PIBASE: a comprehensive database of structurally defined protein interfaces

MOTIVATION: In recent years, the Protein Data Bank (PDB) has experienced rapid growth. To maximize the utility of the high resolution protein-protein interaction data stored in the PDB, we have developed PIBASE, a comprehensive relational database of structurally defined interfaces between pairs of protein domains. It is composed of binary interfaces extracted from structures in the PDB and the Probable Quaternary Structure server using domain assignments from the Structural Classification of Proteins and CATH fold classification systems. RESULTS: PIBASE currently contains 158,915 interacting domain pairs between 105,061 domains from 2125 SCOP families. A diverse set of geometric, physiochemical and topologic properties are calculated for each complex, its domains, interfaces and binding sites. A subset of the interface properties are used to remove interface redundancy within PDB entries, resulting in 20,912 distinct domain-domain interfaces. The complexes are grouped into 989 topological classes based on their patterns of domain-domain contacts. The binary interfaces and their corresponding binding sites are categorized into 18,755 and 30,975 topological classes, respectively, based on the topology of secondary structure elements. The utility of the database is illustrated by outlining several current applications. AVAILABILITY: The database is accessible via the world wide web at http://salilab.org/pibase SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: http://salilab.org/pibase/suppinfo.html.     

Statistical analysis of domains in interacting protein pairs

MOTIVATION: Several methods have recently been developed to analyse large-scale sets of physical interactions between proteins in terms of physical contacts between the constituent domains, often with a view to predicting new pairwise interactions. Our aim is to combine genomic interaction data, in which domain-domain contacts are not explicitly reported, with the domain-level structure of individual proteins, in order to learn about the structure of interacting protein pairs. Our approach is driven by the need to assess the evidence for physical contacts between domains in a statistically rigorous way. RESULTS: We develop a statistical approach that assigns p-values to pairs of domain superfamilies, measuring the strength of evidence within a set of protein interactions that domains from these superfamilies form contacts. A set of p-values is calculated for SCOP superfamily pairs, based on a pooled data set of interactions from yeast. These p-values can be used to predict which domains come into contact in an interacting protein pair. This predictive scheme is tested against protein complexes in the Protein Quaternary Structure (PQS) database, and is used to predict domain-domain contacts within 705 interacting protein pairs taken from our pooled data set.     

ProtBuD: a database of biological unit structures of protein families and superfamilies

MOTIVATION: Modeling of protein interactions is often possible from known structures of related complexes. It is often time-consuming to find the most appropriate template. Hypothesized biological units (BUs) often differ from the asymmetric units and it is usually preferable to model from the BUs. RESULTS: ProtBuD is a database of BUs for all structures in the Protein Data Bank (PDB). We use both the PDBs BUs and those from the Protein Quaternary Server. ProtBuD is searchable by PDB entry, the Structural Classification of Proteins (SCOP) designation or pairs of SCOP designations. The database provides the asymmetric and BU contents of related proteins in the PDB as identified in SCOP and Position-Specific Iterated BLAST (PSI-BLAST). The asymmetric unit is different from PDB and/or Protein Quaternary Server (PQS) BUs for 52% of X-ray structures, and the PDB and PQS BUs disagree on 18% of entries. AVAILABILITY: The database is provided as a standalone program and a web server from http://dunbrack.fccc.edu/ProtBuD.php.     

A comparison of SCOP and CATH with respect to domain-domain interactions

The analysis and prediction of protein-protein interaction sites from structural data are restricted by the limited availability of structural complexes that represent the complete protein-protein interaction space. The domain classification schemes CATH and SCOP are normally used independently in the analysis and prediction of protein domain-domain interactions. In this article, the effect of different domain classification schemes on the number and type of domain-domain interactions observed in structural data is systematically evaluated for the SCOP and CATH hierarchies. Although there is a large overlap in domain assignments between SCOP and CATH, 23.6% of CATH interfaces had no SCOP equivalent and 37.3% of SCOP interfaces had no CATH equivalent in a nonredundant set. Therefore, combining both classifications gives an increase of between 23.6 and 37.3% in domain-domain interfaces. It is suggested that if possible, both domain classification schemes should be used together, but if only one is selected, SCOP provides better coverage than CATH. Employing both SCOP and CATH reduces the false negative rate of predictive methods, which employ homology matching to structural data to predict protein-protein interaction by an estimated 6.5%.     

Co-evolutionary analysis of domains in interacting proteins reveals insights into domain-domain interactions mediating protein-protein interactions

Recent advances in functional genomics have helped generate large-scale high-throughput protein interaction data. Such networks, though extremely valuable towards molecular level understanding of cells, do not provide any direct information about the regions (domains) in the proteins that mediate the interaction. Here, we performed co-evolutionary analysis of domains in interacting proteins in order to understand the degree of co-evolution of interacting and non-interacting domains. Using a combination of sequence and structural analysis, we analyzed protein-protein interactions in F1-ATPase, Sec23p/Sec24p, DNA-directed RNA polymerase and nuclear pore complexes, and found that interacting domain pair(s) for a given interaction exhibits higher level of co-evolution than the non-interacting domain pairs. Motivated by this finding, we developed a computational method to test the generality of the observed trend, and to predict large-scale domain-domain interactions. Given a protein-protein interaction, the proposed method predicts the domain pair(s) that is most likely to mediate the protein interaction. We applied this method on the yeast interactome to predict domain-domain interactions, and used known domain-domain interactions found in PDB crystal structures to validate our predictions. Our results show that the prediction accuracy of the proposed method is statistically significant. Comparison of our prediction results with those from two other methods reveals that only a fraction of predictions are shared by all the three methods, indicating that the proposed method can detect known interactions missed by other methods. We believe that the proposed method can be used with other methods to help identify previously unrecognized domain-domain interactions on a genome scale, and could potentially help reduce the search space for identifying interaction sites.     

结构域相互作用数据库的产生、发展与应用

结构域是进化上的保守序列单元,是蛋白质的结构和功能的标准组件．典型的两个蛋白质间的相互作用涉及特殊结构域间的结合,而且识别相互作用结构域对于在结构域水平上彻底理解蛋白质的功能与进化、构建蛋白质相互作用网络、分析生物学通路等十分重要．目前,依赖于对实验数据的进一步挖掘和对各种不同输入数据的计算预测,已识别出了一些相互作用/功能连锁结构域对,并由此构建了内容丰富、日益更新的结构域相互作用数据库．综述了产生结构域相互作用的8种计算预测方法．介绍了5个结构域相互作用公共数据库3DID、iPfam、InterDom、DIMA和DOMINE的有关信息和最新动态．实例概述了结构域相互作用在蛋白质相互作用计算预测、可信度评估,蛋白质结构域注释,以及在生物学通路分析中的应用．     

Prediction of protein-protein interactions using random decision forest framework

MOTIVATION: Protein interactions are of biological interest because they orchestrate a number of cellular processes such as metabolic pathways and immunological recognition. Domains are the building blocks of proteins; therefore, proteins are assumed to interact as a result of their interacting domains. Many domain-based models for protein interaction prediction have been developed, and preliminary results have demonstrated their feasibility. Most of the existing domain-based methods, however, consider only single-domain pairs (one domain from one protein) and assume independence between domain-domain interactions. RESULTS: In this paper, we introduce a domain-based random forest of decision trees to infer protein interactions. Our proposed method is capable of exploring all possible domain interactions and making predictions based on all the protein domains. Experimental results on Saccharomyces cerevisiae dataset demonstrate that our approach can predict protein-protein interactions with higher sensitivity (79.78%) and specificity (64.38%) compared with that of the maximum likelihood approach. Furthermore, our model can be used to infer interactions not only for single-domain pairs but also for multiple domain pairs.     

Prediction of protein-protein interactions using distant conservation of sequence patterns and structure relationships

MOTIVATION: Given that association and dissociation of protein molecules is crucial in most biological processes several in silico methods have been recently developed to predict protein-protein interactions. Structural evidence has shown that usually interacting pairs of close homologs (interologs) physically interact in the same way. Moreover, conservation of an interaction depends on the conservation of the interface between interacting partners. In this article we make use of both, structural similarities among domains of known interacting proteins found in the Database of Interacting Proteins (DIP) and conservation of pairs of sequence patches involved in protein-protein interfaces to predict putative protein interaction pairs. RESULTS: We have obtained a large amount of putative protein-protein interaction (approximately 130,000). The list is independent from other techniques both experimental and theoretical. We separated the list of predictions into three sets according to their relationship with known interacting proteins found in DIP. For each set, only a small fraction of the predicted protein pairs could be independently validated by cross checking with the Human Protein Reference Database (HPRD). The fraction of validated protein pairs was always larger than that expected by using random protein pairs. Furthermore, a correlation map of interacting protein pairs was calculated with respect to molecular function, as defined in the Gene Ontology database. It shows good consistency of the predicted interactions with data in the HPRD database. The intersection between the lists of interactions of other methods and ours produces a network of potentially high-confidence interactions.     

