Journal of Computer and Communications
Vol.04 No.15(2016), Article ID:72316,9 pages
10.4236/jcc.2016.415005
A Novel Prediction Method of Protein Structural Classes Based on Protein Super-Secondary Structure
Longlong Liu, Jing Cui*, Jie Zhou
Department of Mathematical Sciences, Ocean University of China, Qingdao, China




Received: September 26, 2016; Accepted: November 25, 2016; Published: November 28, 2016
ABSTRACT
At present, the feature extraction of protein sequences is the most basic issue to predict protein structural classes and is also the key problem to decide the quality of prediction. In order to predict protein structural classes accurately, we construct a 14-dimensional feature vector based on protein secondary and super-secondary structure information to reflect the content and spatial ordering of the given protein sequences. Among the vector, seven features about
-helix bundle, hairpin
motifs, Rossman folds,
-plaits and other super-secondary structure information are first proposed in our paper. Experiments show that our method improves overall accuracy of lower similarity datasets 1189 and 640 by 0.9% - 3.8% and 0.5% - 4.2% respectively compared with other methods and has a competitive advantage for predicting proteins in
and
classes.
Keywords:
Proteins, Super-Secondary Structure, Low Similarity, New Features

1. Introduction
Modern molecular biological studies indicate that the function of a protein is determined by its spatial structure. Therefore, it’s very important to predict the structural classes of the newly discovered protein accurately [1]. The types and order of 20 kinds of amino acids are the basic information in a protein sequence, then a large number of initial prediction methods use features based on amino acid composition (AAC) and the position information, which are the easiest and most intuitive methods [2] [3] [4] [5]. However, these methods have advantage to predict protein sequences with high degree of similarity and have disadvantage to predict protein sequences with similarity less than 40%. Due to the low-similarity protein sequences always have high-similarity secondary structural contents and spatial arrangements, so a large number of researchers tried to extract features from the secondary structure of proteins predicted by PSI-PRED[6].Under the guidance of this idea, SPRED model [2] and MODAS model [7] were constructed. Currently novel computational prediction methods [8] [9] build feature vectors by using the protein secondary structure information and protein sequences are predicted into four classes (All-
, All-
,
,
) using SVM (support vector machine) classifier. Overall prediction accuracy on several datasets of these methods reach to 80% - 90%, but the prediction of
and
classes is not ideal, especially for
class with accuracy just about 70%.
In order to improve the prediction accuracy of
and
classes, we will extract seven different features reflecting general contents and spatial arrangements of the secondary structural elements from super-secondary structure of a given protein sequence. We use SVM to predict protein structural classes after features are extracted. Finally, our paper evaluated our model objectively.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
Currently proposed methods widely use low-similarity benchmark datasets named 1189, FC699, 640 and 25PDB.The sequence similarity of 25PDB [10], 1189 [11], FC699 [1] and 640[12] are lower than 25%, 40%, 40% and 25% respectively. In order to compare with other methods, we choose 25PDB dataset as training set for SVM classifier, while the other datasets 1189, FC699 and 640 are test sets.
2.2. Feature Vector
Nowadays, a lot of methods are used to predict amino acids sequences into secondary structural sequences (SSS) constructed by three secondary structural elements,
-helix (H),
-strand (E), and random coil(C). Firstly, we obtain corresponding secondary structural sequences by PSI-PRED (version 2.6) [6]. It’s difficult to distinguish
and
classes for both of them contain 












Our novel method mapped each protein sequence into a 14-dimentional vector that can be defined as

where T is a transpose symbol, 








1) The easiest 

















2) In proteins of 






















Features mentioned above can be represented as:

where 



3) In proteins of the 







4) Because the length of the secondary structural segments will affect the assignment of the structural class, we define new features

where 



5) Position information of SS is also the deciding factor. Herein, the position of a segment is defined as a starting position of the segment. The corresponding features can be defined as

where 







6) To reflect the position information of protein secondary structure, two features 
where 



7) The probability of content C can be ignored due to the sum of the three probabilities of H, E and C is 1 [1]. Hence, the two features are expressed as
where

2.3. Classification Algorithm Construction
Protein secondary structure prediction is a multiclass classification problem. With high prediction accuracy, support vector machine (SVM) has been widely used for protein secondary structure classification [4] [5]. Here we use of the "one to one" multiclass classification method that construct a multiclass classifier by combining six binary classifiers. We choose Gaussian radial basis function (RBF) as the kernel function for SVM [14]. Using a grid search on the training set (25PDB) by tenfold cross-validation, we can find out the penalty parameter 



2.4. Performance Measures
In this paper, we use an independent testing dataset cross-validation. There are many indicators to evaluate model’s performance, sensitivity (Sens), specificity (Spec), Matthew’s correlation coefficient (MCC) and overall accuracy (OA) are widely used in protein structure prediction [15]. The total number of proteins, classes and proteins in k-th
class are denoted by N, k and 

The number of proteins which is correctly predicted as kth class and non-kth class are denoted by 





(2)
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Structural Class Prediction Accuracies
In our experiment, we use 25PDB dataset as a training set and other three datasets as testing sets. We not only report the values of Sens, Spec, MCC and overall accuracy (OA) of every structural class of testing set, but also report the average of Sens, Spec, MCC and overall accuracy (OA). The detail results can be seen in Table 1. The overall accuracy is more than 84% for each test set and it reaches 90% for FC699 dataset. What’s more, the average overall accuracy of 3 test sets is up to 86.6%. The Sens and
Table 1. The prediction quality of our method on test datasets.
MCC values of 





3.2. Feature Vector Analysis
To better verify the effect of the new proposed seven features, we do the following experiment with FC699, 1189 and 640 datasets. The comparison of obtained accuracies between our method including 14 features and our method including 7 features can be seen in Table 2. After added new features, the average overall accuracy increases by 2.6% up to 86.6%. For FC699 dataset, the overall accuracy and accuracies of All-




To further validate effect of super-secondary structure features, we do experiment just on proteins in 










Table 2. Comparison of the accuracies between the method including 14 features and one including only 7 features.
Table 3. The accuracy of differentiating between the 

respectively, however, the accuracy of 


3.3. Comparison with Other Prediction Method
It’s known to all, SCPRED [2] and MODAS [7] are famous in predicting protein secondary structure and are often used as baseline for comparison. From Table 4 we can see, our method improves the overall accuracies by 0.9% - 3.8% and 0.5% - 4.2% on 1189 and 640 datasets compared with other competing prediction methods including SCPRED and MODAS. And only for FC699 dataset, the overall accuracy is lower than Kong et al. and is not the highest, but it is increased by 0.8% - 2.9% compared with the rest methods. Compared with model SCPRED and the method of Liu and Jia, the overall accuracy predicted by our method is improved by 2.9% and 0.8% on FC699 dataset, respectively, besides the accuracy of 



Therefore our method extracting features based on super-secondary structure has the ability to reflect the realistic characteristics of proteins more accurately. Specially, our method improved the accuracies of 

Table 4. Performance comparison of difference methods on 3 test datasets.
4. Conclusion
In this paper, a novel method is proposed based on protein super-secondary structure information. Seven new features related to 




Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank all of the researchers who made publicly available data used in this study and thank the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No: 61303145) for the support to this work.
Cite this paper
Liu, L.L., Cui, J. and Zhou, J. (2016) A Novel Prediction Method of Protein Structural Classes Based on Protein Super-Secondary Structure. Journal of Computer and Communications, 4, 54-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jcc.2016.415005
References
- 1. Kurgan, L.A., Zhang, T., Zhang, H., Shen, S. and Ruan, J. (2008) Secondary Structure-Based Assignment of the Protein Structural Classes. Amino Acids, 35, 551-564. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00726-008-0080-3
- 2. Kurgan, L., Cios, K. and Chen, K. (2008) Scpred: Accurate Prediction of Protein Structural Class for Sequences of Twilight-Zone Similarity with Predicting Sequences. BMC Bioinformatics, 9, 815-818. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-9-226
- 3. Olyaee, M.H., Yaghoubi, A. and Yaghoobi, M. (2016) Predicting Protein Structural Classes Based on Complex Networks and Recurrence Analysis. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 404, 375-382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2016.06.018
- 4. Zhang, S. (2015) Accurate Prediction of Protein Structural Classes by Incorporating PSSS and PSSM into Chou’s General PseAAC. Chemometrics & Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 142, 28-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2015.01.004
- 5. Ding, S., Yan, L., Shi, Z. and Yan, S. (2014) A Protein Structural Classes Prediction Method Based on Predicted Secondary Structure and Psi-Blast Profile. Biochimie, 97, 60-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2013.09.013
- 6. Jones, D.T. (1999) Protein Secondary Structure Prediction Based on Position-Specific Scoring Matrices. Journal of Molecular Biology, 292, 195-202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.1999.3091
- 7. Mizianty, M.J. and Lukasz, K. (2009) Modular Prediction of Protein Structural Classes from Sequences of Twilight-Zone Identity with Predicting Sequences. BMC Bioinformatics, 10, 1-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-10-414
- 8. Liu, T. and Jia, C. (2010) A High-Accuracy Protein Structural Class Prediction Algorithm Using Predicted Secondary Structural Information. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 267, 272-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.09.007
- 9. Zhang, S., Ding, S. and Wang, T. (2011) High-Accuracy Prediction of Protein Structural Class for Low-Similarity Sequences Based on Predicted Secondary Structure. Biochimie, 93, 710-714. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2011.01.001
- 10. Kurgan, L.A. and Homaeian, L. (2006) Prediction of Structural Classes for Protein Se-quences and Domains—Impact of Prediction Algorithms, Sequence Representation and Homology, and Test Procedures on Accuracy. Pattern Recognition, 39, 2323-2343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2006.02.014
- 11. Wang, Z. and Zheng, Y. (2000) How Good Is Prediction of Protein Structural Class by the Component-Coupled Method? Proteins Structure Function & Bioinformatics, 38, 165-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0134(20000201)38:2<165::AID-PROT5>3.0.CO;2-V
- 12. Yang, J.Y., Peng, Z.L. and Xin, C. (2010) Prediction of Protein Structural Classes for Low- Homology Sequences Based on Predicted Secondary Structure. BMC Bioinformatics, 11, 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-s1-s9
- 13. Liang, K., Zhang, L. and Lv, J. (2014) Accurate Prediction of Protein Structural Classes by Incorporating Predicted Secondary Structure Information into the General Form of Chou's Pseudo Amino Acid Composition. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 344, 12-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.11.021
- 14. Zheng, Y., Bailey, T.L. and Teasdale, R.D. (2005) Prediction of Protein b-Factor Profiles. Proteins Structure Function & Bioinformatics, 58, 905-912. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/prot.20375
- 15. Baldi, P., Brunak, S., Chauvin, Y., Andersen, C.A. and Nielsen, H. (2000) Assessing the Accuracy of Prediction Algorithms for Classification: An Overview. Bioinformatics, 16, 412- 424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/16.5.412








