Cargando…

Recognizing protein–protein interfaces with empirical potentials and reduced amino acid alphabets

BACKGROUND: In structural genomics, an important goal is the detection and classification of protein–protein interactions, given the structures of the interacting partners. We have developed empirical energy functions to identify native structures of protein–protein complexes among sets of decoy str...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Launay, Guillaume, Mendez, Raul, Wodak, Shoshana, Simonson, Thomas
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2034607/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17662112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-270
_version_ 1782137033143091200
author Launay, Guillaume
Mendez, Raul
Wodak, Shoshana
Simonson, Thomas
author_facet Launay, Guillaume
Mendez, Raul
Wodak, Shoshana
Simonson, Thomas
author_sort Launay, Guillaume
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In structural genomics, an important goal is the detection and classification of protein–protein interactions, given the structures of the interacting partners. We have developed empirical energy functions to identify native structures of protein–protein complexes among sets of decoy structures. To understand the role of amino acid diversity, we parameterized a series of functions, using a hierarchy of amino acid alphabets of increasing complexity, with 2, 3, 4, 6, and 20 amino acid groups. Compared to previous work, we used the simplest possible functional form, with residue–residue interactions and a stepwise distance-dependence. We used increased computational ressources, however, constructing 290,000 decoys for 219 protein–protein complexes, with a realistic docking protocol where the protein partners are flexible and interact through a molecular mechanics energy function. The energy parameters were optimized to correctly assign as many native complexes as possible. To resolve the multiple minimum problem in parameter space, over 64000 starting parameter guesses were tried for each energy function. The optimized functions were tested by cross validation on subsets of our native and decoy structures, by blind tests on series of native and decoy structures available on the Web, and on models for 13 complexes submitted to the CAPRI structure prediction experiment. RESULTS: Performance is similar to several other statistical potentials of the same complexity. For example, the CAPRI target structure is correctly ranked ahead of 90% of its decoys in 6 cases out of 13. The hierarchy of amino acid alphabets leads to a coherent hierarchy of energy functions, with qualitatively similar parameters for similar amino acid types at all levels. Most remarkably, the performance with six amino acid classes is equivalent to that of the most detailed, 20-class energy function. CONCLUSION: This suggests that six carefully chosen amino acid classes are sufficient to encode specificity in protein–protein interactions, and provide a starting point to develop more complicated energy functions.
format Text
id pubmed-2034607
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-20346072007-10-19 Recognizing protein–protein interfaces with empirical potentials and reduced amino acid alphabets Launay, Guillaume Mendez, Raul Wodak, Shoshana Simonson, Thomas BMC Bioinformatics Research Article BACKGROUND: In structural genomics, an important goal is the detection and classification of protein–protein interactions, given the structures of the interacting partners. We have developed empirical energy functions to identify native structures of protein–protein complexes among sets of decoy structures. To understand the role of amino acid diversity, we parameterized a series of functions, using a hierarchy of amino acid alphabets of increasing complexity, with 2, 3, 4, 6, and 20 amino acid groups. Compared to previous work, we used the simplest possible functional form, with residue–residue interactions and a stepwise distance-dependence. We used increased computational ressources, however, constructing 290,000 decoys for 219 protein–protein complexes, with a realistic docking protocol where the protein partners are flexible and interact through a molecular mechanics energy function. The energy parameters were optimized to correctly assign as many native complexes as possible. To resolve the multiple minimum problem in parameter space, over 64000 starting parameter guesses were tried for each energy function. The optimized functions were tested by cross validation on subsets of our native and decoy structures, by blind tests on series of native and decoy structures available on the Web, and on models for 13 complexes submitted to the CAPRI structure prediction experiment. RESULTS: Performance is similar to several other statistical potentials of the same complexity. For example, the CAPRI target structure is correctly ranked ahead of 90% of its decoys in 6 cases out of 13. The hierarchy of amino acid alphabets leads to a coherent hierarchy of energy functions, with qualitatively similar parameters for similar amino acid types at all levels. Most remarkably, the performance with six amino acid classes is equivalent to that of the most detailed, 20-class energy function. CONCLUSION: This suggests that six carefully chosen amino acid classes are sufficient to encode specificity in protein–protein interactions, and provide a starting point to develop more complicated energy functions. BioMed Central 2007-07-27 /pmc/articles/PMC2034607/ /pubmed/17662112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-270 Text en Copyright © 2007 Launay et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Launay, Guillaume
Mendez, Raul
Wodak, Shoshana
Simonson, Thomas
Recognizing protein–protein interfaces with empirical potentials and reduced amino acid alphabets
title Recognizing protein–protein interfaces with empirical potentials and reduced amino acid alphabets
title_full Recognizing protein–protein interfaces with empirical potentials and reduced amino acid alphabets
title_fullStr Recognizing protein–protein interfaces with empirical potentials and reduced amino acid alphabets
title_full_unstemmed Recognizing protein–protein interfaces with empirical potentials and reduced amino acid alphabets
title_short Recognizing protein–protein interfaces with empirical potentials and reduced amino acid alphabets
title_sort recognizing protein–protein interfaces with empirical potentials and reduced amino acid alphabets
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2034607/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17662112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-270
work_keys_str_mv AT launayguillaume recognizingproteinproteininterfaceswithempiricalpotentialsandreducedaminoacidalphabets
AT mendezraul recognizingproteinproteininterfaceswithempiricalpotentialsandreducedaminoacidalphabets
AT wodakshoshana recognizingproteinproteininterfaceswithempiricalpotentialsandreducedaminoacidalphabets
AT simonsonthomas recognizingproteinproteininterfaceswithempiricalpotentialsandreducedaminoacidalphabets