Difference between revisions of "Superpose"
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
*depth-first recursive search on SSE (DEJAVU; Kleywegt & Jones, 1997); and | *depth-first recursive search on SSE (DEJAVU; Kleywegt & Jones, 1997); and | ||
*many others (Zuker & Somorjai, 1989; Taylor & Orengo, 1989; Godzik & Skolnick, 1994; Russell & Barton, 1992; Sali & Blundell, 1990; Barakat & Dean, 1991; Leluk et al., 2003; Jung & Lee, 2000; Kato & Takahashi, 2001). | *many others (Zuker & Somorjai, 1989; Taylor & Orengo, 1989; Godzik & Skolnick, 1994; Russell & Barton, 1992; Sali & Blundell, 1990; Barakat & Dean, 1991; Leluk et al., 2003; Jung & Lee, 2000; Kato & Takahashi, 2001). | ||
| + | |||
| + | Most details of protein fold may be expressed in terms of just two types of SSEs, namely helices (including what type of helix) and strands. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Keywords== | ||
| + | secondary-structure elements (SSEs) | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| Line 32: | Line 37: | ||
*CE | *CE | ||
*DEJAVU | *DEJAVU | ||
| + | ===Related=== | ||
| + | *''PROMOTIF'' algorithm (Hutchinson & Thornton, 1996) — aids in calculating SSEs | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 23:14, 31 July 2007
superpose - structural alignment based on secondary structure matching and is based on the Secondary Structure Matching (SSM) advanced graph-matching algorithm. It is part of the CCP4 package and was written by Eugene Krissinel of the European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge, UK.
Contents
Background
"While high sequence similarity almost always implies structural similarity, the opposite is not true. It is therefore expected that three-dimensional alignment will provide more significant clues to protein function and properties than sequence alignment alone".[1]
Most similarity measures are based on the evaluation of the size of common substructures, for example the length of alignment (the longer, the better), and a measure of the distance between them, such as r.m.s.d. (the lower, the better).
The graph-theoretical approach typically includes three major steps:
- graph representation of the objects in question;
- matching the graphs representing the objects; and
- evaluating the common subgraphs found in order to form conclusions about similarity.
Several approaches to protein structure alignment have been explored over the past decade. The techniques used include:
- comparison of distance matrices (DALI; Holm & Sander, 1993);
- analysis of differences in vector distance plots (Orengo & Taylor, 1996);
- minimization of the soap-bubble surface area between two protein backbones (Falicov & Cohen, 1996);
- dynamic programming on pairwise distances between the proteins' residues (Subbiah et al., 1993; Gerstein & Levitt, 1996, 1998);
- secondary-structure elements (SSEs) (Singh & Brutlag, 1997);
- three-dimensional clustering (Vriend & Sander, 1991; Mizuguchi & Go, 1995);
- graph theory (Mitchell et al., 1990; Alexandrov, 1996; Grindley et al., 1993);
- combinatorial extension of alignment path (CE; Shindyalov & Bourne, 1998);
- vector alignment of SSEs (VAST; Gibrat et al., 1996);
- depth-first recursive search on SSE (DEJAVU; Kleywegt & Jones, 1997); and
- many others (Zuker & Somorjai, 1989; Taylor & Orengo, 1989; Godzik & Skolnick, 1994; Russell & Barton, 1992; Sali & Blundell, 1990; Barakat & Dean, 1991; Leluk et al., 2003; Jung & Lee, 2000; Kato & Takahashi, 2001).
Most details of protein fold may be expressed in terms of just two types of SSEs, namely helices (including what type of helix) and strands.
Keywords
secondary-structure elements (SSEs)
See also
Web servers
- DALI
- VAST
- CE
- DEJAVU
Related
- PROMOTIF algorithm (Hutchinson & Thornton, 1996) — aids in calculating SSEs
References
- ↑ Krissinel E, Henrick K (2004). "Secondary-structure matching (SSM), a new tool for fast protein structure alignment in three dimensions". Acta Cryst, D60:2256-2268.
Further reading
- Rouvray et al., 1979, and references therein — addresses the problems of structure comparison and recognition by the graph-theoretical approach.
