No abstract

The Conserved Domain Database (CDD) is now indexed as a separate database within the Entrez system and linked to other Entrez databases such as MEDLINE(R). This allows users to search for domain types by name, for example, or to view the domain architecture of any protein in Entrez's sequence database. CDD can be accessed on the WorldWideWeb at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=cdd. Users may also employ the CD-Search service to identify conserved domains in new sequences, at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Structure/cdd/wrpsb.cgi. CD-Search results, and pre-computed links from Entrez's protein database, are calculated using the RPS-BLAST algorithm and Position Specific Score Matrices (PSSMs) derived from CDD alignments. CD-Searches are also run by default for protein-protein queries submitted to BLAST(R) at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/BLAST. CDD mirrors the publicly available domain alignment collections SMART and PFAM, and now also contains alignment models curated at NCBI. Structure information is used to identify the core substructure likely to be present in all family members, and to produce sequence alignments consistent with structure conservation. This alignment model allows NCBI curators to annotate 'columns' corresponding to functional sites conserved among family members.

We present an analysis of 10 blind predictions prepared for a recent conference, "Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction." The sequences of these proteins are not detectably similar to those of any protein in the structure database then available, but we attempted, by a threading method, to recognize similarity to known domain folds. Four of the 10 proteins, as we subsequently learned, do indeed show significant similarity to then-known structures. For 2 of these proteins the predictions were accurate, in the sense that a similar structure was at or near the top of the list of threading scores, and the threading alignment agreed well with the corresponding structural alignment. For the best predicted model mean alignment error relative to the optimal structural alignment was 2.7 residues, arising entirely from small "register shifts" of strands or helices. In the analysis we attempt to identify factors responsible for these successes and failures. Since our threading method does not use gap penalties, we may readily distinguish between errors arising from our prior definition of the "cores" of known structures and errors arising from inherent limitations in the threading potential. It would appear from the results that successful substructure recognition depends most critically on accurate definition of the "fold" of a database protein. This definition must correctly delineate substructures that are, and are not, likely to be conserved during protein evolution.