Bioinformatics: Protein structure prediction

Protein structure prediction (PSP) from amino acid sequence is one of the high focus problems in bioinformatics today. This is due to the fact that the biological function of the protein is determined by its three dimensional structure. The understanding of protein structures is vital to determine the function of a protein and its interaction with DNA, RNA and enzyme. Thus, protein structure is a fundamental area of computational biology. Its importance is intensed by large amounts of sequence data coming from PDB (Protein Data Bank) and the fact that experimentally methods such as X-ray crystallography or Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR)which are used to determining protein structures remains very expensive and time consuming. In this paper, different types of protein structures and methods for its prediction are described.

Protein structure prediction (PSP) problems are a major biocomputing challenge, owing to its scientific intrinsic that assists researchers to understand the relationship between amino acid sequences and protein structures, and to study the function of proteins. Although computational resources increased substantially over the last decade, a complete solution to PSP problems by computational methods has not yet been obtained. Using only one energy function is insufficient to characterize proteins because of their complexity. Diverse protein energy functions and evolutionary computation algorithms have been extensively studied to assist in the prediction of protein structures in different ways. Such algorithms are able to provide a better protein with less computational resources requirement than deep learning methods. For the first time, this study proposes a many-objective PSP (MaOPSP) problem with four types of objectives to alleviate the impact of imprecise energy functions for predicting protein structures. A many-objective evolutionary algorithm (MaOEA) is utilized to solve MaOPSP. The proposed method is compared with existing methods by examining 34 proteins. An analysis of the objectives demonstrates that our generated conformations are more reasonable than those generated by single/multiobjective optimization methods. Experimental results indicate that solving a PSP problem as an MaOPSP problem with four objectives yields better PSPs, in terms of both accuracy and efficiency. The source code of the proposed method can be found at <uri xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">https://toyamaailab.github.io/sourcedata.html</uri> .

One of the main research problems in Structural Bioinformatics is related to the prediction of three-dimensional structures (3-D) of polypeptides or proteins. The rate at which amino acid sequences are identified is increasing faster than the 3-D protein structure determination by experimental methods. Computational prediction methods have been developed during the last years, but the problem still remains challenging because of the complexity and high dimensionality of a protein conformational search space. In this article we present a hybrid genetic algorithm for the Protein Structure Prediction (PSP) Problem. A genetic algorithm is combined with a structured population, and it is hybridized with a path-relinking procedure that helps the algorithm to scape from local minima. We perform a set of experiments and show that the proposed hybrid genetic algorithm is effective in finding good quality solutions for the PSP Problem.

ProteinShop Gives Researchers a Hands-On Tool for Manipulating, Visualizing Protein Structures. The Human Genome Project and other biological research efforts are creating an avalanche of new data about the chemical makeup and genetic codes of living organisms. But in order to make sense of this raw data, researchers need software tools which let them explore and model data in a more intuitive fashion. With this in mind, researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the University of California, Davis, have developed ProteinShop, a visualization and modeling program which allows researchers to manipulate protein structures with pinpoint control, guided in large part by their own biological and experimental instincts. Biologists have spent the last half century trying to unravel the ''protein folding problem,'' which refers to the way chains of amino acids physically fold themselves into three-dimensional proteins. This final shape, which resembles a crumpled ribbon or piece of origami, is what determines how the protein functions and translates genetic information. Understanding and modeling this geometrically complex formation is no easy matter. ProteinShop takes a given sequence of amino acids and uses visualization guides to help generate predictions about the secondary structures, identifying alpha helices and flat beta strands, and the coil regions that bind them. Once secondary structures are in place, researchers can twist and turn these pre-configurations until they come up with a number of possible tertiary structure conformations. In turn, these are fed into a computationally intensive optimization procedure that tries to find the final, three-dimensional protein structure. Most importantly, ProteinShop allows users to add human knowledge and intuition to the protein structure prediction process, thus bypassing bad configurations that would otherwise be fruitless for optimization. This saves compute cycles and accelerates the entire process, so that more and larger problems can be attempted. Currently, the program designers are working to make ProteinShop more applicable and adaptable to different protein folding methodologies. If users could manipulate structures from a biological point of view, and then put them back in the queue for more optimization, the process of experimentation and discovery in protein research could be greatly enhanced. The group is also investigating the use of stereoscopic rendering and three-dimensional input devices to remove the limitations of a two-dimensional interface. Clearly, protein-folding research will have far-reaching ramifications. It could lead to new insights about diseases ranging from Alzheimer's to Cystic fibrosis, which scientists believe are caused by protein folding gone wrong. A better understanding of protein structures could also lead to the engineering of altogether new proteins, and shed light on how drugs bind proteins to alter their structure and function. Above all, ProteinShop is an important tool that will help scientists unravel one of the most challenging problems that theoretical and computational chemistry has to offer.

