Estimating the quality of 3D protein models using the ModFOLD7 server

Assessing the accuracy of 3D models has become a keystone in the protein structure prediction field. ModFOLD7 is our leading resource for Estimates of Model Accuracy (EMA), which has been upgraded by integrating a number of the pioneering pure-single- and quasi-single-model approaches. Such an integration has given our latest version the strengths to accurately score and rank predicted models, with higher consistency compared to older EMA methods. Additionally, the server provides three options for producing global score estimates, depending on the requirements of the user: (1) ModFOLD7_rank, which is optimized for ranking/selection, (2) ModFOLD7_cor, which is optimized for correlations of predicted and observed scores, and (3) ModFOLD7 global for balanced performance. ModFOLD7 has been ranked among the top few EMA methods according to independent blind testing by the CASP13 assessors. Another evaluation resource for ModFOLD7 is the CAMEO project, where the method is continuously automatically evaluated, showing a significant improvement compared to our previous versions. The ModFOLD7 server is freely available at http://www.reading.ac.uk/bioinf/ModFOLD/

Prediction of protein assemblies, the next frontier: The CASP14-CAPRI experiment

We present the results for CAPRI Round 50, the fourth joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round comprised a total of twelve targets, including six dimers, three trimers, and three higher-order oligomers. Four of these were easy targets, for which good structural templates were available either for the full assembly, or for the main interfaces (of the higher-order oligomers). Eight were difficult targets for which only distantly related templates were found for the individual subunits. Twenty-five CAPRI groups including eight automatic servers submitted ~1250 models per target. Twenty groups including six servers participated in the CAPRI scoring challenge submitted ~190 models per target. The accuracy of the predicted models was evaluated using the classical CAPRI criteria. The prediction performance was measured by a weighted scoring scheme that takes into account the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group as part of their five top-ranking models. Compared to the previous CASP-CAPRI challenge, top performing groups submitted such models for a larger fraction (70–75%) of the targets in this Round, but fewer of these models were of high accuracy. Scorer groups achieved stronger performance with more groups submitting correct models for 70–80% of the targets or achieving high accuracy predictions. Servers performed less well in general, except for the MDOCKPP and LZERD servers, who performed on par with human groups. In addition to these results, major advances in methodology are discussed, providing an informative overview of where the prediction of protein assemblies currently stands.Cancer Research UK, Grant/Award Number: FC001003; Changzhou Science and Technology Bureau, Grant/Award Number: CE20200503; Department of Energy and Climate Change, Grant/Award Numbers: DE-AR001213, DE-SC0020400, DE-SC0021303; H2020 European Institute of Innovation and Technology, Grant/Award Numbers: 675728, 777536, 823830; Institut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA), Grant/Award Number: Cordi-S; Lietuvos Mokslo Taryba, Grant/Award Numbers: S-MIP-17-60, S-MIP-21-35; Medical Research Council, Grant/Award Number: FC001003; Japan Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI, Grant/Award Number: JP19J00950; Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Grant/Award Number: PID2019-110167RB-I00; Narodowe Centrum Nauki, Grant/Award Numbers: UMO-2017/25/B/ST4/01026, UMO-2017/26/M/ST4/00044, UMO-2017/27/B/ST4/00926; National Institute of General Medical Sciences, Grant/Award Numbers: R21GM127952, R35GM118078, RM1135136, T32GM132024; National Institutes of Health, Grant/Award Numbers: R01GM074255, R01GM078221, R01GM093123, R01GM109980, R01GM133840, R01GN123055, R01HL142301, R35GM124952, R35GM136409; National Natural Science Foundation of China, Grant/Award Number: 81603152; National Science Foundation, Grant/Award Numbers: AF1645512, CCF1943008, CMMI1825941, DBI1759277, DBI1759934, DBI1917263, DBI20036350, IIS1763246, MCB1925643; NWO, Grant/Award Number: TOP-PUNT 718.015.001; Wellcome Trust, Grant/Award Number: FC00100

Discriminating physiological from non-physiological interfaces in structures of protein complexes: A community-wide study

Reliably scoring and ranking candidate models of protein complexes and assigning their oligomeric state from the structure of the crystal lattice represent outstanding challenges. A community-wide effort was launched to tackle these challenges. The latest resources on protein complexes and interfaces were exploited to derive a benchmark dataset consisting of 1677 homodimer protein crystal structures, including a balanced mix of physiological and non-physiological complexes. The non-physiological complexes in the benchmark were selected to bury a similar or larger interface area than their physiological counterparts, making it more difficult for scoring functions to differentiate between them. Next, 252 functions for scoring protein-protein interfaces previously developed by 13 groups were collected and evaluated for their ability to discriminate between physiological and non-physiological complexes. A simple consensus score generated using the best performing score of each of the 13 groups, and a cross-validated Random Forest (RF) classifier were created. Both approaches showed excellent performance, with an area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.93 and 0.94, respectively, outperforming individual scores developed by different groups. Additionally, AlphaFold2 engines recalled the physiological dimers with significantly higher accuracy than the non-physiological set, lending support to the reliability of our benchmark dataset annotations. Optimizing the combined power of interface scoring functions and evaluating it on challenging benchmark datasets appears to be a promising strategy

Prediction of protein assemblies, the next frontier: The CASP14-CAPRI experiment

We present the results for CAPRI Round 50, the fourth joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round comprised a total of twelve targets, including six dimers, three trimers, and three higher-order oligomers. Four of these were easy targets, for which good structural templates were available either for the full assembly, or for the main interfaces (of the higher-order oligomers). Eight were difficult targets for which only distantly related templates were found for the individual subunits. Twenty-five CAPRI groups including eight automatic servers submitted ~1250 models per target. Twenty groups including six servers participated in the CAPRI scoring challenge submitted ~190 models per target. The accuracy of the predicted models was evaluated using the classical CAPRI criteria. The prediction performance was measured by a weighted scoring scheme that takes into account the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group as part of their five top-ranking models. Compared to the previous CASP-CAPRI challenge, top performing groups submitted such models for a larger fraction (70–75%) of the targets in this Round, but fewer of these models were of high accuracy. Scorer groups achieved stronger performance with more groups submitting correct models for 70–80% of the targets or achieving high accuracy predictions. Servers performed less well in general, except for the MDOCKPP and LZERD servers, who performed on par with human groups. In addition to these results, major advances in methodology are discussed, providing an informative overview of where the prediction of protein assemblies currently stands

Prediction of protein assemblies, the next frontier: The CASP14-CAPRI experiment

We present the results for CAPRI Round 50, the fourth joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round comprised a total of twelve targets, including six dimers, three trimers, and three higher-order oligomers. Four of these were easy targets, for which good structural templates were available either for the full assembly, or for the main interfaces (of the higher-order oligomers). Eight were difficult targets for which only distantly related templates were found for the individual subunits. Twenty-five CAPRI groups including eight automatic servers submitted ~1250 models per target. Twenty groups including six servers participated in the CAPRI scoring challenge submitted ~190 models per target. The accuracy of the predicted models was evaluated using the classical CAPRI criteria. The prediction performance was measured by a weighted scoring scheme that takes into account the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group as part of their five top-ranking models. Compared to the previous CASP-CAPRI challenge, top performing groups submitted such models for a larger fraction (70–75%) of the targets in this Round, but fewer of these models were of high accuracy. Scorer groups achieved stronger performance with more groups submitting correct models for 70–80% of the targets or achieving high accuracy predictions. Servers performed less well in general, except for the MDOCKPP and LZERD servers, who performed on par with human groups. In addition to these results, major advances in methodology are discussed, providing an informative overview of where the prediction of protein assemblies currently stands

Prediction of protein assemblies, the next frontier: The CASP14-CAPRI experiment

We present the results for CAPRI Round 50, the fourth joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round comprised a total of twelve targets, including six dimers, three trimers, and three higher-order oligomers. Four of these were easy targets, for which good structural templates were available either for the full assembly, or for the main interfaces (of the higher-order oligomers). Eight were difficult targets for which only distantly related templates were found for the individual subunits. Twenty-five CAPRI groups including eight automatic servers submitted ~1250 models per target. Twenty groups including six servers participated in the CAPRI scoring challenge submitted ~190 models per target. The accuracy of the predicted models was evaluated using the classical CAPRI criteria. The prediction performance was measured by a weighted scoring scheme that takes into account the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group as part of their five top-ranking models. Compared to the previous CASP-CAPRI challenge, top performing groups submitted such models for a larger fraction (70–75%) of the targets in this Round, but fewer of these models were of high accuracy. Scorer groups achieved stronger performance with more groups submitting correct models for 70–80% of the targets or achieving high accuracy predictions. Servers performed less well in general, except for the MDOCKPP and LZERD servers, who performed on par with human groups. In addition to these results, major advances in methodology are discussed, providing an informative overview of where the prediction of protein assemblies currently stands