Improving threading algorithms for remote homology modeling by combining fragment and template comparisons.
In this work, we develop a method called fragment comparison and the template comparison (FTCOM) for assessing the global quality of protein structural models for targets of medium and hard difficulty (remote homology) produced by structure prediction approaches such as threading or ab initio structure prediction. FTCOM requires the C(alpha) coordinates of full length models and assesses model quality based on fragment comparison and a score derived from comparison of the model to top threading templates. On a set of 361 medium/hard targets, FTCOM was applied to and assessed for its ability to improve on the results from the SP(3), SPARKS, PROSPECTOR_3, and PRO-SP(3)-TASSER threading algorithms. The average TM-score improves by 5-10% for the first selected model by the new method over models obtained by the original selection procedure in the respective threading methods. Moreover, the number of foldable targets (TM-score >or= 0.4) increases from least 7.6% for SP(3) to 54% for SPARKS. Thus, FTCOM is a promising approach to template selection. Proteins 2010. (c) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Zhou
Hongyi
H
Center for the Study of Systems Biology, School of Biology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30318, USA.
Skolnick
Jeffrey
J
D000465:Algorithms; D019295:Computational Biology; D030562:Databases, Protein; D015233:Models, Statistical; D011506:Proteins / Q000737:chemistry*; D020539:Sequence Analysis, Protein / Q000379:methods*; D017386:Sequence Homology, Amino Acid
D011506:Proteins
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 May 18;101(20):7594-9
15126668
Proteins. 2007;69 Suppl 8:38-56
17894352
Nat Biotechnol. 2000 Mar;18(3):283-7
10700142
Bioinformatics. 2003 May 22;19(8):1015-8
12761065
Proteins. 2004 Aug 15;56(3):502-18
15229883
Protein Sci. 2001 Nov;10(11):2354-62
11604541
J Mol Biol. 2001 Mar 9;306(5):1191-9
11237627
Proteins. 2003;53 Suppl 6:534-41
14579343
Proteins. 2003 May 15;51(3):434-41
12696054
Proteins. 2009;77 Suppl 9:181-4
19544564
J Mol Biol. 1999 Apr 9;287(4):797-815
10191147
Proteins. 2008 May 15;71(3):1211-8
18004783
Bioinformatics. 2008 Feb 15;24(4):586-7
18184684
J Mol Biol. 1993 Dec 5;234(3):779-815
8254673
Protein Sci. 2006 Jul;15(7):1653-66
16751606
Proteins. 2009;77 Suppl 9:123-7
19639638
Proteins. 2007;69 Suppl 8:90-7
17705276
Methods Biochem Anal. 2003;44:525-46
12647403
Proteins. 2004 Jun 1;55(4):1005-13
15146497
Proteins. 2004 Dec 1;57(4):702-10
15476259
Bioinformatics. 2006 Jun 15;22(12):1456-63
16547073
Proteins. 2005;61 Suppl 7:91-8
16187349
IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform. 2005 Apr-Jun;2(2):157-65
17044180
Proteins. 2009 May 15;75(3):638-47
19004001
Proteins. 2005;61 Suppl 7:152-6
16187357
Proteins. 2005 Feb 1;58(2):321-8
15523666
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Apr 4;103(14):5361-6
16567638
Bioinformatics. 1998;14(10):846-56
9927713
Proteins. 2009 May 15;75(3):540-9
19003987
J Comput Chem. 2004 Apr 30;25(6):865-71
15011258
J Bioinform Comput Biol. 2003 Apr;1(1):95-117
15290783
Protein Sci. 2006 Apr;15(4):900-13
16522791
Science. 2001 Oct 5;294(5540):93-6
11588250
Proteins. 2005;61 Suppl 7:46-66
16187346
Proteins. 2008 Apr;71(1):261-77
17932912
Biophys J. 2007 Sep 1;93(5):1510-8
17496016
Biophys J. 2009 Mar 18;96(6):2119-27
19289038
Nucleic Acids Res. 2005 Apr 22;33(7):2302-9
15849316
J Mol Biol. 1997 Apr 25;268(1):209-25
9149153