CASP9 results compared to those of previous casp experiments

The quality of structure models submitted to CASP9 is analyzed in the context of previous CASPs. Comparison methods are similar to those used in previous articles in this series, with the addition of new methods looking at model quality in regions not covered by a single best structural template, al...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inProteins, structure, function, and bioinformatics Vol. 79; no. S10; pp. 196 - 207
Main Authors Kryshtafovych, Andriy, Fidelis, Krzysztof, Moult, John
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Hoboken Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company 2011
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The quality of structure models submitted to CASP9 is analyzed in the context of previous CASPs. Comparison methods are similar to those used in previous articles in this series, with the addition of new methods looking at model quality in regions not covered by a single best structural template, alignment accuracy, and progress for template‐free models. Progress in this CASP was again modest and statistically hard to validate. Nevertheless, there are several positive trends. There is an indication of improvement in overall model quality for the midrange of template‐based modeling difficulty, methods for identifying the best model from a set generated have improved, and there are strong indications of progress in the quality of template‐free models of short proteins. In addition, the new examination of a model quality in regions of model not covered by the best available template reveals better performance than had previously been apparent. © Proteins 2011; © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Bibliography:The authors state no conflict of interest.
ark:/67375/WNG-KX5SHR53-Q
NIH - No. LM07085
istex:87E9D4B2DEC737FEB53877E143A3256FA8822539
ArticleID:PROT23182
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0887-3585
1097-0134
DOI:10.1002/prot.23182