Protein Model Quality Research Articles

QMEANclust: estimation of protein model quality by combining a composite scoring function with structural density information

BackgroundThe selection of the most accurate protein model from a set of alternatives is a crucial step in protein structure prediction both in template-based and ab initio approaches. Scoring functions have been developed which can either return a quality estimate for a single model or derive a score from the information contained in the ensemble of models for a given sequence. Local structural features occurring more frequently in the ensemble have a greater probability of being correct. Within the context of the CASP experiment, these so called consensus methods have been shown to perform considerably better in selecting good candidate models, but tend to fail if the best models are far from the dominant structural cluster. In this paper we show that model selection can be improved if both approaches are combined by pre-filtering the models used during the calculation of the structural consensus.ResultsOur recently published QMEAN composite scoring function has been improved by including an all-atom interaction potential term. The preliminary model ranking based on the new QMEAN score is used to select a subset of reliable models against which the structural consensus score is calculated. This scoring function called QMEANclust achieves a correlation coefficient of predicted quality score and GDT_TS of 0.9 averaged over the 98 CASP7 targets and perform significantly better in selecting good models from the ensemble of server models than any other groups participating in the quality estimation category of CASP7. Both scoring functions are also benchmarked on the MOULDER test set consisting of 20 target proteins each with 300 alternatives models generated by MODELLER. QMEAN outperforms all other tested scoring functions operating on individual models, while the consensus method QMEANclust only works properly on decoy sets containing a certain fraction of near-native conformations. We also present a local version of QMEAN for the per-residue estimation of model quality (QMEANlocal) and compare it to a new local consensus-based approach.ConclusionImproved model selection is obtained by using a composite scoring function operating on single models in order to enrich higher quality models which are subsequently used to calculate the structural consensus. The performance of consensus-based methods such as QMEANclust highly depends on the composition and quality of the model ensemble to be analysed. Therefore, performance estimates for consensus methods based on large meta-datasets (e.g. CASP) might overrate their applicability in more realistic modelling situations with smaller sets of models based on individual methods.

Evaluating the absolute quality of a single protein model using structural features and support vector machines

Knowing the quality of a protein structure model is important for its appropriate usage. We developed a model evaluation method to assess the absolute quality of a single protein model using only structural features with support vector machine regression. The method assigns an absolute quantitative score (i.e. GDT-TS) to a model by comparing its secondary structure, relative solvent accessibility, contact map, and beta sheet structure with their counterparts predicted from its primary sequence. We trained and tested the method on the CASP6 dataset using cross-validation. The correlation between predicted and true scores is 0.82. On the independent CASP7 dataset, the correlation averaged over 95 protein targets is 0.76; the average correlation for template-based and ab initio targets is 0.82 and 0.50, respectively. Furthermore, the predicted absolute quality scores can be used to rank models effectively. The average difference (or loss) between the scores of the top-ranked models and the best models is 5.70 on the CASP7 targets. This method performs favorably when compared with the other methods used on the same dataset. Moreover, the predicted absolute quality scores are comparable across models for different proteins. These features make the method a valuable tool for model quality assurance and ranking.

Validation of protein models by a neural network approach

BackgroundThe development and improvement of reliable computational methods designed to evaluate the quality of protein models is relevant in the context of protein structure refinement, which has been recently identified as one of the bottlenecks limiting the quality and usefulness of protein structure prediction.ResultsIn this contribution, we present a computational method (Artificial Intelligence Decoys Evaluator: AIDE) which is able to consistently discriminate between correct and incorrect protein models. In particular, the method is based on neural networks that use as input 15 structural parameters, which include energy, solvent accessible surface, hydrophobic contacts and secondary structure content. The results obtained with AIDE on a set of decoy structures were evaluated using statistical indicators such as Pearson correlation coefficients, Znat, fraction enrichment, as well as ROC plots. It turned out that AIDE performances are comparable and often complementary to available state-of-the-art learning-based methods.ConclusionIn light of the results obtained with AIDE, as well as its comparison with available learning-based methods, it can be concluded that AIDE can be successfully used to evaluate the quality of protein structures. The use of AIDE in combination with other evaluation tools is expected to further enhance protein refinement efforts.

Protein model quality assessment prediction by combining fragment comparisons and a consensus Cα contact potential

In this work, we develop a fully automated method for the quality assessment prediction of protein structural models generated by structure prediction approaches such as fold recognition servers, or ab initio methods. The approach is based on fragment comparisons and a consensus C(alpha) contact potential derived from the set of models to be assessed and was tested on CASP7 server models. The average Pearson linear correlation coefficient between predicted quality and model GDT-score per target is 0.83 for the 98 targets, which is better than those of other quality assessment methods that participated in CASP7. Our method also outperforms the other methods by about 3% as assessed by the total GDT-score of the selected top models.

Molecular dynamics simulations and membrane protein structure quality

Despite a growing repertoire of membrane protein structures (currently approximately 120 unique structures), considerations of low resolution and crystallization in the absence of a lipid bilayer require the development of techniques to assess the global quality of membrane protein folds. This is also the case for assessment of, e.g. homology models of human membrane proteins based on structures of (distant) bacterial homologues. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations may be used to help evaluate the quality of a membrane protein structure or model. We have used a structure of the bacterial ABC transporter MsbA which has the correct transmembrane helices but an incorrect handedness and topology of their packing to test simulation methods of quality assessment. An MD simulation of the MsbA model in a lipid bilayer is compared to a simulation of another bacterial ABC transporter, BtuCD. The latter structure has demonstrated good conformational stability in the same bilayer environment and over the same timescale (20 ns) as for the MsbA model simulation. A number of comparative analyses of the two simulations were performed to assess changes in the structural integrity of each protein. The results show a significant difference between the two simulations, chiefly due to the dramatic structural deformations of MsbA. We therefore propose that MD could become a useful quality control tool for membrane protein structural biology. In particular, it provides a way in which to explore the global conformational stability of a model membrane protein fold.

An information theoretic approach for improving data driven prediction of protein model quality

We present the results of an information theory-based approach to select an optimal subset of features for the prediction of protein model quality. The optimal subset of features was calculated by means of a backward selection procedure. The performances of a probabilistic classifier modeled by means of a Kernel Probability Density Estimation method (KPDE) were compared with those of a feed-forward Artificial Neural Network (ANN) and a Support Vector Machine (SVM).

Scoring predictive models using a reduced representation of proteins: model and energy definition

BackgroundReduced representations of proteins have been playing a keyrole in the study of protein folding. Many such models are available, with different representation detail. Although the usefulness of many such models for structural bioinformatics applications has been demonstrated in recent years, there are few intermediate resolution models endowed with an energy model capable, for instance, of detecting native or native-like structures among decoy sets. The aim of the present work is to provide a discrete empirical potential for a reduced protein model termed here PC2CA, because it employs a PseudoCovalent structure with only 2 Centers of interactions per Amino acid, suitable for protein model quality assessment.ResultsAll protein structures in the set top500H have been converted in reduced form. The distribution of pseudobonds, pseudoangle, pseudodihedrals and distances between centers of interactions have been converted into potentials of mean force. A suitable reference distribution has been defined for non-bonded interactions which takes into account excluded volume effects and protein finite size. The correlation between adjacent main chain pseudodihedrals has been converted in an additional energetic term which is able to account for cooperative effects in secondary structure elements. Local energy surface exploration is performed in order to increase the robustness of the energy function.ConclusionThe model and the energy definition proposed have been tested on all the multiple decoys' sets in the Decoys'R'us database. The energetic model is able to recognize, for almost all sets, native-like structures (RMSD less than 2.0 Å). These results and those obtained in the blind CASP7 quality assessment experiment suggest that the model compares well with scoring potentials with finer granularity and could be useful for fast exploration of conformational space. Parameters are available at the url: .

A method for evaluating the structural quality of protein models by using higher-order φ–ψ pairs scoring

A method is presented for scoring the model quality of experimental and theoretical protein structures. The structural model to be evaluated is dissected into small fragments via a sliding window, where each fragment is represented by a vector of multiple phi-psi angles. The sliding window ranges in size from a length of 1-10 phi-psi pairs (3-12 residues). In this method, the conformation of each fragment is scored based on the fit of multiple phi-psi angles of the fragment to a database of multiple phi-psi angles from high-resolution x-ray crystal structures. We show that measuring the fit of predicted structural models to the allowed conformational space of longer fragments is a significant discriminator for model quality. Reasonable models have higher-order phi-psi score fit values (m) > -1.00.

Why protein R-factors are so large: a self-consistent analysis.

The R-factor and R-free are commonly used to measure the quality of protein models obtained in X-ray crystallography. Well-refined protein structures usually have R-factors in the range of 20-25%, whereas intrinsic errors in the experimental data are usually around 5%. We use molecular dynamics simulations to perform a self-consistent analysis by which we determine the major factors contributing to large values of protein R-factors. The analysis shows that significant R-factor values can arise from the use of isotropic B-factors to model anisotropic protein motions and from coordinate errors. Even in the absence of coordinate errors, the use of isotropic B-factors can cause the R-factors to be around 10%; for coordinate errors smaller than 0.2 A, the two errors types make similar contributions. The inaccuracy of the energy function used and multistate protein dynamics are unlikely to make significant contributions to the large R-factors.