IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0019238.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From Isotropic to Anisotropic Side Chain Representations: Comparison of Three Models for Residue Contact Estimation

Author

Listed:
  • Weitao Sun
  • Jing He

Abstract

The criterion to determine residue contact is a fundamental problem in deriving knowledge-based mean-force potential energy calculations for protein structures. A frequently used criterion is to require the side chain center-to-center distance or the -to- atom distance to be within a pre-determined cutoff distance. However, the spatially anisotropic nature of the side chain determines that it is challenging to identify the contact pairs. This study compares three side chain contact models: the Atom Distance criteria (ADC) model, the Isotropic Sphere Side chain (ISS) model and the Anisotropic Ellipsoid Side chain (AES) model using 424 high resolution protein structures in the Protein Data Bank. The results indicate that the ADC model is the most accurate and ISS is the worst. The AES model eliminates about 95% of the incorrectly counted contact-pairs in the ISS model. Algorithm analysis shows that AES model is the most computational intensive while ADC model has moderate computational cost. We derived a dataset of the mis-estimated contact pairs by AES model. The most misjudged pairs are Arg-Glu, Arg-Asp and Arg-Tyr. Such a dataset can be useful for developing the improved AES model by incorporating the pair-specific information for the cutoff distance.

Suggested Citation

  • Weitao Sun & Jing He, 2011. "From Isotropic to Anisotropic Side Chain Representations: Comparison of Three Models for Residue Contact Estimation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(4), pages 1-14, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0019238
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0019238
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0019238&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0019238?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0019238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.