Contact Lens: Evaluating Protein Structure by Contacts Contact Lens: Evaluating Protein Structure by Contacts RMSD vs. Contact Lens Root Mean Square Distance.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Original Figures for "Molecular Classification of Cancer: Class Discovery and Class Prediction by Gene Expression Monitoring"
Advertisements

Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST Altschul et al Presenter: 張耿豪 莊凱翔.
The Radial Variation of Interplanetary Shocks C.T. Russell, H.R. Lai, L.K. Jian, J.G. Luhmann, A. Wennmacher STEREO SWG Lake Winnepesaukee New Hampshire.
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 29 Multiple Regression.
Protein Tertiary Structure Prediction
Chapter 9 Structure Prediction. Motivation Given a protein, can you predict molecular structure Want to avoid repeated x-ray crystallography, but want.
CISC667, F05, Lec21, Liao1 CISC 467/667 Intro to Bioinformatics (Fall 2005) Protein Structure Prediction 3-Dimensional Structure.
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL SEQUENCE ANALYSISTECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK DTU Can protein model accuracy be identified? Morten Nielsen, CBS, BioCentrum, DTU.
Protein Fold recognition Morten Nielsen, Thomas Nordahl CBS, BioCentrum, DTU.
MULTICOM – A Combination Pipeline for Protein Structure Prediction
Protein Tertiary Structure. Primary: amino acid linear sequence. Secondary:  -helices, β-sheets and loops. Tertiary: the 3D shape of the fully folded.
Protein Tertiary Structure Prediction Structural Bioinformatics.
Protein Tertiary Structure Prediction Structural Bioinformatics.
Protein Structure Alignment by Incremental Combinatorial Extension (CE) of the Optimal Path Ilya N. Shindyalov, Philip E. Bourne.
IBGP/BMI 705 Lab 4: Protein structure and alignment TA: L. Cooper.
© Wiley Publishing All Rights Reserved.
Protein Tertiary Structure Prediction
The results – The data I collected proved to be very interesting and rather unexpected. From looking at my results, it can be seen quite clearly that the.
Spreadsheets and Microsoft Excel. Introduction n A spreadsheet (called a worksheet in Excel) is a two-dimensional array of cells containing data to be.
September In Chapter 14: 14.1 Data 14.2 Scatterplots 14.3 Correlation 14.4 Regression.
Structure superposition ≠ Structure alignment Lecture 11 Chapter 16, Du and Bourne “Structural Bioinformatics”
Small protein modules with similar 3D structure but different amino acid sequence Institute of Evolution, University of Haifa, ISRAEL Genome Diversity.
CS5263 Bioinformatics Lecture 20 Practical issues in motif finding Final project.
A Study of Residue Correlation within Protein Sequences and its Application to Sequence Classification Christopher Hemmerich Advisor: Dr. Sun Kim.
Protein Secondary Structure, Bioinformatics Tools, and Multiple Sequence Alignments Finding Similar Sequences Predicting Secondary Structures Predicting.
Protein Classification II CISC889: Bioinformatics Gang Situ 04/11/2002 Parts of this lecture borrowed from lecture given by Dr. Altman.
BLAST: Basic Local Alignment Search Tool Altschul et al. J. Mol Bio CS 466 Saurabh Sinha.
11/23/2015Slide 1 Using a combination of tables and plots from SPSS plus spreadsheets from Excel, we will show the linkage between correlation and linear.
Pairwise Local Alignment and Database Search Csc 487/687 Computing for Bioinformatics.
Structural alignment methods Like in sequence alignment, try to find best correspondence: –Look at atoms –A 3-dimensional problem –No a priori knowledge.
Jürgen Sühnel Supplementary Material: 3D Structures of Biological Macromolecules Exercise 1:
Structural classification of Proteins SCOP Classification: consists of a database Family Evolutionarily related with a significant sequence identity Superfamily.
V diagonal lines give equivalent residues ILS TRIVHVNSILPSTN V I L S T R I V I L P E F S T Sequence A Sequence B Dot Plots, Path Matrices, Score Matrices.
CS-ROSETTA Yang Shen et al. Presented by Jonathan Jou.
An Efficient Index-based Protein Structure Database Searching Method 陳冠宇.
Modelling genome structure and function Ram Samudrala University of Washington.
Protein Tertiary Structure Prediction Structural Bioinformatics.
Find the optimal alignment ? +. Optimal Alignment Find the highest number of atoms aligned with the lowest RMSD (Root Mean Squared Deviation) Find a balance.
Paul van Mulbregt Sheera Knecht Jon Yamron Dragon Systems Detection at Dragon Systems.
