4.3 Article

Automated protein structure modeling in CASP9 by I-TASSER pipeline combined with QUARK-based ab initio folding and FG-MD-based structure refinement

Journal

PROTEINS-STRUCTURE FUNCTION AND BIOINFORMATICS
Volume 79, Issue -, Pages 147-160

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/prot.23111

Keywords

protein structure prediction; threading; contact prediction; ab initio folding; CASP

Funding

  1. NSF [DBI 1027394]
  2. National Institute of General Medical Sciences [GM083107, GM084222]
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [R01GM083107, R01GM084222] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

I-TASSER is an automated pipeline for protein tertiary structure prediction using multiple threading alignments and iterative structure assembly simulations. In CASP9 experiments, two new algorithms, QUARK and fragment-guided molecular dynamics (FG-MD), were added to the I-TASSER pipeline for improving the structural modeling accuracy. QUARK is a de novo structure prediction algorithm used for structure modeling of proteins that lack detectable template structures. For distantly homologous targets, QUARK models are found useful as a reference structure for selecting good threading alignments and guiding the I-TASSER structure assembly simulations. FG-MD is an atomic-level structural refinement program that uses structural fragments collected from the PDB structures to guide molecular dynamics simulation and improve the local structure of predicted model, including hydrogen-bonding networks, torsion angles, and steric clashes. Despite considerable progress in both the template-based and template-free structure modeling, significant improvements on protein target classification, domain parsing, model selection, and ab initio folding of beta-proteins are still needed to further improve the I-TASSER pipeline. Proteins 2011; 79(Suppl 10): 147-160. (C) 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available