Research Article

You have full text access to this OnlineOpen article

LTHREADER: Prediction of extracellular ligand–receptor interactions in cytokines using localized threading

  1. Vinay Pulim1,
  2. Jadwiga Bienkowska1,2,*,
  3. Bonnie Berger1,3,*

Article first published online: 2 JAN 2009

DOI: 10.1110/ps.073178108

Issue

Protein Science

Protein Science

Volume 17, Issue 2, pages 279–292, February 2008

Additional Information

How to Cite

Pulim, V., Bienkowska, J. and Berger, B. (2008), LTHREADER: Prediction of extracellular ligand–receptor interactions in cytokines using localized threading. Protein Science, 17: 279–292. doi: 10.1110/ps.073178108

Author Information

  1. 1

    Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA

  2. 2

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA

  3. 3

    Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA

*MIT, CSAIL, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA; fax: (617) 258-5429.

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 2 JAN 2009
  2. Article first published online: 2 JAN 2009
  3. Manuscript Revised: 23 OCT 2007
  4. Manuscript Accepted: 23 OCT 2007
  5. Manuscript Received: 16 AUG 2007

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (814K)

References

  • Adamczak, R., Porollo, A., and Meller, J. 2005. Combining prediction of secondary structure and solvent accessibility in proteins. Proteins 59: 467–475.
    Direct Link:
  • Aloy, P. and Russell, R.B. 2002. Interrogating protein interaction networks through structural biology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99: 5896–5901.
  • Aloy, P. and Russell, R.B. 2003. InterPreTS: Protein interaction prediction through tertiary structure. Bioinformatics 19: 161–162.
  • Altschul, S.F., Madden, T.L., Schaffer, A.A., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z., Miller, W., and Lipman, D.J. 1997. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: A new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 25: 3389–3402. doi: 10.1093/nar/25.17.3389.
  • Aytuna, A.S., Gursoy, A., and Keskin, O. 2005. Prediction of protein–protein interactions by combining structure and sequence conservation in protein interfaces. Bioinformatics 21: 2850–2855.
  • Berman, H.M., Battistuz, T., Bhat, T.N., Bluhm, W.F., Bourne, P.E., Burkhardt, K., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G.L., Iype, L., Jain, S., et al. 2002. The Protein Data Bank. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 58: 899–907.
    Direct Link:
  • Bienkowska, J. and Lathrop, R. 2005. Threading algorithms. In Encyclopedia of genetics, genomics, proteomics, and bioinformatics (eds. M. Dunn et al.), pp. 3555–3568. J. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
  • Bossen, C., Ingold, K., Tardivel, A., Bodmer, J.L., Gaide, O., Hertig, S., Ambrose, C., Tschopp, J., and Schneider, P. 2006. Interactions of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and TNF receptor family members in the mouse and human. J. Biol. Chem. 281: 13964–13971.
  • Bowie, J.U., Luthy, R., and Eisenberg, D. 1991. A method to identify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional structure. Science 253: 164–170.
  • Caffrey, D.R., Somaroo, S., Hughes, J.D., Mintseris, J., and Huang, E.S. 2004. Are protein–protein interfaces more conserved in sequence than the rest of the protein surface? Protein Sci. 13: 190–202.
    Direct Link:
  • Canutescu, A.A., Shelenkov, A.A., and Dunbrack, R.L.Jr 2003. A graph–theory algorithm for rapid protein side-chain prediction. Protein Sci. 12: 2001–2014.
    Direct Link:
  • Davis, F.P. and Sali, A. 2005. PIBASE: A comprehensive database of structurally defined protein interfaces. Bioinformatics 21: 1901–1907.
  • Davis, F.P., Braberg, H., Shen, M.Y., Pieper, U., Sali, A., and Madhusudhan, M.S. 2006. Protein complex compositions predicted by structural similarity. Nucleic Acids Res. 34: 2943–2952. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkl353.
  • Fischer, D. 2000. Hybrid fold recognition: Combining sequence derived properties with evolutionary information. Pac. Symp. Biocomput. 5: 119–130.
  • Goh, C.S., Bogan, A.A., Joachimiak, M., Walther, D., and Cohen, F.E. 2000. Co-evolution of proteins with their interaction partners. J. Mol. Biol. 299: 283–293.
  • Henikoff, S. and Henikoff, J.G. 1992. Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 89: 10915–10919.
  • Higgins, D.G. and Sharp, P.M. 1988. CLUSTAL: A package for performing multiple sequence alignment on a microcomputer. Gene 73: 237–244.
  • Hymowitz, S.G., Christinger, H.W., Fuh, G., Ultsch, M., O'Connell, M., Kelley, R.F., Ashkenazi, A., and de Vos, A.M. 1999. Triggering cell death: The crystal structure of Apo2L/TRAIL in a complex with death receptor 5. Mol. Cell 4: 563–571.
  • Janin, J. 2005. Assessing predictions of protein–protein interaction: The CAPRI experiment. Protein Sci. 14: 278–283.
    Direct Link:
  • Jones, D.T. 1999. GenTHREADER: An efficient and reliable protein fold recognition method for genomic sequences. J. Mol. Biol. 287: 797–815.
  • Jones, D.T., Taylor, W.R., and Thornton, J.M. 1992. A new approach to protein fold recognition. Nature 358: 86–89.
