PPI3D: a web server for searching, analyzing and modeling protein-protein, protein-peptide and protein-nucleic acid interactions

Structure-resolved protein interactions with other proteins, peptides and nucleic acids are key for understanding molecular mechanisms. The PPI3D web server enables researchers to query preprocessed and clustered structural data, analyze the results and make homology-based inferences for protein interactions. PPI3D offers three interaction exploration modes: (i) all interactions for proteins homologous to the query, (ii) interactions between two proteins or their homologs and (iii) interactions within a specific PDB entry. The server allows interactive analysis of the identified interactions in both summarized and detailed manner. This includes protein annotations, structures, the interface residues and the corresponding contact surface areas. In addition, users can make inferences about residues at the interaction interface for the query protein(s) from the sequence alignments and homology models. The weekly updated PPI3D database includes all the interaction interfaces and binding sites from PDB, clustered based on both protein sequence and structural similarity, yielding non-redundant datasets without loss of alternative interaction modes. Consequently, the PPI3D users avoid being flooded with redundant information, a typical situation for intensely studied proteins. Furthermore, PPI3D provides a possibility to download user-defined sets of interaction interfaces and analyze them locally. The PPI3D web server is available at https://bioinformatics.lt/ppi3d.

TemStaPro: protein thermostability prediction using sequence representations from protein language models

MOTIVATION

Reliable prediction of protein thermostability from its sequence is valuable for both academic and industrial research. This prediction problem can be tackled using machine learning and by taking advantage of the recent blossoming of deep learning methods for sequence analysis. These methods can facilitate training on more data and, possibly, enable the development of more versatile thermostability predictors for multiple ranges of temperatures.

RESULTS

We applied the principle of transfer learning to predict protein thermostability using embeddings generated by protein language models (pLMs) from an input protein sequence. We used large pLMs that were pre-trained on hundreds of millions of known sequences. The embeddings from such models allowed us to efficiently train and validate a high-performing prediction method using over one million sequences that we collected from organisms with annotated growth temperatures. Our method, TemStaPro (Temperatures of Stability for Proteins), was used to predict thermostability of CRISPR-Cas Class II effector proteins (C2EPs). Predictions indicated sharp differences among groups of C2EPs in terms of thermostability and were largely in tune with previously published and our newly obtained experimental data.

AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION

TemStaPro software and the related data are freely available from https://github.com/ievapudz/TemStaPro and https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7743637.

Prediction of protein assemblies by structure sampling followed by interface-focused scoring

Proteins often function as part of permanent or transient multimeric complexes, and understanding function of these assemblies requires knowledge of their three-dimensional structures. While the ability of AlphaFold to predict structures of individual proteins with unprecedented accuracy has revolutionized structural biology, modeling structures of protein assemblies remains challenging. To address this challenge, we developed a protocol for predicting structures of protein complexes involving model sampling followed by scoring focused on the subunit-subunit interaction interface. In this protocol, we diversified AlphaFold models by varying construction and pairing of multiple sequence alignments as well as increasing the number of recycles. In cases when AlphaFold failed to assemble a full protein complex or produced unreliable results, additional diverse models were constructed by docking of monomers or subcomplexes. All the models were then scored using a newly developed method, VoroIF-jury, which relies only on structural information. Notably, VoroIF-jury is independent of AlphaFold self-assessment scores and therefore can be used to rank models originating from different structure prediction methods. We tested our protocol in CASP15 and obtained top results, significantly outperforming the standard AlphaFold-Multimer pipeline. Analysis of our results showed that the accuracy of our assembly models was capped mainly by structure sampling rather than model scoring. This observation suggests that better sampling, especially for the antibody-antigen complexes, may lead to further improvement. Our protocol is expected to be useful for modeling and/or scoring protein assemblies.

VoroIF-GNN: Voronoi tessellation-derived protein-protein interface assessment using a graph neural network

We present VoroIF-GNN (Voronoi InterFace Graph Neural Network), a novel method for assessing inter-subunit interfaces in a structural model of a protein-protein complex, relying solely on the input structure without any additional information. Given a multimeric protein structural model, we derive interface contacts from the Voronoi tessellation of atomic balls, construct a graph of those contacts, and predict the accuracy of every contact using an attention-based GNN. The contact-level predictions are then summarized to produce whole interface-level scores. VoroIF-GNN was blindly tested for its ability to estimate the accuracy of protein complexes during CASP15 and showed strong performance in selecting the best multimeric model out of many. The method implementation is freely available at https://kliment-olechnovic.github.io/voronota/expansion_js/.

