Abstract
Statistical potentials based on pairwise interactions between C alpha atoms are commonly used in protein threading/fold-recognition attempts. Inclusion of higher order interaction is a possible means of improving the specificity of these potentials. Delaunay tessellation of the C alpha-atom representation of protein structure has been suggested as a means of defining multi-body interactions. A large number of parameters are required to define all four-body interactions of 20 amino acid types (20(4) = 160,000). Assuming that residue order within a four-body contact is irrelevant reduces this to a manageable 8,855 parameters, using a nonredundant dataset of 608 protein structures. Three lines of evidence support the significance and utility of the four-body potential for sequence-structure matching. First, compared to the four-body model, all lower-order interaction models (three-body, two-body, one-body) are found statistically inadequate to explain the frequency distribution of residue contacts. Second, coherent patterns of interaction are seen in a graphic presentation of the four-body potential. Many patterns have plausible biophysical explanations and are consistent across sets of residues sharing certain properties (e.g., size, hydrophobicity, or charge). Third, the utility of the multi-body potential is tested on a test set of 12 same-length pairs of proteins of known structure for two protocols: Sequence-recognizes-structure, where a query sequence is threaded (without gap) through the native and a non-native structure; and structure-recognizes-sequence, where a query structure is threaded by its native and another non-native sequence. Using cross-validated training, protein sequences correctly recognized their native structure in all 24 cases. Conversely, structures recognized the native sequence in 23 of 24 cases. Further, the score differences between correct and decoy structures increased significantly using the three- or four-body potential compared to potentials of lower order.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (13.2 MB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Bryant S. H., Lawrence C. E. An empirical energy function for threading protein sequence through the folding motif. Proteins. 1993 May;16(1):92–112. doi: 10.1002/prot.340160110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Godzik A., Kolinski A., Skolnick J. De novo and inverse folding predictions of protein structure and dynamics. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 1993 Aug;7(4):397–438. doi: 10.1007/BF02337559. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Godzik A., Skolnick J. Sequence-structure matching in globular proteins: application to supersecondary and tertiary structure determination. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992 Dec 15;89(24):12098–12102. doi: 10.1073/pnas.89.24.12098. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hobohm U., Sander C. Enlarged representative set of protein structures. Protein Sci. 1994 Mar;3(3):522–524. doi: 10.1002/pro.5560030317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Holm L., Sander C. Evaluation of protein models by atomic solvation preference. J Mol Biol. 1992 May 5;225(1):93–105. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(92)91028-n. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lee B. Estimation of the maximum change in stability of globular proteins upon mutation of a hydrophobic residue to another of smaller size. Protein Sci. 1993 May;2(5):733–738. doi: 10.1002/pro.5560020505. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lim W. A., Sauer R. T. The role of internal packing interactions in determining the structure and stability of a protein. J Mol Biol. 1991 May 20;219(2):359–376. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(91)90570-v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Singh R. K., Tropsha A., Vaisman I. I. Delaunay tessellation of proteins: four body nearest-neighbor propensities of amino acid residues. J Comput Biol. 1996 Summer;3(2):213–221. doi: 10.1089/cmb.1996.3.213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sippl M. J. Knowledge-based potentials for proteins. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 1995 Apr;5(2):229–235. doi: 10.1016/0959-440x(95)80081-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Srinivasan R., Rose G. D. LINUS: a hierarchic procedure to predict the fold of a protein. Proteins. 1995 Jun;22(2):81–99. doi: 10.1002/prot.340220202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zheng W., Cho S. J., Vaisman I. I., Tropsha A. A new approach to protein fold recognition based on Delaunay tessellation of protein structure. Pac Symp Biocomput. 1997:486–497. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]