  • Kabsch, W. and Sander, C. 1983. Dictionary of protein secondary structure: Pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers 22: 2577–2637.
    Direct Link:
  • Kohlbacher, O. and Lenhof, H.P. 2000. BALL—rapid software prototyping in computational molecular biology. Biochemicals algorithms library. Bioinformatics 16: 815–824.
  • Lathrop, R.H. and Smith, T.F. 1996. Global optimum protein threading with gapped alignment and empirical pair score functions. J. Mol. Biol. 255: 641–665.
  • Lathrop, R.H., Rogers, R.G.Jr, Smith, T.F., and White, J.V. 1998. A Bayes-optimal sequence-structure theory that unifies protein sequence-structure recognition and alignment. Bull. Math. Biol. 60: 1039–1071.
  • Lichtarge, O., Bourne, H.R., and Cohen, F.E. 1996. An evolutionary trace method defines binding surfaces common to protein families. J. Mol. Biol. 257: 342–358.
  • Lu, L., Lu, H., and Skolnick, J. 2002. MULTIPROSPECTOR: An algorithm for the prediction of protein–protein interactions by multimeric threading. Proteins 49: 350–364.
    Direct Link:
  • Lu, H., Lu, L., and Skolnick, J. 2003. Development of unified statistical potentials describing protein-protein interactions. Biophys. J. 84: 1895–1901.
  • Mendez, R., Leplae, R., De Maria, L., and Wodak, S.J. 2003. Assessment of blind predictions of protein–protein interactions: Current status of docking methods. Proteins 52: 51–67.
    Direct Link:
  • Murthy, S., Kasif, S., and Saltzberg, S. 1994. A system for induction of oblique decision trees. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 2: 1–32.
  • Murzin, A.G., Brenner, S.E., Hubbard, T., and Chothia, C. 1995. SCOP: A structural classification of proteins database for the investigation of sequences and structures. J. Mol. Biol. 247: 536–540.
  • Olmea, O., Rost, B., and Valencia, A. 1999. Effective use of sequence correlation and conservation in fold recognition. J. Mol. Biol. 293: 1221–1239.
  • Panchenko, A.R., Marchler-Bauer, A., and Bryant, S.H. 2000. Combination of threading potentials and sequence profiles improves fold recognition. J. Mol. Biol. 296: 1319–1331.
  • Pazos, F., Helmer-Citterich, M., Ausiello, G., and Valencia, A. 1997. Correlated mutations contain information about protein–protein interaction. J. Mol. Biol. 271: 511–523.
  • Pestka, S., Krause, C.D., and Walter, M.R. 2004. Interferons, interferon-like cytokines, and their receptors. Immunol. Rev. 202: 8–32.
    Direct Link:
  • Pieper, U., Eswar, N., Davis, F.P., Braberg, H., Madhusudhan, M.S., Rossi, A., Marti-Renom, M., Karchin, R., Webb, B.M., Eramian, D., et al. 2006. MODBASE: A database of annotated comparative protein structure models and associated resources. Nucleic Acids Res. 34: D291–D295. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkj059.
  • Ponder, J.W. and Case, D.A. 2003. Force fields for protein simulations. Adv. Protein Chem. 66: 27–85.
  • Przybylski, D. and Rost, B. 2004. Improving fold recognition without folds. J. Mol. Biol. 341: 255–269.
  • Qi, Y., Klein-Seetharaman, J., and Bar-Joseph, Z. 2005. Random forest similarity for protein–protein interaction prediction from multiple sources. Pac. Symp. Biocomput. 531–542.
  • Saitou, N. and Nei, M. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: A new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4: 406–425.
  • Singh, R., Xu, J., and Berger, B. 2006. Struct2Net: Integrating structureInto protein–protein interaction prediction. Pac. Symp. Biocomput. 11: 403–414.
  • Smith, G.R. and Sternberg, M.J. 2002. Prediction of protein–protein interactions by docking methods. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 12: 28–35.
  • Summa, C.M., Levitt, M., and Degrado, W.F. 2005. An atomic environment potential for use in protein structure prediction. J. Mol. Biol. 352: 986–1001.
  • Tan, S.H., Zhang, Z., and Ng, S.K. 2004. ADVICE: Automated detection and validation of interaction by co-evolution. Nucleic Acids Res. 32: W69–W72. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh471.
  • von Öhsen, N. and Zimmer, R. 2001. Improving profile–profile alignments via log average scoring. In Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Algorithms in Bioinformatics, Springer-Verlag, London.
  • Winter, C., Henschel, A., Kim, W.K., and Schroeder, M. 2006. SCOPPI: A structural classification of protein–protein interfaces. Nucleic Acids Res. 34: D310–D314. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkj099.
  • Xu, J., Li, M., Kim, D., and Xu, Y. 2003a. RAPTOR: Optimal protein threading by linear programming. J. Bioinform. Comput. Biol. 1: 95–117.
  • Xu, J., Li, M., Lin, G., Kim, D., and Xu, Y. 2003b. Protein threading by linear programming. Pac. Symp. Biocomput. 8: 264–275.
  • Ye, Y. and Godzik, A. 2005. Multiple flexible structure alignment using partial order graphs. Bioinformatics 21: 2362–2369.
  • Zhang, Y., Arakaki, A.K., and Skolnick, J. 2005. TASSER: An automated method for the prediction of protein tertiary structures in CASP6. Proteins Suppl. 7 61: 91–98.
    Direct Link:
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (814K)