Insights from the structural analysis of protein heterodimer interfaces

Protein heterodimer complexes are often involved in catalysis, regulation, assembly, immunity and inhibition. This involves the formation of stable interfaces between the interacting partners. Hence, it is of interest to describe heterodimer interfaces using known structural complexes. We use a non-redundant dataset of 192 heterodimer complex structures from the protein databank (PDB) to identify interface residues and describe their interfaces using amino-acids residue property preference. Analysis of the dataset shows that the heterodimer interfaces are often abundant in polar residues. The analysis also shows the presence of two classes of interfaces in heterodimer complexes. The first class of interfaces (class A) with more polar residues than core but less than surface is known. These interfaces are more hydrophobic than surfaces, where protein-protein binding is largely hydrophobic. The second class of interfaces (class B) with more polar residues than core and surface is shown. These interfaces are more polar than surfaces, where binding is mainly polar. Thus, these findings provide insights to the understanding of protein-protein interactions.     

Using convex hulls to extract interaction interfaces from known structures

MOTIVATION: Protein interactions provide an important context for the understanding of function. Experimental approaches have been complemented with computational ones, such as PSIMAP, which computes domain-domain interactions for all multi-domain and multi-chain proteins in the Protein Data Bank (PDB). PSIMAP has been used to determine that superfamilies occurring in many species have many interaction partners, to show examples of convergent evolution through shared interaction partners and to uncover complexes in the interaction map. To determine an interaction, the original PSIMAP algorithm checks all residue pairs of any domain pair defined by classification systems such as SCOP. The computation takes several days for the PDB. The computation of PSIMAP has two shortcomings: first, the original PSIMAP algorithm considers only interactions of residue pairs rather than atom pairs losing information for detailed analysis of contact patterns. At the atomic level the original algorithm would take months. Second, with the superlinear growth of PDB, PSIMAP is not sustainable. RESULTS: We address these two shortcomings by developing a family of new algorithms for the computation of domain-domain interactions based on the idea of bounding shapes, which are used to prune the search space. The best of the algorithms improves on the old PSIMAP algorithm by a factor of 60 on the PDB. Additionally, the algorithms allow a distributed computation, which we carry out on a farm of 80 Linux PCs. Overall, the new algorithms reduce the computation at atomic level from months to 20 min. The combination of pruning and distribution makes the new algorithm scalable and sustainable even with the superlinear growth in PDB.     

PSIbase: a database of Protein Structural Interactome map (PSIMAP)

Protein Structural Interactome map (PSIMAP) is a global interaction map that describes domain-domain and protein-protein interaction information for known Protein Data Bank structures. It calculates the Euclidean distance to determine interactions between possible pairs of structural domains in proteins. PSIbase is a database and file server for protein structural interaction information calculated by the PSIMAP algorithm. PSIbase also provides an easy-to-use protein domain assignment module, interaction navigation and visual tools. Users can retrieve possible interaction partners of their proteins of interests if a significant homology assignment is made with their query sequences. AVAILABILITY: http://psimap.org and http://psibase.kaist.ac.kr/     

Prediction of protein-protein interactions using protein signature profiling

Protein domains are conserved and functionally independent structures that play an important role in interactions among related proteins. Domain-domain interactions have been recently used to predict protein-protein interactions (PPI). In general, the interaction probability of a pair of domains is scored using a trained scoring function. Satisfying a threshold, the protein pairs carrying those domains are regarded as "interacting". In this study, the signature contents of proteins were utilized to predict PPI pairs in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Caenorhabditis elegans, and Homo sapiens. Similarity between protein signature patterns was scored and PPI predictions were drawn based on the binary similarity scoring function. Results show that the true positive rate of prediction by the proposed approach is approximately 32% higher than that using the maximum likelihood estimation method when compared with a test set, resulting in 22% increase in the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. When proteins containing one or two signatures were removed, the sensitivity of the predicted PPI pairs increased significantly. The predicted PPI pairs are on average 11 times more likely to interact than the random selection at a confidence level of 0.95, and on average 4 times better than those predicted by either phylogenetic profiling or gene expression profiling.     

