D-I-TASSER A6NI28

D-I-TASSER results for A6NI28

[Click result.zip to download all results on this page]

Summary of the Protein

Uniprot ID: A6NI28
Protein Name: Rho GTPase-activating protein 42
Gene Name: ARHGAP42

Input Sequence in FASTA format

>A6NI28 (874 residues)
MGLPTLEFSDSYLDSPDFRERLQCHEIELERTNKFIKELIKDGSLLIGALRNLSMAVQKF
SQSLQDFQFECIGDAETDDEISIAQSLKEFARLLIAVEEERRRLIQNANDVLIAPLEKFR
KEQIGAAKDGKKKFDKESEKYYSILEKHLNLSAKKKESHLQEADTQIDREHQNFYEASLE
YVFKIQEVQEKKKFEFVEPLLSFLQGLFTFYHEGYELAQEFAPYKQQLQFNLQNTRNNFE
STRQEVERLMQRMKSANQDYRPPSQWTMEGYLYVQEKRPLGFTWIKHYCTYDKGSKTFTM
SVSEMKSSGKMNGLVTSSPEMFKLKSCIRRKTDSIDKRFCFDIEVVERHGIITLQAFSEA
NRKLWLEAMDGKEPIYTLPAIISKKEEMYLNEAGFNFVRKCIQAVETRGITILGLYRIGG
VNSKVQKLMNTTFSPKSPPDIDIDIELWDNKTITSGLKNYLRCLAEPLMTYKLHKDFIIA
VKSDDQNYRVEAVHALVHKLPEKNREMLDILIKHLVKVSLHSQQNLMTVSNLGVIFGPTL
MRAQEETVAAMMNIKFQNIVVEILIEHYEKIFHTAPDPSIPLPQPQSRSGSRRTRAICLS
TGSRKPRGRYTPCLAEPDSDSYSSSPDSTPMGSIESLSSHSSEQNSTTKSASCQPREKSG
GIPWIATPSSSNGQKSLGLWTTSPESSSREDATKTDAESDCQSVASVTSPGDVSPPIDLV
KKEPYGLSGLKRASASSLRSISAAEGNKSYSGSIQSLTSVGSKETPKASPNPDLPPKMCR
RLRLDTASSNGYQRPGSVVAAKAQLFENVGSPKPVSSGRQAKAMYSCKAEHSHELSFPQG
AIFSNVYPSVEPGWLKATYEGKTGLVPENYVVFL

Predicted Contact and Distance Map Used in D-I-TASSER simulation

Contact Map

Distance Map

D-I-TASSER simulation is guided by the consensus contact map (left figure) and distance map (right figure) derived based on confidence scores of DeepPotential. In the contact, distance map and hydrogen bond networks, the axes mark the residue index along the sequence. For the contact map, each dot represents a residue pair with predicted contact, while for the distance map and hydrogen bond network, a color scale represents a distance of 1-20+ angstroms or a angle of 0-180 degree.

Information of Domain

No. of Domain	Domain	Domain Boundary	Length of Domain	Models of Domain	Sequence
1	A6NI28-D1	1-256	256		MGLPTLEFSDSYLDSPDFRERLQCHEIELERTNKFIKELIKDGSLLIGALRNLSMAVQKFSQSLQDFQFECIGDAETDDEISIAQSLKEFARLLIAVEEERRRLIQNANDVLIAPLEKFRKEQIGAAKDGKKKFDKESEKYYSILEKHLNLSAKKKESHLQEADTQIDREHQNFYEASLEYVFKIQEVQEKKKFEFVEPLLSFLQGLFTFYHEGYELAQEFAPYKQQLQFNLQNTRNNFESTRQEVERLMQRMKSA
2	A6NI28-D2	257-373	117		NQDYRPPSQWTMEGYLYVQEKRPLGFTWIKHYCTYDKGSKTFTMSVSEMKSSGKMNGLVTSSPEMFKLKSCIRRKTDSIDKRFCFDIEVVERHGIITLQAFSEANRKLWLEAMDGKE
3	A6NI28-D3	374-590	217		PIYTLPAIISKKEEMYLNEAGFNFVRKCIQAVETRGITILGLYRIGGVNSKVQKLMNTTFSPKSPPDIDIDIELWDNKTITSGLKNYLRCLAEPLMTYKLHKDFIIAVKSDDQNYRVEAVHALVHKLPEKNREMLDILIKHLVKVSLHSQQNLMTVSNLGVIFGPTLMRAQEETVAAMMNIKFQNIVVEILIEHYEKIFHTAPDPSIPLPQPQSRSG
4	A6NI28-D4	591-874	284		SRRTRAICLSTGSRKPRGRYTPCLAEPDSDSYSSSPDSTPMGSIESLSSHSSEQNSTTKSASCQPREKSGGIPWIATPSSSNGQKSLGLWTTSPESSSREDATKTDAESDCQSVASVTSPGDVSPPIDLVKKEPYGLSGLKRASASSLRSISAAEGNKSYSGSIQSLTSVGSKETPKASPNPDLPPKMCRRLRLDTASSNGYQRPGSVVAAKAQLFENVGSPKPVSSGRQAKAMYSCKAEHSHELSFPQGAIFSNVYPSVEPGWLKATYEGKTGLVPENYVVFL

Top 1 final models from D-I-TASSER

Click to view	Rank^a	Download	Estimated TM-score^b
	1	model1.pdb.gz	0.47

(a)

D-I-TASSER simulations generate a large ensemble of structural conformations, i.e. decoys. These decoys are clustered by SPICKER based on pairwise structure similarity to report up to five final models from the five largest clusters. Models are ranked in descending order of cluster size. If the simulations converge well, it is possible to have less than 5 models generated, which is usually an indication of good model quality.

(b)

The model confidence is quantitatified by estimated TM-score (eTM-score), calculated based on significance of threading template alignments, contact map satisfaction rate, mean absolute error between distance of model and distance of DeepPotential, and convergence of D-I-TASSER simulations. eTM-score is typically in the range of [0, 1], with higher eTM-score signifies higher model confidence.

Proteins with similar structure

Top 10 structural analogs in PDB (as identified by TM-align)

Rank	PDB Hit	TM-score	RMSD^a	IDEN^a	Cov.	Download Alignment
1	5amqA	0.33	8.84	0.044	0.532	model1_5amqA.pdb.gz
2	6yejA	0.32	8.38	0.035	0.489	model1_6yejA.pdb.gz
3	7kveB	0.31	8.51	0.036	0.489	model1_7kveB.pdb.gz
4	6mf0A	0.31	8.65	0.050	0.495	model1_6mf0A.pdb.gz
5	6hqvA	0.31	9.03	0.056	0.503	model1_6hqvA.pdb.gz
6	4bgdA	0.31	9.22	0.058	0.509	model1_4bgdA.pdb.gz
7	4bxsV	0.30	8.67	0.040	0.479	model1_4bxsV.pdb.gz
8	6g2dC	0.30	8.11	0.050	0.455	model1_6g2dC.pdb.gz
9	7cklA	0.30	8.55	0.038	0.469	model1_7cklA.pdb.gz
10	6h02A	0.30	8.36	0.057	0.457	model1_6h02A.pdb.gz

(a)	Query structure is shown in cartoon, while the structural analog is displayed using backbone trace.
(b)	Ranking of proteins is based on TM-score of the structural alignment between the query structure and known structures in the PDB library.
(c)	RMSD^a is the RMSD between residues that are structurally aligned by TM-align.
(d)	IDEN^a is the percentage sequence identity in the structurally aligned region.
(e)	Cov. represents the coverage of the alignment by TM-align and is equal to the number of structurally aligned residues divided by length of the query protein.

Predicted Gene Ontology (GO) Terms

Molecular Function (MF)

GO term	Cscore^GO	Name
GO:0098772	0.78	molecular function regulator
GO:0030234	0.74	enzyme regulator activity
GO:0005096	0.70	GTPase activator activity
GO:1901363	0.54	heterocyclic compound binding
GO:0097159	0.54	organic cyclic compound binding

Download full result of the above consensus prediction.

Click the graph to show a high resolution version.

(a)

Cscore^GO is the confidence score of predicted GO terms. Cscore^GO values range in between [0-1]; where a higher value indicates a better confidence in predicting the function using the template.

(b)

The graph shows the predicted terms within the Gene Ontology hierachy for Molecular Function. Confidently predicted terms are color coded by Cscore^GO:

[0.4,0.5)

[0.5,0.6)

[0.6,0.7)

[0.7,0.8)

[0.8,0.9)

[0.9,1.0]

Biological Process (BP)

GO term	Cscore^GO	Name
GO:0065007	0.94	biological regulation
GO:0050789	0.71	regulation of biological process
GO:0050794	0.69	regulation of cellular process
GO:0009987	0.63	cellular process
GO:0050790	0.50	regulation of catalytic activity
GO:0044699	0.50	single-organism process

Download full result of the above consensus prediction.

Click the graph to show a high resolution version.

(a)

Cscore^GO is the confidence score of predicted GO terms. Cscore^GO values range in between [0-1]; where a higher value indicates a better confidence in predicting the function using the template.

(b)

The graph shows the predicted terms within the Gene Ontology hierachy for Biological Process. Confidently predicted terms are color coded by Cscore^GO:

[0.4,0.5)

[0.5,0.6)

[0.6,0.7)

[0.7,0.8)

[0.8,0.9)

[0.9,1.0]

Cellular Component (CC)

GO term	Cscore^GO	Name
GO:0044464	1.00	cell part
GO:0044424	0.99	intracellular part
GO:0044444	0.80	cytoplasmic part
GO:0043226	0.71	organelle
GO:0043229	0.70	intracellular organelle
GO:0005737	0.67	cytoplasm
GO:0043232	0.53	intracellular non-membrane-bounded organelle
GO:0043227	0.52	membrane-bounded organelle
GO:0044422	0.50	organelle part

Download full result of the above consensus prediction.

Click the graph to show a high resolution version.

(a)

Cscore^GO is the confidence score of predicted GO terms. Cscore^GO values range in between [0-1]; where a higher value indicates a better confidence in predicting the function using the template.

(b)

The graph shows the predicted terms within the Gene Ontology hierachy for Cellular Component. Confidently predicted terms are color coded by Cscore^GO:

[0.4,0.5)

[0.5,0.6)

[0.6,0.7)

[0.7,0.8)

[0.8,0.9)

[0.9,1.0]

Predicted Enzyme Commission (EC) Numbers

Top 5 enzyme homologs in PDB

Rank	Cscore^EC	PDB Hit	TM-score	RMSD^a	IDEN^a	Cov.	EC Number	Predicted Active Site Residues
1	0.060	1ynnD	0.227	8.64	0.031	0.353	2.7.7.6	NA
2	0.060	2fhcA	0.261	8.72	0.051	0.418	3.2.1.41	460,515
3	0.060	2pffD	0.248	8.86	0.016	0.397	2.3.1.86	394,403
4	0.060	2jfdA	0.156	6.71	0.041	0.214	2.3.1.85	NA
5	0.060	2e1qA	0.266	8.41	0.058	0.413	1.17.3.2 1.17.1.4	NA

	Click on the radio buttons to visualize predicted active site residues.
(a)	Cscore^EC is the confidence score for the Enzyme Commission (EC) number prediction. Cscore^EC values range in between [0-1]; where a higher score indicates a more reliable EC number prediction.
(b)	TM-score is a measure of global structural similarity between query and template protein.
(c)	RMSD^a is the RMSD between residues that are structurally aligned by TM-align.
(d)	IDEN^a is the percentage sequence identity in the structurally aligned region.
(e)	Cov. represents the coverage of global structural alignment and is equal to the number of structurally aligned residues divided by length of the query protein.

Predicted Ligand Binding Sites

Template proteins with similar binding site:

Rank	Cscore^LB	PDB Hit	TM-score	RMSD^a	IDEN^a	Cov.	BS-score	Lig. Name	Download Complex	Predicted binding site residues
1	0.01	3cmvD	0.247	9.18	0.058	0.413	0.15	ANP	complex1.pdb.gz	395,401,402,430
2	0.01	1xmvA	0.135	7.24	0.055	0.193	0.19	ADP	complex2.pdb.gz	394,395,457,460
3	0.01	1lm1A	0.273	8.97	0.037	0.444	0.11	FMN	complex3.pdb.gz	454,460,461,464
4	0.01	3cmvF	0.255	9.17	0.041	0.422	0.21	ANP	complex4.pdb.gz	400,401,403,404,405
5	0.01	1ofdA	0.263	8.46	0.023	0.407	0.39	F3S	complex5.pdb.gz	410,415,416,417,418,419

	Click on the radio buttons to visualize predicted binding site and residues.
(a)	Cscore^LB is the confidence score of predicted binding site. Cscore^LB values range in between [0-1]; where a higher score indicates a more reliable ligand-binding site prediction.
(b)	BS-score is a measure of local similarity (sequence & structure) between template binding site and predicted binding site in the query structure. Based on large scale benchmarking analysis, we have observed that a BS-score >1 reflects a significant local match between the predicted and template binding site.
(c)	TM-score is a measure of global structural similarity between query and template protein.
(d)	RMSD^a the RMSD between residues that are structurally aligned by TM-align.
(e)	IDEN^a is the percentage sequence identity in the structurally aligned region.
(f)	Cov. represents the coverage of global structural alignment and is equal to the number of structurally aligned residues divided by length of the query protein.

[Click result.zip to download all results on this page]

References:
1.	Wei Zheng, Qiqige Wuyun, Yang Li, Quancheng Liu, Xiaogen Zhou, Yiheng Zhu, P. Lydia Freddolino, Yang Zhang. Integrating deep learning potentials with I-TASSER for single- and multi-domain protein structure prediction. Submitted. 2023.