D-I-TASSER Q8NB50-D3

D-I-TASSER results for Q8NB50-D3

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

Input Sequence in FASTA format

>Q8NB50 (42 residues)
SSSLRVHKRIHTGEKPYKCEECGKAYMSYSSLINHKSTHSGE

Predicted Secondary Structure

Sequence	20 40 \| \| SSSLRVHKRIHTGEKPYKCEECGKAYMSYSSLINHKSTHSGE
Prediction	CCCCCCSCCCSCCCCCSCCCCCCCSSCCCCCCCCSCCCCCCC
Confidence	986531012115988821677876544433430112343798
	H:Helix; S:Strand; C:Coil

Predicted Solvent Accessibility

Sequence	20 40 \| \| SSSLRVHKRIHTGEKPYKCEECGKAYMSYSSLINHKSTHSGE
Prediction	856245242314444435175124303442414414343478
	Values range from 0 (buried residue) to 8 (highly exposed residue)

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

Contact Map

Distance Map

Hydrogen bond networks

D-I-TASSER simulation is guided by the consensus contact map (left figure), distance map (middle figure) and Hydrogen bond network (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.

Top 10 threading templates used by D-I-TASSER

Rank

PDB
hit

ID1

ID2

Cov

Norm.
Zscore

Download
alignment

                  20                  40

                   |                   |

SS
Seq

CCCCCCSCCCSCCCCCSCCCCCCCSSCCCCCCCCSCCCCCCC
SSSLRVHKRIHTGEKPYKCEECGKAYMSYSSLINHKSTHSGE

2drpD

0.22

0.21

6.76

1.17

DEthreader

SNFCRHYVTSKRNVKVYPCPFCFKEFTRKDNMTAHVKIHKI-

5v3gD3

0.54

0.52

15.12

3.38

SPARKS-K

-SHLLSHQRTHTGEKPYVCRECGRGFRDKSNLLSHQRTHTGE

1llmC

0.33

10.00

0.68

MapAlign

SDHLTTHIRTHTGEKPFACDICGRKFARSDERKRHRDIQHIL

1llmC

0.33

10.00

0.41

CEthreader

SDHLTTHIRTHTGEKPFACDICGRKFARSDERKRHRDIQHIL

5v3jE1

0.55

15.79

1.95

MUSTER

PSHLLRHQRIHTGEKPHKCKECGKAFRYDTQLSLHLLTHAGA

1x6fA

0.19

6.14

1.09

HHsearch

KRDFIILGGPRLQNSTYQCKHCDSKLQSTAELTSHLNIHNEE

5v3gD3

0.54

0.52

15.12

0.81

FFAS-3D

-SHLLSHQRTHTGEKPYVCRECGRGFRDKSNLLSHQRTHTGE

2rqlA

0.07

2.90

0.50

EigenThreader

VEITFDLKVE-KVTHTSDAGGIHASAEDMYAAIDQLTKHKDK

5v3mC

0.48

13.86

3.44

CNFpred

NAQLSLHHRVHTDEKCFECKECGKAFMRPSHLLRHQRIHTGE

2lt7A

0.38

0.36

10.60

1.17

DEthreader

CS-LRRHFNIHS-WKKYPCRYCEKVFPLAEYRTKHEIHHTGE

(a)	ID1 is the number of template residues identical to query divided by number of aligned residues.
(b)	ID2 is the number of template residues identical to query divided by query sequence length.
(c)	Cov is equal the number of aligned template residues divided by query sequence length.
(d)	Norm. Zscore is the normalized Z-score of the threading alignments. A Normalized Z-score >1 means a good alignment and is highlighted in bold.
(e)	Download alignment lists the threading program used to identify the template, and provide the 3D structure of aligned regions of threading templates (threading[1-10].pdb.gz).
(f)	Template residues identical to query sequence are highlighted in color.

Top 1 final models from D-I-TASSER

Click to view	Rank^a	Download	Estimated TM-score^b
	1	model1.pdb.gz	0.4863

(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	5egbA1	0.75	1.93	0.537	0.952	model1_5egbA1.pdb.gz
2	5v3gD	0.75	2.04	0.537	0.952	model1_5v3gD.pdb.gz
3	2i13A	0.74	1.15	0.537	0.905	model1_2i13A.pdb.gz
4	1llmC	0.74	2.28	0.317	0.952	model1_1llmC.pdb.gz
5	2jpaA	0.73	1.56	0.390	0.929	model1_2jpaA.pdb.gz
6	6e93A	0.73	1.48	0.375	0.952	model1_6e93A.pdb.gz
7	1a1fA	0.73	1.65	0.439	0.929	model1_1a1fA.pdb.gz
8	6ml2A2	0.71	2.15	0.381	0.929	model1_6ml2A2.pdb.gz
9	2lt7A	0.71	2.11	0.325	0.929	model1_2lt7A.pdb.gz
10	2kmkA	0.70	1.89	0.268	0.905	model1_2kmkA.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:0003700	0.86	transcription factor activity, sequence-specific DNA binding
GO:1901363	0.68	heterocyclic compound binding
GO:0097159	0.68	organic cyclic compound binding
GO:0003676	0.54	nucleic acid binding
GO:0003677	0.52	DNA binding
GO:0046872	0.51	metal ion 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	0.98	biological regulation
GO:0050794	0.97	regulation of cellular process
GO:0060255	0.94	regulation of macromolecule metabolic process
GO:0006355	0.93	regulation of transcription, DNA-templated
GO:0009987	0.60	cellular process
GO:0044699	0.56	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:0005634	1.00	nucleus

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	0.066	2gkvA	0.509	2.12	0.182	0.738	3.4.21.81	NA
2	0.060	1ii2A	0.550	2.23	0.024	0.833	4.1.1.49	NA
3	0.060	1tkyA	0.328	1.80	0.024	0.429	6.1.1.3	NA
4	0.060	2pq4A	0.446	2.22	0.057	0.691	1.7.99.4	31
5	0.060	3em5A	0.531	2.05	0.061	0.786	3.2.1.39	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	0.31	1meyC	0.705	1.55	0.524	0.929	0.89	UUU	complex1.pdb.gz	17,29,30,34
2	0.29	1meyF	0.723	1.49	0.513	0.881	0.63	QNA	complex2.pdb.gz	7,10,24,28,31,34,35,38
3	0.08	1llmC	0.738	2.28	0.317	0.952	0.84	QNA	complex3.pdb.gz	7,10,24,26,28,31,34,35
4	0.06	1f2i0	0.662	2.09	0.385	0.905	0.64	III	complex4.pdb.gz	16,17,27,28,32,33,36,40,42

	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.