Literature DB >> 18546502

FragQA: predicting local fragment quality of a sequence-structure alignment.

Xin Gao1, Dongbo Bu, Shuai Cheng Li, Jinbo Xu, Ming Li.   

Abstract

MOTIVATION: Although protein structure prediction has made great progress in recent years, a protein model derived from automated prediction methods is subject to various errors. As methods for structure prediction develop, a continuing problem is how to evaluate the quality of a protein model, especially to identify some well predicted regions of the model, so that the structure biology community can benefit from automated structure prediction. It is also important to identify badly-predicted regions in a model so that some refinement measurements can be applied to.
RESULTS: We present a novel technique FragQA to accurately predict local quality of a sequence-structure (i.e., sequence-template) alignment generated by comparative modeling (i.e., homology modeling and threading). Different from previous local quality assessment methods, FragQA directly predicts cRMSD between a continuously aligned fragment determined by an alignment and the corresponding fragment in the native structure. FragQA uses an SVM (Support Vector Machines) regression method to perform prediction using information extracted from a single given alignment. Experimental results demonstrate that FragQA performs well on predicting local quality. More specifically, FragQA has prediction accuracy better than a top performer ProQres [18]. Our results indicate that (1) local quality can be predicted well; (2) local sequence evolutionary information (i.e., sequence similarity) is the major factor in predicting local quality; and (3) structure information such as solvent accessibility and secondary structure helps improving prediction performance.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18546502

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genome Inform        ISSN: 0919-9454


  4 in total

1.  How well can the accuracy of comparative protein structure models be predicted?

Authors:  David Eramian; Narayanan Eswar; Min-Yi Shen; Andrej Sali
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 6.725

Review 2.  Template-based protein modeling: recent methodological advances.

Authors:  Pankaj R Daga; Ronak Y Patel; Robert J Doerksen
Journal:  Curr Top Med Chem       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 3.  Protein structure prediction and model quality assessment.

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

4.  Protein structural model selection by combining consensus and single scoring methods.

Authors:  Zhiquan He; Meshari Alazmi; Jingfen Zhang; Dong Xu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.