Literature DB >> 22069034

Assessment of protein structure refinement in CASP9.

Justin L MacCallum1, Alberto Pérez, Michael J Schnieders, Lan Hua, Matthew P Jacobson, Ken A Dill.   

Abstract

We assess performance in the structure refinement category in CASP9. Two years after CASP8, the performance of the best groups has not improved. There are few groups that improve any of our assessment scores with statistical significance. Some predictors, however, are able to consistently improve the physicality of the models. Although we cannot identify any clear bottleneck in improving refinement, several points arise: (1) The refinement portion of CASP has too few targets to make many statistically meaningful conclusions. (2) Predictors are usually very conservative, limiting the possibility of large improvements in models. (3) No group is actually able to correctly rank their five submissions-indicating that potentially better models may be discarded. (4) Different sampling strategies work better for different refinement problems; there is no single strategy that works on all targets. In general, conservative strategies do better, while the greatest improvements come from more adventurous sampling-at the cost of consistency. Comparison with experimental data reveals aspects not captured by comparison to a single structure. In particular, we show that improvement in backbone geometry does not always mean better agreement with experimental data. Finally, we demonstrate that even given the current challenges facing refinement, the refined models are useful for solving the crystallographic phase problem through molecular replacement. Proteins 2011;. © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Copyright © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22069034      PMCID: PMC3238793          DOI: 10.1002/prot.23131

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


  36 in total

1.  Molecular dynamics in the endgame of protein structure prediction.

Authors:  M R Lee; J Tsai; D Baker; P A Kollman
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2001-10-19       Impact factor: 5.469

2.  Liking likelihood.

Authors:  Airlie J McCoy
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr       Date:  2004-11-26

3.  Simultaneous determination of protein structure and dynamics.

Authors:  Kresten Lindorff-Larsen; Robert B Best; Mark A Depristo; Christopher M Dobson; Michele Vendruscolo
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-01-13       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Comparing atomistic simulation data with the NMR experiment: how much can NOEs actually tell us?

Authors:  Bojan Zagrovic; Wilfred F van Gunsteren
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2006-04-01

5.  On the use of orientational restraints and symmetry corrections in alchemical free energy calculations.

Authors:  David L Mobley; John D Chodera; Ken A Dill
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2006-08-28       Impact factor: 3.488

6.  Comparison of multiple Amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters.

Authors:  Viktor Hornak; Robert Abel; Asim Okur; Bentley Strockbine; Adrian Roitberg; Carlos Simmerling
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2006-11-15

7.  The other 90% of the protein: assessment beyond the Calphas for CASP8 template-based and high-accuracy models.

Authors:  Daniel A Keedy; Christopher J Williams; Jeffrey J Headd; W Bryan Arendall; Vincent B Chen; Gary J Kapral; Robert A Gillespie; Jeremy N Block; Adam Zemla; David C Richardson; Jane S Richardson
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2009

8.  MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography.

Authors:  Vincent B Chen; W Bryan Arendall; Jeffrey J Headd; Daniel A Keedy; Robert M Immormino; Gary J Kapral; Laura W Murray; Jane S Richardson; David C Richardson
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr       Date:  2009-12-21

9.  New tools and expanded data analysis capabilities at the Protein Structure Prediction Center.

Authors:  Andriy Kryshtafovych; Andreas Prlic; Zinoviy Dmytriv; Pawel Daniluk; Maciej Milostan; Volker Eyrich; Tim Hubbard; Krzysztof Fidelis
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2007

10.  Phaser crystallographic software.

Authors:  Airlie J McCoy; Ralf W Grosse-Kunstleve; Paul D Adams; Martyn D Winn; Laurent C Storoni; Randy J Read
Journal:  J Appl Crystallogr       Date:  2007-07-13       Impact factor: 3.304

View more
  51 in total

1.  Modeling large regions in proteins: applications to loops, termini, and folding.

Authors:  Aashish N Adhikari; Jian Peng; Michael Wilde; Jinbo Xu; Karl F Freed; Tobin R Sosnick
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 6.725

Review 2.  Constraint methods that accelerate free-energy simulations of biomolecules.

Authors:  Alberto Perez; Justin L MacCallum; Evangelos A Coutsias; Ken A Dill
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  Elastic network normal modes provide a basis for protein structure refinement.

Authors:  Pawel Gniewek; Andrzej Kolinski; Robert L Jernigan; Andrzej Kloczkowski
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2012-05-21       Impact factor: 3.488

4.  Multi-Dimensional Scaling and MODELLER-Based Evolutionary Algorithms for Protein Model Refinement.

Authors:  Yan Chen; Yi Shang; Dong Xu
Journal:  Proc Congr Evol Comput       Date:  2014-07

5.  Refining protein structures using enhanced sampling techniques with restraints derived from an ensemble-based model.

Authors:  Tianqi Ma; Tianwu Zang; Qinghua Wang; Jianpeng Ma
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 6.725

6.  Improving low-accuracy protein structures using enhanced sampling techniques.

Authors:  Tianwu Zang; Tianqi Ma; Qinghua Wang; Jianpeng Ma
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 3.488

Review 7.  Protein modeling: what happened to the "protein structure gap"?

Authors:  Torsten Schwede
Journal:  Structure       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 5.006

Review 8.  Modelling three-dimensional protein structures for applications in drug design.

Authors:  Tobias Schmidt; Andreas Bergner; Torsten Schwede
Journal:  Drug Discov Today       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 7.851

9.  Flexible backbone sampling methods to model and design protein alternative conformations.

Authors:  Noah Ollikainen; Colin A Smith; James S Fraser; Tanja Kortemme
Journal:  Methods Enzymol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.600

10.  Protein Structure Refinement through Structure Selection and Averaging from Molecular Dynamics Ensembles.

Authors:  Vahid Mirjalili; Michael Feig
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2012-12-22       Impact factor: 6.006

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.