CFSSP is a online program which predicts secondary structure of the protein. In this program Chou & Fasman algorithm is implemented. This exercise teaches how to use the Chou-Fasman Interactive. The Chou- Fasman method predicts protein secondary structures in a given protein sequence. Predict locations of alpha-helix and beta-strand from amino acid sequence using Chou-Fasman method, Garnier-Osguthorpe-Robson method, and Neural.
|Published (Last):||16 May 2016|
|PDF File Size:||1.50 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.1 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Nevertheless, in our method, the accuracy of alpha class and beta class is still well.
Improved Chou-Fasman method for protein secondary structure prediction
Their works are focused on the modification of amino acid conformation propensities [ 11 – 1317 – 20 ] since this is the key point to improve CFM as we all know that the location of nucleation and the threshold of extension are closely algoritjm to the residue conformation propensities.
Wavelet transformation of protein hydrophobicity sequences suggests their memberships in structural families.
A turn is predicted only if the turn probability is greater than the helix or sheet probabilities and a probability value based on the positions of particular amino acids in the turn exceeds a predetermined threshold. Secondary structure prediction method by Chou and Fasman CF is one of the oldest and simplest method.
The refined results were biologically significant. Proc Natl Acad Sci.
Prediction of the Secondary Structure by Chou-Fasman, GOR and Neural Network
Evaluation and improvement of multiple sequence methods for protein secondary structure prediction. H, G, and Chpu are helices; E and B are strands; other conformations are coils. Before performing our method, we compared traditional CFM proposed in with four current methods mentioned above to see how large the difference is.
Methods Chou-Fasman rules algorithn be concluded in three points below [ 10 ]: The original Chou—Fasman parameters  were derived from a very small and non-representative sample of protein structures due to the small number of such structures that were known at the time of their original work.
Hence, it is unnecessary to calculate the extension threshold using cross validation, any number around the average propensity value is accepted. We just undid some processes in modification of the third rule. Secondly, the accuracy of CFM is low. Measurement of the beta-sheet forming propensities of amino acids. Hence, we are confident to believe that with the combination of all three modifications, the accuracy should be much better than CFM for all the indices. The high false positive still existed in our method.
According to the analysis above, a was set as 9. The folding type-specific conformation propensities had been divided into 4 groups corresponding to the 4 protein classes: Public domain protein secondary structure prediction. First, the hydrophobicity value based CWT technology was used to calculate the number and locations of protein secondary structure segments, and then substituted the nucleation regions of CFM with these positions.
However, as a result, it causes the wide confidence limit which even makes us difficult to tell if an amino acid is a helix former or breaker [ 11 ]. In addition, coil propensities can be included in protein secondary structure prediction for reducing over prediction. Among these different kinds of propensities calculated by various methods, most of them examined amino acid secondary structure propensities in a whole conformational base regardless of protein folding types.
If the secondary structure component is located on the surface of a protein, their residues are usually hydrophilic. The full contents of the supplement are available online at http: This method is good at determining the number of secondary structure segments and locating the regions of them, which is a weak point of CFM. A nucleation can be predicted when 4 of 6 sequential residues in certain segment tend to form helix the helix formerand this number is 3 of 5 for strand.
The conformational parameters for each amino acid were calculated by considering the relative frequency of a given amino acid within a protein, its occurrence in a given type of secondary structure, and the fraction of residues occurring in that type of structure.
All the observed secondary structures derived from PDB crystal structure and DSSP protein secondary structure dictionary and predicted secondary structures calculated by our method and four other methods were performed with two processes: These parameters are measures of a given amino acid’s preference to be found in helix, sheet or coil.
Another index which was proposed recently is the SOV segment overlap measure. The Chou-Fasman method of secondary structure prediction depends on assigning a set of prediction values to a residue and then applying a simple algorithm to the conformational parameters and positional frequencies.
If p t exceeds an arbitrary cutoff value originally 7. We improved Chou-Fasman method in three aspects. Fortunately, Jiang et al. Turns are also evaluated in four-residue windows, but are calculated using a multi-step procedure because many turn regions contain amino acids that could also appear in helix or sheet regions. The difference which makes people doubt the consequence from Chou and Fasman derives from the test data set.