Dataset Information

Discrimination between biological interfaces and crystal-packing contacts.

ABSTRACT: A discrimination method between biologically relevant interfaces and artificial crystal-packing contacts in crystal structures was constructed. The method evaluates protein-protein interfaces in terms of complementarities for hydrophobicity, electrostatic potential and shape on the protein surfaces, and chooses the most probable biological interfaces among all possible contacts in the crystal. The method uses a discriminator named as "COMP", which is a linear combination of the complementarities for the above three surface features and does not correlate with the contact area. The discrimination of homo-dimer interfaces from symmetry-related crystal-packing contacts based on the COMP value achieved the modest success rate. Subsequent detailed review of the discrimination results raised the success rate to about 88.8%. In addition, our discrimination method yielded some clues for understanding the interaction patterns in several examples in the PDB. Thus, the COMP discriminator can also be used as an indicator of the "biological-ness" of protein-protein interfaces.

SUBMITTER: Tsuchiya Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3169932 | biostudies-literature | 2008

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Discrimination between biological interfaces and crystal-packing contacts.

Tsuchiya Yuko Y Nakamura Haruki H Kinoshita Kengo K

Advances and applications in bioinformatics and chemistry : AABC 20081102

A discrimination method between biologically relevant interfaces and artificial crystal-packing contacts in crystal structures was constructed. The method evaluates protein-protein interfaces in terms of complementarities for hydrophobicity, electrostatic potential and shape on the protein surfaces, and chooses the most probable biological interfaces among all possible contacts in the crystal. The method uses a discriminator named as "COMP", which is a linear combination of the complementarities ...[more]

PMID: 21918609

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Distinction between true protein interactions and crystal packing contacts is important for structural bioinformatics studies to respond to the need of accurate classification of the rapidly increasing protein structures. There are many unannotated crystal contacts and there also exist false annotations in this rapidly expanding volume of data. Previous tools have been proposed to address this problem. However, challenging issues still remain, such as low performance when the training and test data contain mixed interfaces having diverse sizes of contact areas. METHODS AND RESULTS: B factor is a measure to quantify the vibrational motion of an atom, a more relevant feature than interface size to characterize protein binding. We propose to use three features related to B factor for the classification between biological interfaces and crystal packing contacts. The first feature is the sum of the normalized B factors of the interfacial atoms in the contact area, the second is the average of the interfacial B factor per residue in the chain, and the third is the average number of interfacial atoms with a negative normalized B factor per residue in the chain. We investigate the distribution properties of these basic features and a compound feature on four datasets of biological binding and crystal packing, and on a protein binding-only dataset with known binding affinity. We also compare the cross-dataset classification performance of these features with existing methods and with a widely-used and the most effective feature interface area. The results demonstrate that our features outperform the interface area approach and the existing prediction methods remarkably for many tests on all of these datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed B factor related features are more effective than interface area to distinguish crystal packing from biological binding interfaces. Our computational methods have a potential for large-scale and accurate identification of biological interactions from the experimentally determined structural data stored at PDB which may have diverse interface sizes.

Project description:BackgroundStudy of macromolecular assemblies is fundamental to understand functions in cells. X-ray crystallography is the most common technique to solve their 3D structure at atomic resolution. In a crystal, however, both biologically-relevant interfaces and non-specific interfaces resulting from crystallographic packing are observed. Due to the complexity of the biological assemblies currently tackled, classifying those interfaces, i.e. distinguishing biological from crystal lattice interfaces, is not trivial and often prone to errors. In this context, analyzing the physico-chemical characteristics of biological/crystal interfaces can help researchers identify possible features that distinguish them and gain a better understanding of the systems.ResultsIn this work, we are providing new insights into the differences between biological and crystallographic complexes by focusing on "pair-properties" of interfaces that have not yet been fully investigated. We investigated properties such intermolecular residue-residue contacts (already successfully applied to the prediction of binding affinities) and interaction energies (electrostatic, Van der Waals and desolvation). By using the XtalMany and BioMany interface datasets, we show that interfacial residue contacts, classified as a function of their physico-chemical properties, can distinguish between biological and crystallographic interfaces. The energetic terms show, on average, higher values for crystal interfaces, reflecting a less stable interface due to crystal packing compared to biological interfaces. By using a variety of machine learning approaches, we trained a new interface classification predictor based on contacts and interaction energetic features. Our predictor reaches an accuracy in classifying biological vs crystal interfaces of 0.92, compared to 0.88 for EPPIC (one of the main state-of-the-art classifiers reporting same performance as PISA).ConclusionIn this work we have gained insights into the nature of intermolecular contacts and energetics terms distinguishing biological from crystallographic interfaces. Our findings might have a broader applicability in structural biology, for example for the identification of near native poses in docking. We implemented our classification approach into an easy-to-use and fast software, freely available to the scientific community from http://github.com/haddocking/interface-classifier .

Dataset Information

Discrimination between biological interfaces and crystal-packing contacts.

Publications

Discrimination between biological interfaces and crystal-packing contacts.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets