skip to main content
10.1145/2739482.2768436acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

MeGASS: Multi-Objective Genetic Active Site Search

Published:11 July 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Active sites are regions in the enzyme surface designed to interact with other molecules. Given their importance to enzyme function, active site amino acids are more conserved during evolution than the whole sequence, and can be a useful source of information for function prediction. For this reason, great effort has been put into identifying active sites in proteins. The majority of methods for this purpose uses an active site template of a protein of known function to search for similar structures into proteins of unknown function. In this direction, we recently proposed GASS (Genetic Active Site Search), a method based on an evolutionary algorithm to search for active sites in proteins. Although the method obtained very accurate results, its main strength and weakness are related to using only the spatial distance from the template to the protein to evaluate candidate sites. In this direction, this paper proposes MeGASS, a multi-objective version of GASS that also considers the depth of the residues when looking for active sites. This is important, as active sites are known for being closer to the protein surface to allow interactions with ligands. Results showed the depth attribute improves over the results of GASS, and its role into the method is worth further investigation.

References

  1. H. Berman, J. Westbrook, Z. Feng, G. Gilliland, T. Bhat, H. Weissig, I. Shindyalov, and P. Bourne. The protein data bank. Nucleic acids research, 28(1):235, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. M. Brylinski and J. Skolnick. A threading-based method (FINDSITE) for ligand-binding site prediction and functional annotation. Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 105(1):129--134, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. T. G. Cassarino, L. Bordoli, and T. Schwede. Assessment of ligand binding site predictions in CASP 10. Proteins, 82((Suppl 2)):154--163, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. S. Chakravarty and R. Varadarajan. Residue depth: a novel parameter for the analysis of protein structure and stability. Structure with Folding & Design, 7(7):723--732, Jul 15 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. F. L. Custodio, H. J. Barbosa, and L. E. Dardenne. A multiple minima genetic algorithm for protein structure prediction. Applied Soft Computing, 15(0):88 -- 99, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. K. Deb and D. Kalyanmoy. Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, USA, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. T. Fober, M. Mernberger, G. Klebe, and E. Hüllermeier. Evolutionary construction of multiple graph alignments for the structural analysis of biomolecules. Bioinformatics, 25(16):i2110--i2117, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. G. B. Fogel and D. W. Corne, editors. Evolutionary Computation in Bioinformatics. Morgan Kaufmann, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. S. Henikoff and J. G. Henikoff. Amino-acid Substitution Matrices from Protein Blocks. Proc. of The National Academy of Sciences of The USA, 89(22):10915--10919, Nov 15 1992.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. S. C. Izidoro, R. C. de Melo-Minardi, and G. L. Pappa. GASS: identifying enzyme active sites with genetic algorithms. Bioinformatics, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. T. Kato and N. Nagano. Metric learning for enzyme active-site search. Bioinformatics, 26(21):2698--2704, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. R. A. Laskowski, J. D. Watson, and J. M. Thornton. Protein function prediction using local 3D templates. Journal of Molecular Biology, 351:614--626, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. B. Lee and F. M. Richards. Interpretation of Protein Structures - Estimation of Static Accessibility. Journal of Molecular Biology, 55(3):379--&, 1971.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. F. C. Lightstone, S. E. Wong, D. A. Kirshner, and J. P. Nilmeier. Rapid Catalytic Template Searching as an Enzyme Function Prediction Procedure. PLoS ONE, 8(5):1--17, may 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. G. Lopez, P. Maietta, J. M. Rodriguez, A. Valencia, and M. L. Tress. firestar-advances in the prediction of functionally important residues. Nucleic Acids Research, 39(2):W235--W241, Jul 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. A. Marhaman and J. M. Thornton. Methods to Characterize the Structure of Enzyme Binding Sites. In T. Schwede and M. Peitsch, editors, Computational Structural Biology - Methods and Applications, pages 189--221. World Scientific Publishing, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. N. Nadzirin, E. J. Gardiner, P. Willett, P. J. Artymiuk, and M. Firdaus-Raih. SPRITE and ASSAM: web servers for side chain 3D-motif searching in protein structures. Nucleic Acids Res., 40:W380--W386, May 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. S. Pal, S. Bandyopadhyay, and S. Ray. Evolutionary computation in bioinformatics: a review. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, IEEE Transactions on, 36(5):601--615, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. C. T. Porter, G. J. Bartlett, and J. M. Thornton. The Catalytic Site Atlas: a resource of catalytic sites and residues identified in enzymes using structural data. Nucleic Acids Res., 32:D129--D133, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. A. Stark and R. B. Russell. Annotation in three dimensions. PINTS: Patterns in Non-homologous Tertiary Structures. Nucleic Acids Res., 31(13):3341--3344, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. J. W. Torrance and J. M. Thornton. Structure-based Prediction of Enzymes and Their Active Sites. Wiley, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. A. C. Wallace, N. Borkakoti, and J. M. Thornton. Tess: A geometric hashing algorithm for deriving 3d coordinate templates for searching structural databases application to enzyme active sites. Protein Sci., 6:2308--2323, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. J. C. Whisstock and A. M. Lesk. Prediction of protein function from protein sequence and structure. Q. Rev. Biophys, 36:307--340, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. MeGASS: Multi-Objective Genetic Active Site Search

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          GECCO Companion '15: Proceedings of the Companion Publication of the 2015 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation
          July 2015
          1568 pages
          ISBN:9781450334884
          DOI:10.1145/2739482

          Copyright © 2015 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 11 July 2015

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

          Upcoming Conference

          GECCO '24
          Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
          July 14 - 18, 2024
          Melbourne , VIC , Australia
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)4
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader