An official website of the United States government
Abstract The Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics Protein Data Bank (RCSB PDB), founding member of the Worldwide Protein Data Bank (wwPDB), is the US data center for the open-access PDB archive. As wwPDB-designated Archive Keeper, RCSB PDB is also responsible for PDB data security. Annually, RCSB PDB serves >10 000 depositors of three-dimensional (3D) biostructures working on all permanently inhabited continents. RCSB PDB delivers data from its research-focused RCSB.org web portal to many millions of PDB data consumers based in virtually every United Nations-recognized country, territory, etc. This Database Issue contribution describes upgrades to the research-focused RCSB.org web portal that created a one-stop-shop for open access to ∼200 000 experimentally-determined PDB structures of biological macromolecules alongside >1 000 000 incorporated Computed Structure Models (CSMs) predicted using artificial intelligence/machine learning methods. RCSB.org is a ‘living data resource.’ Every PDB structure and CSM is integrated weekly with related functional annotations from external biodata resources, providing up-to-date information for the entire corpus of 3D biostructure data freely available from RCSB.org with no usage limitations. Within RCSB.org, PDB structures and the CSMs are clearly identified as to their provenance and reliability. Both are fully searchable, and can be analyzed and visualized using the full complement of RCSB.org web portal capabilities.
more »
« less
BioLiP2: an updated structure database for biologically relevant ligand–protein interactions
Abstract With the progress of structural biology, the Protein Data Bank (PDB) has witnessed rapid accumulation of experimentally solved protein structures. Since many structures are determined with purification and crystallization additives that are unrelated to a protein's in vivo function, it is nontrivial to identify the subset of protein–ligand interactions that are biologically relevant. We developed the BioLiP2 database (https://zhanggroup.org/BioLiP) to extract biologically relevant protein–ligand interactions from the PDB database. BioLiP2 assesses the functional relevance of the ligands by geometric rules and experimental literature validations. The ligand binding information is further enriched with other function annotations, including Enzyme Commission numbers, Gene Ontology terms, catalytic sites, and binding affinities collected from other databases and a manual literature survey. Compared to its predecessor BioLiP, BioLiP2 offers significantly greater coverage of nucleic acid-protein interactions, and interactions involving large complexes that are unavailable in PDB format. BioLiP2 also integrates cutting-edge structural alignment algorithms with state-of-the-art structure prediction techniques, which for the first time enables composite protein structure and sequence-based searching and significantly enhances the usefulness of the database in structure-based function annotations. With these new developments, BioLiP2 will continue to be an important and comprehensive database for docking, virtual screening, and structure-based protein function analyses.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2025426
- PAR ID:
- 10436917
- Publisher / Repository:
- Oxford University Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Nucleic Acids Research
- Volume:
- 52
- Issue:
- D1
- ISSN:
- 0305-1048
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. D404-D412
- Size(s):
- p. D404-D412
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract MotivationGiven a protein of unknown function, fast identification of similar protein structures from the Protein Data Bank (PDB) is a critical step for inferring its biological function. Such structural neighbors can provide evolutionary insights into protein conformation, interfaces and binding sites that are not detectable from sequence similarity. However, the computational cost of performing pairwise structural alignment against all structures in PDB is prohibitively expensive. Alignment-free approaches have been introduced to enable fast but coarse comparisons by representing each protein as a vector of structure features or fingerprints and only computing similarity between vectors. As a notable example, FragBag represents each protein by a ‘bag of fragments’, which is a vector of frequencies of contiguous short backbone fragments from a predetermined library. Despite being efficient, the accuracy of FragBag is unsatisfactory because its backbone fragment library may not be optimally constructed and long-range interacting patterns are omitted. ResultsHere we present a new approach to learning effective structural motif presentations using deep learning. We develop DeepFold, a deep convolutional neural network model to extract structural motif features of a protein structure. We demonstrate that DeepFold substantially outperforms FragBag on protein structural search on a non-redundant protein structure database and a set of newly released structures. Remarkably, DeepFold not only extracts meaningful backbone segments but also finds important long-range interacting motifs for structural comparison. We expect that DeepFold will provide new insights into the evolution and hierarchical organization of protein structural motifs. Availability and implementationhttps://github.com/largelymfs/DeepFoldmore » « less
