Models of protein interactions

How to choose one

Rose Du, Alexander Yu Grosberg, Toyoichi Tanaka

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Background: There have been many attempts to approximate realistic protein interaction energies by coarse graining (i.e. considering interactions between amino acids rather than those between atoms). In particular, many 20-letter models have been derived (corresponding to the 20 naturally occurring amino acids). Because such models remain computationally infeasible, many two-letter models have been proposed as further simplifications. The choice of which model to use remains arbitrary, however. In this work, we formulate the framework within which the quality of approximate interaction potentials with respect to folding can be defined explicitly. Results: Using a recently proposed criterion for comparing interaction matrices, we compare various 20 x 20 interaction matrices and obtain the two-letter model that most closely approximates each 20 x 20 matrix. We find that there are considerable differences among the 20 x 20 matrices. In particular, some matrices are much more similar to the hydrophobic model than others. Furthermore, we find that although the best two-letter approximation of a 20-letter model is a significantly better approximation than a random two-letter model, it is still a poor approximation of realistic protein interactions. Conclusions: The determination of the best two-letter approximations of various 20-letter models of protein interaction energies reveals the degree to which hydrophobic interactions dominate in each of the models and hence in proteins.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)203-211
    Number of pages9
    JournalFolding and Design
    Volume3
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 1998

    Fingerprint

    Proteins
    Amino Acids
    Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions
    Atoms

    Keywords

    • Protein folding
    • Protein potentials

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Biochemistry
    • Molecular Medicine

    Cite this

    Models of protein interactions : How to choose one. / Du, Rose; Grosberg, Alexander Yu; Tanaka, Toyoichi.

    In: Folding and Design, Vol. 3, No. 3, 1998, p. 203-211.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Du, Rose ; Grosberg, Alexander Yu ; Tanaka, Toyoichi. / Models of protein interactions : How to choose one. In: Folding and Design. 1998 ; Vol. 3, No. 3. pp. 203-211.
    @article{3096e73ddcd648afad69e9e3b66a1898,
    title = "Models of protein interactions: How to choose one",
    abstract = "Background: There have been many attempts to approximate realistic protein interaction energies by coarse graining (i.e. considering interactions between amino acids rather than those between atoms). In particular, many 20-letter models have been derived (corresponding to the 20 naturally occurring amino acids). Because such models remain computationally infeasible, many two-letter models have been proposed as further simplifications. The choice of which model to use remains arbitrary, however. In this work, we formulate the framework within which the quality of approximate interaction potentials with respect to folding can be defined explicitly. Results: Using a recently proposed criterion for comparing interaction matrices, we compare various 20 x 20 interaction matrices and obtain the two-letter model that most closely approximates each 20 x 20 matrix. We find that there are considerable differences among the 20 x 20 matrices. In particular, some matrices are much more similar to the hydrophobic model than others. Furthermore, we find that although the best two-letter approximation of a 20-letter model is a significantly better approximation than a random two-letter model, it is still a poor approximation of realistic protein interactions. Conclusions: The determination of the best two-letter approximations of various 20-letter models of protein interaction energies reveals the degree to which hydrophobic interactions dominate in each of the models and hence in proteins.",
    keywords = "Protein folding, Protein potentials",
    author = "Rose Du and Grosberg, {Alexander Yu} and Toyoichi Tanaka",
    year = "1998",
    doi = "10.1016/S1359-0278(98)00028-5",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "3",
    pages = "203--211",
    journal = "Folding and Design",
    issn = "1359-0278",
    publisher = "Cell Press",
    number = "3",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Models of protein interactions

    T2 - How to choose one

    AU - Du, Rose

    AU - Grosberg, Alexander Yu

    AU - Tanaka, Toyoichi

    PY - 1998

    Y1 - 1998

    N2 - Background: There have been many attempts to approximate realistic protein interaction energies by coarse graining (i.e. considering interactions between amino acids rather than those between atoms). In particular, many 20-letter models have been derived (corresponding to the 20 naturally occurring amino acids). Because such models remain computationally infeasible, many two-letter models have been proposed as further simplifications. The choice of which model to use remains arbitrary, however. In this work, we formulate the framework within which the quality of approximate interaction potentials with respect to folding can be defined explicitly. Results: Using a recently proposed criterion for comparing interaction matrices, we compare various 20 x 20 interaction matrices and obtain the two-letter model that most closely approximates each 20 x 20 matrix. We find that there are considerable differences among the 20 x 20 matrices. In particular, some matrices are much more similar to the hydrophobic model than others. Furthermore, we find that although the best two-letter approximation of a 20-letter model is a significantly better approximation than a random two-letter model, it is still a poor approximation of realistic protein interactions. Conclusions: The determination of the best two-letter approximations of various 20-letter models of protein interaction energies reveals the degree to which hydrophobic interactions dominate in each of the models and hence in proteins.

    AB - Background: There have been many attempts to approximate realistic protein interaction energies by coarse graining (i.e. considering interactions between amino acids rather than those between atoms). In particular, many 20-letter models have been derived (corresponding to the 20 naturally occurring amino acids). Because such models remain computationally infeasible, many two-letter models have been proposed as further simplifications. The choice of which model to use remains arbitrary, however. In this work, we formulate the framework within which the quality of approximate interaction potentials with respect to folding can be defined explicitly. Results: Using a recently proposed criterion for comparing interaction matrices, we compare various 20 x 20 interaction matrices and obtain the two-letter model that most closely approximates each 20 x 20 matrix. We find that there are considerable differences among the 20 x 20 matrices. In particular, some matrices are much more similar to the hydrophobic model than others. Furthermore, we find that although the best two-letter approximation of a 20-letter model is a significantly better approximation than a random two-letter model, it is still a poor approximation of realistic protein interactions. Conclusions: The determination of the best two-letter approximations of various 20-letter models of protein interaction energies reveals the degree to which hydrophobic interactions dominate in each of the models and hence in proteins.

    KW - Protein folding

    KW - Protein potentials

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031746227&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031746227&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/S1359-0278(98)00028-5

    DO - 10.1016/S1359-0278(98)00028-5

    M3 - Article

    VL - 3

    SP - 203

    EP - 211

    JO - Folding and Design

    JF - Folding and Design

    SN - 1359-0278

    IS - 3

    ER -