Chapter 1 of this thesis provides an overview of the structure and function of proteins as well as their investigation via NMR spectroscopy. Proteins are one of the most important building blocks of life. They are part of every organism and fulfill a variety of functions including, for example, the catalysis of many chemical reactions, which is the reason various processes in an organism become possible in the first place. Proteins are made up of amino acids, which are linked together via peptide bonds during the protein biosynthesis. The 22 proteinogenic amino acids result in an almost unlimited number of sequential combinations that give proteins their versatility. The sequence of amino acids in a protein is also called the primary structure. From this, locally limited structural motifs such as α-helices and β-sheets are formed, representing the secondary structure. Further intramolecular interactions create the tertiary structure of a protein, which can be seen as the overall three-dimensional structure of the protein. Furthermore, several individual proteins can assemble into a larger complex to form a quaternary structure. There are various methods for investigating the structure of proteins, including nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. In NMR spectroscopy, atomic nuclei with a non-zero nuclear spin are polarized by a constant magnetic field and then excited using radio frequency pulses. The emitted resonance frequencies are detected in the form of a free induction decay (FID) and converted into an NMR spectrum by a Fourier transformation. Many NMR experiments are available for researching proteins. By default, a two-dimensional 1H15N-HSQC spectrum is measured, which provides signals for each N-H bond in a protein meaning that one signal is obtained for each N-H in the backbone of the amino acids. Using 3D NMR experiments, these signals can then be assigned to the respective amino acids in the protein sequence. This makes it possible to investigate the dynamics of proteins as well as the formation of complexes with a ligand or another biomacromolecule if they interact. Further 3D NMR experiments also make it possible to assign the side-chains of the protein. With the help of the determined resonance assignments and spatial information from various NOESY spectra, a protein structure can then be calculated using a suitable computer program. Recently, the prediction of protein structures using AI (artificial intelligence)-supported programs has also become more prevalent. In particular, the artificial neural network AlphaFold has been extremely successful in predicting correct structures without any experimental data provided by the user. Chapter 2 of this thesis introduces the research field of small proteins. These are proteins with a length of usually less than 100 amino acids, although definitions in literature vary and upper limits of, for example, 50 or 200 amino acids exist as well. Various other names are also used to describe small proteins, such as μ-proteins or sORF-encoded peptides. The field of small proteins is still relatively new, as they were overlooked in research for many years. One reason for this was the lower limit of 100 codons that was set for the identification of open reading frames (ORFs) in genome projects. This served to exclude numerous biologically irrelevant ORFs from genome annotation. However, this meant that functional ORFs coding for small proteins were also ignored. Another reason was that experimental methods were not designed for the analysis of small proteins, meaning they could often not be detected at all. However, new analytical methods such as ribosome profiling and a generally increased focus on the detection of small proteins have led to their detection in all domains of life. In the research group of Prof. Dr. Schwalbe, small proteins of various prokaryotes were structurally characterized as part of a special priority program by the DFG. NMR spectroscopy was primarily used for this purpose, as it is the method of choice for the investigation of small proteins. The results of this research were published in several articles, two of which are part of this dissertation.

Knowledge of the protein three dimensional structure gives the most accurate guide to the significance of individual residues to protein function. Three dimensional structural information is essential for the rational design and interpretation of site directed mutagenesis studies aimed at enhancing stability or catalytic activity of a protein. Unfortunately, the determination of protein three dimensional structures by X-ray crystallography and NMR techniques is often difficult, and as a consequence, there are only around 1000 protein structures known to atomic resolution. In contrast, the rapid development of nucleic acid and protein sequencing techniques has led current protein sequence databanks to contain over 40,000 unique entries. When a newly determined sequence shows similarity to a protein of known three dimensional structure, then a tertiary model may be built for the new protein with a fair degree of confidence (e.g. see Blundell et al., 1987, for review). However, until recently, attempts to predict protein structure from the amino acid sequence have had little success, with three state (α-helix, β-strand and loop) secondary structure prediction accuracies of 55–65%.

The abundance of different protein variants generated by alternative splicing (AS) is not fully represented in the Protein Structure Database (PDB). Among the already limited set of proteins with experimentally determined structures deposited in PDB, only a small fraction have structures ofmore than one splicing variant. In the absence of experimental data, computational methods can be used to predict the structure of protein isoforms. In this chapter, the established approaches to computational protein structure prediction will be briefly described, and their use for studying differences that result from AS will be detailed. In particular, it will be noted when a reliable structural model can be obtained for a given protein sequence. Topics of finding the best template structures for modeling individual protein domains, predicting the structure of long, multidomain proteins, and assessing the quality of theoretical models, together with error correction, will also be addressed. The suggested protocol will be illustrated by the structure prediction of isoform C of phosphotyrosine phosphatase (LMPTP-C). 54.1 Theoretical Background In 1961, based on studies with ribonuclease A, Christian Anfinsen hypothesized that the structure of a protein in its native environment would be determined by the protein’s amino acid sequence, and that this native conformation is the one in which the Gibbs free energy of the system is lowest [1]. Since then, the prediction of a protein’s structure from its amino acid sequence has become the “holy grail” of computational biology. However, despite great efforts having been made, a universal algorithm with which to infer protein structure has not yet been developed. Nonetheless, several methods have been developed that can provide useful models, depending on a variety of conditions. There are two major approaches for protein structure prediction. The first approach, termed “comparative modeling” or “template-based modeling,” is based on the experimental observation that evolutionarily related proteins usually retain similar structures, despite an accumulation of substitutions at the level of amino acid sequence, and that the structure changes very slowly compared to the sequence [2]. Thus, an experimentally determined structure of one protein can be used as a template to model the structure of another related protein (a modeling target) by simulating the process of evolution at the sequence level.Modification of the template to “transmute” it into the target requires only limited computation. Therefore, comparative modeling does not require special computer resources, and can be easily carried out on a personal workstation using computer programs that are simple to install and use. Template-based modeling requires that, for a given target sequence, a structurally similar template is identified, and a correct target–template sequence alignment is Alternative pre-mRNA Splicing: Theory and Protocols, First Edition. Edited by Stefan Stamm, Chris Smith, and Reinhard Luhrmann. 2012 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. Published 2012 by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. j 583

Covalent labeling mass spectrometry experiments are growing in popularity and provide important information regarding protein structure. Information obtained from these experiments correlates with residue solvent exposure within the protein in solution. However, it is impossible to determine protein structure from covalent labeling data alone. Incorporation of sparse covalent labeling data into the protein structure prediction software Rosetta has been shown to improve protein tertiary structure prediction. Here, covalent labeling techniques were analyzed computationally to provide insight into what labeling data is needed to optimize tertiary protein structure prediction in Rosetta. We have successfully implemented a new scoring functionality that provides improved predictions. We developed two new covalent labeling based score terms that use a "cone"-based neighbor count to quantify the relative solvent exposure of each amino acid. To test our method, we used a set of 20 proteins with structures deposited in the Protein Data Bank. Decoy model sets were generated for each of these 20 proteins, and the normalized covalent labeling score versus RMSD distributions were evaluated. On the basis of these distributions, we have determined an optimal subset of residues to use when performing covalent labeling experiments in order to maximize the structure prediction capabilities of the covalent labeling data. We also investigated how much false negative and false positive data can be tolerated without meaningfully impacting protein structure prediction. Using these new covalent labeling score terms, protein models were rescored and the resulting models improved by 3.9 Å RMSD on average. New models were also generated using Rosetta's AbinitioRelax program under the guidance of covalent labeling information, and improvement in model quality was observed.

Summary form only given. The understanding of protein structures is vital to determine the function of a protein and its interaction with DNA, RNA and enzyme. The information about its conformation can provide essential information for drug design and protein engineering. While there are over a million known protein sequences, only a limited number of protein structures are experimentally determined. Hence, prediction of protein structures from protein sequences using computer programs is an important step to unveil proteins' three dimensional conformation and functions. As a result, prediction of protein structures has profound theoretical and practical influence over biological study. In this talk, we would show how to use machine learning methods with various advanced encoding schemes and classifiers improve the accuracy of protein structure prediction. The explanation of how a decision is made is also important for improving protein structure prediction. The reasonable interpretation is not only useful to guide the "wet experiments", but also the extracted rules are helpful to integrate computational intelligence with symbolic AI systems for advanced deduction. Some preliminary results using SVM and decision tree for rule extraction and prediction interpretation would also be presented.

Understanding a protein’s 3D structure, which is linked to its function, is essential for biological processes, identifying disease mechanisms, and drug development. Traditional experimental techniques like X-ray crystallography, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and cryogenic electron microscopy (Cryo-EM) have been used to determine precise protein structures. However, these methods are resource-intensive, resulting in only a few thousand structures being deciphered every year. This is in stark contrast to the extensive number of sequences in the UniProt database. To this end, numerous studies have investigated the possibility of integrating template-based and template-free structure prediction approaches. The most notable advancement was through the use of a hybrid approach in 2021 when DeepMind’s AlphaFold2 (AF2) introduced a protein structure prediction model with unprecedented accuracy using an end-to-end deep learning algorithm. Despite its widespread impact, AF2 continues to face architectural challenges and struggles with limited available data, preventing it from generating structures consistent with those that result from experimental methods. Recently, several techniques, such as smart sampling methods, and hybrid experimental approaches that enhance Cryo-EM maps with AF2 structures have been developed to address these limitations, surpassing AF2 and traditional methods in many instances. As developments of novel core algorithms allow AF2 to model a wider range of proteins with higher accuracy and hybrid AF2-experimental approaches expedite experimental data collection for AF2, a pure computation based solution to protein structure prediction seems increasingly likely. This review will provide an overview of AF2 and identify promising advancements in protein structure prediction since its introduction.

Most computational protein structure prediction methods are designed for either template based or template-free (ab initio) structure prediction. The approaches that integrate the prediction capabilities of both template-based modeling and template-free modeling are needed to synergistically combine the two kinds of methods to improve protein structure prediction. In this work, we develop a new method to integrate several protein structure prediction methods including our template-based MULTICOM server, our ab initio contact-based protein structure prediction method CONFOLD, our multi-template-based model generation tool MTMG, and locally installed external Rosetta, I-TASSER and RaptorX protein structure prediction tools to improve protein structure prediction of a fullspectrum difficulty ranging from easy, to medium and to hard. Our method participated in the 11(th) community-wide Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction (CASP11) in 2014 as MULTICOM-NOVEL server. It was ranked among top 10 methods for protein tertiary structure prediction according to the official CASP11 assessment, which demonstrates that integrating complementary modeling methods is useful for advancing protein structure prediction.

This chapter discusses protein structure determinations, which involve experimental and computational methods, and combined applications of both. For many years, X-ray crystallography and fibre diffraction were the only methods for determining the positions of individual atoms in macromolecular structures. A companion appeared in the 1980s, when K. Wüthrich, R.R. Ernst, and their coworkers developed methods for solving protein structures by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. With a third technique, cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM), it has been possible to determine structures of large aggregates, including viral capsids, large protein complexes, and intact ribosomes. Cryo-EM of large multiprotein complexes plus X-ray crystal structures of individual components has proved a powerful combination. The chapter also considers protein structure prediction and modelling.

BackgroundAs genome sequencing is becoming routine in biomedical research, the total number of protein sequences is increasing exponentially, recently reaching over 108 million. However, only a tiny portion of these proteins (i.e. ~75,000 or < 0.07%) have solved tertiary structures determined by experimental techniques. The gap between protein sequence and structure continues to enlarge rapidly as the throughput of genome sequencing techniques is much higher than that of protein structure determination techniques. Computational software tools for predicting protein structure and structural features from protein sequences are crucial to make use of this vast repository of protein resources.ResultsTo meet the need, we have developed a comprehensive MULTICOM toolbox consisting of a set of protein structure and structural feature prediction tools. These tools include secondary structure prediction, solvent accessibility prediction, disorder region prediction, domain boundary prediction, contact map prediction, disulfide bond prediction, beta-sheet topology prediction, fold recognition, multiple template combination and alignment, template-based tertiary structure modeling, protein model quality assessment, and mutation stability prediction.ConclusionsThese tools have been rigorously tested by many users in the last several years and/or during the last three rounds of the Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction (CASP7-9) from 2006 to 2010, achieving state-of-the-art or near performance. In order to facilitate bioinformatics research and technological development in the field, we have made the MULTICOM toolbox freely available as web services and/or software packages for academic use and scientific research. It is available at http://sysbio.rnet.missouri.edu/multicom_toolbox/.

The seminal work of Bowie, Lüthy, and Eisenberg (Bowie et al., 1991) on “the inverse protein folding problem” laid the foundation of protein structure prediction by protein threading. By using simple measures for fitness of different amino acid types to local structural environments defined in terms of solvent accessibility and protein secondary structure, the authors derived a simple and yet profoundly novel approach to assessing if a protein sequence fits well with a given protein structural fold. Their follow-up work (Elofsson et al., 1996; Fischer and Eisenberg, 1996; Fischer et al., 1996a,b) and the work by Jones, Taylor, and Thornton (Jones et al., 1992) on protein fold recognition led to the development of a new brand of powerful tools for protein structure prediction, which we now term “protein threading.” These computational tools have played a key role in extending the utility of all the experimentally solved structures by X-ray crystallography and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), providing structural models and functional predictions for many of the proteins encoded in the hundreds of genomes that have been sequenced up to now.

One of the most challenging problems in Bioinformatics is the finding of a protein conformation and it is known as the Protein Structure Prediction (PSP) problem. The main feature present in the AB off‐lattice model is the use of polarity as the main driving force to guide the optimization process. The present work proposes an adaptive evolutionary algorithm based on GPU that is applied to the 3D‐AB off‐lattice PSP problem. The proposed approach is named cuDSMjDE, and is composed of a Dynamic Speciation‐based Mutation Strategies Differential Evolution that employs the jDE mechanism to control F and CR parameters. A crowding strategy is also adopted, increasing competition between individuals and maintaining the diversity of solutions. All routines of the proposed algorithm are developed to run in GPU. During the experiments, eight Protein Data Bank sequences are employed. Results obtained concerning potential energy are competitive when compared with state‐of‐the‐art algorithms. The use of a massively parallel architecture promoted the necessary scalability with speedups up to 708.78.