Abstract
Ancestral protein sequence reconstruction is a powerful technique for explicitly testing hypotheses about the evolution of molecular function, allowing researchers to meticulously dissect how historical changes in protein sequence impacted functional repertoire by altering the protein’s 3D structure. These techniques have provided concrete, experimentally validated insights into ancient evolutionary processes and help illuminate the complex relationship between protein sequence, structure, and function. Inferring the protein family phylogenies on which ancestral sequence reconstruction depends and reconstructing the sequences, themselves, are amenable to high-throughput computational analysis. However, determining the structures of ancestral-reconstructed proteins and characterizing their functions typically rely on time-consuming and expensive laboratory analyses, limiting most current studies to examining a relatively small number of specific hypotheses. For this reason, we have little detailed, unbiased information about how molecular function evolves across large protein family phylogenies. Here we describe a generalized protocol that integrates ancestral sequence reconstruction with structural homology modeling and structure-based molecular affinity prediction to characterize historical changes in protein function across families with thousands of individual sequences. We highlight key steps in the analysis protocol requiring particularly careful attention to avoid introducing potential errors as well as steps for which computationally efficient subroutines can be substituted for more intensive approaches, allowing researchers to scale the analysis up or down, depending on available resources and requirements for reproducibility and scientific rigor. In our view, this approach provides a compelling compliment to more laboratory-intensive procedures, generating important contextual information that can help guide detailed experiments.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The Python scripts described in this chapter are hosted with the online version of the book.
References
Dean AM, Thornton JW (2007) Mechanistic approaches to the study of evolution: the functional synthesis. Nat Rev Genet 8(9):675–688. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2160
Harms MJ, Thornton JW (2013) Evolutionary biochemistry: revealing the historical and physical causes of protein properties. Nat Rev Genet 14(8):559–571. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3540
Cole MF, Gaucher EA (2011) Exploiting models of molecular evolution to efficiently direct protein engineering. J Mol Evol 72(2):193–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00239-010-9415-2
Ogawa T, Shirai T (2014) Tracing ancestral specificity of lectins: ancestral sequence reconstruction method as a new approach in protein engineering. Methods Mol Biol 1200:539–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1292-6_44
Yang Z, Kumar S, Nei M (1995) A new method of inference of ancestral nucleotide and amino acid sequences. Genetics 141(4):1641–1650
Shih P, Malcolm BA, Rosenberg S, Kirsch JF, Wilson AC (1993) Reconstruction and testing of ancestral proteins. Methods Enzymol 224:576–590
Zmasek CM, Godzik A (2011) Strong functional patterns in the evolution of eukaryotic genomes revealed by the reconstruction of ancestral protein domain repertoires. Genome Biol 12(1):R4. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2011-12-1-r4
Whitfield JH, Zhang WH, Herde MK, Clifton BE, Radziejewski J, Janovjak H, Henneberger C, Jackson CJ (2015) Construction of a robust and sensitive arginine biosensor through ancestral protein reconstruction. Protein Sci 24(9):1412–1422. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.2721
Malcolm BA, Wilson KP, Matthews BW, Kirsch JF, Wilson AC (1990) Ancestral lysozymes reconstructed, neutrality tested, and thermostability linked to hydrocarbon packing. Nature 345(6270):86–89. https://doi.org/10.1038/345086a0
Clifton BE, Jackson CJ (2016) Ancestral protein reconstruction yields insights into adaptive evolution of binding specificity in solute-binding proteins. Cell Chem Biol 23(2):236–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chembiol.2015.12.010
Bridgham JT, Carroll SM, Thornton JW (2006) Evolution of hormone-receptor complexity by molecular exploitation. Science 312(5770):97–101. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1123348
Bridgham JT, Ortlund EA, Thornton JW (2009) An epistatic ratchet constrains the direction of glucocorticoid receptor evolution. Nature 461(7263):515–519. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08249
Voordeckers K, Brown CA, Vanneste K, van der Zande E, Voet A, Maere S, Verstrepen KJ (2012) Reconstruction of ancestral metabolic enzymes reveals molecular mechanisms underlying evolutionary innovation through gene duplication. PLoS Biol 10(12):e1001446. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001446
Ugalde JA, Chang BS, Matz MV (2004) Evolution of coral pigments recreated. Science 305(5689):1433. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1099597
van Hazel I, Sabouhanian A, Day L, Endler JA, Chang BS (2013) Functional characterization of spectral tuning mechanisms in the great bowerbird short-wavelength sensitive visual pigment (SWS1), and the origins of UV/violet vision in passerines and parrots. BMC Evol Biol 13:250. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-13-250
Hall BG (2006) Simple and accurate estimation of ancestral protein sequences. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103(14):5431–5436. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0508991103
Ashkenazy H, Penn O, Doron-Faigenboim A, Cohen O, Cannarozzi G, Zomer O, Pupko T (2012) FastML: a web server for probabilistic reconstruction of ancestral sequences. Nucleic Acids Res 40(Web Server issue):W580–W584. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks498
Redelings BD, Suchard MA (2005) Joint Bayesian estimation of alignment and phylogeny. Syst Biol 54(3):401–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150590947041
Suchard MA, Redelings BD (2006) BAli-Phy: simultaneous Bayesian inference of alignment and phylogeny. Bioinformatics 22(16):2047–2048. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btl175
Anderson DP, Whitney DS, Hanson-Smith V, Woznica A, Campodonico-Burnett W, Volkman BF, King N, Thornton JW, Prehoda KE (2016) Evolution of an ancient protein function involved in organized multicellularity in animals. Elife 5:e10147. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10147
Thornton JW (2004) Resurrecting ancient genes: experimental analysis of extinct molecules. Nat Rev Genet 5(5):366–375. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1324
Chang BS, Jonsson K, Kazmi MA, Donoghue MJ, Sakmar TP (2002) Recreating a functional ancestral archosaur visual pigment. Mol Biol Evol 19(9):1483–1489
Williams PD, Pollock DD, Blackburne BP, Goldstein RA (2006) Assessing the accuracy of ancestral protein reconstruction methods. PLoS Comput Biol 2(6):e69. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020069
Matsumoto T, Akashi H, Yang Z (2015) Evaluation of ancestral sequence reconstruction methods to infer nonstationary patterns of nucleotide substitution. Genetics 200(3):873–890. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.115.177386
Susko E, Roger AJ (2013) Problems with estimation of ancestral frequencies under stationary models. Syst Biol 62(2):330–338. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/sys075
Pollock DD, Chang BS (2007) Dealing with uncertainty in ancestral sequence reconstruction: sampling from the posterior distribution. In: Liberles DA (ed) Ancestral sequence reconstruction. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Dias R, Manny A, Kolaczkowski O, Kolaczkowski B (2017) Convergence of domain architecture, structure, and ligand affinity in animal and plant RNA-binding proteins. Mol Biol Evol 34(6):1429–1444. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msx090
Randall RN, Radford CE, Roof KA, Natarajan DK, Gaucher EA (2016) An experimental phylogeny to benchmark ancestral sequence reconstruction. Nat Commun 7:12847. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12847
Hanson-Smith V, Kolaczkowski B, Thornton JW (2010) Robustness of ancestral sequence reconstruction to phylogenetic uncertainty. Mol Biol Evol 27(9):1988–1999. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msq081
Kolaczkowski B, Thornton JW (2004) Performance of maximum parsimony and likelihood phylogenetics when evolution is heterogeneous. Nature 431(7011):980–984. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02917
Blanquart S, Lartillot N (2006) A Bayesian compound stochastic process for modeling nonstationary and nonhomogeneous sequence evolution. Mol Biol Evol 23(11):2058–2071. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msl091
Blanquart S, Lartillot N (2008) A site- and time-heterogeneous model of amino acid replacement. Mol Biol Evol 25(5):842–858. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msn018
Risso VA, Gavira JA, Mejia-Carmona DF, Gaucher EA, Sanchez-Ruiz JM (2013) Hyperstability and substrate promiscuity in laboratory resurrections of Precambrian beta-lactamases. J Am Chem Soc 135(8):2899–2902. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja311630a
Korithoski B, Kolaczkowski O, Mukherjee K, Kola R, Earl C, Kolaczkowski B (2015) Evolution of a novel antiviral immune-signaling interaction by partial-gene duplication. PLoS One 10(9):e0137276. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0137276
Pugh C, Kolaczkowski O, Manny A, Korithoski B, Kolaczkowski B (2016) Resurrecting ancestral structural dynamics of an antiviral immune receptor: adaptive binding pocket reorganization repeatedly shifts RNA preference. BMC Evol Biol 16(1):241. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-016-0818-6
Finnigan GC, Hanson-Smith V, Stevens TH, Thornton JW (2012) Evolution of increased complexity in a molecular machine. Nature 481(7381):360–364. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10724
Kratzer JT, Lanaspa MA, Murphy MN, Cicerchi C, Graves CL, Tipton PA, Ortlund EA, Johnson RJ, Gaucher EA (2014) Evolutionary history and metabolic insights of ancient mammalian uricases. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111(10):3763–3768. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320393111
Ortlund EA, Bridgham JT, Redinbo MR, Thornton JW (2007) Crystal structure of an ancient protein: evolution by conformational epistasis. Science 317(5844):1544–1548. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1142819
Marchler-Bauer A, Derbyshire MK, Gonzales NR, Lu S, Chitsaz F, Geer LY, Geer RC, He J, Gwadz M, Hurwitz DI, Lanczycki CJ, Lu F, Marchler GH, Song JS, Thanki N, Wang Z, Yamashita RA, Zhang D, Zheng C, Bryant SH (2015) CDD: NCBI’s conserved domain database. Nucleic Acids Res 43(Database issue):D222–D226. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku1221
Finn RD, Bateman A, Clements J, Coggill P, Eberhardt RY, Eddy SR, Heger A, Hetherington K, Holm L, Mistry J, Sonnhammer EL, Tate J, Punta M (2014) Pfam: the protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res 42(Database issue):D222–D230. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkt1223
Yue F, Shi J, Tang J (2009) Simultaneous phylogeny reconstruction and multiple sequence alignment. BMC Bioinformatics 10(Suppl 1):S11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-10-S1-S11
Fleissner R, Metzler D, von Haeseler A (2005) Simultaneous statistical multiple alignment and phylogeny reconstruction. Syst Biol 54(4):548–561. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150590950371
Herman JL, Challis CJ, Novak A, Hein J, Schmidler SC (2014) Simultaneous Bayesian estimation of alignment and phylogeny under a joint model of protein sequence and structure. Mol Biol Evol 31(9):2251–2266. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msu184
Liu K, Warnow TJ, Holder MT, Nelesen SM, Yu J, Stamatakis AP, Linder CR (2012) SATe-II: very fast and accurate simultaneous estimation of multiple sequence alignments and phylogenetic trees. Syst Biol 61(1):90–106. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syr095
Nuin PA, Wang Z, Tillier ER (2006) The accuracy of several multiple sequence alignment programs for proteins. BMC Bioinformatics 7:471. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-7-471
Pervez MT, Babar ME, Nadeem A, Aslam M, Awan AR, Aslam N, Hussain T, Naveed N, Qadri S, Waheed U, Shoaib M (2014) Evaluating the accuracy and efficiency of multiple sequence alignment methods. Evol Bioinformatics Online 10:205–217. https://doi.org/10.4137/EBO.S19199
Thompson JD, Linard B, Lecompte O, Poch O (2011) A comprehensive benchmark study of multiple sequence alignment methods: current challenges and future perspectives. PLoS One 6(3):e18093. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018093
Ogden TH, Rosenberg MS (2006) Multiple sequence alignment accuracy and phylogenetic inference. Syst Biol 55(2):314–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150500541730
Simmons MP, Muller KF, Webb CT (2011) The deterministic effects of alignment bias in phylogenetic inference. Cladistics 27(4):402–416
Wang LS, Leebens-Mack J, Kerr Wall P, Beckmann K, dePamphilis CW, Warnow T (2011) The impact of multiple protein sequence alignment on phylogenetic estimation. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform 8(4):1108–1119. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCBB.2009.68
Larkin MA, Blackshields G, Brown NP, Chenna R, McGettigan PA, McWilliam H, Valentin F, Wallace IM, Wilm A, Lopez R, Thompson JD, Gibson TJ, Higgins DG (2007) Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics 23(21):2947–2948. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btm404
Sievers F, Wilm A, Dineen D, Gibson TJ, Karplus K, Li W, Lopez R, McWilliam H, Remmert M, Soding J, Thompson JD, Higgins DG (2011) Fast, scalable generation of high-quality protein multiple sequence alignments using Clustal Omega. Mol Syst Biol 7:539. https://doi.org/10.1038/msb.2011.75
Edgar RC (2004) MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res 32(5):1792–1797. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkh340
Katoh K, Standley DM (2013) MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol 30(4):772–780. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst010
Liu Y, Schmidt B, Maskell DL (2010) MSAProbs: multiple sequence alignment based on pair hidden Markov models and partition function posterior probabilities. Bioinformatics 26(16):1958–1964. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btq338
Roshan U, Livesay DR (2006) Probalign: multiple sequence alignment using partition function posterior probabilities. Bioinformatics 22(22):2715–2721. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btl472
Do CB, Mahabhashyam MS, Brudno M, Batzoglou S (2005) ProbCons: probabilistic consistency-based multiple sequence alignment. Genome Res 15(2):330–340. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.2821705
Notredame C, Higgins DG, Heringa J (2000) T-Coffee: a novel method for fast and accurate multiple sequence alignment. J Mol Biol 302(1):205–217. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.2000.4042
Talavera G, Castresana J (2007) Improvement of phylogenies after removing divergent and ambiguously aligned blocks from protein sequence alignments. Syst Biol 56(4):564–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150701472164
Gouveia-Oliveira R, Sackett PW, Pedersen AG (2007) MaxAlign: maximizing usable data in an alignment. BMC Bioinformatics 8:312. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-312
Capella-Gutierrez S, Silla-Martinez JM, Gabaldon T (2009) trimAl: a tool for automated alignment trimming in large-scale phylogenetic analyses. Bioinformatics 25(15):1972–1973. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp348
Wu M, Chatterji S, Eisen JA (2012) Accounting for alignment uncertainty in phylogenomics. PLoS One 7(1):e30288. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030288
Castresana J (2000) Selection of conserved blocks from multiple alignments for their use in phylogenetic analysis. Mol Biol Evol 17(4):540–552
Wheeler WC, Gatesy J, DeSalle R (1995) Elision: a method for accommodating multiple molecular sequence alignments with alignment-ambiguous sites. Mol Phylogenet Evol 4(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1006/mpev.1995.1001
de Queiroz A, Gatesy J (2007) The supermatrix approach to systematics. Trends Ecol Evol 22(1):34–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.10.002
Mar JC, Harlow TJ, Ragan MA (2005) Bayesian and maximum likelihood phylogenetic analyses of protein sequence data under relative branch-length differences and model violation. BMC Evol Biol 5:8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-5-8
Kolaczkowski B, Thornton JW (2009) Long-branch attraction bias and inconsistency in Bayesian phylogenetics. PLoS One 4(12):e7891. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0007891
Price MN, Dehal PS, Arkin AP (2010) FastTree 2--approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PLoS One 5(3):e9490. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0009490
Liu K, Linder CR, Warnow T (2011) RAxML and FastTree: comparing two methods for large-scale maximum likelihood phylogeny estimation. PLoS One 6(11):e27731. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0027731
Stamatakis A (2014) RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30(9):1312–1313. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033
Ripplinger J, Sullivan J (2008) Does choice in model selection affect maximum likelihood analysis? Syst Biol 57(1):76–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150801898920
Ripplinger J, Sullivan J (2010) Assessment of substitution model adequacy using frequentist and Bayesian methods. Mol Biol Evol 27(12):2790–2803. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msq168
Darriba D, Taboada GL, Doallo R, Posada D (2011) ProtTest 3: fast selection of best-fit models of protein evolution. Bioinformatics 27(8):1164–1165. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btr088
Le SQ, Gascuel O (2008) An improved general amino acid replacement matrix. Mol Biol Evol 25(7):1307–1320. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msn067
Anisimova M, Gascuel O (2006) Approximate likelihood-ratio test for branches: a fast, accurate, and powerful alternative. Syst Biol 55(4):539–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150600755453
Anisimova M, Gil M, Dufayard JF, Dessimoz C, Gascuel O (2011) Survey of branch support methods demonstrates accuracy, power, and robustness of fast likelihood-based approximation schemes. Syst Biol 60(5):685–699. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syr041
Hill J, Davis KE (2014) The Supertree Toolkit 2: a new and improved software package with a Graphical User Interface for supertree construction. Biodivers Data J 2:e1053. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.2.e1053
Pagel M, Meade A, Barker D (2004) Bayesian estimation of ancestral character states on phylogenies. Syst Biol 53(5):673–684. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150490522232
Eswar N, Eramian D, Webb B, Shen MY, Sali A (2008) Protein structure modeling with MODELLER. Methods Mol Biol 426:145–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-058-8_8
Madhusudhan MS, Webb BM, Marti-Renom MA, Eswar N, Sali A (2009) Alignment of multiple protein structures based on sequence and structure features. Protein Eng Des Sel 22(9):569–574. https://doi.org/10.1093/protein/gzp040
Kalaimathy S, Sowdhamini R, Kanagarajadurai K (2011) Critical assessment of structure-based sequence alignment methods at distant relationships. Brief Bioinform 12(2):163–175. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbq025
Kim C, Lee B (2007) Accuracy of structure-based sequence alignment of automatic methods. BMC Bioinformatics 8:355. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-355
Ashtawy HM, Mahapatra NR (2012) A comparative assessment of ranking accuracies of conventional and machine-learning-based scoring functions for protein-ligand binding affinity prediction. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform 9(5):1301–1313. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCBB.2012.36
Ashtawy HM, Mahapatra NR (2015) BgN-Score and BsN-Score: bagging and boosting based ensemble neural networks scoring functions for accurate binding affinity prediction of protein-ligand complexes. BMC Bioinformatics 16(Suppl 4):S8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-16-S4-S8
Brylinski M (2013) Nonlinear scoring functions for similarity-based ligand docking and binding affinity prediction. J Chem Inf Model 53(11):3097–3112. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci400510e
Rose PW, Bi C, Bluhm WF, Christie CH, Dimitropoulos D, Dutta S, Green RK, Goodsell DS, Prlic A, Quesada M, Quinn GB, Ramos AG, Westbrook JD, Young J, Zardecki C, Berman HM, Bourne PE (2013) The RCSB Protein Data Bank: new resources for research and education. Nucleic Acids Res 41(Database issue):D475–D482. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks1200
Comeau SR, Gatchell DW, Vajda S, Camacho CJ (2004) ClusPro: an automated docking and discrimination method for the prediction of protein complexes. Bioinformatics 20(1):45–50
Kastritis PL, Bonvin AM (2010) Are scoring functions in protein-protein docking ready to predict interactomes? Clues from a novel binding affinity benchmark. J Proteome Res 9(5):2216–2225. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr9009854
Kozakov D, Beglov D, Bohnuud T, Mottarella SE, Xia B, Hall DR, Vajda S (2013) How good is automated protein docking? Proteins 81(12):2159–2166. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.24403
Lensink MF, Wodak SJ (2013) Docking, scoring, and affinity prediction in CAPRI. Proteins 81(12):2082–2095. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.24428
Roberts VA, Thompson EE, Pique ME, Perez MS, Ten Eyck LF (2013) DOT2: macromolecular docking with improved biophysical models. J Comput Chem 34(20):1743–1758. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.23304
Dolinsky TJ, Czodrowski P, Li H, Nielsen JE, Jensen JH, Klebe G, Baker NA (2007) PDB2PQR: expanding and upgrading automated preparation of biomolecular structures for molecular simulations. Nucleic Acids Res 35(Web Server issue):W522–W525. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkm276
Pronk S, Pall S, Schulz R, Larsson P, Bjelkmar P, Apostolov R, Shirts MR, Smith JC, Kasson PM, van der Spoel D, Hess B, Lindahl E (2013) GROMACS 4.5: a high-throughput and highly parallel open source molecular simulation toolkit. Bioinformatics 29(7):845–854. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt055
Dias R, Timmers LF, Caceres RA, de Azevedo WF Jr (2008) Evaluation of molecular docking using polynomial empirical scoring functions. Curr Drug Targets 9(12):1062–1070
De Paris R, Quevedo CV, Ruiz DD, Norberto de Souza O, Barros RC (2015) Clustering molecular dynamics trajectories for optimizing docking experiments. Comput Intell Neurosci 2015:916240. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/916240
Seo MH, Park J, Kim E, Hohng S, Kim HS (2014) Protein conformational dynamics dictate the binding affinity for a ligand. Nat Commun 5:3724. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4724
Kruger DM, Ignacio Garzon J, Chacon P, Gohlke H (2014) DrugScorePPI knowledge-based potentials used as scoring and objective function in protein-protein docking. PLoS One 9(2):e89466. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089466
Camacho CJ, Zhang C (2005) FastContact: rapid estimate of contact and binding free energies. Bioinformatics 21(10):2534–2536. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bti322
Dias R, Kolaczkowski B (2017) Improving the accuracy of high-throughput protein-protein affinity prediction may require better training data. BMC Bioinformatics 18(Suppl 5):102. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-017-1533-z
Dias R, Kolazckowski B (2015) Different combinations of atomic interactions predict protein-small molecule and protein-DNA/RNA affinities with similar accuracy. Proteins 83(11):2100–2114. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.24928
O’Boyle NM, Banck M, James CA, Morley C, Vandermeersch T, Hutchison GR (2011) Open Babel: an open chemical toolbox. J Cheminform 3:33. https://doi.org/10.1186/1758-2946-3-33
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
1 Electronic Supplementary Material
Data 1
Python scripts and data required for the presented examples. (ZIP 10 KB)
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Aadland, K., Pugh, C., Kolaczkowski, B. (2019). High-Throughput Reconstruction of Ancestral Protein Sequence, Structure, and Molecular Function. In: Sikosek, T. (eds) Computational Methods in Protein Evolution. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 1851. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-8736-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-8736-8_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-8735-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-8736-8
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols