Dataset Information

Use of residue pairs in protein sequence-sequence and sequence-structure alignments.

ABSTRACT: Two new sets of scoring matrices are introduced: H2 for the protein sequence comparison and T2 for the protein sequence-structure correlation. Each element of H2 or T2 measures the frequency with which a pair of amino acid types in one protein, k-residues apart in the sequence, is aligned with another pair of residues, of given amino acid types (for H2) or in given structural states (for T2), in other structurally homologous proteins. There are four types, corresponding to the k-values of 1 to 4, for both H2 and T2. These matrices were set up using a large number of structurally homologous protein pairs, with little sequence homology between the pair, that were recently generated using the structure comparison program SHEBA. The two scoring matrices were incorporated into the main body of the sequence alignment program SSEARCH in the FASTA package and tested in a fold recognition setting in which a set of 107 test sequences were aligned to each of a panel of 3,539 domains that represent all known protein structures. Six procedures were tested; the straight Smith-Waterman (SW) and FASTA procedures, which used the Blosum62 single residue type substitution matrix; BLAST and PSI-BLAST procedures, which also used the Blosum62 matrix; PASH, which used Blosum62 and H2 matrices; and PASSC, which used Blosum62, H2, and T2 matrices. All procedures gave similar results when the probe and target sequences had greater than 30% sequence identity. However, when the sequence identity was below 30%, a similar structure could be found for more sequences using PASSC than using any other procedure. PASH and PSI-BLAST gave the next best results.

SUBMITTER: Jung J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2144723 | biostudies-other | 2000 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Use of residue pairs in protein sequence-sequence and sequence-structure alignments.

Jung J J Lee B B

Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society 20000801 8

Two new sets of scoring matrices are introduced: H2 for the protein sequence comparison and T2 for the protein sequence-structure correlation. Each element of H2 or T2 measures the frequency with which a pair of amino acid types in one protein, k-residues apart in the sequence, is aligned with another pair of residues, of given amino acid types (for H2) or in given structural states (for T2), in other structurally homologous proteins. There are four types, corresponding to the k-values of 1 to 4 ...[more]

PMID: 10975579

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOne aim of the in silico characterization of proteins is to identify all residue-positions, which are crucial for function or structure. Several sequence-based algorithms exist, which predict functionally important sites. However, with respect to sequence information, many functionally and structurally important sites are hard to distinguish and consequently a large number of incorrectly predicted functional sites have to be expected. This is why we were interested to design a new classifier that differentiates between functionally and structurally important sites and to assess its performance on representative datasets.ResultsWe have implemented CLIPS-1D, which predicts a role in catalysis, ligand-binding, or protein structure for residue-positions in a mutually exclusive manner. By analyzing a multiple sequence alignment, the algorithm scores conservation as well as abundance of residues at individual sites and their local neighborhood and categorizes by means of a multiclass support vector machine. A cross-validation confirmed that residue-positions involved in catalysis were identified with state-of-the-art quality; the mean MCC-value was 0.34. For structurally important sites, prediction quality was considerably higher (mean MCC = 0.67). For ligand-binding sites, prediction quality was lower (mean MCC = 0.12), because binding sites and structurally important residue-positions share conservation and abundance values, which makes their separation difficult. We show that classification success varies for residues in a class-specific manner. This is why our algorithm computes residue-specific p-values, which allow for the statistical assessment of each individual prediction. CLIPS-1D is available as a Web service at http://www-bioinf.uni-regensburg.de/.ConclusionsCLIPS-1D is a classifier, whose prediction quality has been determined separately for catalytic sites, ligand-binding sites, and structurally important sites. It generates hypotheses about residue-positions important for a set of homologous proteins and focuses on conservation and abundance signals. Thus, the algorithm can be applied in cases where function cannot be transferred from well-characterized proteins by means of sequence comparison.

Project description:It is often assumed that in the Protein Data Bank (PDB), two proteins with similar sequences will also have similar structures. Accordingly, it has proved useful to develop subsets of the PDB from which "redundant" structures have been removed, based on a sequence-based criterion for similarity. Similarly, when predicting protein structure using homology modeling, if a template structure for modeling a target sequence is selected by sequence alone, this implicitly assumes that all sequence-similar templates are equivalent. Here, we show that this assumption is often not correct and that standard approaches to create subsets of the PDB can lead to the loss of structurally and functionally important information. We have carried out sequence-based structural superpositions and geometry-based structural alignments of a large number of protein pairs to determine the extent to which sequence similarity ensures structural similarity. We find many examples where two proteins that are similar in sequence have structures that differ significantly from one another. The source of the structural differences usually has a functional basis. The number of such proteins pairs that are identified and the magnitude of the dissimilarity depend on the approach that is used to calculate the differences; in particular sequence-based structure superpositioning will identify a larger number of structurally dissimilar pairs than geometry-based structural alignments. When two sequences can be aligned in a statistically meaningful way, sequence-based structural superpositioning provides a meaningful measure of structural differences. This approach and geometry-based structure alignments reveal somewhat different information and one or the other might be preferable in a given application. Our results suggest that in some cases, notably homology modeling, the common use of nonredundant datasets, culled from the PDB based on sequence, may mask important structural and functional information. We have established a data base of sequence-similar, structurally dissimilar protein pairs that will help address this problem (http://luna.bioc.columbia.edu/rachel/seqsimstrdiff.htm).

Dataset Information

Use of residue pairs in protein sequence-sequence and sequence-structure alignments.

Publications

Use of residue pairs in protein sequence-sequence and sequence-structure alignments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets