Literature DB >> 16751606

A composite score for predicting errors in protein structure models.

David Eramian1, Min-yi Shen, Damien Devos, Francisco Melo, Andrej Sali, Marc A Marti-Renom.   

Abstract

Reliable prediction of model accuracy is an important unsolved problem in protein structure modeling. To address this problem, we studied 24 individual assessment scores, including physics-based energy functions, statistical potentials, and machine learning-based scoring functions. Individual scores were also used to construct approximately 85,000 composite scoring functions using support vector machine (SVM) regression. The scores were tested for their abilities to identify the most native-like models from a set of 6000 comparative models of 20 representative protein structures. Each of the 20 targets was modeled using a template of <30% sequence identity, corresponding to challenging comparative modeling cases. The best SVM score outperformed all individual scores by decreasing the average RMSD difference between the model identified as the best of the set and the model with the lowest RMSD (DeltaRMSD) from 0.63 A to 0.45 A, while having a higher Pearson correlation coefficient to RMSD (r=0.87) than any other tested score. The most accurate score is based on a combination of the DOPE non-hydrogen atom statistical potential; surface, contact, and combined statistical potentials from MODPIPE; and two PSIPRED/DSSP scores. It was implemented in the SVMod program, which can now be applied to select the final model in various modeling problems, including fold assignment, target-template alignment, and loop modeling.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16751606      PMCID: PMC2242555          DOI: 10.1110/ps.062095806

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


  62 in total

1.  Discrimination of near-native protein structures from misfolded models by empirical free energy functions.

Authors:  D W Gatchell; S Dennis; S Vajda
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2000-12-01

2.  Reliability of assessment of protein structure prediction methods.

Authors:  Marc A Marti-Renom; M S Madhusudhan; András Fiser; Burkhard Rost; Andrej Sali
Journal:  Structure       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.006

3.  Predicting CNS permeability of drug molecules: comparison of neural network and support vector machine algorithms.

Authors:  Scott Doniger; Thomas Hofmann; Joanne Yeh
Journal:  J Comput Biol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 1.479

4.  Can correct protein models be identified?

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

5.  MOPED: method for optimizing physical energy parameters using decoys.

Authors:  Chaok Seok; J B Rosen; John D Chodera; Ken A Dill
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2003-01-15       Impact factor: 3.376

6.  Tools for comparative protein structure modeling and analysis.

Authors:  Narayanan Eswar; Bino John; Nebojsa Mirkovic; Andras Fiser; Valentin A Ilyin; Ursula Pieper; Ashley C Stuart; Marc A Marti-Renom; M S Madhusudhan; Bozidar Yerkovich; Andrej Sali
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2003-07-01       Impact factor: 16.971

7.  Comparative protein structure modeling by iterative alignment, model building and model assessment.

Authors:  Bino John; Andrej Sali
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2003-07-15       Impact factor: 16.971

8.  How well can we predict native contacts in proteins based on decoy structures and their energies?

Authors:  Jiang Zhu; Qianqian Zhu; Yunyu Shi; Haiyan Liu
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2003-09-01

9.  Prediction of beta-turns with learning machines.

Authors:  Yu-Dong Cai; Xiao-Jun Liu; Yi-Xue Li; Xue-biao Xu; Kuo-Chen Chou
Journal:  Peptides       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.750

10.  Benchmarking secondary structure prediction for fold recognition.

Authors:  Liam J McGuffin; David T Jones
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2003-08-01
View more
  74 in total

1.  Improving threading algorithms for remote homology modeling by combining fragment and template comparisons.

Authors:  Hongyi Zhou; Jeffrey Skolnick
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2010-07

2.  GOAP: a generalized orientation-dependent, all-atom statistical potential for protein structure prediction.

Authors:  Hongyi Zhou; Jeffrey Skolnick
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 4.033

3.  Sub-AQUA: real-value quality assessment of protein structure models.

Authors:  Yifeng David Yang; Preston Spratt; Hao Chen; Changsoon Park; Daisuke Kihara
Journal:  Protein Eng Des Sel       Date:  2010-06-04       Impact factor: 1.650

4.  Recovering physical potentials from a model protein databank.

Authors:  J W Mullinax; W G Noid
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-11-01       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures.

Authors:  Min-Yi Shen; Andrej Sali
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 6.725

6.  Host pathogen protein interactions predicted by comparative modeling.

Authors:  Fred P Davis; David T Barkan; Narayanan Eswar; James H McKerrow; Andrej Sali
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2007-10-26       Impact factor: 6.725

7.  Fold assessment for comparative protein structure modeling.

Authors:  Francisco Melo; Andrej Sali
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2007-09-28       Impact factor: 6.725

8.  Reduced C(beta) statistical potentials can outperform all-atom potentials in decoy identification.

Authors:  James E Fitzgerald; Abhishek K Jha; Andres Colubri; Tobin R Sosnick; Karl F Freed
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 6.725

9.  Local quality assessment in homology models using statistical potentials and support vector machines.

Authors:  Marc Fasnacht; Jiang Zhu; Barry Honig
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2007-06-28       Impact factor: 6.725

10.  Structural mechanism of SDS-induced enzyme activity of scorpion hemocyanin revealed by electron cryomicroscopy.

Authors:  Yao Cong; Qinfen Zhang; David Woolford; Thorsten Schweikardt; Htet Khant; Matthew Dougherty; Steven J Ludtke; Wah Chiu; Heinz Decker
Journal:  Structure       Date:  2009-05-13       Impact factor: 5.006

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.