The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Protein Structure Comparison by Alignment of Distance Matrices
Abstract
With a rapidly growing pool of known tertiary structures, the importance of protein structure comparison parallels that of sequence alignment. We have developed a novel algorithm (DALI) for optimal pairwise alignment of protein structures. The three-dimensional co-ordinates of each protein are used to calculate residue-residue (C alpha-C alpha) distance matrices. The distance matrices are first decomposed into elementary contact patterns, e.g. hexapeptide-hexapeptide submatrices. Then, similar contact patterns in the two matrices are paired and combined into larger consistent sets of pairs. A Monte Carlo procedure is used to optimize a similarity score defined in terms of equivalent intramolecular distances. Several alignments are optimized in parallel, leading to simultaneous detection of the best, second-best and so on solutions. The method allows sequence gaps of any length, reversal of chain direction and free topological connectivity of aligned segments. Sequential connectivity can be imposed as an option. The method is fully automatic and identifies structural resemblances and common structural cores accurately and sensitively, even in the presence of geometrical distortions. An all-against-all alignment of over 200 representative protein structures results in an objective classification of known three-dimensional folds in agreement with visual classifications. Unexpected topological similarities of biological interest have been detected, e.g. between the bacterial toxin colicin A and globins, and between the eukaryotic POU-specific DNA-binding domain and the bacterial lambda repressor.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The templates were pairwise structurally aligned according to DALILite (41,42), using HIF-2 α as a reference. The sequence alignments were obtained by CLUSTALW (43), and the result was confirmed using the Align-2D command within the MODELLER program (37-39).”
From Structural and Functional Characterization of the Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Ligand Binding Domain by Homology Modeling and Mutational Analysis (2007) · cites this paper as [41]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Murzin, A. G., Brenner, S. E., Hubbard, T., & Chothia, C. (1995) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/s0022-2836(05)80134-2 · Cited by 6,445
“This early work has been taken further in more recent papers; see, for example, Holm & Sander (1993), Orengo et al. (1993), Overington et al. (1993) and Yee & Dill (1993).”
ResultTM-align: a protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score
Zhang, Y. (2005) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gki524 · Cited by 3,774
“Since DALI only reports those alignments of significant Z -score and 17 086/39 800 pairs have DALI outputs, we take averages for all four methods over these 17 086 structural pairs in the lower part of Table 1.”
InfluentialRecurrence plots for the analysis of complex systems
Marwan, N., Romano, M. C., Thiel, M., & Kurths, J. (2007) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2006.11.001 · Cited by 3,965
Krissinel, E., & Henrick, K. (2004) · Acta Crystallographica Section D Biological Crystallography · doi:10.1107/s0907444904026460 · Cited by 3,788
Carbohydrate-binding modules: fine-tuning polysaccharide recognition
Boraston, A. B., Bolam, D. N., Gilbert, H. J., & Davies, G. J. (2004) · Biochemical Journal · doi:10.1042/bj20040892 · Cited by 2,034
Metadata
- Authors
- Holm, L., & Sander, C.
- Affiliations
- European Molecular Biology Laboratory (DE)
- Venue
- Journal of Molecular Biology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1993-09
- Volume
- 233
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 123-138
- ISSN
- 0022-2836 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2022058405
- Cited by
- 3,984
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 42 · 2016: 53 · 2015: 65 · 2014: 73 · 2013: 106 · 2012: 98
- FWCI
- 15.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Molecular Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Structural Biology › Enzyme Structure and Function
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Keywords
- protein structure comparison, Dali, Monte Carlo optimization, structural similarity, protein fold classification, structural core, colicin A, globin, lambda repressor, sequence gaps
- MeSH terms
- Actins, Algorithms, Amino Acid Sequence, Colicins, DNA-Binding Proteins, Globins, Heat-Shock Proteins, Hexokinase, Models, Molecular, Molecular Sequence Data, Monte Carlo Method, Muramidase, Software, Reproducibility of Results, Cluster Analysis, Sequence Alignment, Sequence Homology, Amino Acid, Protein Structure, Secondary, Protein Structure, Tertiary
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review