Literature DB >> 17640066

Assessing model accuracy using the homology modeling automatically software.

Aneerban Bhattacharya1, Zeba Wunderlich, Daniel Monleon, Roberto Tejero, Gaetano T Montelione.   

Abstract

Homology modeling is a powerful technique that greatly increases the value of experimental structure determination by using the structural information of one protein to predict the structures of homologous proteins. We have previously described a method of homology modeling by satisfaction of spatial restraints (Li et al., Protein Sci 1997;6:956-970). The Homology Modeling Automatically (HOMA) web site, <http://www-nmr.cabm.rutgers.edu/HOMA>, is a new tool, using this method to predict 3D structure of a target protein based on the sequence alignment of the target protein to a template protein and the structure coordinates of the template. The user is presented with the resulting models, together with an extensive structure validation report providing critical assessments of the quality of the resulting homology models. The homology modeling method employed by HOMA was assessed and validated using twenty-four groups of homologous proteins. Using HOMA, homology models were generated for 510 proteins, including 264 proteins modeled with correct folds and 246 modeled with incorrect folds. Accuracies of these models were assessed by superimposition on the corresponding experimentally determined structures. A subset of these results was compared with parallel studies of modeling accuracy using several other automated homology modeling approaches. Overall, HOMA provides prediction accuracies similar to other state-of-the-art homology modeling methods. We also provide an evaluation of several structure quality validation tools in assessing the accuracy of homology models generated with HOMA. This study demonstrates that Verify3D (Luthy et al., Nature 1992;356:83-85) and ProsaII (Sippl, Proteins 1993;17:355-362) are most sensitive in distinguishing between homology models with correct or incorrect folds. For homology models that have the correct fold, the steric conformational energy (including primarily the Van der Waals energy), MolProbity clashscore (Word et al., Protein Sci 2000;9:2251-2259), and the PROCHECK G-factors (Laskowski et al., J Biomol NMR 1996;8:477-486) provide sensitive and consistent methods for assessing accuracy and can distinguish between homology models of higher and lower accuracy. As demonstrated in the accompanying paper (Bhattacharya et al., accompanying paper), combinations of these scores for models generated with HOMA provide a basis for distinguishing low from high accuracy models. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 17640066     DOI: 10.1002/prot.21466

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proteins        ISSN: 0887-3585


  19 in total

1.  Protein structure validation by generalized linear model root-mean-square deviation prediction.

Authors:  Anurag Bagaria; Victor Jaravine; Yuanpeng J Huang; Gaetano T Montelione; Peter Güntert
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 6.725

2.  Structural genomics is the largest contributor of novel structural leverage.

Authors:  Rajesh Nair; Jinfeng Liu; Ta-Tsen Soong; Thomas B Acton; John K Everett; Andrei Kouranov; Andras Fiser; Adam Godzik; Lukasz Jaroszewski; Christine Orengo; Gaetano T Montelione; Burkhard Rost
Journal:  J Struct Funct Genomics       Date:  2009-02-05

3.  Definition and classification of evaluation units for CASP10.

Authors:  Todd J Taylor; Chin-Hsien Tai; Yuanpeng J Huang; Jeremy Block; Hongjun Bai; Andriy Kryshtafovych; Gaetano T Montelione; Byungkook Lee
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2013-11-22

4.  NMR solution structure of a cyanovirin homolog from wheat head blight fungus.

Authors:  Elena Matei; John M Louis; JunGoo Jee; Angela M Gronenborn
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2011-03-01

5.  Homology model and potential virus-capsid binding site of a putative HEV receptor Grp78.

Authors:  Hai Yu; Shaowei Li; Chunyan Yang; Minxi Wei; Cuiling Song; Zizheng Zheng; Ying Gu; Hailian Du; Jun Zhang; Ningshao Xia
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2010-07-14       Impact factor: 1.810

6.  Protein structure prediction assisted with sparse NMR data in CASP13.

Authors:  Davide Sala; Yuanpeng Janet Huang; Casey A Cole; David A Snyder; Gaohua Liu; Yojiro Ishida; G V T Swapna; Kelly P Brock; Chris Sander; Krzysztof Fidelis; Andriy Kryshtafovych; Masayori Inouye; Roberto Tejero; Homayoun Valafar; Antonio Rosato; Gaetano T Montelione
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2019-12

7.  Catalytic key amino acids and UDP-sugar donor specificity of a plant glucuronosyltransferase, UGT94B1: molecular modeling substantiated by site-specific mutagenesis and biochemical analyses.

Authors:  Sarah A Osmani; Søren Bak; Anne Imberty; Carl Erik Olsen; Birger Lindberg Møller
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 8.340

8.  Outcome of a workshop on applications of protein models in biomedical research.

Authors:  Torsten Schwede; Andrej Sali; Barry Honig; Michael Levitt; Helen M Berman; David Jones; Steven E Brenner; Stephen K Burley; Rhiju Das; Nikolay V Dokholyan; Roland L Dunbrack; Krzysztof Fidelis; Andras Fiser; Adam Godzik; Yuanpeng Janet Huang; Christine Humblet; Matthew P Jacobson; Andrzej Joachimiak; Stanley R Krystek; Tanja Kortemme; Andriy Kryshtafovych; Gaetano T Montelione; John Moult; Diana Murray; Roberto Sanchez; Tobin R Sosnick; Daron M Standley; Terry Stouch; Sandor Vajda; Max Vasquez; John D Westbrook; Ian A Wilson
Journal:  Structure       Date:  2009-02-13       Impact factor: 5.006

Review 9.  Protein structure prediction and model quality assessment.

Authors:  Andriy Kryshtafovych; Krzysztof Fidelis
Journal:  Drug Discov Today       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 7.851

10.  Targeting the human cancer pathway protein interaction network by structural genomics.

Authors:  Yuanpeng Janet Huang; Dehua Hang; Long Jason Lu; Liang Tong; Mark B Gerstein; Gaetano T Montelione
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2008-05-18       Impact factor: 5.911

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.