Discriminating physiological from non-physiological interfaces in structures of protein complexes: A community-wide study

Reliably scoring and ranking candidate models of protein complexes and assigning their oligomeric state from the structure of the crystal lattice represent outstanding challenges. A community-wide effort was launched to tackle these challenges. The latest resources on protein complexes and interfaces were exploited to derive a benchmark dataset consisting of 1677 homodimer protein crystal structures, including a balanced mix of physiological and non-physiological complexes. The non-physiological complexes in the benchmark were selected to bury a similar or larger interface area than their physiological counterparts, making it more difficult for scoring functions to differentiate between them. Next, 252 functions for scoring protein-protein interfaces previously developed by 13 groups were collected and evaluated for their ability to discriminate between physiological and non-physiological complexes. A simple consensus score generated using the best performing score of each of the 13 groups, and a cross-validated Random Forest (RF) classifier were created. Both approaches showed excellent performance, with an area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.93 and 0.94, respectively, outperforming individual scores developed by different groups. Additionally, AlphaFold2 engines recalled the physiological dimers with significantly higher accuracy than the non-physiological set, lending support to the reliability of our benchmark dataset annotations. Optimizing the combined power of interface scoring functions and evaluating it on challenging benchmark datasets appears to be a promising strategy.

Prediction of protein assemblies, the next frontier: The CASP14-CAPRI experiment

We present the results for CAPRI Round 50, the fourth joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round comprised a total of twelve targets, including six dimers, three trimers, and three higher-order oligomers. Four of these were easy targets, for which good structural templates were available either for the full assembly, or for the main interfaces (of the higher-order oligomers). Eight were difficult targets for which only distantly related templates were found for the individual subunits. Twenty-five CAPRI groups including eight automatic servers submitted ~1250 models per target. Twenty groups including six servers participated in the CAPRI scoring challenge submitted ~190 models per target. The accuracy of the predicted models was evaluated using the classical CAPRI criteria. The prediction performance was measured by a weighted scoring scheme that takes into account the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group as part of their five top-ranking models. Compared to the previous CASP-CAPRI challenge, top performing groups submitted such models for a larger fraction (70-75%) of the targets in this Round, but fewer of these models were of high accuracy. Scorer groups achieved stronger performance with more groups submitting correct models for 70-80% of the targets or achieving high accuracy predictions. Servers performed less well in general, except for the MDOCKPP and LZERD servers, who performed on par with human groups. In addition to these results, major advances in methodology are discussed, providing an informative overview of where the prediction of protein assemblies currently stands.

Modeling SARS-CoV-2 proteins in the CASP-commons experiment

Critical Assessment of Structure Prediction (CASP) is an organization aimed at advancing the state of the art in computing protein structure from sequence. In the spring of 2020, CASP launched a community project to compute the structures of the most structurally challenging proteins coded for in the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Forty-seven research groups submitted over 3000 three-dimensional models and 700 sets of accuracy estimates on 10 proteins. The resulting models were released to the public. CASP community members also worked together to provide estimates of local and global accuracy and identify structure-based domain boundaries for some proteins. Subsequently, two of these structures (ORF3a and ORF8) have been solved experimentally, allowing assessment of both model quality and the accuracy estimates. Models from the AlphaFold2 group were found to have good agreement with the experimental structures, with main chain GDT_TS accuracy scores ranging from 63 (a correct topology) to 87 (competitive with experiment).

Modeling of protein complexes in CASP14 with emphasis on the interaction interface prediction

The goal of CASP experiments is to monitor the progress in the protein structure prediction field. During the 14th CASP edition we aimed to test our capabilities of predicting structures of protein complexes. Our protocol for modeling protein assemblies included both template‐based modeling and free docking. Structural templates were identified using sensitive sequence‐based searches. If sequence‐based searches failed, we performed structure‐based template searches using selected CASP server models. In the absence of reliable templates we applied free docking starting from monomers generated by CASP servers. We evaluated and ranked models of protein complexes using an improved version of our protein structure quality assessment method, VoroMQA, taking into account both interaction interface and global structure scores. If reliable templates could be identified, generally accurate models of protein assemblies were generated with the exception of an antibody‐antigen interaction. The success of free docking mainly depended on the accuracy of initial subunit models and on the scoring of docking solutions. To put our overall results in perspective, we analyzed our performance in the context of other CASP groups. Although the subunits in our assembly models often were not of the top quality, these models had, overall, the best‐predicted intersubunit interfaces according to several accuracy measures. We attribute our relative success primarily to the emphasis on the interaction interface when modeling and scoring.

VoroContacts: a tool for the analysis of interatomic contacts in macromolecular structures

SUMMARY

VoroContacts is a versatile tool for computing and analyzing contact surface areas (CSAs) and solvent accessible surface areas (SASAs) for 3 D structures of proteins, nucleic acids and their complexes at the atomic resolution. CSAs and SASAs are derived using Voronoi tessellation of 3 D structure, represented as a collection of atomic balls. VoroContacts web server features a highly configurable query interface, which enables on-the-fly analysis of contacts for selected set of atoms and allows filtering interatomic contacts by their type, surface areas, distance between contacting atoms and sequence separation between contacting residues. The VoroContacts functionality is also implemented as part of the standalone Voronota package, enabling batch processing.

AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION

https://bioinformatics.lt/wtsam/vorocontacts.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

VoroMQA web server for assessing three-dimensional structures of proteins and protein complexes

The VoroMQA (Voronoi tessellation-based Model Quality Assessment) web server is dedicated to the estimation of protein structure quality, a common step in selecting realistic and most accurate computational models and in validating experimental structures. As an input, the VoroMQA web server accepts one or more protein structures in PDB format. Input structures may be either monomeric proteins or multimeric protein complexes. For every input structure, the server provides both global and local (per-residue) scores. Visualization of the local scores along the protein chain is enhanced by providing secondary structure assignment and information on solvent accessibility. A unique feature of the VoroMQA server is the ability to directly assess protein-protein interaction interfaces. If this type of assessment is requested, the web server provides interface quality scores, interface energy estimates, and local scores for residues involved in inter-chain interfaces. VoroMQA, the underlying method of the web server, was extensively tested in recent community-wide CASP and CAPRI experiments. During these experiments VoroMQA showed outstanding performance both in model selection and in estimation of accuracy of local structural regions. The VoroMQA web server is available at http://bioinformatics.ibt.lt/wtsam/voromqa.

Contact Area-Based Structural Analysis of Proteins and Their Complexes Using CAD-Score

Quantifying discrepancies between computationally derived and native (reference) structures is an essential step in the development and comparison of protein modeling and protein-protein docking methods. Measuring conformational differences of proteins or protein complexes is also important in other areas of structural biology such as molecular dynamics and crystallography. There are multiple scores to do that. However, nearly all of them, whether superposition-based (e.g., RMSD) or superposition-free, use distances to measure similarity. CAD-score is conceptually different as it uses physical contacts represented as contact areas. Such representation makes it possible to quantify differences of both structures and surfaces (e.g., protein-protein interfaces and binding sites) using the same framework. A number of studies have found CAD-score to be among the most robust scores. The method is implemented both as a web server and as standalone software available at http://bioinformatics.lt/software/cad-score . Here, we describe how to use the standalone CAD-score software for comparison and analysis of protein structures, interfaces, and binding sites.

Comparative analysis of methods for evaluation of protein models against native structures

MOTIVATION

Measuring discrepancies between protein models and native structures is at the heart of development of protein structure prediction methods and comparison of their performance. A number of different evaluation methods have been developed; however, their comprehensive and unbiased comparison has not been performed.

RESULTS

We carried out a comparative analysis of several popular model assessment methods (RMSD, TM-score, GDT, QCS, CAD-score, LDDT, SphereGrinder and RPF) to reveal their relative strengths and weaknesses. The analysis, performed on a large and diverse model set derived in the course of three latest community-wide CASP experiments (CASP10-12), had two major directions. First, we looked at general differences between the scores by analyzing distribution, correspondence and correlation of their values as well as differences in selecting best models. Second, we examined the score differences taking into account various structural properties of models (stereochemistry, hydrogen bonds, packing of domains and chain fragments, missing residues, protein length and secondary structure). Our results provide a solid basis for an informed selection of the most appropriate score or combination of scores depending on the task at hand.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Blind prediction of homo- and hetero-protein complexes: The CASP13-CAPRI experiment

