Issue No. 05 - Sept.-Oct. (2014 vol. 11)
To calculate similarities between molecular structures, measures based on the maximum common subgraph are frequently applied. For the comparison of protein binding sites, these measures are not fully appropriate since graphs representing binding sites on a detailed atomic level tend to get very large. In combination with an NP-hard problem, a large graph leads to a computationally demanding task. Therefore, for the comparison of binding sites, a less detailed coarse graph model is used building upon so-called pseudocenters. Consistently, a loss of structural data is caused since many atoms are discarded and no information about the shape of the binding site is considered. This is usually resolved by performing subsequent calculations based on additional information. These steps are usually quite expensive, making the whole approach very slow. The main drawback of a graph-based model solely based on pseudocenters, however, is the loss of information about the shape of the protein surface. In this study, we propose a novel and efficient modeling formalism that does not increase the size of the graph model compared to the original approach, but leads to graphs containing considerably more information assigned to the nodes. More specifically, additional descriptors considering surface characteristics are extracted from the local surface and attributed to the pseudocenters stored in Cavbase. These properties are evaluated as additional node labels, which lead to a gain of information and allow for much faster but still very accurate comparisons between different structures.
Proteins, Shape, Vectors, Histograms, Bioinformatics, Principal component analysis, IEEE transactions,maximum common subgraph, Cavbase, protein binding site, similarity measure, distance, structural alignment
Timo Krotzky, Thomas Fober, Eyke Hullermeier, Gerhard Klebe, "Extended Graph-Based Models for Enhanced Similarity Search in Cavbase", IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, vol. 11, no. , pp. 878-890, Sept.-Oct. 2014, doi:10.1109/TCBB.2014.2325020