Application of protein structure alignments to iterated hidden Markov model protocols for structure prediction.

BackgroundOne of the most powerful methods for the prediction of protein structure from sequence information alone is the iterative construction of profile-type models. Because profiles are built from sequence alignments, the sequences included in the alignment and the method used to align them will be important to the sensitivity of the resulting profile. The inclusion of highly diverse sequences will presumably produce a more powerful profile, but distantly related sequences can be difficult to align accurately using only sequence information. Therefore, it would be expected that the use of protein structure alignments to improve the selection and alignment of diverse sequence homologs might yield improved profiles. However, the actual utility of such an approach has remained unclear.ResultsWe explored several iterative protocols for the generation of profile hidden Markov models. These protocols were tailored to allow the inclusion of protein structure alignments in the process, and were used for large-scale creation and benchmarking of structure alignment-enhanced models. We found that models using structure alignments did not provide an overall improvement over sequence-only models for superfamily-level structure predictions. However, the results also revealed that the structure alignment-enhanced models were complimentary to the sequence-only models, particularly at the edge of the "twilight zone". When the two sets of models were combined, they provided improved results over sequence-only models alone. In addition, we found that the beneficial effects of the structure alignment-enhanced models could not be realized if the structure-based alignments were replaced with sequence-based alignments. Our experiments with different iterative protocols for sequence-only models also suggested that simple protocol modifications were unable to yield equivalent improvements to those provided by the structure alignment-enhanced models. Finally, we found that models using structure alignments provided fold-level structure assignments that were superior to those produced by sequence-only models.ConclusionWhen attempting to predict the structure of remote homologs, we advocate a combined approach in which both traditional models and models incorporating structure alignments are used

MRFalign: Protein Homology Detection through Alignment of Markov Random Fields

Sequence-based protein homology detection has been extensively studied and so far the most sensitive method is based upon comparison of protein sequence profiles, which are derived from multiple sequence alignment (MSA) of sequence homologs in a protein family. A sequence profile is usually represented as a position-specific scoring matrix (PSSM) or an HMM (Hidden Markov Model) and accordingly PSSM-PSSM or HMM-HMM comparison is used for homolog detection. This paper presents a new homology detection method MRFalign, consisting of three key components: 1) a Markov Random Fields (MRF) representation of a protein family; 2) a scoring function measuring similarity of two MRFs; and 3) an efficient ADMM (Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers) algorithm aligning two MRFs. Compared to HMM that can only model very short-range residue correlation, MRFs can model long-range residue interaction pattern and thus, encode information for the global 3D structure of a protein family. Consequently, MRF-MRF comparison for remote homology detection shall be much more sensitive than HMM-HMM or PSSM-PSSM comparison. Experiments confirm that MRFalign outperforms several popular HMM or PSSM-based methods in terms of both alignment accuracy and remote homology detection and that MRFalign works particularly well for mainly beta proteins. For example, tested on the benchmark SCOP40 (8353 proteins) for homology detection, PSSM-PSSM and HMM-HMM succeed on 48% and 52% of proteins, respectively, at superfamily level, and on 15% and 27% of proteins, respectively, at fold level. In contrast, MRFalign succeeds on 57.3% and 42.5% of proteins at superfamily and fold level, respectively. This study implies that long-range residue interaction patterns are very helpful for sequence-based homology detection. The software is available for download at http://raptorx.uchicago.edu/download/.Comment: Accepted by both RECOMB 2014 and PLOS Computational Biolog

Information Extraction, Data Integration, and Uncertain Data Management: The State of The Art

Information Extraction, data Integration, and uncertain data management are different areas of research that got vast focus in the last two decades. Many researches tackled those areas of research individually. However, information extraction systems should have integrated with data integration methods to make use of the extracted information. Handling uncertainty in extraction and integration process is an important issue to enhance the quality of the data in such integrated systems. This article presents the state of the art of the mentioned areas of research and shows the common grounds and how to integrate information extraction and data integration under uncertainty management cover

Accurate De Novo Prediction of Protein Contact Map by Ultra-Deep Learning Model

Recently exciting progress has been made on protein contact prediction, but the predicted contacts for proteins without many sequence homologs is still of low quality and not very useful for de novo structure prediction. This paper presents a new deep learning method that predicts contacts by integrating both evolutionary coupling (EC) and sequence conservation information through an ultra-deep neural network formed by two deep residual networks. This deep neural network allows us to model very complex sequence-contact relationship as well as long-range inter-contact correlation. Our method greatly outperforms existing contact prediction methods and leads to much more accurate contact-assisted protein folding. Tested on three datasets of 579 proteins, the average top L long-range prediction accuracy obtained our method, the representative EC method CCMpred and the CASP11 winner MetaPSICOV is 0.47, 0.21 and 0.30, respectively; the average top L/10 long-range accuracy of our method, CCMpred and MetaPSICOV is 0.77, 0.47 and 0.59, respectively. Ab initio folding using our predicted contacts as restraints can yield correct folds (i.e., TMscore>0.6) for 203 test proteins, while that using MetaPSICOV- and CCMpred-predicted contacts can do so for only 79 and 62 proteins, respectively. Further, our contact-assisted models have much better quality than template-based models. Using our predicted contacts as restraints, we can (ab initio) fold 208 of the 398 membrane proteins with TMscore>0.5. By contrast, when the training proteins of our method are used as templates, homology modeling can only do so for 10 of them. One interesting finding is that even if we do not train our prediction models with any membrane proteins, our method works very well on membrane protein prediction. Finally, in recent blind CAMEO benchmark our method successfully folded 5 test proteins with a novel fold