We present the results for CAPRI Round 46, the third joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round comprised a total of 20 targets including 14 homo-oligomers and 6 heterocomplexes. Eight of the homo-oligomer targets and one heterodimer comprised proteins that could be readily modeled using templates from the Protein Data Bank, often available for the full assembly. The remaining 11 targets comprised 5 homodimers, 3 heterodimers, and two higher-order assemblies. These were more difficult to model, as their prediction mainly involved "ab-initio" docking of subunit models derived from distantly related templates. A total of ~30 CAPRI groups, including 9 automatic servers, submitted on average ~2000 models per target. About 17 groups participated in the CAPRI scoring rounds, offered for most targets, submitting ~170 models per target. The prediction performance, measured by the fraction of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted across all predictors groups, was very good to excellent for the nine easy targets. Poorer performance was achieved by predictors for the 11 difficult targets, with medium and high quality models submitted for only 3 of these targets. A similar performance "gap" was displayed by scorer groups, highlighting yet again the unmet challenge of modeling the conformational changes of the protein components that occur upon binding or that must be accounted for in template-based modeling. Our analysis also indicates that residues in binding interfaces were less well predicted in this set of targets than in previous Rounds, providing useful insights for directions of future improvements.

Template-based modeling of diverse protein interactions in CAPRI rounds 38-45

Structures of proteins complexed with other proteins, peptides, or ligands are essential for investigation of molecular mechanisms. However, the experimental structures of protein complexes of interest are often not available. Therefore, computational methods are widely used to predict these structures, and, of those methods, template-based modeling is the most successful. In the rounds 38-45 of the Critical Assessment of PRediction of Interactions (CAPRI), we applied template-based modeling for 9 of 11 protein-protein and protein-peptide interaction targets, resulting in medium and high-quality models for six targets. For the protein-oligosaccharide docking targets, we used constraints derived from template structures, and generated models of at least acceptable quality for most of the targets. Apparently, high flexibility of oligosaccharide molecules was the main cause preventing us from obtaining models of higher quality. We also participated in the CAPRI scoring challenge, the goal of which was to identify the highest quality models from a large pool of decoys. In this experiment, we tested VoroMQA, a scoring method based on interatomic contact areas. The results showed VoroMQA to be quite effective in scoring strongly binding and obligatory protein complexes, but less successful in the case of transient interactions. We extensively used manual intervention in both CAPRI modeling and scoring experiments. This oftentimes allowed us to select the correct templates from available alternatives and to limit the search space during the model scoring.

Structural modeling of protein complexes: Current capabilities and challenges

Proteins frequently interact with each other, and the knowledge of structures of the corresponding protein complexes is necessary to understand how they function. Computational methods are increasingly used to provide structural models of protein complexes. Not surprisingly, community-wide Critical Assessment of protein Structure Prediction (CASP) experiments have recently started monitoring the progress in this research area. We participated in CASP13 with the aim to evaluate our current capabilities in modeling of protein complexes and to gain a better understanding of factors that exert the largest impact on these capabilities. To model protein complexes in CASP13, we applied template-based modeling, free docking and hybrid techniques that enabled us to generate models of the topmost quality for 27 of 42 multimers. If templates for protein complexes could be identified, we modeled the structures with reasonable accuracy by straightforward homology modeling. If only partial templates were available, it was nevertheless possible to predict the interaction interfaces correctly or to generate acceptable models for protein complexes by combining template-based modeling with docking. If no templates were available, we used rigid-body docking with limited success. However, in some free docking models, despite the incorrect subunit orientation and missed interface contacts, the approximate location of protein binding sites was identified correctly. Apparently, our overall performance in docking was limited by the quality of monomer models and by the imperfection of scoring methods. The impact of human intervention on our results in modeling of protein complexes was significant indicating the need for improvements of automatic methods.

Estimation of model accuracy in CASP13

Methods to reliably estimate the accuracy of 3D models of proteins are both a fundamental part of most protein folding pipelines and important for reliable identification of the best models when multiple pipelines are used. Here, we describe the progress made from CASP12 to CASP13 in the field of estimation of model accuracy (EMA) as seen from the progress of the most successful methods in CASP13. We show small but clear progress, that is, several methods perform better than the best methods from CASP12 when tested on CASP13 EMA targets. Some progress is driven by applying deep learning and residue-residue contacts to model accuracy prediction. We show that the best EMA methods select better models than the best servers in CASP13, but that there exists a great potential to improve this further. Also, according to the evaluation criteria based on local similarities, such as lDDT and CAD, it is now clear that single model accuracy methods perform relatively better than consensus-based methods.

The CAD-score web server: contact area-based comparison of structures and interfaces of proteins, nucleic acids and their complexes

The Contact Area Difference score (CAD-score) web server provides a universal framework to compute and analyze discrepancies between different 3D structures of the same biological macromolecule or complex. The server accepts both single-subunit and multi-subunit structures and can handle all the major types of macromolecules (proteins, RNA, DNA and their complexes). It can perform numerical comparison of both structures and interfaces. In addition to entire structures and interfaces, the server can assess user-defined subsets. The CAD-score server performs both global and local numerical evaluations of structural differences between structures or interfaces. The results can be explored interactively using sortable tables of global scores, profiles of local errors, superimposed contact maps and 3D structure visualization. The web server could be used for tasks such as comparison of models with the native (reference) structure, comparison of X-ray structures of the same macromolecule obtained in different states (e.g. with and without a bound ligand), analysis of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) structural ensemble or structures obtained in the course of molecular dynamics simulation. The web server is freely accessible at: http://www.ibt.lt/bioinformatics/cad-score.

The use of interatomic contact areas to quantify discrepancies between RNA 3D models and reference structures

Growing interest in computational prediction of ribonucleic acid (RNA) three-dimensional structure has highlighted the need for reliable and meaningful methods to compare models and experimental structures. We present a structure superposition-free method to quantify both the local and global accuracy of RNA structural models with respect to the reference structure. The method, initially developed for proteins and here extended to RNA, closely reflects physical interactions, has a simple definition, a fixed range of values and no arbitrary parameters. It is based on the correspondence of respective contact areas between nucleotides or their components (base or backbone). The better is the agreement between respective contact areas in a model and the reference structure, the more accurate the model is considered to be. Since RNA bases account for the largest contact areas, we further distinguish stacking and non-stacking contacts. We have extensively tested the contact area-based evaluation method and found it effective in both revealing local discrepancies and ranking models by their overall quality. Compared to other reference-based RNA model evaluation methods, the new method shows a stronger emphasis on stereochemical quality of models. In addition, it takes into account model completeness, enabling a meaningful evaluation of full models and those missing some residues.

Voronota: A fast and reliable tool for computing the vertices of the Voronoi diagram of atomic balls

The Voronoi diagram of balls, corresponding to atoms of van der Waals radii, is particularly well-suited for the analysis of three-dimensional structures of biological macromolecules. However, due to the shortage of practical algorithms and the corresponding software, simpler approaches are often used instead. Here, we present a simple and robust algorithm for computing the vertices of the Voronoi diagram of balls. The vertices of Voronoi cells correspond to the centers of the empty tangent spheres defined by quadruples of balls. The algorithm is implemented as an open-source software tool, Voronota. Large-scale tests show that Voronota is a fast and reliable tool for processing both experimentally determined and computationally modeled macromolecular structures. Voronota can be easily deployed and may be used for the development of various other structure analysis tools that utilize the Voronoi diagram of balls. Voronota is available at: http://www.ibt.lt/bioinformatics/voronota.

CAD-score: a new contact area difference-based function for evaluation of protein structural models

Evaluation of protein models against the native structure is essential for the development and benchmarking of protein structure prediction methods. Although a number of evaluation scores have been proposed to date, many aspects of model assessment still lack desired robustness. In this study we present CAD-score, a new evaluation function quantifying differences between physical contacts in a model and the reference structure. The new score uses the concept of residue-residue contact area difference (CAD) introduced by Abagyan and Totrov (J Mol Biol 1997; 268:678-685). Contact areas, the underlying basis of the score, are derived using the Voronoi tessellation of protein structure. The newly introduced CAD-score is a continuous function, confined within fixed limits, free of any arbitrary thresholds or parameters. The built-in logic for treatment of missing residues allows consistent ranking of models of any degree of completeness. We tested CAD-score on a large set of diverse models and compared it to GDT-TS, a widely accepted measure of model accuracy. Similarly to GDT-TS, CAD-score showed a robust performance on single-domain proteins, but displayed a stronger preference for physically more realistic models. Unlike GDT-TS, the new score revealed a balanced assessment of domain rearrangement, removing the necessity for different treatment of single-domain, multi-domain, and multi-subunit structures. Moreover, CAD-score makes it possible to assess the accuracy of inter-domain or inter-subunit interfaces directly. In addition, the approach offers an alternative to the superposition-based model clustering. The CAD-score implementation is available both as a web server and a standalone software package at http://www.ibt.lt/bioinformatics/cad-score/.