Literature DB >> 18077243

A comparative study of the reported performance of ab initio protein structure prediction algorithms.

Glennie Helles1.   

Abstract

Protein structure prediction is one of the major challenges in bioinformatics today. Throughout the past five decades, many different algorithmic approaches have been attempted, and although progress has been made the problem remains unsolvable even for many small proteins. While the general objective is to predict the three-dimensional structure from primary sequence, our current knowledge and computational power are simply insufficient to solve a problem of such high complexity. Some prediction algorithms do, however, appear to perform better than others, although it is not always obvious which ones they are and it is perhaps even less obvious why that is. In this review, the reported performance results from 18 different recently published prediction algorithms are compared. Furthermore, the general algorithmic settings most likely responsible for the difference in the reported performance are identified, and the specific settings of each of the 18 prediction algorithms are also compared. The average normalized r.m.s.d. scores reported range from 11.17 to 3.48. With a performance measure including both r.m.s.d. scores and CPU time, the currently best-performing prediction algorithm is identified to be the I-TASSER algorithm. Two of the algorithmic settings--protein representation and fragment assembly--were found to have definite positive influence on the running time and the predicted structures, respectively. There thus appears to be a clear benefit from incorporating this knowledge in the design of new prediction algorithms.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18077243      PMCID: PMC2405928          DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2007.1278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J R Soc Interface        ISSN: 1742-5662            Impact factor:   4.118


  41 in total

1.  Protein secondary structure prediction based on position-specific scoring matrices.

Authors:  D T Jones
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1999-09-17       Impact factor: 5.469

Review 2.  Ab initio protein structure prediction.

Authors:  Corey Hardin; Taras V Pogorelov; Zaida Luthey-Schulten
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 6.809

Review 3.  Rotamer libraries in the 21st century.

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

4.  TOUCHSTONE II: a new approach to ab initio protein structure prediction.

Authors:  Yang Zhang; Andrzej Kolinski; Jeffrey Skolnick
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 4.033

5.  Unique optimal foldings of proteins on a triangular lattice.

Authors:  Zhenping Li; Xiangsun Zhang; Luonan Chen
Journal:  Appl Bioinformatics       Date:  2005

6.  Toward high-resolution de novo structure prediction for small proteins.

Authors:  Philip Bradley; Kira M S Misura; David Baker
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-09-16       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  An evolutionary strategy for all-atom folding of the 60-amino-acid bacterial ribosomal protein l20.

Authors:  A Schug; W Wenzel
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2006-03-24       Impact factor: 4.033

8.  Effective optimization algorithms for fragment-assembly based protein structure prediction.

Authors:  Kevin W DeRonne; George Karypis
Journal:  Comput Syst Bioinformatics Conf       Date:  2006

9.  Assessment of CASP7 structure predictions for template free targets.

Authors:  Ralf Jauch; Hock Chuan Yeo; Prasanna R Kolatkar; Neil D Clarke
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2007

10.  Protein structure prediction using mutually orthogonal Latin squares and a genetic algorithm.

Authors:  J Arunachalam; V Kanagasabai; N Gautham
Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun       Date:  2006-02-08       Impact factor: 3.575

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Enhanced sampling techniques in molecular dynamics simulations of biological systems.

Authors:  Rafael C Bernardi; Marcelo C R Melo; Klaus Schulten
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2014-10-23

2.  When the lowest energy does not induce native structures: parallel minimization of multi-energy values by hybridizing searching intelligences.

Authors:  Qiang Lü; Xiao-Yan Xia; Rong Chen; Da-Jun Miao; Sha-Sha Chen; Li-Jun Quan; Hai-Ou Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-09-28       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  An automated procedure for detecting protein folds from sub-nanometer resolution electron density.

Authors:  Reza Khayat; Gabriel C Lander; John E Johnson
Journal:  J Struct Biol       Date:  2009-12-22       Impact factor: 2.867

4.  Predicting nucleic acid binding interfaces from structural models of proteins.

Authors:  Iris Dror; Shula Shazman; Srayanta Mukherjee; Yang Zhang; Fabian Glaser; Yael Mandel-Gutfreund
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2011-11-16

5.  The role of atomic level steric effects and attractive forces in protein folding.

Authors:  Heiko Lammert; Peter G Wolynes; José N Onuchic
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2011-11-12

6.  Molecular docking, molecular modeling, and molecular dynamics studies of azaisoflavone as dual COX-2 inhibitors and TP receptor antagonists.

Authors:  Murtuza Hadianawala; Amarjyoti Das Mahapatra; Jitender K Yadav; Bhaskar Datta
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 1.810

7.  Structure-function analysis of MurJ reveals a solvent-exposed cavity containing residues essential for peptidoglycan biogenesis in Escherichia coli.

Authors:  Emily K Butler; Rebecca M Davis; Vase Bari; Paul A Nicholson; Natividad Ruiz
Journal:  J Bacteriol       Date:  2013-08-09       Impact factor: 3.490

8.  NCACO-score: an effective main-chain dependent scoring function for structure modeling.

Authors:  Liqing Tian; Aiping Wu; Yang Cao; Xiaoxi Dong; Yun Hu; Taijiao Jiang
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-05-26       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  A framework for evolutionary systems biology.

Authors:  Laurence Loewe
Journal:  BMC Syst Biol       Date:  2009-02-24

Review 10.  Strategies and molecular tools to fight antimicrobial resistance: resistome, transcriptome, and antimicrobial peptides.

Authors:  Letícia S Tavares; Carolina S F Silva; Vinicius C de Souza; Vânia L da Silva; Cláudio G Diniz; Marcelo O Santos
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 5.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.