has the highest alignment accuracy among the methods compared. On the Fischer's benchmark, SSALN performs better than CLUSTALW and GenTHREADER, and generates more alignments with accuracy >50%, >60% or >70% than FUGUE, but fewer alignments with accuracy >80% than FUGUE. All the supplemental materials can be found at http://www.cs.cornell.edu/ approximately jianq/research.htm.     

CAB-Align: A Flexible Protein Structure Alignment Method Based on the Residue-Residue Contact Area

Proteins are flexible, and this flexibility has an essential functional role. Flexibility can be observed in loop regions, rearrangements between secondary structure elements, and conformational changes between entire domains. However, most protein structure alignment methods treat protein structures as rigid bodies. Thus, these methods fail to identify the equivalences of residue pairs in regions with flexibility. In this study, we considered that the evolutionary relationship between proteins corresponds directly to the residue–residue physical contacts rather than the three-dimensional (3D) coordinates of proteins. Thus, we developed a new protein structure alignment method, contact area-based alignment (CAB-align), which uses the residue–residue contact area to identify regions of similarity. The main purpose of CAB-align is to identify homologous relationships at the residue level between related protein structures. The CAB-align procedure comprises two main steps: First, a rigid-body alignment method based on local and global 3D structure superposition is employed to generate a sufficient number of initial alignments. Then, iterative dynamic programming is executed to find the optimal alignment. We evaluated the performance and advantages of CAB-align based on four main points: (1) agreement with the gold standard alignment, (2) alignment quality based on an evolutionary relationship without 3D coordinate superposition, (3) consistency of the multiple alignments, and (4) classification agreement with the gold standard classification. Comparisons of CAB-align with other state-of-the-art protein structure alignment methods (TM-align, FATCAT, and DaliLite) using our benchmark dataset showed that CAB-align performed robustly in obtaining high-quality alignments and generating consistent multiple alignments with high coverage and accuracy rates, and it performed extremely well when discriminating between homologous and nonhomologous pairs of proteins in both single and multi-domain comparisons. The CAB-align software is freely available to academic users as stand-alone software at http://www.pharm.kitasato-u.ac.jp/bmd/bmd/Publications.html.     

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.     

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.     

In search for more accurate alignments in the twilight zone

A major bottleneck in comparative modeling is the alignment quality; this is especially true for proteins whose distant relationships could be reliably recognized only by recent advances in fold recognition. The best algorithms excel in recognizing distant homologs but often produce incorrect alignments for over 50% of protein pairs in large fold-prediction benchmarks. The alignments obtained by sequence-sequence or sequence-structure matching algorithms differ significantly from the structural alignments. To study this problem, we developed a simplified method to explicitly enumerate all possible alignments for a pair of proteins. This allowed us to estimate the number of significantly different alignments for a given scoring method that score better than the structural alignment. Using several examples of distantly related proteins, we show that for standard sequence-sequence alignment methods, the number of significantly different alignments is usually large, often about 10(10) alternatives. This distance decreases when the alignment method is improved, but the number is still too large for the brute force enumeration approach. More effective strategies were needed, so we evaluated and compared two well-known approaches for searching the space of suboptimal alignments. We combined their best features and produced a hybrid method, which yielded alignments that surpassed the original alignments for about 50% of protein pairs with minimal computational effort.     

The structural alignment between two proteins: is there a unique answer?

Structurally similar but sequentially unrelated proteins have been discovered and rediscovered by many researchers, using a variety of structure comparison tools. For several pairs of such proteins, existing structural alignments obtained from the literature, as well as alignments prepared using several different similarity criteria, are compared with each other. It is shown that, in general, they differ from each other, with differences increasing with diminishing sequence similarity. Differences are particularly strong between alignments optimizing global similarity measures, such as RMS deviation between C alpha atoms, and alignments focusing on more local features, such as packing or interaction pattern similarity. Simply speaking, by putting emphasis on different aspects of structure, different structural alignments show the unquestionable similarity in a different way. With differences between various alignments extending to a point where they can differ at all positions, analysis of structural similarities leads to contradictory results reported by groups using different alignment techniques. The problem of uniqueness and stability of structural alignments is further studied with the help of visualization of the suboptimal alignments. It is shown that alignments are often degenerate and whole families of alignments can be generated with almost the same score as the "optimal alignment." However, for some similarity criteria, specially those based on side-chain positions, rather than C alpha positions, alignments in some areas of the protein are unique. This opens the question of how and if the structural alignments can be used as "standards of truth" for protein comparison.     

Matt: local flexibility aids protein multiple structure alignment

Even when there is agreement on what measure a protein multiple structure alignment should be optimizing, finding the optimal alignment is computationally prohibitive. One approach used by many previous methods is aligned fragment pair chaining, where short structural fragments from all the proteins are aligned against each other optimally, and the final alignment chains these together in geometrically consistent ways. Ye and Godzik have recently suggested that adding geometric flexibility may help better model protein structures in a variety of contexts. We introduce the program Matt (Multiple Alignment with Translations and Twists), an aligned fragment pair chaining algorithm that, in intermediate steps, allows local flexibility between fragments: small translations and rotations are temporarily allowed to bring sets of aligned fragments closer, even if they are physically impossible under rigid body transformations. After a dynamic programming assembly guided by these “bent” alignments, geometric consistency is restored in the final step before the alignment is output. Matt is tested against other recent multiple protein structure alignment programs on the popular Homstrad and SABmark benchmark datasets. Matt's global performance is competitive with the other programs on Homstrad, but outperforms the other programs on SABmark, a benchmark of multiple structure alignments of proteins with more distant homology. On both datasets, Matt demonstrates an ability to better align the ends of α-helices and β-strands, an important characteristic of any structure alignment program intended to help construct a structural template library for threading approaches to the inverse protein-folding problem. The related question of whether Matt alignments can be used to distinguish distantly homologous structure pairs from pairs of proteins that are not homologous is also considered. For this purpose, a p-value score based on the length of the common core and average root mean squared deviation (RMSD) of Matt alignments is shown to largely separate decoys from homologous protein structures in the SABmark benchmark dataset. We postulate that Matt's strong performance comes from its ability to model proteins in different conformational states and, perhaps even more important, its ability to model backbone distortions in more distantly related proteins.