Survey of the geometric association of domain-domain interfaces

Considering the limited success of the most sophisticated docking methods available and the amount of computation required for systematic docking, cataloging all the known interfaces may be an alternative basis for the prediction of protein tertiary and quaternary structures. We classify domain interfaces according to the geometry of domain-domain association. By applying a simple and efficient method called "interface tag clustering," more than 4,000 distinct types of domain interfaces are collected from Protein Quaternary Structure Server and Protein Data Bank. Given a pair of interacting domains, we define "face" as the set of interacting residues in each single domain and the pair of interacting faces as an "interface." We investigate how the geometry of interfaces relates to a network of interacting protein families, such as how many different binding orientations are possible between two families or whether a family uses distinct surfaces or the same surface when the family has diverse interaction partners from various families. We show there are, on average, 1.2-1.9 different types of interfaces between interacting domains and a significant number of family pairs associate in multiple orientations. In general, a family tends to use distinct faces for each partner when the family has diverse interaction partners. Each face is highly specific to its interaction partner and the binding orientation. The relative positions of interface residues are generally well conserved within the same type of interface even between remote homologs. The classification result is available at http://www.biotec.tu-dresden.de/~wkim/supplement.     

Decomposing protein networks into domain-domain interactions

The application of novel experimental techniques has generated large networks of protein-protein interactions. Frequently, important information on the structure and cellular function of protein-protein interactions can be gained from the domains of interacting proteins. We have designed a Cytoscape plugin that decomposes interacting proteins into their respective domains and computes a putative network of corresponding domain-domain interactions. To this end, the network graph of proteins has been extended by additional node and edge types for domain interactions, including different node and edge shapes and coloring schemes used for visualization. An additional plugin provides supplementary web links to Internet resources on domain function and structure. AVAILABILITY: Both Cytoscape plugins can be downloaded from http://www.cytoscape.org     

Statistical analysis of interface similarity in crystals of homologous proteins

Many proteins function as homo-oligomers and are regulated via their oligomeric state. For some proteins, the stoichiometry of homo-oligomeric states under various conditions has been studied using gel filtration or analytical ultracentrifugation experiments. The interfaces involved in these assemblies may be identified using cross-linking and mass spectrometry, solution-state NMR, and other experiments. However, for most proteins, the actual interfaces that are involved in oligomerization are inferred from X-ray crystallographic structures using assumptions about interface surface areas and physical properties. Examination of interfaces across different Protein Data Bank (PDB) entries in a protein family reveals several important features. First, similarities in space group, asymmetric unit size, and cell dimensions and angles (within 1%) do not guarantee that two crystals are actually the same crystal form, containing similar relative orientations and interactions within the crystal. Conversely, two crystals in different space groups may be quite similar in terms of all the interfaces within each crystal. Second, NMR structures and an existing benchmark of PDB crystallographic entries consisting of 126 dimers as well as larger structures and 132 monomers were used to determine whether the existence or lack of common interfaces across multiple crystal forms can be used to predict whether a protein is an oligomer or not. Monomeric proteins tend to have common interfaces across only a minority of crystal forms, whereas higher-order structures exhibit common interfaces across a majority of available crystal forms. The data can be used to estimate the probability that an interface is biological if two or more crystal forms are available. Finally, the Protein Interfaces, Surfaces, and Assemblies (PISA) database available from the European Bioinformatics Institute is more consistent in identifying interfaces observed in many crystal forms compared with the PDB and the European Bioinformatics Institute's Protein Quaternary Server (PQS). The PDB, in particular, is missing highly likely biological interfaces in its biological unit files for about 10% of PDB entries.     

Functional evaluation of domain-domain interactions and human protein interaction networks

MOTIVATION: Large amounts of protein and domain interaction data are being produced by experimental high-throughput techniques and computational approaches. To gain insight into the value of the provided data, we used our new similarity measure based on the Gene Ontology (GO) to evaluate the molecular functions and biological processes of interacting proteins or domains. The applied measure particularly addresses the frequent annotation of proteins or domains with multiple GO terms. RESULTS: Using our similarity measure, we compare predicted domain-domain and human protein-protein interactions with experimentally derived interactions. The results show that our similarity measure is of significant benefit in quality assessment and confidence ranking of domain and protein networks. We also derive useful confidence score thresholds for dividing domain interaction predictions into subsets of low and high confidence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.     

