Biomedical subjects

Andrew Kernytsky

Publications and source records attributed to Andrew Kernytsky.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2003

Static benchmarking of membrane helix predictions.

Prediction of trans-membrane helices continues to be a difficult task with a few prediction methods clearly taking the lead; none of these is clearly best on all accounts. Recently, we have carefully set up protocols for benchmarking the most relevant aspects of prediction accuracy and have applied it to >30 prediction methods. Here, we present the extension of that analysis to the level of an automatic web server evaluating new methods (http://cubic.bioc.columbia.edu/services/tmh_benchmark/). The most important achievements of the tool are: (i) any new method is compared to the battery of well-established tools; (ii) the battery of measures explored allows spotting strengths in methods that may not be 'best' overall. In particular, we report per-residue and per-segment scores for accuracy and the error-rates for confusing membrane helices with globular proteins or signal peptides. An additional feature is that developers can directly investigate any hydrophobicity scale for its potential in predicting membrane helices.

Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions↗

PubMed2003

Using multiple structure alignments, fast model building, and energetic analysis in fold recognition and homology modeling.

We participated in the fold recognition and homology sections of CASP5 using primarily in-house software. The central feature of our structure prediction strategy involved the ability to generate good sequence-to-structure alignments and to quickly transform them into models that could be evaluated both with energy-based methods and manually. The in-house tools we used include: a) HMAP (Hybrid Multidimensional Alignment Profile)-a profile-to-profile alignment method that is derived from sequence-enhanced multiple structure alignments in core regions, and sequence motifs in non-structurally conserved regions. b) NEST-a fast model building program that applies an "artificial evolution" algorithm to construct a model from a given template and alignment. c) GRASP2-a new structure and alignment visualization program incorporating multiple structure superposition and domain database scanning modules. These methods were combined with model evaluation based on all atom and simplified physical-chemical energy functions. All of these methods were under development during CASP5 and consequently a great deal of manual analysis was carried out at each stage of the prediction process. This interactive model building procedure has several advantages and suggests important ways in which our and other methods can be improved, examples of which are provided.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2002

Transmembrane helix predictions revisited.

Methods that predict membrane helices have become increasingly useful in the context of analyzing entire proteomes, as well as in everyday sequence analysis. Here, we analyzed 27 advanced and simple methods in detail. To resolve contradictions in previous works and to reevaluate transmembrane helix prediction algorithms, we introduced an analysis that distinguished between performance on redundancy-reduced high- and low-resolution data sets, established thresholds for significant differences in performance, and implemented both per-segment and per-residue analysis of membrane helix predictions. Although some of the advanced methods performed better than others, we showed in a thorough bootstrapping experiment based on various measures of accuracy that no method performed consistently best. In contrast, most simple hydrophobicity scale-based methods were significantly less accurate than any advanced method as they overpredicted membrane helices and confused membrane helices with hydrophobic regions outside of membranes. In contrast, the advanced methods usually distinguished correctly between membrane-helical and other proteins. Nonetheless, few methods reliably distinguished between signal peptides and membrane helices. We could not verify a significant difference in performance between eukaryotic and prokaryotic proteins. Surprisingly, we found that proteins with more than five helices were predicted at a significantly lower accuracy than proteins with five or fewer. The important implication is that structurally unsolved multispanning membrane proteins, which are often important drug targets, will remain problematic for transmembrane helix prediction algorithms. Overall, by establishing a standardized methodology for transmembrane helix prediction evaluation, we have resolved differences among previous works and presented novel trends that may impact the analysis of entire proteomes.

Algorithms↗