Abstract

Co-evolution between pairs of residues in a multiple sequence alignment (MSA) of homologous proteins has long been proposed as an indicator of structural contacts. Recently, several methods, such as direct-coupling analysis (DCA) and MetaPSICOV, have been shown to achieve impressive rates of contact prediction by taking advantage of considerable sequence data. In this paper, we show that prediction success rates are highly sensitive to the structural definition of a contact, with more permissive definitions (i.e., those classifying more pairs as true contacts) naturally leading to higher positive predictive rates, but at the expense of the amount of structural information contributed by each contact. Thus, the remaining limitations of contact prediction algorithms are most noticeable in conjunction with geometrically restrictive contacts—precisely those that contribute more information in structure prediction. We suggest that to improve prediction rates for such “informative” contacts one could combine co-evolution scores with additional indicators of contact likelihood. Specifically, we find that when a pair of co-varying positions in an MSA is occupied by residue pairs with favorable statistical contact energies, that pair is more likely to represent a true contact. We show that combining a contact potential metric with DCA or MetaPSICOV performs considerably better than DCA or MetaPSICOV alone, respectively. This is true regardless of contact definition, but especially true for stricter and more informative contact definitions. In summary, this work outlines some remaining challenges to be addressed in contact prediction and proposes and validates a promising direction towards improvement.

Highlights

  • Formation of tertiary structure in proteins is dependent on the establishment of close throughspace interactions, often between amino-acid residues distant in sequence

  • We find that multiple sequence alignment (MSA)-based contact prediction results in much lower precision for contact degree (CD)-based contacts as it does for traditional contact definitions

  • We consider three different commonly-used contact definitions: the one proposed by Morcos et al in presenting the direct-coupling analysis (DCA) method—i.e., two residues with at least one pair of non-hydrogen atoms within 8 Å of each other [12], the official CASP definition—i.e., two residues with Cβ atoms within 8 Å of each other [19], and a definition based on a metric used in coarse-grained modeling—two residues with centroids within 6 Å of each other [26, 27]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Formation of tertiary structure in proteins is dependent on the establishment of close throughspace interactions, often between amino-acid residues distant in sequence. Inter-residue contacts should impose constraints on evolutionary dynamics. Mutations at contacting pairs are expected to be coupled in the evolutionary record. Contact prediction is hardest for the most informative contacts, but contact potentials improve it Information files). CASP12 sequence information can be downloaded from the official CASP website. The DCA Matlab script is included in the Supplementary Information files. MetaPSICOV can be downloaded from http://bioinf.cs.ucl.ac.uk/ MetaPSICOV/

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call