Regarding align2d & CS-BLAST alignments PLEASE ANSWER ME QUICKER ..I AM STUCK UP IN A FEW CASES
Dear Modellers and Sir Ben Webb, I am finding a critical difference in the pairwise alignment computed by MODELLER and the corresponding alignment cognitive to the CS-BLAST undertaken alignment.
These are the differences. Will someone help me understanding why there is the case of shifted alignments in the the alignment case mentioned below for the following alignments of templates 2Q7BA and 3PP9A for the CASP8 target T0400? I have written TARGE in the MODELLER Alignment file for target sequence for better one-to-one alignment residue correlation. On top of it the CS-BLAST residue order is not available in the template PDB files. So i am confused..Where CS-BLAST has got the altered sequences from, when i precisely called the PDB for it.
2Q7BA ALIGNMENT MODELLER ALIGNMENT 2Q7BA>FQGMEIKEYENNPYHLAQLVDLINYCQNIEAKLDIKMAEQDDIFQIENYYQNRKGQFWIALEN-EKVVGSIALLRIDDKTAVLKKFFTYPKYRGNPVRLGRKLFERFMLFARASKFTRIVLDTPEKEKRSHFFYENQGFKQITRDELDVDYIFPDRDSRIYVKLL--* TARGE>M-AINIIEY-NRSY-KEELIEFILSIQKNEFNIKIDRDDQPDLENIEHNYLNSGGQFWLAINNHQNIVGTIGLIRLDNNMSALKKMFVDKGYR-N-LKIGKKLLDKVIMTCKEQNIDGIYLGTIDKFISAQYFYSNNGFREIKRGDLPSSFPKLDVDNRFYYRNLKD*
CS-BLAST ALIGNMENT Query: 1 MAINIIEYNRSYKEELIEFILSIQKNEFNIKIDRDDQPDLENIEHNYLNSGGQFWLAINN 60 M I E N + +L++ I Q E + I +Q D+ IE+ Y N GQFW Sbjct: 20 MEIKEYENNPYHLAQLVDLINYCQNIEAKLDIKMAEQDDIFQIENYYQNRKGQFW-IALE 78
Query: 61 HQNIVGTIGLIRLDNNMSALKKMFVDKGYRN--LKIGKKLLDKVIMTCKEQNIDGIYLGT 118 ++ +VG+I L+R+D+ + LKK F YR +++G+KL ++ ++ + I L T Sbjct: 79 NEKVVGSIALLRIDDKTAVLKKFFTYPKYRGNPVRLGRKLFERFMLFARASKFTRIVLDT 138
Query: 119 IDKFISAQYFYSNNGFREIKRGDLPSSFPKLDVDNRFYYRNLK 161 +K + +FY N GF++I R +L + D D+R Y + L Sbjct: 139 PEKEKRSHFFYENQGFKQITRDELDVDYIFPDRDSRIYVKLLD 181
3PP9A ALIGNMENT MODELLER ALIGNMENT 3PP9A>SLLIRELETNDLDNFPEIDDSFIVNARLMLSLSKVNRRIEYTVEDVPSYEKSYLELVYNEYINKPNQIIYIALLHNQIIGFIVLKKNWNNYAYIEDITVDKKYRTLGVGKRLIAQAKQWAKEGNMPGIMLETQNNNVAACKFYEKCGFVIGGFDFLVYKGLNMTSDEVAIYWYLHF* TARGE>------M---AI-NIIEYNRSY-KEELIEFILS-I-QKNEFNIK-IDRDDQPDLENIEHNYLNSGGQFWLAINNHQNIVGTIGLIRLDNNMSALKKMFVDKGYRNLKIGKKLLDKVIMTCKEQNIDGIYLGTIDKFISAQYFYSNNGFREIKRGDLPSSFPKLDVDNRFYYRNLKD*
CS-BLAST ALIGNMENT Query: 1 MAINIIEYNRSYKEELIE----------FILSIQKNEFNIKIDRDDQPDLEN-------- 42 M++ I E + + E +LS+ K I+ +D P E Sbjct: 4 MSLLIRELETNDLDNFPEIDDSFIVNARLMLSLSKVNRRIEYTVEDVPSYEKSYLQNDNE 63
Query: 43 --IEHNYLNSGGQFWLAINNHQNIVGTIGLIRLDNNMSALKKMFVDKGYRNLKIGKKLLD 100 + + Y+N Q H I+G I L + NN + ++ + VDK YR L +GK+L+ Sbjct: 64 ELVYNEYINKPNQIIYIALLHNQIIGFIVLKKNWNNYAYIEDITVDKKYRTLGVGKRLIA 123
Query: 101 KVIMTCKEQNIDGIYLGTIDKFISAQYFYSNNGFRE 136 + KE N+ GI L T + ++A FY GF Sbjct: 124 QAKQWAKEGNMPGIMLETQNNNVAACKFYEKCGFVI 159
Thanks Ashish
Ashish Runthala, Lecturer, Structural Biology Cell, Biological Sciences Group, BITS, Pilani Rajasthan, INDIA
On 09/12/2011 06:27 AM, Ashish Runthala wrote: > I am finding a critical difference in the pairwise alignment > computed by MODELLER and the corresponding alignment cognitive to the > CS-BLAST undertaken alignment.
That doesn't seem surprising. BLAST alignments are local and approximate; Modeller does rigorous dynamic programming with global or local alignments using a range of methods for constructing the residue distance matrix.
> Where CS-BLAST has got the altered sequences from, when i precisely > called the PDB for it.
You'll have to ask the CS-BLAST people about that.
Ben Webb, Modeller Caretaker
participants (2)
-
Ashish Runthala
-
Modeller Caretaker