Searching protein structure databases with DaliLite v.3

The Red Queen said, ‘It takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.’ Lewis Carro

Fast and accurate protein substructure searching with simulated annealing and GPUs

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Searching a database of protein structures for matches to a query structure, or occurrences of a structural motif, is an important task in structural biology and bioinformatics. While there are many existing methods for structural similarity searching, faster and more accurate approaches are still required, and few current methods are capable of substructure (motif) searching.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We developed an improved heuristic for tableau-based protein structure and substructure searching using simulated annealing, that is as fast or faster and comparable in accuracy, with some widely used existing methods. Furthermore, we created a parallel implementation on a modern graphics processing unit (GPU).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The GPU implementation achieves up to 34 times speedup over the CPU implementation of tableau-based structure search with simulated annealing, making it one of the fastest available methods. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first application of a GPU to the protein structural search problem.</p

PROMALS3D: a tool for multiple protein sequence and structure alignments

Although multiple sequence alignments (MSAs) are essential for a wide range of applications from structure modeling to prediction of functional sites, construction of accurate MSAs for distantly related proteins remains a largely unsolved problem. The rapidly increasing database of spatial structures is a valuable source to improve alignment quality. We explore the use of 3D structural information to guide sequence alignments constructed by our MSA program PROMALS. The resulting tool, PROMALS3D, automatically identifies homologs with known 3D structures for the input sequences, derives structural constraints through structure-based alignments and combines them with sequence constraints to construct consistency-based multiple sequence alignments. The output is a consensus alignment that brings together sequence and structural information about input proteins and their homologs. PROMALS3D can also align sequences of multiple input structures, with the output representing a multiple structure-based alignment refined in combination with sequence constraints. The advantage of PROMALS3D is that it gives researchers an easy way to produce high-quality alignments consistent with both sequences and structures of proteins. PROMALS3D outperforms a number of existing methods for constructing multiple sequence or structural alignments using both reference-dependent and reference-independent evaluation methods

PROFESS: a PROtein Function, Evolution, Structure and Sequence database

The proliferation of biological databases and the easy access enabled by the Internet is having a beneficial impact on biological sciences and transforming the way research is conducted. There are ∼1100 molecular biology databases dispersed throughout the Internet. To assist in the functional, structural and evolutionary analysis of the abundant number of novel proteins continually identified from whole-genome sequencing, we introduce the PROFESS (PROtein Function, Evolution, Structure and Sequence) database. Our database is designed to be versatile and expandable and will not confine analysis to a pre-existing set of data relationships. A fundamental component of this approach is the development of an intuitive query system that incorporates a variety of similarity functions capable of generating data relationships not conceived during the creation of the database. The utility of PROFESS is demonstrated by the analysis of the structural drift of homologous proteins and the identification of potential pancreatic cancer therapeutic targets based on the observation of protein–protein interaction networks

Dali server : structural unification of protein families

Protein structure is key to understanding biological function. Structure comparison deciphers deep phylogenies, providing insight into functional conservation and functional shifts during evolution. Until recently, structural coverage of the protein universe was limited by the cost and labour involved in experimental structure determination. Recent breakthroughs in deep learning revolutionized structural bioinformatics by providing accurate structural models of numerous protein families for which no structural information existed. The Dali server for 3D protein structure comparison is widely used by crystal-lographers to relate new structures to pre-existing ones. Here, we report two most recent upgrades to the web server: (i) the foldomes of key organisms in the AlphaFold Database (version 1) are searchable by Dali, (ii) structural alignments are annotated with protein families. Using these new features, we discovered a novel functionally diverse subgroup within the WRKY/GCM1 clan. This was accomplished by linking the structurally characterized SWI/SNF and NAM families as well as the structural models of the CG-1 family and uncharacterized proteins to the structure of Gti1/Pac2, a previously known member of the WRKY/GCM1 clan. The Dali server is available at http://ekhidna2.biocenter.helsinki.fi/dali. This website is free and open to all users and there is no login requirement. [GRAPHICS] .Peer reviewe

