Maxim Shatsky

A Method for Simultaneous Alignment of Multiple Protein Structures

Here, we present MultiProt, a fully automated highly efficient technique to detect multiple structural alignments of protein structures. MultiProt finds the common geometrical cores between input molecules. To date, most methods for multiple alignment start from the pairwise alignment solutions. This may lead to a small overall alignment. In contrast, our method derives multiple alignments from simultaneous superpositions of input molecules. Further, our method does not require that all input molecules participate in the alignment. Actually, it efficiently detects high scoring partial multiple alignments for all possible number of molecules in the input. To demonstrate the power of MultiProt, we provide a number of case studies. First, we demonstrate known multiple alignments of protein structures to illustrate the performance of MultiProt. Next, we present various biological applications. These include: (1) a partial alignment of hinge‐bent domains; (2) identification of functional groups of G‐proteins; (3) analysis of binding sites; and (4) protein‐protein interface alignment. Some applications preserve the sequence order of the residues in the alignment, whereas others are order‐independent. It is their residue sequence order‐independence that allows application of MultiProt to derive multiple alignments of binding sites and of protein‐protein interfaces, making MultiProt an extremely useful structural tool. Proteins 2004;55:000–000.

Multiple diverse ligands binding at a single protein site: A matter of pre‐existing populations

Here, we comment on the steadily increasing body of data showing that proteins with specificity actually bind ligands of diverse shapes, sizes, and composition. Such a phenomenon is not surprising when one considers that binding is a dynamic process with populations in equilibrium and that the shape of the binding site is strongly influenced by the molecular partner. It derives implicitly from the concept of populations. All proteins, specific and nonspecific, exist in ensembles of substates. If the library of ligands in solution is large enough, favorably matching ligands with altered shapes and sizes can be expected to bind, with a redistribution of the protein populations. Point mutations at spatially distant sites may exert large conformational rearrangements and hinge effects, consistent with mutations away from the binding site leading to population shifts and (cross‐)drug resistance. A similar effect is observed in protein superfamilies, in which different sequences with similar topologies display similar large‐scale dynamic motions. The hinges are frequently at analogous sites, yet with different substrate specificity. Similar topologies yield similar conformational isomers, although with different distributions of population times, owing to the change in the conditions, that is, the change in the sequences. In turn, different distributions relate to binding of different sizes and shapes. Hence, the binding site shape and size are defined by the ligand. They are not independent entities of fixed proportions and cannot be analyzed independently of the binding partner. Such a proposition derives from viewing proteins as dynamic distributions, presenting to the incoming ligands a range of binding site shapes. It illustrates how presumably specific binding molecules can bind multiple ligands. In terms of drug design, the ability of a single receptor to recognize many dissimilar ligands shows the need to consider more diverse molecules. It provides a rationale for higher affinity inhibitors that are not derived from substrates at their transition states and indicates flexible docking schemes.

Taking geometry to its edge: fast unbound rigid (and hinge-bent) docking.

We present a very efficient rigid “unbound” soft docking methodology, which is based on detection of geometric shape complementarity, allowing liberal steric clash at the interface. The method is based on local shape feature matching, avoiding the exhaustive search of the 6D transformation space. Our experiments at CAPRI rounds 1 and 2 show that although the method does not perform an exhaustive search of the 6D transformation space, the “correct” solution is never lost. However, such a solution might rank low for large proteins, because there are alternatives with significantly larger geometrically compatible interfaces. In many cases this problem can be resolved by successful a priori focusing on the vicinity of potential binding sites as well as the extension of the technique to flexible (hinge‐bent) docking. This is demonstrated in the experiments performed as a lesson from our CAPRI experience. Proteins 2003;52:107–112. Published 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Flexible protein alignment and hinge detection

Here we present a novel technique for the alignment of flexible proteins. The method does not require an a priori knowledge of the flexible hinge regions. The FlexProt algorithm simultaneously detects the hinge regions and aligns the rigid subparts of the molecules. Our technique is not sensitive to insertions and deletions. Numerous methods have been developed to solve rigid structural comparisons. Unlike FlexProt, all previously developed methods designed to solve the protein flexible alignment require an a priori knowledge of the hinge regions. The FlexProt method is based on 3‐D pattern‐matching algorithms combined with graph theoretic techniques. The algorithm is highly efficient. For example, it performs a structural comparison of a pair of proteins with 300 amino acids in about 7 s on a 400‐MHz desktop PC. We provide experimental results obtained with this algorithm. First, we flexibly align pairs of proteins taken from the database of motions. These are extended by taking additional proteins from the same SCOP family. Next, we present some of the results obtained from exhaustive all‐against‐all flexible structural comparisons of 1329 SCOP family representatives. Our results include relatively high‐scoring flexible structural alignments between the C‐terminal merozoite surface protein vs. tissue factor; class II aminoacyl‐tRNA synthase, histocompatibility antigen vs. neonatal FC receptor; tyrosine‐protein kinase C‐SRC vs. haematopoetic cell kinase (HCK); tyrosine‐protein kinase C‐SRC vs. titine protein (autoinhibited serine kinase domain); and tissue factor vs. hormone‐binding protein. These are illustrated and discussed, showing the capabilities of this structural alignment algorithm, which allows un‐predefined hinge‐based motions. Proteins 2002;48:242–256.

MultiBind and MAPPIS: webservers for multiple alignment of protein 3D-binding sites and their interactions

Analysis of protein–ligand complexes and recognition of spatially conserved physico-chemical properties is important for the prediction of binding and function. Here, we present two webservers for multiple alignment and recognition of binding patterns shared by a set of protein structures. The first webserver, MultiBind (http://bioinfo3d.cs.tau.ac.il/MultiBind), performs multiple alignment of protein binding sites. It recognizes the common spatial chemical binding patterns even in the absence of similarity of the sequences or the folds of the compared proteins. The input to the MultiBind server is a set of protein-binding sites defined by interactions with small molecules. The output is a detailed list of the shared physico-chemical binding site properties. The second webserver, MAPPIS (http://bioinfo3d.cs.tau.ac.il/MAPPIS), aims to analyze protein–protein interactions. It performs multiple alignment of protein–protein interfaces (PPIs), which are regions of interaction between two protein molecules. MAPPIS recognizes the spatially conserved physico-chemical interactions, which often involve energetically important hot-spot residues that are crucial for protein–protein associations. The input to the MAPPIS server is a set of protein-protein complexes. The output is a detailed list of the shared interaction properties of the interfaces.

The Multiple Common Point Set Problem and Its Application to Molecule Binding Pattern Detection

Recognition of binding patterns common to a set of protein structures is important for recognition of function, prediction of binding, and drug design. We consider protein binding sites represented by a set of 3D points with assigned physico-chemical and geometrical properties important for protein-ligand interactions. We formulate the multiple binding site alignment problem as detection of the largest common set of such 3D points. We discuss the computational problem of multiple common point set detection and, particularly, the matching problem in K-partite-epsilon graphs, where K partitions are associated with K structures and edges are defined between epsilon-close points. We show that the K-partite-epsilon matching problem is NP-hard in the Euclidean space with dimension larger than one. Consequently, we show that the largest common point set problem between three point sets is NP-hard. On the practical side, we present a novel computational method, MultiBind, for recognition of binding patterns common to a set of protein structures. It performs a multiple alignment between protein binding sites in the absence of overall sequence, fold, or binding partner similarity. Despite the NP-hardness results, in our applications, we practically overcome the exponential number of multiple alignment combinations by applying an efficient branchand- bound filtering procedure. We show applications of MultiBind to several biological targets. The method recognizes patterns which are responsible for binding small molecules, such as estradiol, ATP/ANP, and transition state analogues.

