D-I-TASSER Q00535

D-I-TASSER results for Q00535

[Click result.zip to download all results on this page]

Summary of the Protein

Uniprot ID: Q00535
Protein Name: Cyclin-dependent-like kinase 5
Gene Name: CDK5

Input Sequence in FASTA format

>Q00535 (292 residues)
MQKYEKLEKIGEGTYGTVFKAKNRETHEIVALKRVRLDDDDEGVPSSALREICLLKELKH
KNIVRLHDVLHSDKKLTLVFEFCDQDLKKYFDSCNGDLDPEIVKSFLFQLLKGLGFCHSR
NVLHRDLKPQNLLINRNGELKLADFGLARAFGIPVRCYSAEVVTLWYRPPDVLFGAKLYS
TSIDMWSAGCIFAELANAGRPLFPGNDVDDQLKRIFRLLGTPTEEQWPSMTKLPDYKPYP
MYPATTSLVNVVPKLNATGRDLLQNLLKCNPVQRISAEEALQHPYFSDFCPP

Predicted Contact and Distance Map Used in D-I-TASSER simulation

Contact Map

Distance Map

D-I-TASSER simulation is guided by the consensus contact map (left figure) and distance map (right figure) derived based on confidence scores of AttentionPotential. In the contact, distance map and hydrogen bond networks, the axes mark the residue index along the sequence. For the contact map, each dot represents a residue pair with predicted contact, while for the distance map and hydrogen bond network, a color scale represents a distance of 1-20+ angstroms or a angle of 0-180 degree.

Information of Domain

No. of Domain	Domain	Domain Boundary	Length of Domain	Models of Domain	Sequence
1	Q00535-D1	1-155	155		MQKYEKLEKIGEGTYGTVFKAKNRETHEIVALKRVRLDDDDEGVPSSALREICLLKELKHKNIVRLHDVLHSDKKLTLVFEFCDQDLKKYFDSCNGDLDPEIVKSFLFQLLKGLGFCHSRNVLHRDLKPQNLLINRNGELKLADFGLARAFGIPV
2	Q00535-D2	156-292	137		RCYSAEVVTLWYRPPDVLFGAKLYSTSIDMWSAGCIFAELANAGRPLFPGNDVDDQLKRIFRLLGTPTEEQWPSMTKLPDYKPYPMYPATTSLVNVVPKLNATGRDLLQNLLKCNPVQRISAEEALQHPYFSDFCPP

Top 1 final models from D-I-TASSER

Click to view	Rank^a	Download	Estimated TM-score^b
	1	model1.pdb.gz	0.87

(a)

D-I-TASSER simulations generate a large ensemble of structural conformations, i.e. decoys. These decoys are clustered by SPICKER based on pairwise structure similarity to report up to five final models from the five largest clusters. Models are ranked in descending order of cluster size. If the simulations converge well, it is possible to have less than 5 models generated, which is usually an indication of good model quality.

(b)

The model confidence is quantitatified by estimated TM-score (eTM-score), calculated based on significance of threading template alignments, contact map satisfaction rate, mean absolute error between distance of model and distance of AttentionPotential, and convergence of D-I-TASSER simulations. eTM-score is typically in the range of [0, 1], with higher eTM-score signifies higher model confidence.

Proteins with similar structure

Top 10 structural analogs in PDB (as identified by TM-align)

Rank	PDB Hit	TM-score	RMSD^a	IDEN^a	Cov.	Download Alignment
1	1unlA	0.98	0.95	0.997	1.000	model1_1unlA.pdb.gz
2	6gubA	0.94	1.54	0.598	0.976	model1_6gubA.pdb.gz
3	6gu2A	0.92	2.00	0.554	0.980	model1_6gu2A.pdb.gz
4	2pk9A	0.92	1.48	0.575	0.959	model1_2pk9A.pdb.gz
5	7nxjA	0.92	2.17	0.408	0.990	model1_7nxjA.pdb.gz
6	7kpvA	0.92	2.25	0.368	0.997	model1_7kpvA.pdb.gz
7	6z3uB	0.92	2.19	0.385	0.993	model1_6z3uB.pdb.gz
8	4cjyC	0.91	2.16	0.413	0.983	model1_4cjyC.pdb.gz
9	5z33A	0.91	2.18	0.394	0.990	model1_5z33A.pdb.gz
10	3i4bA	0.90	1.95	0.333	0.966	model1_3i4bA.pdb.gz

(a)	Query structure is shown in cartoon, while the structural analog is displayed using backbone trace.
(b)	Ranking of proteins is based on TM-score of the structural alignment between the query structure and known structures in the PDB library.
(c)	RMSD^a is the RMSD between residues that are structurally aligned by TM-align.
(d)	IDEN^a is the percentage sequence identity in the structurally aligned region.
(e)	Cov. represents the coverage of the alignment by TM-align and is equal to the number of structurally aligned residues divided by length of the query protein.

Predicted Gene Ontology (GO) Terms

Molecular Function (MF)

GO term	Cscore^GO	Name
GO:0003824	0.97	catalytic activity
GO:0004672	0.96	protein kinase activity
GO:0004674	0.86	protein serine/threonine kinase activity

Download full result of the above consensus prediction.

Click the graph to show a high resolution version.

(a)

Cscore^GO is the confidence score of predicted GO terms. Cscore^GO values range in between [0-1]; where a higher value indicates a better confidence in predicting the function using the template.

