AlphaFold2 examples from CASP 14: Difference between revisions

From Proteopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Eric Martz (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Eric Martz (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 27: Line 27:
===AlphaFold2 Prediction for ORF8===
===AlphaFold2 Prediction for ORF8===


The quality of a prediction in CASP is judged, in large part, by the [[Theoretical_models#CASP_14_Global_Distance_Test_Results|Global Distance Test Total Score, GDT_TS]]. AlphaFold2's predicted structure<ref>Download AlphaFold2's predicted structure for ORF8 from [https://predictioncenter.org/casp14/MODELS_PDB/T1064-D1/T1064TS427_1-D1.pdb T1064TS427_1-D1.pdb].</ref> has a '''GDT_TS score of 87'''. (A score of 0 is meaningless, and a score of 100 means perfect agreement with an X-ray crystal structure.) 87 means <scene name='87/875686/Af2_vs_7jx6_chain_a/1'>the model is close to the accuracy of an X-ray crystal structure</scene><ref name="imf" />. The structure predicted by AlphaFold2 is '''almost as close to the X-ray crystallographic model''' [[7jx6]] as is the independently-determined X-ray structure [[7jtl]]. AlphaFold2 predicted the positions of 92 amino acids. (CASP 14 excluded residues 48-59, a 12-residue surface loop, from the target residues<ref name="casp14domains" />.) See Table I below for [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root-mean-square_deviation_of_atomic_positions RMSD] values. The prediction was largely accurate regarding salt bridges and cation-pi interactions (see Tables II and III below).
The quality of a prediction in CASP is judged, in large part, by the [[Theoretical_models#CASP_14_Global_Distance_Test_Results|Global Distance Test Total Score, GDT_TS]]. AlphaFold2's predicted structure<ref>Download AlphaFold2's predicted structure for ORF8 from [https://predictioncenter.org/casp14/MODELS_PDB/T1064-D1/T1064TS427_1-D1.pdb T1064TS427_1-D1.pdb].</ref> has a '''GDT_TS score of 87'''. (A score of 0 is meaningless, and a score of 100 means perfect agreement with an X-ray crystal structure.) 87 means <scene name='87/875686/Af2_vs_7jx6_chain_a/1'>the model is close to the accuracy of an X-ray crystal structure</scene><ref name="imf" />. The structure predicted by AlphaFold2 is '''almost as close to the X-ray crystallographic model''' [[7jx6]] as is the independently-determined X-ray structure [[7jtl]]. AlphaFold2 predicted the positions of 92 amino acids. (CASP 14 excluded residues 48-59, a 12-residue surface loop, from the target residues<ref name="casp14domains" />.) See Table I below for [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root-mean-square_deviation_of_atomic_positions RMSD] values. The prediction was largely accurate regarding salt bridges and cation-pi interactions (see Tables III and IV below).


{| style="text-align:center;" class="wikitable"
{| style="text-align:center;" class="wikitable"
Line 57: Line 57:


===Second Best Prediction for ORF8===
===Second Best Prediction for ORF8===
In CASP 14, 70 research groups and 42 automated servers predicted structures for ORF8. The median GDT_TS score for all 112 predictions was 26. AlphaFold2 made the best prediction (GDT_TS 87). <scene name='87/875686/Second_best_orf8_imf/1'>The second best prediction was by the group of Xian Ming Pan</scene><ref name="imf" />, with GDT_TS 43 (see Table I above). The fold and topology were predicted correctly, but the '''details are far less accurate''' than those in AlphaFold2's prediction. The 2nd best prediction has '''no disulfide bonds'''. This prediction was largely incorrect regarding salt bridges and cation-pi interactions (see Tables II and III below).
In CASP 14, 70 research groups and 42 automated servers predicted structures for ORF8. The median GDT_TS score for all 112 predictions was 26. AlphaFold2 made the best prediction (GDT_TS 87). <scene name='87/875686/Second_best_orf8_imf/1'>The second best prediction was by the group of Xian Ming Pan</scene><ref name="imf" />, with GDT_TS 43 (see Table I above). The fold and topology were predicted correctly, but the '''details are far less accurate''' than those in AlphaFold2's prediction. The 2nd best prediction has '''no disulfide bonds'''. This prediction was largely incorrect regarding salt bridges and cation-pi interactions (see Tables III and IV below).


===Third Best Prediction for ORF8===
===Third Best Prediction for ORF8===
Line 79: Line 79:


<scene name='87/875686/T1037_length_404/1'>The X-ray structure of CASP 14 domain T1037</scene> (length 404 residues) consists of residues 337-369 + 531-901 of [[6vr4]]. It is an <scene name='87/875686/T1037_length_404/2'>alpha/beta domain with secondary structure</scene> <span style="color:#ff0080;font-weight:bold;">45% helices</span>, <span style="color:#ffc800;background-color:black;font-weight:bold;">&nbsp;19% beta strands&nbsp;</span>, and 37% loops and turns. The N- and C-termini are 10 Å apart, and there are no cysteines (thus no disulfide bonds).
<scene name='87/875686/T1037_length_404/1'>The X-ray structure of CASP 14 domain T1037</scene> (length 404 residues) consists of residues 337-369 + 531-901 of [[6vr4]]. It is an <scene name='87/875686/T1037_length_404/2'>alpha/beta domain with secondary structure</scene> <span style="color:#ff0080;font-weight:bold;">45% helices</span>, <span style="color:#ffc800;background-color:black;font-weight:bold;">&nbsp;19% beta strands&nbsp;</span>, and 37% loops and turns. The N- and C-termini are 10 Å apart, and there are no cysteines (thus no disulfide bonds).
===AlphaFold2 prediction for T1037===
AlphaFold2 predicted the structure of T1037 with high accuracy (GDT_TS 88; see Table II below for details).
{| style="text-align:center;" class="wikitable"
|+ Table II. T1037 Predictions Superposed With Sub-Domain of [[6vr4]] Chain B
|-
! Model || GDT_TS || C&alpha; [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root-mean-square_deviation_of_atomic_positions RMSD], Å || C&alpha; Superposed || [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root-mean-square_deviation_of_atomic_positions RMSD] Including<br>Sidechains, Å || Atoms Superposed
|-
| T1037 of<br>[[6vr4]]:A || XX<ref name="gdt_ts" /> || 0.25<br>'''0.25''' || 404/404 (100%)<br>'''404/404 (100%)''' || 0.58<br>'''0.24''' || 3157/3157 (100%)<br>'''1616/3157 (51%)'''
|}


<!--########################################################-->
<!--########################################################-->
Line 98: Line 109:


{| style="text-align:center;" class="wikitable"
{| style="text-align:center;" class="wikitable"
|+ Table II. Salt Bridge Prediction Accuracy
|+ Table III. Salt Bridge Prediction Accuracy
|-
|-
!7JX6 !! 7JTL !! AlphaFold2 !! 2nd Best
!7JX6 !! 7JTL !! AlphaFold2 !! 2nd Best
Line 118: Line 129:


{| style="text-align:center;" class="wikitable"
{| style="text-align:center;" class="wikitable"
|+ Table III. Cation-Pi Prediction Accuracy
|+ Table IV. Cation-Pi Prediction Accuracy
|-
|-
!7JX6 !! 7JTL !! AlphaFold2 !! 2nd Best
!7JX6 !! 7JTL !! AlphaFold2 !! 2nd Best

Revision as of 21:38, 7 March 2021

This page is under construction. Eric Martz 01:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Prediction of protein structures from amino acid sequences, GDT_TS scores, has been extremely challenging. In 2020, breakthrough success was achieved by AlphaFold2[1], a project of DeepMind. For an overview of this breakthrough, documented by the bi-annual prediction competition 6vr4, please see SARS-CoV-2 protein ORF8. Below are illustrated some examples of predictions from that competition.

Drag the structure with the mouse to rotate

ORF8 Sidechain Accuracy

AlphaFold2's predictions for sidechain positions seem fairly good, while sidechain positions in the 2nd best prediction seem poor. This conclusion is based on three types of observations:

  1. Table I gives RMSD values for all atoms, which is one indication of sidechain accuracy.
  2. Prediction of homology modeling and empirical models.
  3. Visualization of the distributions of charges on the surfaces.

Salt Bridges and Cation-Pi Interactions

  • AlphaFold2's prediction was correct for 4/5 interactions, with one incorrect interaction.
    • AlphaFold2's prediction was correct for one of two salt bridges, and predicted no incorrect salt bridges.
    • AlphaFold2's prediction was correct for three of three cation-pi interactions, but predicted one incorrect interaction.
  • The 2nd best prediction was correct for 1/5 interactions, with 2 incorrect interactions.
    • The 2nd best prediction was correct for one of two salt bridges, but predicted two incorrect salt bridges.
    • The 2nd best prediction failed to predict any of the three cation-pi interactions, predicting zero interactions.
Table III. Salt Bridge Prediction Accuracy
7JX6 7JTL AlphaFold2 2nd Best
R101:D112 (AB) R101:D113 (AB) R86:D98 R86:D98
R115:D119 (AB) R115:D119 (AB) R100:E4
K44:E59 (AB) K44:E59 (AB) K29:E44
K78:E77
  • Bridges in the same row are identical (except for red residues). Subtract 15 from the sequence numbers in the X-ray structures for the equivalent sequence numbers in the predictions.
  • Black: Shortest sidechain nitrogen to sidechain oxygen distance ≤4.0 Å.
  • Gray: Shortest sidechain nitrogen to sidechain oxygen distance 4.4 to 4.8 Å.
  • –: Shortest sidechain nitrogen to sidechain oxygen distance 6 to 16 Å.
  • (AB): The two chains in each X-ray model.
  • Italics: erroneous prediction.
Table IV. Cation-Pi Prediction Accuracy
7JX6 7JTL AlphaFold2 2nd Best
R101:Y46+Y108 (AB) R101:Y46+Y108 (AB) R86:Y31+Y96
K44:F108 (B) K44:F108 (AB) K29:F93
K79:F105
  • All interactions listed are deemed energetically significant by the CaPTURE Server.
  • Interactions in the same row are identical. Subtract 15 from the sequence numbers in the X-ray structures for the equivalent sequence numbers in the predictions.
  • Italics: erroneous prediction.
  • The 2nd best prediction has no cation-pi interactions.
  • (AB): The two chains in each X-ray model.

Visualization of Surface Charge Distributions

GDT_TS Calculations

GDT_TS values for predictions are taken from CASP 14 results. GDT_TS values for 7JTL and 5A2F vs. 7JX6 chain A were calculated using the AS2TS server of Adam Zemla[2]. See instructions for 7jtl. CASP 14 reported GDT_TS 86.96 for the AlphaFold2 prediction, while the AS2TS server calculated GDT_TS 86.41 vs. 7jx6 chain A, and 88.59 vs. 7JTL chain A.

References

  1. Senior AW, Evans R, Jumper J, Kirkpatrick J, Sifre L, Green T, Qin C, Zidek A, Nelson AWR, Bridgland A, Penedones H, Petersen S, Simonyan K, Crossan S, Kohli P, Jones DT, Silver D, Kavukcuoglu K, Hassabis D. Improved protein structure prediction using potentials from deep learning. Nature. 2020 Jan;577(7792):706-710. doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1923-7. Epub 2020 Jan, 15. PMID:31942072 doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1923-7
  2. Zemla A. LGA: A method for finding 3D similarities in protein structures. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Jul 1;31(13):3370-4. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkg571. PMID:12824330 doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkg571

Proteopedia Page Contributors and Editors (what is this?)

Eric Martz