Literature DB >> 15840834

All are not equal: a benchmark of different homology modeling programs.

Björn Wallner1, Arne Elofsson.   

Abstract

Modeling a protein structure based on a homologous structure is a standard method in structural biology today. In this process an alignment of a target protein sequence onto the structure of a template(s) is used as input to a program that constructs a 3D model. It has been shown that the most important factor in this process is the correctness of the alignment and the choice of the best template structure(s), while it is generally believed that there are no major differences between the best modeling programs. Therefore, a large number of studies to benchmark the alignment qualities and the selection process have been performed. However, to our knowledge no large-scale benchmark has been performed to evaluate the programs used to transform the alignment to a 3D model. In this study, a benchmark of six different homology modeling programs- Modeller, SegMod/ENCAD, SWISS-MODEL, 3D-JIGSAW, nest, and Builder-is presented. The performance of these programs is evaluated using physiochemical correctness and structural similarity to the correct structure. From our analysis it can be concluded that no single modeling program outperform the others in all tests. However, it is quite clear that three modeling programs, Modeller, nest, and SegMod/ ENCAD, perform better than the others. Interestingly, the fastest and oldest modeling program, SegMod/ ENCAD, performs very well, although it was written more than 10 years ago and has not undergone any development since. It can also be observed that none of the homology modeling programs builds side chains as well as a specialized program (SCWRL), and therefore there should be room for improvement.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15840834      PMCID: PMC2253266          DOI: 10.1110/ps.041253405

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Protein Sci        ISSN: 0961-8368            Impact factor:   6.725


  47 in total

1.  Analysis and assessment of comparative modeling predictions in CASP4.

Authors:  A Tramontano; R Leplae; V Morea
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2001

2.  The 2002 Olympic Games of protein structure prediction.

Authors:  Daniel Fischer; Leszek Rychlewski
Journal:  Protein Eng       Date:  2003-03

3.  Can correct protein models be identified?

Authors:  Björn Wallner; Arne Elofsson
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 6.725

4.  Assessment of homology-based predictions in CASP5.

Authors:  Anna Tramontano; Veronica Morea
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2003

5.  Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP)-round V.

Authors:  John Moult; Krzysztof Fidelis; Adam Zemla; Tim Hubbard
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2003

Review 6.  Rotamer libraries in the 21st century.

Authors:  Roland L Dunbrack
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 6.809

7.  In search for more accurate alignments in the twilight zone.

Authors:  Lukasz Jaroszewski; Weizhong Li; Adam Godzik
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 6.725

8.  SWISS-MODEL: An automated protein homology-modeling server.

Authors:  Torsten Schwede; Jürgen Kopp; Nicolas Guex; Manuel C Peitsch
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2003-07-01       Impact factor: 16.971

9.  A graph-theory algorithm for rapid protein side-chain prediction.

Authors:  Adrian A Canutescu; Andrew A Shelenkov; Roland L Dunbrack
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 6.725

10.  Sequence comparisons using multiple sequences detect three times as many remote homologues as pairwise methods.

Authors:  J Park; K Karplus; C Barrett; R Hughey; D Haussler; T Hubbard; C Chothia
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1998-12-11       Impact factor: 5.469

View more
  68 in total

1.  PyMod: sequence similarity searches, multiple sequence-structure alignments, and homology modeling within PyMOL.

Authors:  Emanuele Bramucci; Alessandro Paiardini; Francesco Bossa; Stefano Pascarella
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 3.169

2.  Relative packing groups in template-based structure prediction: cooperative effects of true positive constraints.

Authors:  Ryan Day; Xiaotao Qu; Rosemarie Swanson; Zach Bohannan; Robert Bliss; Jerry Tsai
Journal:  J Comput Biol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 1.479

Review 3.  Advances in homology protein structure modeling.

Authors:  Zhexin Xiang
Journal:  Curr Protein Pept Sci       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.272

4.  A comparative study of available software for high-accuracy homology modeling: from sequence alignments to structural models.

Authors:  Akbar Nayeem; Doree Sitkoff; Stanley Krystek
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 6.725

5.  Physically realistic homology models built with ROSETTA can be more accurate than their templates.

Authors:  Kira M S Misura; Dylan Chivian; Carol A Rohl; David E Kim; David Baker
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-03-27       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 6.  Membrane protein prediction methods.

Authors:  Marco Punta; Lucy R Forrest; Henry Bigelow; Andrew Kernytsky; Jinfeng Liu; Burkhard Rost
Journal:  Methods       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.608

7.  Identification of correct regions in protein models using structural, alignment, and consensus information.

Authors:  Björn Wallner; Arne Elofsson
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2006-03-07       Impact factor: 6.725

8.  Loopholes and missing links in protein modeling.

Authors:  Karen A Rossi; Carolyn A Weigelt; Akbar Nayeem; Stanley R Krystek
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2007-07-27       Impact factor: 6.725

9.  PIK3CA somatic mutations in breast cancer: Mechanistic insights from Langevin dynamics simulations.

Authors:  Parminder K Mankoo; Saraswati Sukumar; Rachel Karchin
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2009-05-01

10.  Explicit orientation dependence in empirical potentials and its significance to side-chain modeling.

Authors:  Jianpeng Ma
Journal:  Acc Chem Res       Date:  2009-08-18       Impact factor: 22.384

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.