Bioinformatics Advance Access originally published online on September 5, 2006
Bioinformatics 2006 22(22):2715-2721; doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btl472
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Probalign: multiple sequence alignment using partition function posterior probabilities
1 Department of Computer Science, New Jersey Institute of Technology GITC 4400, University Heights, NJ 07102, USA
2 Department of Computer Science and Bioinformatics Research Center, University of North Carolina at Charlotte 9201 University City Blvd, Charlotte, NC 28223, USA
*To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Motivation: The maximum expected accuracy optimization criterion for multiple sequence alignment uses pairwise posterior probabilities of residues to align sequences. The partition function methodology is one way of estimating these probabilities. Here, we combine these two ideas for the first time to construct maximal expected accuracy sequence alignments.
Results: We bridge the two techniques within the program Probalign. Our results indicate that Probalign alignments are generally more accurate than other leading multiple sequence alignment methods (i.e. Probcons, MAFFT and MUSCLE) on the BAliBASE 3.0 protein alignment benchmark. Similarly, Probalign also outperforms these methods on the HOMSTRAD and OXBENCH benchmarks. Probalign ranks statistically highest (P-value < 0.005) on all three benchmarks. Deeper scrutiny of the technique indicates that the improvements are largest on datasets containing N/C-terminal extensions and on datasets containing long and heterogeneous length proteins. These points are demonstrated on both real and simulated data. Finally, our method also produces accurate alignments on long and heterogeneous length datasets containing protein repeats. Here, alignment accuracy scores are at least 10% and 15% higher than the other three methods when standard deviation of length is >300 and 400, respectively.
Availability: Open source code implementing Probalign as well as for producing the simulated data, and all real and simulated data are freely available from http://www.cs.njit.edu/usman/probalign
Contact: usman{at}cs.njit.edu
Received on July 27, 2006; revised on July 29, 2006; accepted on September 1, 2006
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. Lefebure and M. J. Stanhope Pervasive, genome-wide positive selection leading to functional divergence in the bacterial genus Campylobacter Genome Res., July 1, 2009; 19(7): 1224 - 1232. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Hamada, K. Sato, H. Kiryu, T. Mituyama, and K. Asai Predictions of RNA secondary structure by combining homologous sequence information Bioinformatics, June 15, 2009; 25(12): i330 - i338. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Y. Lu and S.-H. Sze Improving accuracy of multiple sequence alignment algorithms based on alignment of neighboring residues Nucleic Acids Res., February 1, 2009; 37(2): 463 - 472. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Katoh and H. Toh Recent developments in the MAFFT multiple sequence alignment program Brief Bioinform, July 1, 2008; 9(4): 286 - 298. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Lunter, A. Rocco, N. Mimouni, A. Heger, A. Caldeira, and J. Hein Uncertainty in homology inferences: Assessing and improving genomic sequence alignment Genome Res., February 1, 2008; 18(2): 298 - 309. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Chikkagoudar, U. Roshan, and D. Livesay eProbalign: generation and manipulation of multiple sequence alignments using partition function posterior probabilities Nucleic Acids Res., July 13, 2007; 35(suppl_2): W675 - W677. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|