Structural Bioinformatics Elodie Laine Master BIM-BMC Semester 3, Genomics of Microorganisms, UMR 7238, CNRS-UPMC e-documents:
Chapter 14 Protein Structure Classification
Cases and controls A case is an individual with a disease, whose location can be represented by a point on the map (red dot). In this table we examine.
Generating, Maintaining, and Exploiting Diversity in a Memetic Algorithm for Protein Structure Prediction Mario Garza-Fabre, Shaun M. Kandathil, Julia.
Advantages and disadvantages of types of graphs
Prediction of Protein Structure and Function on a Proteomic Scale
Arithmetic Expressions
Hahnbeom Park, Frank DiMaio, David Baker  Structure 
Yang Zhang, Andrzej Kolinski, Jeffrey Skolnick  Biophysical Journal 
Rosetta: De Novo determination of protein structure
Volume 19, Issue 7, Pages (July 2011)
Protein structure prediction.
Yang Liu, Perry Palmedo, Qing Ye, Bonnie Berger, Jian Peng 
Volume 13, Issue 5, Pages (November 2000)
Blind Test of Physics-Based Prediction of Protein Structures
Complementarity of Structure Ensembles in Protein-Protein Binding
Sandeep Kumar, Yuk Yin Sham, Chung-Jung Tsai, Ruth Nussinov 
Protein Tertiary Structure by Crosslinking/Mass Spectrometry
Monica Berrondo, Marc Ostermeier, Jeffrey J. Gray  Structure 
Volume 20, Issue 6, Pages (June 2012)
Volume 20, Issue 3, Pages (March 2012)
The structure of coxsackievirus B3 at 3.5 å resolution
Fan Zheng, Jian Zhang, Gevorg Grigoryan  Structure 
Recognizing Protein Substructure Similarity Using Segmental Threading
Probing the “Dark Matter” of Protein Fold Space
Structural Flexibility of CaV1. 2 and CaV2
Volume 26, Issue 1, Pages e3 (January 2018)
Protein structure prediction
High-Resolution Comparative Modeling with RosettaCM
Yang Zhang, Jeffrey Skolnick  Biophysical Journal 
M-TASSER: An Algorithm for Protein Quaternary Structure Prediction
Presentation transcript:

Contact Lens: Evaluating Protein Structure by Contacts Contact Lens: Evaluating Protein Structure by Contacts RMSD vs. Contact Lens Root Mean Square Distance is a measure of the distance between the same residue in two different structures that have been superimposed. While it is easy to calculate, it fails to recognize overly compact structures and allows small discrepancies to overwhelm the score. A traditional contact measure is a count of intra-chain Cα pairs that are within a certain threshold distance of each other, as compared with the expected contacts in the native structure. Tim Dreszer -University of California at Santa Cruz Rapid evaluation of the similarity of two structures is an essential tool in protein 3D structure prediction. Perhaps the most widely used tool is RMSD, yet it suffers several major shortcomings. Another is GDT (as used in CASP6), however it is computationally expensive and still comes up short. In this project a new tool is developed based upon residue-residue contacts. While the basic contact score has strengths, it is improved upon by rewarding distant contacts and near identical contact distances, as well as smoothing the boundary at the contact threshold and normalizing the score. This contact measure dubbed “contact lens” is used to evaluate CASP6 structure predictions. Contact lens proves better than both RMSD and GDT at resolving some structure similarities. Conclusions Contact lens shows strong localized differences from both RMSD and GDT, yet trends with each of them across the scoring range. The advantages of Contact Lens over GDT appear most obvious, as computation is significantly reduced and intra-model consistencies are rewarded. In almost all cases where GDT and Contact Lens disagreed, RMSD agreed with Contact Lens. Like RMSD, the current form of contact lens may be overly sensitive to global folding, at the expense of secondary structure. Fortunately, this tool is easily recalibrated for near or far-sightedness. Acknowledgements: Kevin Karplus, fellow students of BME220 and the many contributors to protein structure prediction methods at UCSC. GDT vs. Contact Lens The Global Distance Test is a measure of the number of residues whose distance between two superimposed structures is less than a certain threshold. Because GDT requires multiple super-positions it is computationally expensive. When Contact Lens is plotted against GDT the two scores often trend together across the whole range, yet show great differences in a local area. T0274 (red), superimposed on native (PDB: 1wgb 159 residues). Both models closely match most of 11 beta and 3 helices. However, while GDT scores these identically, Contact Lens scores the left figure higher. The model on the right has a prominent unaligned loop, which may account for some of this difference. Two predicted structures of T0203 (red), superimposed upon the native structure (blue PDB:1vkpA, 382 residues). The “align2” model on the left is the top scorer for Contact Lens, while “model5” had the best RMSD score. While both models show many secondary structure similarities, model5 is overly compact. Two graphs of Contact Lens vs RMSD. While the two scores frequently show a similar trend as seen on the left, it may be the differences that tell the story.