Spatial chemical conservation of hot spot interactions in protein-protein complexes

BackgroundConservation of the spatial binding organizations at the level of physico-chemical interactions is important for the formation and stability of protein-protein complexes as well as protein and drug design. Due to the lack of computational tools for recognition of spatial patterns of interactions shared by a set of protein-protein complexes, the conservation of such interactions has not been addressed previously.ResultsWe performed extensive spatial comparisons of physico-chemical interactions common to different types of protein-protein complexes. We observed that 80% of these interactions correspond to known hot spots. Moreover, we show that spatially conserved interactions allow prediction of hot spots with a success rate higher than obtained by methods based on sequence or backbone similarity. Detection of spatially conserved interaction patterns was performed by our novel MAPPIS algorithm. MAPPIS performs multiple alignments of the physico-chemical interactions and the binding properties in three dimensional space. It is independent of the overall similarity in the protein sequences, folds or amino acid identities. We present examples of interactions shared between complexes of colicins with immunity proteins, serine proteases with inhibitors and T-cell receptors with superantigens. We unravel previously overlooked similarities, such as the interactions shared by the structurally different RNase-inhibitor families.ConclusionThe key contribution of MAPPIS is in discovering the 3D patterns of physico-chemical interactions. The detected patterns describe the conserved binding organizations that involve energetically important hot spot residues and are crucial for the protein-protein associations.

MultiProt - A Multiple Protein Structural Alignment Algorithm

We present a fully automated highly efficient technique which detects the multiple structural alignments of protein structures. Our method, MultiProt, finds the common geometrical cores between the input molecules. To date, only few methods were developed to tackle the structural multiple alignment problem. Most of them require that all the input molecules be aligned, while our method does not require that all the input molecules participate in the alignment. Actually, it efficiently detects high scoring partial multiple alignments for all possible number of molecules from the input. To demonstrate the power of the presented method we provide a number of experimental results performed by the implemented program. Along with the known multiple alignments of protein structures, we present new multiple structural alignment results of protein families from the All beta proteins class in the SCOP classification.

FlexProt: Alignment of Flexible Protein Structures Without a Predefinition of Hinge Regions

FlexProt is a novel technique for the alignment of flexible proteins. Unlike all previous algorithms designed to solve the problem of structural comparisons allowing hinge-bending motions, FlexProt does not require an a priori knowledge of the location of the hinge(s). FlexProt carries out the flexible alignment, superimposing the matching rigid subpart pairs, and detects the flexible hinge regions simultaneously. A large number of methods are available to handle rigid structural alignment. However, proteins are flexible molecules, which may appear in different conformations. Hence, protein structural analysis requires algorithms that can deal with molecular flexibility. Here, we present a method addressing specifically a flexible protein alignment task. First, the method efficiently detects maximal congruent rigid fragments in both molecules. Transforming the task into a graph theoretic problem, our method proceeds to calculate the optimal arrangement of previously detected maximal congruent rigid fragments. The fragment arrangement does not violate the protein sequence order. A clustering procedure is performed on fragment-pairs which have the same 3-D rigid transformation regardless of insertions and deletions (such as loops and turns) which separate them. Although the theoretical worst case complexity of the algorithm is O(n(6)), in practice FlexProt is highly efficient. It performs a structural comparison of a pair of proteins 300 amino acids long in about seven seconds on a standard desktop PC (400 MHz Pentium II processor with 256MB internal memory). We have performed extensive experiments with the algorithm. An assortment of these results is presented here. FlexProt can be accessed via WWW at bioinfo3d.cs.tau.ac.il/FlexProt/.

Optimization of multiple-sequence alignment based on multiple-structure alignment.

Routinely used multiple‐sequence alignment methods use only sequence information. Consequently, they may produce inaccurate alignments. Multiple‐structure alignment methods, on the other hand, optimize structural alignment by ignoring sequence information. Here, we present an optimization method that unifies sequence and structure information. The alignment score is based on standard amino acid substitution probabilities combined with newly computed three‐dimensional structure alignment probabilities. The advantage of our alignment scheme is in its ability to produce more accurate multiple alignments. We demonstrate the usefulness of the method in three applications: 1) computing more accurate multiple‐sequence alignments, 2) analyzing protein conformational changes, and 3) computation of amino acid structure‐sequence conservation with application to protein–protein docking prediction. The method is available at http://bioinfo3d.cs.tau.ac.il/staccato/. Proteins 2006.