Literature DB >> 21464511

Touring protein space with Matt.

Noah M Daniels1, Anoop Kumar, Lenore J Cowen, Matt Menke.   

Abstract

Using the Matt structure alignment program, we take a tour of protein space, producing a hierarchical clustering scheme that divides protein structural domains into clusters based on geometric dissimilarity. While it was known that purely structural, geometric, distance-based measures of structural similarity, such as Dali/FSSP, could largely replicate hand-curated schemes such as SCOP at the family level, it was an open question as to whether any such scheme could approximate SCOP at the more distant superfamily and fold levels. We partially answer this question in the affirmative, by designing a clustering scheme based on Matt that approximately matches SCOP at the superfamily level, and demonstrates qualitative differences in performance between Matt and DaliLite. Implications for the debate over the organization of protein fold space are discussed. Based on our clustering of protein space, we introduce the Mattbench benchmark set, a new collection of structural alignments useful for testing sequence aligners on more distantly homologous proteins.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21464511      PMCID: PMC3355523          DOI: 10.1109/TCBB.2011.70

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform        ISSN: 1545-5963            Impact factor:   3.710


  36 in total

1.  A systematic comparison of protein structure classifications: SCOP, CATH and FSSP.

Authors:  C Hadley; D T Jones
Journal:  Structure       Date:  1999-09-15       Impact factor: 5.006

2.  SABmark--a benchmark for sequence alignment that covers the entire known fold space.

Authors:  Ivo Van Walle; Ignace Lasters; Lode Wyns
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2004-08-27       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 3.  Protein structure comparison: implications for the nature of 'fold space', and structure and function prediction.

Authors:  Rachel Kolodny; Donald Petrey; Barry Honig
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2006-05-04       Impact factor: 6.809

4.  Partitioning protein structures into domains: why is it so difficult?

Authors:  Timothy A Holland; Stella Veretnik; Ilya N Shindyalov; Philip E Bourne
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2006-06-22       Impact factor: 5.469

5.  Evolution of protein structural classes and protein sequence families.

Authors:  In-Geol Choi; Sung-Hou Kim
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-09-07       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  The CATH domain structure database: new protocols and classification levels give a more comprehensive resource for exploring evolution.

Authors:  Lesley H Greene; Tony E Lewis; Sarah Addou; Alison Cuff; Tim Dallman; Mark Dibley; Oliver Redfern; Frances Pearl; Rekha Nambudiry; Adam Reid; Ian Sillitoe; Corin Yeats; Janet M Thornton; Christine A Orengo
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2006-11-29       Impact factor: 16.971

7.  A fast SCOP fold classification system using content-based E-Predict algorithm.

Authors:  Pin-Hao Chi; Chi-Ren Shyu; Dong Xu
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2006-07-26       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  ROC and confusion analysis of structure comparison methods identify the main causes of divergence from manual protein classification.

Authors:  Vichetra Sam; Chin-Hsien Tai; Jean Garnier; Jean-Francois Gibrat; Byungkook Lee; Peter J Munson
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2006-04-13       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  4SCOPmap: automated assignment of protein structures to evolutionary superfamilies.

Authors:  Sara Cheek; Yuan Qi; S Sri Krishna; Lisa N Kinch; Nick V Grishin
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2004-12-14       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  TM-align: a protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score.

Authors:  Yang Zhang; Jeffrey Skolnick
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2005-04-22       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  7 in total

1.  Evaluating Statistical Multiple Sequence Alignment in Comparison to Other Alignment Methods on Protein Data Sets.

Authors:  Michael Nute; Ehsan Saleh; Tandy Warnow
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 15.683

2.  Global view of the protein universe.

Authors:  Sergey Nepomnyachiy; Nir Ben-Tal; Rachel Kolodny
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-07-28       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  MAFFT-DASH: integrated protein sequence and structural alignment.

Authors:  John Rozewicki; Songling Li; Karlou Mar Amada; Daron M Standley; Kazutaka Katoh
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 16.971

4.  Correlations between alignment gaps and nucleotide substitution or amino acid replacement.

Authors:  Tae-Kun Seo; Benjamin D Redelings; Jeffrey L Thorne
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 12.779

5.  SMURFLite: combining simplified Markov random fields with simulated evolution improves remote homology detection for beta-structural proteins into the twilight zone.

Authors:  Noah M Daniels; Raghavendra Hosur; Bonnie Berger; Lenore J Cowen
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2012-03-09       Impact factor: 6.937

6.  Automatic classification of protein structures using low-dimensional structure space mappings.

Authors:  Daniel Asarnow; Rahul Singh
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Bridging the gaps in statistical models of protein alignment.

Authors:  Dinithi Sumanaweera; Lloyd Allison; Arun S Konagurthu
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2022-06-24       Impact factor: 6.931

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.