Search

Critical assessment of structure prediction (CASP) conducts community experiments to determine the state of the art in computing protein structure from amino acid sequence. The process relies on the experimental community providing information about not yet public or about to be solved structures, for use as targets. For some targets, the experimental structure is not solved in time for use in CASP. Calculated structure accuracy improved dramatically in this round, implying that models should now be much more useful for resolving many sorts of experimental difficulties. To test this, selected models for seven unsolved targets were provided to the experimental groups. These models were from the AlphaFold2 group, who overall submitted the most accurate predictions in CASP14. Four targets were solved with the aid of the models, and, additionally, the structure of an already solved target was improved. An a posteriori analysis showed that, in some cases, models from other groups would also be effective. This paper provides accounts of the successful application of models to structure determination, including molecular replacement for X-ray crystallography, backbone tracing and sequence positioning in a cryo-electron microscopy structure, and correction of local features. The results suggest that, in future, there will be greatly increased synergy between computational and experimental approaches to structure determination.

The functional and biological significance of the selected CASP12 targets are described by the authors of the structures. The crystallographers discuss the most interesting structural features of the target proteins and assess whether these features were correctly reproduced in the predictions submitted to the CASP12 experiment.

The CASP14 experiment demonstrated the extraordinary structure modeling capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI) methods. That result has ignited a fierce debate about what these methods are actually doing. One of the criticisms has been that the AI does not have any sense of the underlying physics but is merely performing pattern recognition. Here, we address that issue by analyzing the extent to which the methods identify rare structural motifs. The rationale underlying the approach is that a pattern recognition machine tends to choose the more frequently occurring motifs, whereas some sense of subtle energetic factors is required to choose infrequently occurring ones. To reduce the possibility of bias from related experimental structures and to minimize the effect of experimental errors, we examined only CASP14 target protein crystal structures determined to a resolution limit better than 2 Å, which lacked significant amino acid sequence homology to proteins of known structure. In those experimental structures and in the corresponding models, we track cis peptides, π- helices, 3 10- helices, and other small 3D motifs that occur in the PDB database at a frequency of lower than 1% of total amino acid residues. The best-performing AI method, AlphaFold2, captured these uncommon structural elements exquisitely well. All discrepancies appeared to be a con- sequence of crystal environment effects. We propose that the neural network learned a protein structure potential of mean force, enabling it to correctly identify situations where unusual structural features represent the lowest local free energy because of subtle influences from the atomic environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]