SUPFAM: A database of sequence superfamilies of protein domains

BACKGROUND: SUPFAM database is a compilation of superfamily relationships between protein domain families of either known or unknown 3-D structure. In SUPFAM, sequence families from Pfam and structural families from SCOP are associated, using profile matching, to result in sequence superfamilies of known structure. Subsequently all-against-all family profile matches are made to deduce a list of new potential superfamilies of yet unknown structure. DESCRIPTION: The current version of SUPFAM (release 1.4) corresponds to significant enhancements and major developments compared to the earlier and basic version. In the present version we have used RPS-BLAST, which is robust and sensitive, for profile matching. The reliability of connections between protein families is ensured better than before by use of benchmarked criteria involving strict e-value cut-off and a minimal alignment length condition. An e-value based indication of reliability of connections is now presented in the database. Web access to a RPS-BLAST-based tool to associate a query sequence to one of the family profiles in SUPFAM is available with the current release. In terms of the scientific content the present release of SUPFAM is entirely reorganized with the use of 6190 Pfam families and 2317 structural families derived from SCOP. Due to a steep increase in the number of sequence and structural families used in SUPFAM the details of scientific content in the present release are almost entirely complementary to previous basic version. Of the 2286 families, we could relate 245 Pfam families with apparently no structural information to families of known 3-D structures, thus resulting in the identification of new families in the existing superfamilies. Using the profiles of 3904 Pfam families of yet unknown structure, an all-against-all comparison involving sequence-profile match resulted in clustering of 96 Pfam families into 39 new potential superfamilies. CONCLUSION: SUPFAM presents many non-trivial superfamily relationships of sequence families involved in a variety of functions and hence the information content is of interest to a wide scientific community. The grouping of related proteins without a known structure in SUPFAM is useful in identifying priority targets for structural genomics initiatives and in the assignment of putative functions. Database URL:

Insertions and the emergence of novel protein structure: a structure-based phylogenetic study of insertions

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In protein evolution, the mechanism of the emergence of novel protein domain is still an open question. The incremental growth of protein variable regions, which was produced by stochastic insertions, has the potential to generate large and complex sub-structures. In this study, a deterministic methodology is proposed to reconstruct phylogenies from protein structures, and to infer insertion events in protein evolution. The analysis was performed on a broad range of SCOP domain families.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Phylogenies were reconstructed from protein 3D structural data. The phylogenetic trees were used to infer ancestral structures with a consensus method. From these ancestral reconstructions, 42.7% of the observed insertions are nested insertions, which locate in previous insert regions. The average size of inserts tends to increase with the insert rank or total number of insertions in the variable regions. We found that the structures of some nested inserts show complex or even domain-like fold patterns with helices, strands and loops. Furthermore, a basal level of structural innovation was found in inserts which displayed a significant structural similarity exclusively to themselves. The β-Lactamase/D-ala carboxypeptidase domain family is provided as an example to illustrate the inference of insertion events, and how the incremental growth of a variable region is capable to generate novel structural patterns.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Using 3D data, we proposed a method to reconstruct phylogenies. We applied the method to reconstruct the sequences of insertion events leading to the emergence of potentially novel structural elements within existing protein domains. The results suggest that structural innovation is possible via the stochastic process of insertions and rapid evolution within variable regions where inserts tend to be nested. We also demonstrate that the structure-based phylogeny enables the study of new questions relating to the evolution of protein domain and biological function.</p

Protein Block Expert (PBE): a web-based protein structure analysis server using a structural alphabet

Encoding protein 3D structures into 1D string using short structural prototypes or structural alphabets opens a new front for structure comparison and analysis. Using the well-documented 16 motifs of Protein Blocks (PBs) as structural alphabet, we have developed a methodology to compare protein structures that are encoded as sequences of PBs by aligning them using dynamic programming which uses a substitution matrix for PBs. This methodology is implemented in the applications available in Protein Block Expert (PBE) server. PBE addresses common issues in the field of protein structure analysis such as comparison of proteins structures and identification of protein structures in structural databanks that resemble a given structure. PBE-T provides facility to transform any PDB file into sequences of PBs. PBE-ALIGNc performs comparison of two protein structures based on the alignment of their corresponding PB sequences. PBE-ALIGNm is a facility for mining SCOP database for similar structures based on the alignment of PBs. Besides, PBE provides an interface to a database (PBE-SAdb) of preprocessed PB sequences from SCOP culled at 95% and of all-against-all pairwise PB alignments at family and superfamily levels. PBE server is freely available at

PASS2 version 4: An update to the database of structure-based sequence alignments of structural domain superfamilies

Accurate structure-based sequence alignments of distantly related proteins are crucial in gaining insight about protein domains that belong to a superfamily. The PASS2 database provides alignments of proteins related at the superfamily level and are characterized by low sequence identity. We thus report an automated, updated version of the superfamily alignment database known as PASS2.4, consisting of 1961 superfamilies and 10 569 protein domains, which is in direct correspondence with SCOP (1.75) database. Database organization, improved methods for efficient structure-based sequence alignments and the analysis of extreme distantly related proteins within superfamilies formed the focus of this update. Alignment of family-specific functional residues can be realized using such alignments and is shown using one superfamily as an example. The database of alignments and other related features can be accessed at http://caps.ncbs.res.in/pass2/

MulPSSM: a database of multiple position-specific scoring matrices of protein domain families

Representation of multiple sequence alignments of protein families in terms of position-specific scoring matrices (PSSMs) is commonly used in the detection of remote homologues. A PSSM is generated with respect to one of the sequences involved in the multiple sequence alignment as a reference. We have shown recently that the use of multiple PSSMs corresponding to an alignment, with several sequences in the family used as reference, improves the sensitivity of the remote homology detection dramatically. MulPSSM contains PSSMs for a large number of sequence and structural families of protein domains with multiple PSSMs for every family. The approach involves use of a clustering algorithm to identify most distinct sequences corresponding to a family. With each one of the distinct sequences as reference, multiple PSSMs have been generated. The current release of MulPSSM contains ∼33 000 and ∼38 000 PSSMs corresponding to 7868 sequence and 2625 structural families. A RPS_BLAST interface allows sequence search against PSSMs of sequence or structural families or both. An analysis interface allows display and convenient navigation of alignments and domain hits. MulPSSM can be accessed at

Identification of local conformational similarity in structurally variable regions of homologous proteins using protein blocks.

International audienceStructure comparison tools can be used to align related protein structures to identify structurally conserved and variable regions and to infer functional and evolutionary relationships. While the conserved regions often superimpose well, the variable regions appear non superimposable. Differences in homologous protein structures are thought to be due to evolutionary plasticity to accommodate diverged sequences during evolution. One of the kinds of differences between 3-D structures of homologous proteins is rigid body displacement. A glaring example is not well superimposed equivalent regions of homologous proteins corresponding to α-helical conformation with different spatial orientations. In a rigid body superimposition, these regions would appear variable although they may contain local similarity. Also, due to high spatial deviation in the variable region, one-to-one correspondence at the residue level cannot be determined accurately. Another kind of difference is conformational variability and the most common example is topologically equivalent loops of two homologues but with different conformations. In the current study, we present a refined view of the "structurally variable" regions which may contain local similarity obscured in global alignment of homologous protein structures. As structural alphabet is able to describe local structures of proteins precisely through Protein Blocks approach, conformational similarity has been identified in a substantial number of 'variable' regions in a large data set of protein structural alignments; optimal residue-residue equivalences could be achieved on the basis of Protein Blocks which led to improved local alignments. Also, through an example, we have demonstrated how the additional information on local backbone structures through protein blocks can aid in comparative modeling of a loop region. In addition, understanding on sequence-structure relationships can be enhanced through our approach. This has been illustrated through examples where the equivalent regions in homologous protein structures share sequence similarity to varied extent but do not preserve local structure

Structural phylogeny by profile extraction and multiple superimposition using electrostatic congruence as a discriminator

Phylogenetic analysis of proteins using multiple sequence alignment (MSA) assumes an underlying evolutionary relationship in these proteins which occasionally remains undetected due to considerable sequence divergence. Structural alignment programs have been developed to unravel such fuzzy relationships. However, none of these structure based methods have used electrostatic properties to discriminate between spatially equivalent residues. We present a methodology for MSA of a set of related proteins with known structures using electrostatic properties as an additional discriminator (STEEP). STEEP first extracts a profile, then generates a multiple structural superimposition providing a consolidated spatial framework for comparing residues and finally emits the MSA. Residues that are aligned differently by including or excluding electrostatic properties can be targeted by directed evolution experiments to transform the enzymatic properties of one protein into another. We have compared STEEP results to those obtained from a MSA program (ClustalW) and a structural alignment method (MUSTANG) for chymotrypsin serine proteases. Subsequently, we used PhyML to generate phylogenetic trees for the serine and metallo-&#946;-lactamase superfamilies from the STEEP generated MSA, and corroborated the accepted relationships in these superfamilies. We have observed that STEEP acts as a functional classifier when electrostatic congruence is used as a discriminator, and thus identifies potential targets for directed evolution experiments. In summary, STEEP is unique among phylogenetic methods for its ability to use electrostatic congruence to specify mutations that might be the source of the functional divergence in a protein family. Based on our results, we also hypothesize that the active site and its close vicinity contains enough information to infer the correct phylogeny for related proteins

Accuracy of structure-based sequence alignment of automatic methods

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Accurate sequence alignments are essential for homology searches and for building three-dimensional structural models of proteins. Since structure is better conserved than sequence, structure alignments have been used to guide sequence alignments and are commonly used as the gold standard for sequence alignment evaluation. Nonetheless, as far as we know, there is no report of a systematic evaluation of pairwise structure alignment programs in terms of the sequence alignment accuracy.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In this study, we evaluate CE, DaliLite, FAST, LOCK2, MATRAS, SHEBA and VAST in terms of the accuracy of the sequence alignments they produce, using sequence alignments from NCBI's human-curated Conserved Domain Database (CDD) as the standard of truth. We find that 4 to 9% of the residues on average are either not aligned or aligned with more than 8 residues of shift error and that an additional 6 to 14% of residues on average are misaligned by 1–8 residues, depending on the program and the data set used. The fraction of correctly aligned residues generally decreases as the sequence similarity decreases or as the RMSD between the C_{<it>α </it>}positions of the two structures increases. It varies significantly across CDD superfamilies whether shift error is allowed or not. Also, alignments with different shift errors occur between proteins within the same CDD superfamily, leading to inconsistent alignments between superfamily members. In general, residue pairs that are more than 3.0 Å apart in the reference alignment are heavily (>= 25% on average) misaligned in the test alignments. In addition, each method shows a different pattern of relative weaknesses for different SCOP classes. CE gives relatively poor results for <it>β</it>-sheet-containing structures (all-<it>β</it>, <it>α</it>/<it>β</it>, and <it>α</it>+<it>β </it>classes), DaliLite for "others" class where all but the major four classes are combined, and LOCK2 and VAST for all-<it>β </it>and "others" classes.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>When the sequence similarity is low, structure-based methods produce better sequence alignments than by using sequence similarities alone. However, current structure-based methods still mis-align 11–19% of the conserved core residues when compared to the human-curated CDD alignments. The alignment quality of each program depends on the protein structural type and similarity, with DaliLite showing the most agreement with CDD on average.</p

SInCRe—structural interactome computational resource for Mycobacterium tuberculosis

We have developed an integrated database for Mycobacterium tuberculosis H37Rv (Mtb) that collates information on protein sequences, domain assignments, functional annotation and 3D structural information along with protein–protein and protein–small molecule interactions. SInCRe (Structural Interactome Computational Resource) is developed out of CamBan (Cambridge and Bangalore) collaboration. The motivation for development of this database is to provide an integrated platform to allow easily access and interpretation of data and results obtained by all the groups in CamBan in the field of Mtb informatics. In-house algorithms and databases developed independently by various academic groups in CamBan are used to generate Mtb-specific datasets and are integrated in this database to provide a structural dimension to studies on tuberculosis. The SInCRe database readily provides information on identification of functional domains, genome-scale modelling of structures of Mtb proteins and characterization of the small-molecule binding sites within Mtb. The resource also provides structure-based function annotation, information on small-molecule binders including FDA (Food and Drug Administration)-approved drugs, protein–protein interactions (PPIs) and natural compounds that bind to pathogen proteins potentially and result in weakening or elimination of host–pathogen protein–protein interactions. Together they provide prerequisites for identification of off-target binding

Correlation between local structural dynamics of proteins inferred from NMR ensembles and evolutionary dynamics of homologues of known structure.: Inherent and evolutionary structural dynamics

International audienceConformational changes in proteins are extremely important for their biochemical functions. Correlation between inherent conformational variations in a protein and conformational differences in its homologues of known structure is still unclear. In this study, we have used a structural alphabet called Protein Blocks (PBs). PBs are used to perform abstraction of protein 3-D structures into a 1-D strings of 16 alphabets (a-p) based on dihedral angles of overlapping pentapeptides. We have analyzed the variations in local conformations in terms of PBs represented in the ensembles of 801 protein structures determined using NMR spectroscopy. In the analysis of concatenated data over all the residues in all the NMR ensembles, we observe that the overall nature of inherent local structural variations in NMR ensembles is similar to the nature of local structural differences in homologous proteins with a high correlation coefficient of .94. High correlation at the alignment positions corresponding to helical and β-sheet regions is only expected. However, the correlation coefficient by considering only the loop regions is also quite high (.91). Surprisingly, segregated position-wise analysis shows that this high correlation does not hold true to loop regions at the structurally equivalent positions in NMR ensembles and their homologues of known structure. This suggests that the general nature of local structural changes is unique; however most of the local structural variations in loop regions of NMR ensembles do not correlate to their local structural differences at structurally equivalent positions in homologues