-
The goal of this paper is predicting the conformational distributions of ligand binding sites using the AlphaFold2 (AF2) protein structure prediction program with stochastic subsampling of the multiple sequence alignment (MSA). We explored the opening of cryptic ligand binding sites in 16 proteins, where the closed and open conformations define the expected extreme points of the conformational variation. Due to the many structures of these proteins in the Protein Data Bank (PDB), we were able to study whether the distribution of X-ray structures affects the distribution of AF2 models. We have found that AF2 generates both a cluster of open and a cluster of closed models for proteins that have comparable numbers of open and closed structures in the PDB and not too many other conformations. This was observed even with default MSA parameters, thus without further subsampling. In contrast, with the exception of a single protein, AF2 did not yield multiple clusters of conformations for proteins that had imbalanced numbers of open and closed structures in the PDB, or had substantial numbers of other structures. Subsampling improved the results only for a single protein, but very shallow MSA led to incorrect structures. The ability of generating both open and closed conformations for six out of the 16 proteins agrees with the success rates of similar studies reported in the literature. However, we showed that this partial success is due to AF2 “remembering” the conformational distributions in the PDB and that the approach fails to predict rarely seen conformations.more » « less
-
Abstract Dozens of impactful methods that predict intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) in protein sequences that interact with proteins and/or nucleic acids were developed. Their training and assessment rely on the IDR‐level binding annotations, while the equivalent structure‐trained methods predict more granular annotations of binding amino acids (AA). We compiled a new benchmark dataset that annotates binding AA in IDRs and applied it to complete a first‐of‐its‐kind assessment of predictions of the disordered binding residues. We evaluated a representative collection of 14 methods, used several hundred low‐similarity test proteins, and focused on the challenging task of differentiating these binding residues from other disordered AA and considering ligand type‐specific predictions (protein–protein vs. protein–nucleic acid interactions). We found that current methods struggle to accurately predict binding IDRs among disordered residues; however, better‐than‐random tools predict disordered binding residues significantly better than binding IDRs. We identified at least one relatively accurate tool for predicting disordered protein‐binding and disordered nucleic acid‐binding AA. Analysis of cross‐predictions between interactions with protein and nucleic acids revealed that most methods are ligand‐type‐agnostic. Only two predictors of the nucleic acid‐binding IDRs and two predictors of the protein‐binding IDRs can be considered as ligand‐type‐specific. We also discussed several potential future directions that would move this field forward by producing more accurate methods that target the prediction of binding residues, reduce cross‐predictions, and cover a broader range of ligand types.more » « less
-
Abstract The evolutionary classification of protein domains (ECOD) classifies protein domains using a combination of sequence and structural data (http://prodata.swmed.edu/ecod). Here we present the culmination of our previous efforts at classifying domains from predicted structures, principally from the AlphaFold Database (AFDB), by integrating these domains with our existing classification of PDB structures. This combined classification includes both domains from our previous, purely experimental, classification of domains as well as domains from our provisional classification of 48 proteomes in AFDB predicted from model organisms and organisms of concern to global health. ECOD classifies over 1.8 M domains from over 1000 000 proteins collectively deposited in the PDB and AFDB. Additionally, we have changed the F-group classification reference used for ECOD, deprecating our original ECODf library and instead relying on direct collaboration with the Pfam sequence family database to inform our classification. Pfam provides similar coverage of ECOD with family classification while being more accurate and less redundant. By eliminating duplication of effort, we can improve both classifications. Finally, we discuss the initial deployment of DrugDomain, a database of domain-ligand interactions, on ECOD and discuss future plans.more » « less
