Afficher la notice abrégée

dc.creatorBagos, P. G.en
dc.creatorTsaousis, G. N.en
dc.creatorHamodrakas, S. J.en
dc.date.accessioned2015-11-23T10:23:25Z
dc.date.available2015-11-23T10:23:25Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.identifier10.1016/S1672-0229(08)60041-8
dc.identifier.issn16720229
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11615/26087
dc.description.abstractIt has been shown that the progress in the determination of membrane protein structure grows exponentially, with approximately the same growth rate as that of the water-soluble proteins. In order to investigate the effect of this, on the performance of prediction algorithms for both α-helical and β-barrel membrane proteins, we conducted a prospective study based on historical records. We trained separate hidden Markov models with different sized training sets and evaluated their performance on topology prediction for the two classes of transmembrane proteins. We show that the existing top-scoring algorithms for predicting the transmembrane segments of α-helical membrane proteins perform slightly better than that of β-barrel outer membrane proteins in all measures of accuracy. With the same rationale, a meta-analysis of the performance of the secondary structure prediction algorithms indicates that existing algorithmic techniques cannot be further improved by just adding more non-homologous sequences to the training sets. The upper limit for secondary structure prediction is estimated to be no more than 70% and 80% of correctly predicted residues for single sequence based methods and multiple sequence based ones, respectively. Therefore, we should concentrate our efforts on utilizing new techniques for the development of even better scoring predictors. © 2009 Beijing Genomics Institute.en
dc.sourceGenomics, Proteomics and Bioinformaticsen
dc.source.urihttp://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-71549119472&partnerID=40&md5=fa438dd733dcd0da1ff250899303426b
dc.subject3D structureen
dc.subjectalpha-helicalen
dc.subjectbeta-barrelen
dc.subjectmembrane proteinen
dc.subjectsecondary structure predictionen
dc.subjectouter membrane proteinen
dc.subjectaccuracyen
dc.subjectalgorithmen
dc.subjectalpha helixen
dc.subjectamino acid sequenceen
dc.subjectarticleen
dc.subjectbeta barrelen
dc.subjectbeta sheeten
dc.subjectbioinformaticsen
dc.subjectprotein secondary structureen
dc.subjectstructure analysisen
dc.subjectthree dimensional imagingen
dc.subjectAlgorithmsen
dc.subjectComputational Biologyen
dc.subjectComputer Simulationen
dc.subjectHumansen
dc.subjectMarkov Chainsen
dc.subjectMembrane Proteinsen
dc.subjectSequence Analysis, Proteinen
dc.titleHow Many 3D Structures Do We Need to Train a Predictor?en
dc.typejournalArticleen


Fichier(s) constituant ce document

FichiersTailleFormatVue

Il n'y a pas de fichiers associés à ce document.

Ce document figure dans la(les) collection(s) suivante(s)

Afficher la notice abrégée