Literature DB >> 18704942

Information theory provides a comprehensive framework for the evaluation of protein structure predictions.

Rosemarie Swanson1, Marina Vannucci, Jerry W Tsai.   

Abstract

Protein structure prediction has a number of important ad hoc similarity measures for evaluating predictions, but would benefit from a measure that is able to provide a common framework for a broad range of comparisons. Here we show that a mutual information-like measure can provide a comprehensive framework for evaluating protein structure prediction of all types. We discuss the concept of information, its application to secondary structure, and the obstacle to applying it to 3D structure. On the basis of the insights from the secondary structure case, we present an approach to work around the 3D difficulties, and develop a method to measure the mutual information provided by a 3D structure prediction. We integrate the evaluation of all types of protein structure prediction into a single framework, and compare the amount of information provided by various prediction methods, including secondary structure prediction. Within this broadened framework, the idea that structure is better preserved than sequence during evolution is evaluated quantitatively for the globin family. A nearly perfect sequence match in the globin family corresponds to about 300 bits of information, whereas a nearly perfect structural match for the same two proteins corresponds to about 2500 bits of information, where bits of information describes the probability of obtaining a match of similar closeness by chance. Mutual information provides both a theoretical basis for evaluating structure similarity and an explanatory surround for existing similarity measures. (c) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 18704942      PMCID: PMC2629808          DOI: 10.1002/prot.22186

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


  21 in total

1.  The Protein Data Bank.

Authors:  H M Berman; J Westbrook; Z Feng; G Gilliland; T N Bhat; H Weissig; I N Shindyalov; P E Bourne
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2000-01-01       Impact factor: 16.971

Review 2.  Assessing the accuracy of prediction algorithms for classification: an overview.

Authors:  P Baldi; S Brunak; Y Chauvin; C A Andersen; H Nielsen
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 6.937

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

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

4.  Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP): round IV.

Authors:  J Moult; K Fidelis; A Zemla; T Hubbard
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2001

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

6.  LGA: A method for finding 3D similarities in protein structures.

Authors:  Adam Zemla
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2003-07-01       Impact factor: 16.971

7.  Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP): round II.

Authors:  J Moult; T Hubbard; S H Bryant; K Fidelis; J T Pedersen
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  1997

8.  A large-scale experiment to assess protein structure prediction methods.

Authors:  J Moult; J T Pedersen; R Judson; K Fidelis
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  1995-11

9.  Prediction of protein secondary structure at better than 70% accuracy.

Authors:  B Rost; C Sander
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1993-07-20       Impact factor: 5.469

10.  Tuna cytochrome c at 2.0 A resolution. I. Ferricytochrome structure analysis.

Authors:  R Swanson; B L Trus; N Mandel; G Mandel; O B Kallai; R E Dickerson
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1977-01-25       Impact factor: 5.157

View more
  2 in total

1.  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

2.  Fast geometric consensus approach for protein model quality assessment.

Authors:  Rafal Adamczak; Jaroslaw Pillardy; Brinda K Vallat; Jaroslaw Meller
Journal:  J Comput Biol       Date:  2011-01-18       Impact factor: 1.479

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.