4.8 Article

Inferring interaction partners from protein sequences

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1606762113

关键词

protein-protein interactions; coevolution; paralogs; maximum entropy; direct coupling analysis

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01-GM082938]
  2. National Science Foundation [PHY-1305525]
  3. Marie Curie Career Integration Grant [631609]
  4. Next Generation Fellowship
  5. Eric and Wendy Schmidt Transformative Technology Fund
  6. Division Of Physics
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1305525] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Specific protein-protein interactions are crucial in the cell, both to ensure the formation and stability of multiprotein complexes and to enable signal transduction in various pathways. Functional interactions between proteins result in coevolution between the interaction partners, causing their sequences to be correlated. Here we exploit these correlations to accurately identify, from sequence data alone, which proteins are specific interaction partners. Our general approach, which employs a pairwise maximum entropy model to infer couplings between residues, has been successfully used to predict the 3D structures of proteins from sequences. Thus inspired, we introduce an iterative algorithm to predict specific interaction partners from two protein families whose members are known to interact. We first assess the algorithm's performance on histidine kinases and response regulators from bacterial two-component signaling systems. We obtain a striking 0.93 true positive fraction on our complete dataset without any a priori knowledge of interaction partners, and we uncover the origin of this success. We then apply the algorithm to proteins from ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter complexes, and obtain accurate predictions in these systems as well. Finally, we present two metrics that accurately distinguish interacting protein families from noninteracting ones, using only sequence data.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据