Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27708689›Full record

ArticleAlgorithms for molecular biology : AMB2016

An efficient algorithm for protein structure comparison using elastic shape analysis.

S Srivastava, S B Lal, D C Mishra, U B Angadi, K K Chaturvedi, S N Rai, A Rai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

S SrivastavaICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi, India ; Biostatistics Shared Facility, James Graham Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville, Louisville, USA.
S B LalICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi, India.
D C MishraICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi, India.
U B AngadiICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi, India.
K K ChaturvediICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi, India.
S N RaiBiostatistics Shared Facility, James Graham Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville, Louisville, USA ; Department of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, University of Louisville, Louisville, USA.
A RaiICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi, India ; Centre for Agricultural Bioinformatics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, Library Avenue, New Delhi, 110012 India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProtein structure comparison play important role in in silico functional prediction of a new protein. It is also used for understanding the evolutionary relationships among proteins. A variety of methods have been proposed in literature for comparing protein structures but they have their own limitations in terms of accuracy and complexity with respect to computational time and space. There is a need to improve the computational complexity in comparison/alignment of proteins through incorporation of important biological and structural properties in the existing techniques.

resultsAn efficient algorithm has been developed for comparing protein structures using elastic shape analysis in which the sequence of 3D coordinates atoms of protein structures supplemented by additional auxiliary information from side-chain properties are incorporated. The protein structure is represented by a special function called square-root velocity function. Furthermore, singular value decomposition and dynamic programming have been employed for optimal rotation and optimal matching of the proteins, respectively. Also, geodesic distance has been calculated and used as the dissimilarity score between two protein structures. The performance of the developed algorithm is tested and found to be more efficient, i.e., running time reduced by 80-90 % without compromising accuracy of comparison when compared with the existing methods. Source codes for different functions have been developed in R. Also, user friendly web-based application called ProtSComp has been developed using above algorithm for comparing protein 3D structures and is accessible free.

conclusionsThe methodology and algorithm developed in this study is taking considerably less computational time without loss of accuracy (Table 2). The proposed algorithm is considering different criteria of representing protein structures using 3D coordinates of atoms and inclusion of residue wise molecular properties as auxiliary information.

Indexed as

Backbone atomsGeodesic distanceProtein structure comparisonSide chain properties

Identifiers

PMID27708689
PMCPMC5041553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.