AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
Powered by AMiner. Clicking this button will take you away from SciOpen.
Home Tsinghua Science and Technology Article
PDF (1 MB)
Cite
EndNote(RIS) BibTeX
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Open Access

How the "Folding Funnel" Depends on Size and Structure of Proteins? A View from the Scoring Function Perspective

Research Support Computing, University of Missouri Bioinformatics Consortium and Department of Computer Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA
Show Author Information

Abstract

It has been well accepted that the folding energy landscape may resemble a funnel according to the theory of protein folding. This theory of "folding funnel" has been extensively studied and thought to play an important role in guiding the sampling process of the protein folding and refinement in protein structure prediction. Here, we have investigated the relationship between the "funnel likeness" of protein folding and the size/structure of the proteins based on a set of non-homologous proteins we have recently evaluated using a statistical mechanics-based scoring function ITScorePro. It was found that larger proteins that consist of more helix/sheet structures tend to have a higher score-Root Mean Square Deviation (RMSD) correlation (or a more funnel like energy landscape). Another measurement in protein folding, Z-score, has also shown some correlation with the size of the proteins. As expected, proteins with a better "olding funnel likeness" (or score-RMSD correlation) tend to have a better-predicted conformation with a lower RMSD from their native structures. These findings can be extremely valuable for the development and improvement of sampling and scoring algorithms for protein structure prediction.

Keywords

energy landscapefolding funnelprotein structure predictionscoring functionprotein folding

References

[1]
J.Skolnick, J. S.Fetrow, and A.Kolinski, Structural genomics and its importance for gene function analysis, Nat. Biotechnol., vol. 18, pp. 283-287, 2000.
Crossref Google Scholar
[2]
D.Baker, Protein structure prediction and structural genomics, Science, vol. 294, pp. 93-96, 2001.
Crossref Google Scholar
[3]
M.Jacobsonand A.Sali, Comparative protein structure modeling and its applications to drug discovery, in Annual Reports in Medicinal Chemistry, J.Overington, Ed. London, UK: Inpharmatica Ltd., 2004, vol. 39, pp. 259-276.
Crossref
[4]
K.Ginalski, N. V.Grishin, A.Godzik, and L.Rychlewski, Practical lessons from protein structure prediction, Nucleic Acids Res., vol. 33, pp. 1874-1891, 2005.
Crossref Google Scholar
[5]
H.Zhouand J.Skolnick, Protein structure prediction by pro-Sp3-TASSER, Biophys J., vol. 96, pp. 2119-2127, 2009.
Crossref Google Scholar
[6]
K. A.Dill, S. B.Ozkan, T. R.Weikl, J. D.Chodera, and V. A.Voelz, The protein folding problem: When will it be solved? Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., vol. 17, pp. 342-346, 2007.
Crossref Google Scholar
[7]
A.Roy, A.Kucukural, and Y.Zhang, I-TASSER: A unified platform for automated protein structure and function prediction, Nat. Protoc., vol. 5, pp. 725-738, 2010.
Crossref Google Scholar
[8]
D.Petreyand B.Honig, Protein structure prediction: Inroads to biology, Mol. Cell, vol. 20, pp. 811-819, 2005.
Crossref Google Scholar
[9]
R.Dasand D.Bake, Macromolecular modeling with rosetta, Annu. Rev. Biochem., vol. 77, pp. 363-382, 2008.
Crossref Google Scholar
[10]
Y.Zhang, Protein structure prediction: When is it useful? Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., vol. 19, pp. 145-155, 2009.
Crossref Google Scholar
[11]
Y.Zhang, Progress and challenges in protein structure prediction, Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., vol. 18, pp. 342-348, 2008.
Crossref Google Scholar
[12]
H. M.Berman, J.Westbrook, Z.Feng, G.Gilliland, T. N.Bhat, H.Weissig, I. N.Shindyalov, and P. E.Bourne, The protein data bank, Nucleic Acids Res., vol. 28, pp. 235-242, 2000.
Crossref Google Scholar
[13]
M. A.Martí-Renom, A. C.Stuart, A.Fiser, R.Sánchez, F.Melo, and A.Sali, Comparative protein structure modeling of genes and genomes, Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct., vol. 29, pp. 291-325, 2000.
Crossref Google Scholar
[14]
K. T.Simons, C.Kooperberg, E.Huang, and D.Baker, Assembly of protein tertiary structures from fragments with similar local sequences using simulated annealing and Bayesian scoring functions, J. Mol. Biol., vol. 268, pp. 209-225, 1997.
Crossref Google Scholar
[15]
Y.Zhang, A. K.Arakaki, and J.Skolnick, TASSER: An automated method for the prediction of protein tertiary structures in CASP6, Proteins, vol. 61(S7), pp. 91-98, 2005.
Crossref Google Scholar
[16]
Y.Xia, E. S.Huang, M.Levitt, and R.Samudrala, Ab initio construction of protein tertiary structures using a hierarchical approach, J. Mol. Biol., vol. 300, pp. 171-185, 2000.
Crossref Google Scholar
[17]
A.Shmygelskaand M.Levitt, Generalized ensemble methods for de novo structure prediction, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 106, pp. 1415-1420, 2009.
Crossref Google Scholar
[18]
J.Qiu, W.Sheffler, D.Baker, and W. S.Noble, Ranking predicted protein structures with support vector regression, Proteins, vol. 71, pp. 1175-1182, 2008.
Crossref Google Scholar
[19]
D. E.Kim, B.Blum, P.Bradley, and D.Baker, Sampling bottlenecks in de novo protein structure prediction, J. Mol. Biol., vol. 393, pp. 249-260, 2009.
Crossref Google Scholar
[20]
K. M.Misuraand D.Baker, Progress and challenges in high-resolution refinement of protein structure models, Proteins, vol. 59, pp. 15-29, 2005.
Crossref Google Scholar
[21]
L.Wroblewskaand J.Skolnick, Can a physics-based, all-atom potential find a protein’s native structure among misfolded structures? I. Large scale AMBER benchmarking, J. Comput. Chem., vol. 28, pp. 2059-2066, 2007.
Crossref Google Scholar
[22]
A.Jagielska, L.Wroblewska, and J.Skolnick, Protein model refinement using an optimized physics-based all-atom force field, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 105, pp. 8268-8273, 2008.
Crossref Google Scholar
[23]
J.Skolnick, H.Zhou, and M.Gao, Are predicted protein structures of any value for binding site prediction and virtual ligand screening? Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., vol. 23, pp. 191-197, 2013.
Crossref Google Scholar
[24]
H. S.Chanand K. A.Dill, Transition states and folding dynamics of proteins and heteropolymers, J. Chem. Phys., vol. 100, pp. 9238-9257, 1994.
Crossref Google Scholar
[25]
J. N.Onuchic, Z.Luthey-Schulten, and P. G.Wolynes, Theory of protein folding: The energy landscape perspective, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem., vol. 48, pp. 545-600, 1997.
Crossref Google Scholar
[26]
K. A.Dill, S. B.Ozkan, M. S.Shell, and T. R.Weikl, The protein folding problem, Annu. Rev. Bipohys., vol. 37, pp. 289-316, 2008.
Crossref Google Scholar
[27]
S.-Y.Huang and X.Zou, An iterative knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions: I. Derivation of interaction potentials, J. Comput. Chem., vol. 27, pp. 1865-1875, 2006.
Crossref Google Scholar
[28]
S.-Y.Huangand X.Zou, An iterative knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions: II. Validation of the scoring function, J. Comput. Chem., vol. 27, pp. 1876-1882, 2006.
Crossref Google Scholar
[29]
S.-Y.Huangand X.Zou, An iterative knowledge-based scoring function for protein-protein recognition, Proteins, vol. 72, pp. 557-579, 2008.
Crossref Google Scholar
[30]
S.-Y.Huangand X.Zou, Statistical mechanics-based method to extract atomic distance-dependent potentials from protein structures, Proteins, vol. 79, pp. 2648-2661, 2011.
Crossref Google Scholar
[31]
Y.Zhangand J.Skolnick, Automated structure prediction of weakly homologous proteins on a genomic scale, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 101, pp. 7594-7599, 2004.
Crossref Google Scholar
[32]
P.Guntert, C.Mumenthaler, and K.Wuthrich, Torsion angle dynamics for NMR structure calculation with the new program DYANA, J. Mol. Biol., vol. 273, pp. 283-298, 1997.
Crossref Google Scholar
[33]
R.Rajgaria, S. R.McAllister, and C. A.Floudas, Distance dependent centroid to centroid force fields using high resolution decoys, Proteins, vol. 70, pp. 950-970, 2008.
Crossref Google Scholar
[34]
E. F.Pettersen, T. D.Goddard, C. C.Huang, G. S.Couch, D. M.Greenblatt, E. C.Meng, and T. E.Ferrin, UCSF Chimera - A visualization system for exploratory research and analysis, J. Comput. Chem., vol. 25, pp. 1605-1612, 2004.
Crossref Google Scholar
[35]
L.Zhangand J.Skolnick, What should the Z-score of native protein structures be? Protein Sci., vol. 7, pp. 1201-1207, 1998.
Crossref Google Scholar
[36]
P. E.Leopold, M.Montal, and J. N.Onuchic, Protein folding funnels - A kinetic approach to the sequence structure relationship, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 89, pp. 8721-8725, 1992.
Crossref Google Scholar
Tsinghua Science and Technology
Volume 18 Issue 5,
October 2013
Pages 462-468
DOI: 10.1109/TST.2013.6616520
Cite this article:
Huang S-Y, Springer GK. How the "Folding Funnel" Depends on Size and Structure of Proteins? A View from the Scoring Function Perspective. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 2013, 18(5): 462-468. https://doi.org/10.1109/TST.2013.6616520

512

Views

21

Downloads

2

Crossref

N/A

Web of Science

2

Scopus

0

CSCD

Altmetrics
Received: 09 August 2013
Revised: 01 September 2013
Accepted: 02 September 2013
Published: 03 October 2013
© The author(s) 2013
Return