Journal of Molecular Evolution

, Volume 36, Issue 1, pp 67–78 | Cite as

Phyletic relationships of protein structures based on spatial preference of residues

  • Chun-xu Qu
  • Lu-hua Lai
  • Xiao-jie Xu
  • You-qi Tang
Article

Summary

A structure-based scoring matrix MDPRE was derived from amino acid spatial preferences in protein structures. Sequence alignment and evolutionary studies by using MDPRE matrix gave similar results as those from ordinary sequence and structure alignments. It is interesting that a matrix derived from structure data solely could give comparable alignment results, strongly indicating the intimate connection between protein sequences and structures. The branch order and length from this approach were close to those obtained by a structure comparison method. Thus, by applying this structure-based matrix, the trees obtained should reflect evolutionary characteristics of protein structure. This approach takes advantage over a direct structure comparison in that (1) only a sequence and MDPRE matrix are needed, making it simple and widely applicable (especially in the absence of 3-dimensional protein structure data); (2) an established algorithm for sequence alignment and tree building could be employed, providing opportunities for direct comparison between matrices from different methodologies. One of the most striking features of this method is its capability to detect protein structure homologies when the sequence identities are low. This was well reflected in the given examples of the alignment of dinucleotidebinding domains.

Key words

Structure-based scoring matrix MDPRE Phyletic relationship of protein structure Spatial preference factor Sequence alignment Protein homology detect Globins Immunoglobulins Cytochromes c Serine proteinases Dinucleotide-binding domains 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Argos P, Siezen RJ (1983) Structural homology of lens crystallines. Eur J Biochem 131:143–148CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bajai M, Blundell T (1984) Evolution and the tertiary structure of proteins. Annu Rev Biophys Bioeng 13:453–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barton GJ, Sternberg MJE (1987) A strategy for the rapid multiple alignment of protein sequences. J Mol Biol 198:327–337CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernstein FC, Koetzle TF, Williams GJB, Merer EF, Brice MD, Rodgers JR, Kennard O, Shimanouchi T, Tasumi M (1977) The Protein Data Bank: a computer based archival file for macromolecular structures. J Mol Biol 112:535–542PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowie JU, Clarke ND, Pabo CO, Sauer RT (1990) Identification of protein folds: matching hydrophobicity patterns of sequence sets with solvent accessibility patterns of known structures. Protein Struct Funct Genet 7:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowie JU, Luthy R, Eisenberg D (1991) A method to indentify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional structure. Science 253:164–170PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dayhoff MO, Schwartz RM, Orcutt BC (1978) A model for evolutionary change. In: Dayhoff MO (ed) Atlas of protein sequence and structure, vol 5, suppl 3. National Biomedical Research Foundation, Washington D.C., pp 345–358Google Scholar
  8. Doolittle RF (1989) Redundancies in protein sequences. In Fasman GD (ed) Prediction of protein structure and the principles of protein conformation. Plenum, New York and London, p 600Google Scholar
  9. Feng DF, Doolittle RF (1987) Progressive sequence alignment as a prerequisite to correct phyletic trees. J Mol Evol 25:351–360PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Fitch WM, Margoliash E (1967) Construction of phyletic trees. Science 15:279–284Google Scholar
  11. Johnson MS, Sutcliffe MJ, Blundell TL (1990) Molecular anatomy: phyletic relationships derived from three-dimensional structures of proteins. J Mol Evol 30:43–59CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Johnson MS, Sall A, Blundell TL (1990a) Phyogenetic relationships from three-dimensional protein structures. Methods Enzymol 183:670–690PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Narayana SVL, Argos P (1986) Residue contacts in protein structures and implications for protein folding. Int J Peptide Protein Res 24:25–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. NBRF PIR 23.0: National Biomedical Research Foundation. Georgetown University Medical Center, 1900 Reservior Road, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20007, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. Needleman S, Wunsch CD (1970) A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. J Mol Biol 48:443–453CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Rossmann MG, Moras D, Olsen KW (1974) Chemical and biological evolution of a nucleotide-binding protein. Nature 250:194–199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Taylor WR, Orengo CA (1989) A holistic approach to protein structure alignment. Prot Eng 2:505–519Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chun-xu Qu
    • 1
  • Lu-hua Lai
    • 1
  • Xiao-jie Xu
    • 1
  • You-qi Tang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryPeking UniversityBeijingPeople's Republic of China

Personalised recommendations