Dataset Information

Detecting protein candidate fragments using a structural alphabet profile comparison approach.

ABSTRACT: Predicting accurate fragments from sequence has recently become a critical step for protein structure modeling, as protein fragment assembly techniques are presently among the most efficient approaches for de novo prediction. A key step in these approaches is, given the sequence of a protein to model, the identification of relevant fragments - candidate fragments - from a collection of the available 3D structures. These fragments can then be assembled to produce a model of the complete structure of the protein of interest. The search for candidate fragments is classically achieved by considering local sequence similarity using profile comparison, or threading approaches. In the present study, we introduce a new profile comparison approach that, instead of using amino acid profiles, is based on the use of predicted structural alphabet profiles, where structural alphabet profiles contain information related to the 3D local shapes associated with the sequences. We show that structural alphabet profile-profile comparison can be used efficiently to retrieve accurate structural fragments, and we introduce a fully new protocol for the detection of candidate fragments. It identifies fragments specific of each position of the sequence and of size varying between 6 and 27 amino-acids. We find it outperforms present state of the art approaches in terms (i) of the accuracy of the fragments identified, (ii) the rate of true positives identified, while having a high coverage score. We illustrate the relevance of the approach on complete target sets of the two previous Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction (CASP) rounds 9 and 10. A web server for the approach is freely available at http://bioserv.rpbs.univ-paris-diderot.fr/SAFrag.

SUBMITTER: Shen Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3841190 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Detecting protein candidate fragments using a structural alphabet profile comparison approach.

Shen Yimin Y Picord Géraldine G Guyon Frédéric F Tuffery Pierre P

PloS one 20131126 11

Predicting accurate fragments from sequence has recently become a critical step for protein structure modeling, as protein fragment assembly techniques are presently among the most efficient approaches for de novo prediction. A key step in these approaches is, given the sequence of a protein to model, the identification of relevant fragments - candidate fragments - from a collection of the available 3D structures. These fragments can then be assembled to produce a model of the complete structure ...[more]

PMID: 24303019

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Protein loops encompass 50% of protein residues in available three-dimensional structures. These regions are often involved in protein functions, e.g. binding site, catalytic pocket... However, the description of protein loops with conventional tools is an uneasy task. Regular secondary structures, helices and strands, have been widely studied whereas loops, because they are highly variable in terms of sequence and structure, are difficult to analyze. Due to data sparsity, long loops have rarely been systematically studied. RESULTS: We developed a simple and accurate method that allows the description and analysis of the structures of short and long loops using structural motifs without restriction on loop length. This method is based on the structural alphabet HMM-SA. HMM-SA allows the simplification of a three-dimensional protein structure into a one-dimensional string of states, where each state is a four-residue prototype fragment, called structural letter. The difficult task of the structural grouping of huge data sets is thus easily accomplished by handling structural letter strings as in conventional protein sequence analysis. We systematically extracted all seven-residue fragments in a bank of 93000 protein loops and grouped them according to the structural-letter sequence, named structural word. This approach permits a systematic analysis of loops of all sizes since we consider the structural motifs of seven residues rather than complete loops. We focused the analysis on highly recurrent words of loops (observed more than 30 times). Our study reveals that 73% of loop-lengths are covered by only 3310 highly recurrent structural words out of 28274 observed words). These structural words have low structural variability (mean RMSd of 0.85 A). As expected, half of these motifs display a flanking-region preference but interestingly, two thirds are shared by short (less than 12 residues) and long loops. Moreover, half of recurrent motifs exhibit a significant level of amino-acid conservation with at least four significant positions and 87% of long loops contain at least one such word. We complement our analysis with the detection of statistically over-represented patterns of structural letters as in conventional DNA sequence analysis. About 30% (930) of structural words are over-represented, and cover about 40% of loop lengths. Interestingly, these words exhibit lower structural variability and higher sequential specificity, suggesting structural or functional constraints. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a method to systematically decompose and study protein loops using recurrent structural motifs. This method is based on the structural alphabet HMM-SA and not on structural alignment and geometrical parameters. We extracted meaningful structural motifs that are found in both short and long loops. To our knowledge, it is the first time that pattern mining helps to increase the signal-to-noise ratio in protein loops. This finding helps to better describe protein loops and might permit to decrease the complexity of long-loop analysis. Detailed results are available at http://www.mti.univ-paris-diderot.fr/publication/supplementary/2009/ACCLoop/.

