Skip to main content
NCBI home page
EURASIP Journal on Bioinformatics and Systems Biology logoLink to EURASIP Journal on Bioinformatics and Systems Biology
. 2007 Oct 30;2007(1):60723. doi: 10.1155/2007/60723

Compressing Proteomes: The Relevance of Medium Range Correlations

Dario Benedetto 1, Emanuele Caglioti 1, Claudia Chica 2,✉
PMCID: PMC3171345  PMID: 18256727

Abstract

We study the nonrandomness of proteome sequences by analysing the correlations that arise between amino acids at a short and medium range, more specifically, between amino acids located 10 or 100 residues apart; respectively. We show that statistical models that consider these two types of correlation are more likely to seize the information contained in protein sequences and thus achieve good compression rates. Finally, we propose that the cause for this redundancy is related to the evolutionary origin of proteomes and protein sequences.

[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31]

Contributor Information

Dario Benedetto, Email: benedetto@mat.uniroma1.it.

Emanuele Caglioti, Email: caglioti@mat.uniroma1.it.

Claudia Chica, Email: claudia.chica@embl.de.

References

  1. Wootton JC. Non-globular domains in protein sequences: automated segmentation using complexity measures. Computers & Chemistry. 1994;18(3):269–285. doi: 10.1016/0097-8485(94)85023-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Blaisdell BE. A prevalent persistent global nonrandomness that distinguishes coding and non-coding eucaryotic nuclear DNA sequences. Journal of Molecular Evolution. 1983;19(2):122–133. doi: 10.1007/BF02300750. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Almirantis Y, Provata A. An evolutionary model for the origin of non-randomness, long-range order and fractality in the genome. BioEssays. 2001;23(7):647–656. doi: 10.1002/bies.1090. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Weiss O, Jiménez-Montaño MA, Herzel H. Information content of protein sequences. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 2000;206(3):379–386. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.2000.2138. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Nevill-Manning CG, Witten IH. Protein is incompressible. Proceedings of the Data Compression Conference (DCC '99), Snowbird, Utah, USA, March 1999. pp. 257–266.
  6. Matsumoto T, Sadakane K, Imai H. Biological sequence compression algorithms. Genome Informatics. 2000;11:43–52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Cao MD, Dix TI, Allison L, Mears C. A simple statistical algorithm for biological sequence compression. Proceedings of the Data Compression Conference (DCC '07), Snowbird, Utah, USA, March 2007. pp. 43–52.
  8. Hategan A, Tabus I. Protein is compressible. Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Signal Processing Symposium (NORSIG '04), Espoo, Finland, June 2004. pp. 192–195.
  9. Adjeroh D, Nan F. On compressibility of protein sequences. Proceedings of the Data Compression Conference (DCC '06), Snowbird, Utah, USA, March 2006. pp. 422–434.
  10. Sampath G. A block coding method that leads to significantly lower entropy values for the proteins and coding sections of Haemophilus influenzae. Proceedings of the IEEE Bioinformatics Conference (CSB '03), Stanford, Calif, USA, August 2003. pp. 287–293. [PubMed]
  11. Shannon CE. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal. 1948;27:379–423 and 623–656. [Google Scholar]
  12. Cleary J, Witten I. Data compression using adaptive coding and partial string matching. IEEE Transactions on Communications. 1984;32(4):396–402. [Google Scholar]
  13. Willems FMJ, Shtarkov YM, Tjalkens TJ. The context-tree weighting method: basic properties. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. 1995;41(3):653–664. doi: 10.1109/18.382012. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Integr8 web portal. 2006. ftp://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/integr8/ ftp://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/integr8/
  15. Abel J. The data compression resource on the internet. 2005. http://www.datacompression.info/ http://www.datacompression.info/
  16. Orengo CA, Thornton JM. Protein families and their evolution—a structural perspective. Annual Review of Biochemistry. 2005;74:867–900. doi: 10.1146/annurev.biochem.74.082803.133029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Heringa J. The evolution and recognition of protein sequence repeats. Computers & Chemistry. 1994;18(3):233–243. doi: 10.1016/0097-8485(94)85018-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Andrade MA, Petosa C, O'Donoghue SI, Müller CW, Bork P. Comparison of ARM and HEAT protein repeats. Journal of Molecular Biology. 2001;309(1):1–18. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.2001.4624. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt CD Jr, Vecchi MP. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science. 1983;220(4598):671–680. doi: 10.1126/science.220.4598.671. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Mirny LA, Shakhnovich EI. Universally conserved positions in protein folds: reading evolutionary signals about stability, folding kinetics and function. Journal of Molecular Biology. 1999;291(1):177–196. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.1999.2911. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Huynen MA, Stadler PF, Fontana W. Smoothness within ruggedness: the role of neutrality in adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1996;93(1):397–401. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.1.397. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Karlin S. Statistical signals in bioinformatics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2005;102(38):13355–13362. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0501804102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Dill KA. Dominant forces in protein folding. Biochemistry. 1990;29(31):7133–7155. doi: 10.1021/bi00483a001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Rost B. Did evolution leap to create the protein universe? Current Opinion in Structural Biology. 2002;12(3):409–416. doi: 10.1016/S0959-440X(02)00337-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Rissanen J, Langdon GG Jr.. Arithmetic Coding. IBM Journal of Research and Development. 1979;23(2):149–162. [Google Scholar]
  26. Salzberg SL, Delcher AL, Kasif S, White O. Microbial gene identification using interpolated Markov models. Nucleic Acids Research. 1998;26(2):544–548. doi: 10.1093/nar/26.2.544. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Turutina VP, Laskin AA, Kudryashov NA, Skryabin KG, Korotkov EV. Identification of latent periodicity in amino acid sequences of protein families. Biochemistry (Moscow) 2006;71(1):18–31. doi: 10.1134/S0006297906010032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Korotkov EV, Korotkova MA. Enlarged similarity of nucleic acid sequences. DNA Research. 1996;3(3):157–164. doi: 10.1093/dnares/3.3.157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Camproux AC, Tufféry P. Hidden Markov model-derived structural alphabet for proteins: the learning of protein local shapes captures sequence specificity. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2005;1724(3):394–403. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagen.2005.05.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Bentley SD, Parkhill J. Comparative genomic structure of prokaryotes. Annual Review of Genetics. 2004;38:771–791. doi: 10.1146/annurev.genet.38.072902.094318. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Raes J, Korbel JO, Lercher MJ, von Mering C, Bork P. Prediction of effective genome size in metagenomic samples. Genome Biology. 2007;8(1):R10. doi: 10.1186/gb-2007-8-1-r10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from EURASIP Journal on Bioinformatics and Systems Biology are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES