These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Evaluation of protein fold comparison servers.
    Author: Novotny M, Madsen D, Kleywegt GJ.
    Journal: Proteins; 2004 Feb 01; 54(2):260-70. PubMed ID: 14696188.
    Abstract:
    When a new protein structure has been determined, comparison with the database of known structures enables classification of its fold as new or belonging to a known class of proteins. This in turn may provide clues about the function of the protein. A large number of fold comparison programs have been developed, but they have never been subjected to a comprehensive and critical comparative analysis. Here we describe an evaluation of 11 publicly available, Web-based servers for automatic fold comparison. Both their functionality (e.g., user interface, presentation, and annotation of results) and their performance (i.e., how well established structural similarities are recognized) were assessed. The servers were subjected to a battery of performance tests covering a broad spectrum of folds as well as special cases, such as multidomain proteins, Calpha-only models, new folds, and NMR-based models. The CATH structural classification system was used as a reference. These tests revealed the strong and weak sides of each server. On the whole, CE, DALI, MATRAS, and VAST showed the best performance, but none of the servers achieved a 100% success rate. Where no structurally similar proteins are found by any individual server, it is recommended to try one or two other servers before any conclusions concerning the novelty of a fold are put on paper.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]