Project description:One approach for speeding-up protein structure comparison is the projection approach, where a protein structure is mapped to a high-dimensional vector and structural similarity is approximated by distance between the corresponding vectors. Structural footprinting methods are projection methods that employ the same general technique to produce the mapping: first select a representative set of structural fragments as models and then map a protein structure to a vector in which each dimension corresponds to a particular model and "counts" the number of times the model appears in the structure. The main difference between any two structural footprinting methods is in the set of models they use; in fact a large number of methods can be generated by varying the type of structural fragments used and the amount of detail in their representation. How do these choices affect the ability of the method to detect various types of structural similarity?To answer this question we benchmarked three structural footprinting methods that vary significantly in their selection of models against the CATH database. In the first set of experiments we compared the methods' ability to detect structural similarity characteristic of evolutionarily related structures, i.e., structures within the same CATH superfamily. In the second set of experiments we tested the methods' agreement with the boundaries imposed by classification groups at the Class, Architecture, and Fold levels of the CATH hierarchy.In both experiments we found that the method which uses secondary structure information has the best performance on average, but no one method performs consistently the best across all groups at a given classification level. We also found that combining the methods' outputs significantly improves the performance. Moreover, our new techniques to measure and visualize the methods' agreement with the CATH hierarchy, including the threshholded affinity graph, are useful beyond this work. In particular, they can be used to expose a similar composition of different classification groups in terms of structural fragments used by the method and thus provide an alternative demonstration of the continuous nature of the protein structure universe.

Project description:BACKGROUND: For many metalloproteins, sequence motifs characteristic of metal-binding sites have not been found or are so short that they would not be expected to be metal-specific. Striking examples of such metalloproteins are those containing Mg2+, one of the most versatile metal cofactors in cellular biochemistry. Even when Mg2+-proteins share insufficient sequence homology to identify Mg2+-specific sequence motifs, they may still share similarity in the Mg2+-binding site structure. However, no structural motifs characteristic of Mg2+-binding sites have been reported. Thus, our aims are (i) to develop a general method for discovering structural patterns/motifs characteristic of ligand-binding sites, given the 3D protein structures, and (ii) to apply it to Mg2+-proteins sharing <30% sequence identity. Our motif discovery method employs structural alphabet encoding to convert 3D structures to the corresponding 1D structural letter sequences, where the Mg2+-structural motifs are identified as recurring structural patterns. RESULTS: The structural alphabet-based motif discovery method has revealed the structural preference of Mg2+-binding sites for certain local/secondary structures: compared to all residues in the Mg2+-proteins, both first and second-shell Mg2+-ligands prefer loops to helices. Even when the Mg2+-proteins share no significant sequence homology, some of them share a similar Mg2+-binding site structure: 4 Mg2+-structural motifs, comprising 21% of the binding sites, were found. In particular, one of the Mg2+-structural motifs found maps to a specific functional group, namely, hydrolases. Furthermore, 2 of the motifs were not found in non metalloproteins or in Ca2+-binding proteins. The structural motifs discovered thus capture some essential biochemical and/or evolutionary properties, and hence may be useful for discovering proteins where Mg2+ plays an important biological role. CONCLUSION: The structural motif discovery method presented herein is general and can be applied to any set of proteins with known 3D structures. This new method is timely considering the increasing number of structures for proteins with unknown function that are being solved from structural genomics incentives. For such proteins, which share no significant sequence homology to proteins of known function, the presence of a structural motif that maps to a specific protein function in the structure would suggest likely active/binding sites and a particular biological function.

Dataset Information

Detecting protein candidate fragments using a structural alphabet profile comparison approach.

Publications

Detecting protein candidate fragments using a structural alphabet profile comparison approach.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets