Predicting the conformation of proteins man versus machine
- 28 June 1993
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wiley in FEBS Letters
- Vol. 325 (1-2) , 29-33
- https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-5793(93)81408-r
Abstract
Two types of approaches for predicting the conformation of proteins from sequence data have lately received attention: ‘black box’ tools that generate fully automated predictions of secondary structure from a set of homologous protein sequences, and methods involving the expertise of a human biochemist who is assisted, but not replaced, by computer tools. A friendly controversy has emerged as to which approach offers a brighter future. In fact, both are necessary. Nevertheless, a snapshot of the controversy at this instant offers much insight into the structure prediction problem itself.Keywords
This publication has 41 references indexed in Scilit:
- The nitrogenase MoFe proteinFEBS Letters, 1993
- Protein structure predictionNature, 1993
- Predicted Secondary Structure for the Src Homology 3 DomainJournal of Molecular Biology, 1993
- Predicting protein secondary structure with a nearest-neighbor algorithmJournal of Molecular Biology, 1992
- SH3 — an abundant protein domain in search of a functionFEBS Letters, 1992
- Conservation analysis and structure prediction of the SH2 family of phosphotyrosine binding domainsFEBS Letters, 1992
- Prediction of progress at lastNature, 1991
- The ribonuclease from an extinct bovid ruminantFEBS Letters, 1990
- Knowledge-based prediction of protein structures and the design of novel moleculesNature, 1987
- Analysis of the accuracy and implications of simple methods for predicting the secondary structure of globular proteinsJournal of Molecular Biology, 1978