Abstract
The quality assessment of protein structures is one of the most critical steps in the regime of reliable protein tertiary structure prediction. Post-conformational sampling of the decoys for a protein sequence and the scoring functions to perform quality assessment usually dictate the overall success of protein structure prediction. The field of protein structure quality assessment has achieved a chronological success over the years in differentiating between accurately and spuriously modeled structures. Implementation of physics-based, knowledge-based, and consensus approaches has contributed immensely in pushing the field to higher levels. Recently, the addition of metaserver approaches while integrating previously known methodologies has further pushed the field of protein structure quality assessment to a more reliable zone. Here, we described some of the tools/softwares/servers which implements diverse parameters to quantify the accuracy of modeled protein structures.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Benkert P, Kuenzli M, Schwede T (2009) QMEAN server for protein model quality estimation. Nucleic Acids Res 37:W510–W514
Bourne PE (2003) CASP and CAFASP experiments and their findings. Methods Biochem Anal 44:501–507
Brooks BR, Bruccoleri RE, Olafson BD, States DJ et al (1983) CHARMM: a program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations. J Comput Chem 4:187–217
Cao R, Jianlin C (2016) Protein single-model quality assessment by feature-based probability density function. Sci Rep 6:23990
Cao R, Wang Z, Wang Y, Cheng J (2014) SMOQ: a tool for predicting the absolute residue-specific quality of a single protein model with support vector machines. BMC Bioinformatics 15:120
Chen VB, Arendall WB 3rd, Headd JJ, Keedy DA et al (2010) MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallogr D66:12–21
Cheng J (2008) A multi-template combination algorithm for protein comparative modeling. BMC Struct Biol 8:18
Colovos C, Yeates TO (1993) Verification of protein structures, patterns of non-bonded atomic interactions. Protein Sci 2:1511–1519
Cozzetto D, Kryshtafovych A, Ceriani M, Tramontano A (2007) Assessment of predictions in the model quality assessment category. Proteins 69(8):175–183
Fise A (2010) Template-based protein structure modeling. Methods Mol Biol 673:73–94
Ghosh S, Vishveshwara S (2014) Ranking the quality of protein structure models using side chain based network properties. F1000Res 3:17
Jayaram B, Bhushan K, Shenoy SR et al (2006) Bhageerath: an energy based web enabled computer soft-ware suite for limiting the search space of tertiary structures of small globular proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 34:6195–6204
Jayaram B, Dhingra P, Mishra A et al (2014) Bhageerath-H: a homology/ab initio hybrid server for predicting tertiary structures of monomeric soluble proteins. BMC Bioinformatics 15(S16):S7
Jing X, Dong Q (2017) MQAPRank: improved global protein model quality assessment by learning-to-rank. BMC Bioinformatics 18:275
Kaushik R, Jayaram B (2016) Structural difficulty index: a reliable measure for modelability of protein tertiary structures. Protein Eng Des Sel 29(9):391–397
Kryshtafovych A, Fidelis K (2009) Protein structure prediction and model quality assessment. Drug Discov Today 14:386–390
Laskowski RA (1993) PROCHECK: a program to check the stereo chemical quality of protein structures. J Appl Crystallogr 26:283–291
Lee B, Richards FM (1971) The interpretation of protein structures: estimation of static accessibility. J Mol Biol 55:379–400
Luthy R, Bowie JU, Eisenberg D (1992) Assessment of protein models with three-dimensional profiles. Nature 356:83–85
McGuffin L, Roche D (2010) Rapid model quality assessment for protein structure predictions using the comparison of multiple models without structural alignments. Bioinformatics 26:182–188
Melo F, Feytmans E (1998) Assessing protein structures with non-local atomic interaction energy. J Mol Biol 17:1141–1152
Melo F, Sali A (2007) Fold assessment for comparative protein structure modeling. Protein Sci 16:2412–2426
Mishra A, Rao S, Mittal A, Jayaram B (2013) Capturing native/native like structures with a Physico-chemical metric (pcSM) in protein folding. Biochim Biophys Acta 1834:1520–1531
Mishra A, Rana PS, Mittal A, Jayaram B (2014) D2N: distance to the native. Biochim Biophys Acta 10:1798–1807
Narang P, Bhushan K, Bose S, Jayaram B (2005) A computational pathway for bracketing native-like structures for small alpha helical globular proteins. Phys Chem Chem Phys 7:2364–2375
Olechnovic K, Venclovas C (2017) VoroMQA: assessment of protein structure quality using interatomic contact areas. Proteins 85:1131–1145
Pawlowski M, Gajda MJ, Matlak R, Bujnicki JM (2008) MetaMQAP: a meta-server for the quality assessment of protein models. BMC Bioinformatics 9:403
Pearlman DA, Case DA, Caldwell JW, Ross WS et al (1995) AMBER 4.1. University of San Francisco, San Francisco
Samudrala R, Levitt M (2000) Decoys ‘R’ Us: a database of incorrect protein conformations to improve protein structure prediction. Protein Sci 9:1399–1401
Shen M, Sali A (2006) Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures. Protein Sci 15:2507–2524
Singh A, Kaushik R, Mishra A, Shanker A, Jayaram B (2015) ProTSAV: a protein tertiary structure analysis and validation server. Biochim Biophys Acta 1864:11–19
Sippl MJ (1995) Knowledge-based potentials for proteins. Curr Opin Struct Biol 5:229–235
Soares TA, Hünenberger PH, Kastenholz MA, Kräutle V et al (2005) An improved nucleic acid parameter set for the GROMOS force field. J Comput Chem 26:725–737
Venclovas C, Zemla A, Fidelis K, Moult J (2003) Assessment of progress over the CASP experiments. Proteins 53:585–595
Wallner B, Elofsson A (2003) Can correct protein models be identified? Protein Sci 12:1073–1086
Wang Q, Shang Y, Xu D (2011) Improving a consensus approach for protein structure selection by removing redundancy. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform 8:1708–1715
Wiederstein M, Sippl MJ (2007) ProSA-web: interactive web service for the recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins. Nucl Acids Res 35:W407–W410
Yang Y, Zhou Y (2008) Specific interactions for ab initio folding of protein terminal regions with secondary structures. Proteins 72:793–803
Zemla A, Venclovas C, Fidelis K, Moult J (2001) Processing and evaluation of predictions in CASP4. Proteins 5:13–21
Zhang Y, Skolnick J (2004) Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality. Proteins 57:702–710
Acknowledgments
Support to the Supercomputing Facility for Bioinformatics & Computational Biology (SCFBio), IIT Delhi, from the Department of Biotechnology, Govt. of India, is gratefully acknowledged.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Singh, A., Kaushik, R., Jayaram, B. (2018). Quality Assessment of Protein Tertiary Structures: Past, Present, and Future. In: Shanker, A. (eds) Bioinformatics: Sequences, Structures, Phylogeny . Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1562-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1562-6_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-1561-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-1562-6
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)