deconSTRUCT: general purpose protein database search on the substructure level

deconSTRUCT webserver offers an interface to a protein database search engine, usable for a general purpose detection of similar protein (sub)structures. Initially, it deconstructs the query structure into its secondary structure elements (SSEs) and reassembles the match to the target by requiring a (tunable) degree of similarity in the direction and sequential order of SSEs. Hierarchical organization and judicious use of the information about protein structure enables deconSTRUCT to achieve the sensitivity and specificity of the established search engines at orders of magnitude increased speed, without tying up irretrievably the substructure information in the form of a hash. In a post-processing step, a match on the level of the backbone atoms is constructed. The results presented to the user consist of the list of the matched SSEs, the transformation matrix for rigid superposition of the structures and several ways of visualization, both downloadable and implemented as a web-browser plug-in. The server is available at http://epsf.bmad.bii.a-star.edu.sg/struct_server.html

Exploring protein structural dissimilarity to facilitate structure classification

Background: Classification of newly resolved protein structures is important in understanding their architectural, evolutionary and functional relatedness to known protein structures. Among various efforts to improve the database of Structural Classification of Proteins (SCOP), automation has received particular attention. Herein, we predict the deepest SCOP structural level that an unclassified protein shares with classified proteins with an equal number of secondary structure elements (SSEs). Results: We compute a coefficient of dissimilarity (omega) between proteins, based on structural and sequence-based descriptors characterising the respective constituent SSEs. For a set of 1,661 pairs of proteins with sequence identity up to 35%, the performance of omega in predicting shared Class, Fold and Super-family levels is comparable to that of DaliLite Z score and shows a greater than four-fold increase in the true positive rate (TPR) for proteins sharing the Family level. On a larger set of 600 domains representing 200 families, the performance of Z score improves in predicting a shared Family, but still only achieves about half of the TPR of omega. The TPR for structures sharing a Superfamily is lower than in the first dataset, but omega performs slightly better than Z score. Overall, the sensitivity of omega in predicting common Fold level is higher than that of the DaliLite Z score. Conclusion: Classification to a deeper level in the hierarchy is specific and difficult. So the efficiency of omega may be attractive to the curators and the end-users of SCOP. We suggest omega may be a better measure for structure classification than the DaliLite Z score, with the caveat that currently we are restricted to comparing structures with equal number of SSEs

ProCKSI: a decision support system for Protein (Structure) Comparison, Knowledge, Similarity and Information

Background: We introduce the decision support system for Protein (Structure) Comparison, Knowledge, Similarity and Information (ProCKSI). ProCKSI integrates various protein similarity measures through an easy to use interface that allows the comparison of multiple proteins simultaneously. It employs the Universal Similarity Metric (USM), the Maximum Contact Map Overlap (MaxCMO) of protein structures and other external methods such as the DaliLite and the TM-align methods, the Combinatorial Extension (CE) of the optimal path, and the FAST Align and Search Tool (FAST). Additionally, ProCKSI allows the user to upload a user-defined similarity matrix supplementing the methods mentioned, and computes a similarity consensus in order to provide a rich, integrated, multicriteria view of large datasets of protein structures. Results: We present ProCKSI's architecture and workflow describing its intuitive user interface, and show its potential on three distinct test-cases. In the first case, ProCKSI is used to evaluate the results of a previous CASP competition, assessing the similarity of proposed models for given targets where the structures could have a large deviation from one another. To perform this type of comparison reliably, we introduce a new consensus method. The second study deals with the verification of a classification scheme for protein kinases, originally derived by sequence comparison by Hanks and Hunter, but here we use a consensus similarity measure based on structures. In the third experiment using the Rost and Sander dataset (RS126), we investigate how a combination of different sets of similarity measures influences the quality and performance of ProCKSI's new consensus measure. ProCKSI performs well with all three datasets, showing its potential for complex, simultaneous multi-method assessment of structural similarity in large protein datasets. Furthermore, combining different similarity measures is usually more robust than relying on one single, unique measure. Conclusion: Based on a diverse set of similarity measures, ProCKSI computes a consensus similarity profile for the entire protein set. All results can be clustered, visualised, analysed and easily compared with each other through a simple and intuitive interface

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