A dissection of specific and non-specific protein-protein interfaces

We compare the geometric and physical-chemical properties of interfaces involved in specific and non-specific protein-protein interactions in crystal structures reported in the Protein Data Bank. Specific interactions are illustrated by 70 protein-protein complexes and by subunit contacts in 122 homodimeric proteins; non-specific interactions are illustrated by 188 pairs of monomeric proteins making crystal-packing contacts selected to bury more than 800 A2 of protein surface. A majority of these pairs have 2-fold symmetry and form "crystal dimers" that cannot be distinguished from real dimers on the basis of the interface size or symmetry. The chemical and amino acid compositions of the large crystal-packing interfaces resemble the protein solvent-accessible surface. These interfaces are less hydrophobic than in homodimers and contain much fewer fully buried atoms. We develop a residue propensity score and a hydrophobic interaction score to assess preferences seen in the chemical and amino acid compositions of the different types of interfaces, and we derive indexes to evaluate the atomic packing, which we find to be less compact at non-specific than at specific interfaces. We test the capacity of these parameters to identify homodimeric proteins in crystal structures, and show that a simple combination of the non-polar interface area and the fraction of buried interface atoms assigns the quaternary structure of 88% of the homodimers and 77% of the monomers in our data set correctly. These success rates increase to 93-95% when the residue propensity score of the interfaces is taken into consideration.     

Building an automated classification of DNA-binding protein domains

Intensive growth in 3D structure data on DNA-protein complexes as reflected in the Protein Data Bank (PDB) demands new approaches to the annotation and characterization of these data and will lead to a new understanding of critical biological processes involving these data. These data and those from other protein structure classifications will become increasingly important for the modeling of complete proteomes. We propose a fully automated classification of DNA-binding protein domains based on existing 3D-structures from the PDB. The classification, by domain, relies on the Protein Domain Parser (PDP) and the Combinatorial Extension (CE) algorithm for structural alignment. The approach involves the analysis of 3D-interaction patterns in DNA-protein interfaces, assignment of structural domains interacting with DNA, clustering of domains based on structural similarity and DNA-interacting patterns. Comparison with existing resources on describing structural and functional classifications of DNA-binding proteins was used to validate and improve the approach proposed here. In the course of our study we defined a set of criteria and heuristics allowing us to automatically build a biologically meaningful classification and define classes of functionally related protein domains. It was shown that taking into consideration interactions between protein domains and DNA considerably improves the classification accuracy. Our approach provides a high-throughput and up-to-date annotation of DNA-binding protein families which can be found at http://spdc.sdsc.edu.     

Inferring protein-protein interactions through high-throughput interaction data from diverse organisms

MOTIVATION: Identifying protein-protein interactions is critical for understanding cellular processes. Because protein domains represent binding modules and are responsible for the interactions between proteins, computational approaches have been proposed to predict protein interactions at the domain level. The fact that protein domains are likely evolutionarily conserved allows us to pool information from data across multiple organisms for the inference of domain-domain and protein-protein interaction probabilities. RESULTS: We use a likelihood approach to estimating domain-domain interaction probabilities by integrating large-scale protein interaction data from three organisms, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Caenorhabditis elegans and Drosophila melanogaster. The estimated domain-domain interaction probabilities are then used to predict protein-protein interactions in S.cerevisiae. Based on a thorough comparison of sensitivity and specificity, Gene Ontology term enrichment and gene expression profiles, we have demonstrated that it may be far more informative to predict protein-protein interactions from diverse organisms than from a single organism. AVAILABILITY: The program for computing the protein-protein interaction probabilities and supplementary material are available at http://bioinformatics.med.yale.edu/interaction.     

Multi-domain protein families and domain pairs: comparison with known structures and a random model of domain recombination

There is a limited repertoire of domain families in nature that are duplicated and combined in different ways to form the set of proteins in a genome. Most proteins in both prokaryote and eukaryote genomes consist of two or more domains, and we show that the family size distribution of multi-domain protein families follows a power law like that of individual families. Most domain pairs occur in four to six different domain architectures: in isolation and in combinations with different partners. We showed previously that within the set of all pairwise domain combinations, most small and medium-sized families are observed in combination with one or two other families, while a few large families are very versatile and combine with many different partners. Though this may appear to be a stochastic pattern, in which large families have more combination partners by virtue of their size, we establish here that all the domain families with more than three members in genomes are duplicated more frequently than would be expected by chance considering their number of neighbouring domains. This duplication of domain pairs is statistically significant for between one and three quarters of all families with seven or more members. For the majority of pairwise domain combinations, there is no known three-dimensional structure of the two domains together, and we term these novel combinations. Novel domain combinations are interesting and important targets for structural elucidation, as the geometry and interaction between the domains will help understand the function and evolution of multi-domain proteins. Of particular interest are those combinations that occur in the largest number of multi-domain proteins, and several of these frequent novel combinations contain DNA-binding domains.Abbreviations:SCOP: Structural Classification of Proteins database, PDB: Protein DataBank, HMM: hidden Markov model