Cargando…
Why do Sequence Signatures Predict Enzyme Mechanism? Homology versus Chemistry
First, we identify InterPro sequence signatures representing evolutionary relatedness and, second, signatures identifying specific chemical machinery. Thus, we predict the chemical mechanisms of enzyme-catalyzed reactions from catalytic and non-catalytic subsets of InterPro signatures. We first scan...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Libertas Academica
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4696837/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26740739 http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/EBO.S31482 |
_version_ | 1782407843267215360 |
---|---|
author | Beattie, Kirsten E. De Ferrari, Luna Mitchell, John B. O. |
author_facet | Beattie, Kirsten E. De Ferrari, Luna Mitchell, John B. O. |
author_sort | Beattie, Kirsten E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | First, we identify InterPro sequence signatures representing evolutionary relatedness and, second, signatures identifying specific chemical machinery. Thus, we predict the chemical mechanisms of enzyme-catalyzed reactions from catalytic and non-catalytic subsets of InterPro signatures. We first scanned our 249 sequences using InterProScan and then used the MACiE database to identify those amino acid residues that are important for catalysis. The sequences were mutated in silico to replace these catalytic residues with glycine and then again scanned using InterProScan. Those signature matches from the original scan that disappeared on mutation were called catalytic. Mechanism was predicted using all signatures, only the 78 “catalytic” signatures, or only the 519 “non-catalytic” signatures. The non-catalytic signatures gave indistinguishable results from those for the whole feature set, with precision of 0.991 and sensitivity of 0.970. The catalytic signatures alone gave less impressive predictivity, with precision and sensitivity of 0.791 and 0.735, respectively. These results show that our successful prediction of enzyme mechanism is mostly by homology rather than by identifying catalytic machinery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4696837 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Libertas Academica |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46968372016-01-06 Why do Sequence Signatures Predict Enzyme Mechanism? Homology versus Chemistry Beattie, Kirsten E. De Ferrari, Luna Mitchell, John B. O. Evol Bioinform Online Original Research First, we identify InterPro sequence signatures representing evolutionary relatedness and, second, signatures identifying specific chemical machinery. Thus, we predict the chemical mechanisms of enzyme-catalyzed reactions from catalytic and non-catalytic subsets of InterPro signatures. We first scanned our 249 sequences using InterProScan and then used the MACiE database to identify those amino acid residues that are important for catalysis. The sequences were mutated in silico to replace these catalytic residues with glycine and then again scanned using InterProScan. Those signature matches from the original scan that disappeared on mutation were called catalytic. Mechanism was predicted using all signatures, only the 78 “catalytic” signatures, or only the 519 “non-catalytic” signatures. The non-catalytic signatures gave indistinguishable results from those for the whole feature set, with precision of 0.991 and sensitivity of 0.970. The catalytic signatures alone gave less impressive predictivity, with precision and sensitivity of 0.791 and 0.735, respectively. These results show that our successful prediction of enzyme mechanism is mostly by homology rather than by identifying catalytic machinery. Libertas Academica 2015-12-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4696837/ /pubmed/26740739 http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/EBO.S31482 Text en © 2015 the author(s), publisher and licensee Libertas Academica Ltd. This is an open access article published under the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC 3.0 license. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Beattie, Kirsten E. De Ferrari, Luna Mitchell, John B. O. Why do Sequence Signatures Predict Enzyme Mechanism? Homology versus Chemistry |
title | Why do Sequence Signatures Predict Enzyme Mechanism? Homology versus Chemistry |
title_full | Why do Sequence Signatures Predict Enzyme Mechanism? Homology versus Chemistry |
title_fullStr | Why do Sequence Signatures Predict Enzyme Mechanism? Homology versus Chemistry |
title_full_unstemmed | Why do Sequence Signatures Predict Enzyme Mechanism? Homology versus Chemistry |
title_short | Why do Sequence Signatures Predict Enzyme Mechanism? Homology versus Chemistry |
title_sort | why do sequence signatures predict enzyme mechanism? homology versus chemistry |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4696837/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26740739 http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/EBO.S31482 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT beattiekirstene whydosequencesignaturespredictenzymemechanismhomologyversuschemistry AT deferrariluna whydosequencesignaturespredictenzymemechanismhomologyversuschemistry AT mitchelljohnbo whydosequencesignaturespredictenzymemechanismhomologyversuschemistry |