Literature DB >> 9199410

Recognition of analogous and homologous protein folds: analysis of sequence and structure conservation.

R B Russell1, M A Saqi, R A Sayle, P A Bates, M J Sternberg.   

Abstract

An analysis was performed on 335 pairs of structurally aligned proteins derived from the structural classification of proteins (SCOP http://scop.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/scop/) database. These similarities were divided into analogues, defined as proteins with similar three-dimensional structures (same SCOP fold classification) but generally with different functions and little evidence of a common ancestor (different SCOP superfamily classification). Homologues were defined as pairs of similar structures likely to be the result of evolutionary divergence (same superfamily) and were divided into remote, medium and close sub-divisions based on the percentage sequence identity. Particular attention was paid to the differences between analogues and remote homologues, since both types of similarities are generally undetectable by sequence comparison and their detection is the aim of fold recognition methods. Distributions of sequence identities and substitution matrices suggest a higher degree of sequence similarity in remote homologues than in analogues. Matrices for remote homologues show similarity to existing mutation matrices, providing some validity for their use in previously described fold recognition methods. In contrast, matrices derived from analogous proteins show little conservation of amino acid properties beyond broad conservation of hydrophobic or polar character. Secondary structure and accessibility were more conserved on average in remote homologues than in analogues, though there was no apparent difference in the root-mean-square deviation between these two types of similarities. Alignments of remote homologues and analogues show a similar number of gaps, openings (one or more sequential gaps) and inserted/deleted secondary structure elements, and both generally contain more gaps/openings/deleted secondary structure elements than medium and close homologues. These results suggest that gap parameters for fold recognition should be more lenient than those used in sequence comparison. Parameters were derived from the analogue and remote homologue datasets for potential used in fold recognition methods. Implications for protein fold recognition and evolution are discussed.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9199410     DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.1997.1019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mol Biol        ISSN: 0022-2836            Impact factor:   5.469


  55 in total

1.  Detection of protein fold similarity based on correlation of amino acid properties.

Authors:  I V Grigoriev; S H Kim
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1999-12-07       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Factors limiting the performance of prediction-based fold recognition methods.

Authors:  X de la Cruz; J M Thornton
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 6.725

3.  Cloning and functional analysis of cDNAs with open reading frames for 300 previously undefined genes expressed in CD34+ hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells.

Authors:  Q H Zhang; M Ye; X Y Wu; S X Ren; M Zhao; C J Zhao; G Fu; Y Shen; H Y Fan; G Lu; M Zhong; X R Xu; Z G Han; J W Zhang; J Tao; Q H Huang; J Zhou; G X Hu; J Gu; S J Chen; Z Chen
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 9.043

4.  Models of the extracellular domain of the nicotinic receptors and of agonist- and Ca2+-binding sites.

Authors:  Nicolas Le Novère; Thomas Grutter; Jean-Pierre Changeux
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-02-26       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Classification of protein folds.

Authors:  Robert B Russell
Journal:  Mol Biotechnol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.695

6.  Annotation transfer for genomics: measuring functional divergence in multi-domain proteins.

Authors:  H Hegyi; M Gerstein
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 9.043

7.  Classification of protein disulphide-bridge topologies.

Authors:  J M Mas; P Aloy; M A Martí-Renom; B Oliva; R de Llorens; F X Avilés; E Querol
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 3.686

8.  Structural similarity to link sequence space: new potential superfamilies and implications for structural genomics.

Authors:  Patrick Aloy; Baldomero Oliva; Enrique Querol; Francesc X Aviles; Robert B Russell
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 6.725

9.  Sequence variations within protein families are linearly related to structural variations.

Authors:  Patrice Koehl; Michael Levitt
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2002-10-25       Impact factor: 5.469

10.  Analysis of protein sequence/structure similarity relationships.

Authors:  Hin Hark Gan; Rebecca A Perlow; Sharmili Roy; Joy Ko; Min Wu; Jing Huang; Shixiang Yan; Angelo Nicoletta; Jonathan Vafai; Ding Sun; Lihua Wang; Joyce E Noah; Samuela Pasquali; Tamar Schlick
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.033

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.