(b)

The graph shows the predicted terms within the Gene Ontology hierachy for Molecular Function. Confidently predicted terms are color coded by Cscore^GO:

[0.4,0.5)

[0.5,0.6)

[0.6,0.7)

[0.7,0.8)

[0.8,0.9)

[0.9,1.0]

Biological Process (BP)

GO term	Cscore^GO	Name
GO:0009987	0.93	cellular process
GO:0065007	0.83	biological regulation
GO:0008152	0.83	metabolic process
GO:0071704	0.82	organic substance metabolic process
GO:0050789	0.82	regulation of biological process
GO:0044237	0.81	cellular metabolic process
GO:0050794	0.80	regulation of cellular process
GO:0044260	0.80	cellular macromolecule metabolic process
GO:0044238	0.80	primary metabolic process
GO:0019538	0.75	protein metabolic process
GO:0006796	0.74	phosphate-containing compound metabolic process
GO:0006464	0.74	cellular protein modification process
GO:0006468	0.73	protein phosphorylation
GO:0007165	0.60	signal transduction
GO:0044699	0.51	single-organism process

Download full result of the above consensus prediction.

Click the graph to show a high resolution version.

(a)

Cscore^GO is the confidence score of predicted GO terms. Cscore^GO values range in between [0-1]; where a higher value indicates a better confidence in predicting the function using the template.

(b)

The graph shows the predicted terms within the Gene Ontology hierachy for Biological Process. Confidently predicted terms are color coded by Cscore^GO:

[0.4,0.5)

[0.5,0.6)

[0.6,0.7)

[0.7,0.8)

[0.8,0.9)

[0.9,1.0]

Cellular Component (CC)

GO term	Cscore^GO	Name
GO:0044464	1.00	cell part
GO:0044424	0.92	intracellular part
GO:0043226	0.61	organelle
GO:0043229	0.60	intracellular organelle
GO:0043227	0.56	membrane-bounded organelle
GO:0043231	0.55	intracellular membrane-bounded organelle
GO:0005737	0.53	cytoplasm
GO:0005634	0.50	nucleus

Download full result of the above consensus prediction.

Click the graph to show a high resolution version.

(a)

Cscore^GO is the confidence score of predicted GO terms. Cscore^GO values range in between [0-1]; where a higher value indicates a better confidence in predicting the function using the template.

(b)

The graph shows the predicted terms within the Gene Ontology hierachy for Cellular Component. Confidently predicted terms are color coded by Cscore^GO:

[0.4,0.5)

[0.5,0.6)

[0.6,0.7)

[0.7,0.8)

[0.8,0.9)

[0.9,1.0]

Predicted Enzyme Commission (EC) Numbers

Top 5 enzyme homologs in PDB

Rank	Cscore^EC	PDB Hit	TM-score	RMSD^a	IDEN^a	Cov.	EC Number	Predicted Active Site Residues
1	0.347	3efwB	0.736	1.99	0.318	0.798	2.7.11.1	51,126,128,133,143,145,165
2	0.308	3cokB	0.698	2.07	0.293	0.760	2.7.11.21	11,18,31,66,83,143
3	0.293	2bfyB	0.800	2.30	0.302	0.884	2.7.11.1	89,133
4	0.290	2np8A	0.773	2.24	0.297	0.853	2.7.11.1	126,128,133,143
5	0.221	1vywA	0.946	1.49	0.581	0.986	2.7.11.22 2.7.1.37	NA

	Click on the radio buttons to visualize predicted active site residues.
(a)	Cscore^EC is the confidence score for the Enzyme Commission (EC) number prediction. Cscore^EC values range in between [0-1]; where a higher score indicates a more reliable EC number prediction.
(b)	TM-score is a measure of global structural similarity between query and template protein.
(c)	RMSD^a is the RMSD between residues that are structurally aligned by TM-align.
(d)	IDEN^a is the percentage sequence identity in the structurally aligned region.
(e)	Cov. represents the coverage of global structural alignment and is equal to the number of structurally aligned residues divided by length of the query protein.

Predicted Ligand Binding Sites

Template proteins with similar binding site:

Rank	Cscore^LB	PDB Hit	TM-score	RMSD^a	IDEN^a	Cov.	BS-score	Lig. Name	Download Complex	Predicted binding site residues
1	0.92	3o0gB	0.881	1.08	0.966	0.904	1.54	3O0	complex1.pdb.gz	10,18,31,33,64,81,82,83,84,85,89,133,144
2	0.71	2b9fA	0.889	2.12	0.388	0.962	1.28	ADP	complex2.pdb.gz	10,15,18,31,33,47,80,81,83,86,130,131,133,144
3	0.51	1unl0	0.981	0.95	0.997	1.000	1.87	III	complex3.pdb.gz	37,42,43,45,46,47,49,50,53,54,56,57,71,76,120,121,122,149,150,151,152,157,158,159
4	0.50	1q4lA	0.885	2.02	0.343	0.949	1.39	679	complex4.pdb.gz	10,11,12,13,31,33,64,80,81,82,83,86,89,130,133,143,144
5	0.48	2wo6A	0.898	1.66	0.314	0.949	1.34	D15	complex5.pdb.gz	10,12,13,15,16,17,18,31,33,81,82,83,84,132,143,144
6	0.48	3f88A	0.896	2.07	0.337	0.966	1.11	2HT	complex6.pdb.gz	11,15,18,130,131,144
7	0.45	3anqA	0.903	1.55	0.307	0.949	1.03	EHB	complex7.pdb.gz	15,18,31,33,80,81,83,143,144
8	0.08	2f49A	0.894	1.99	0.388	0.962	1.07	MG	complex8.pdb.gz	15,16,35,36
9	0.07	2b9iA	0.895	2.17	0.371	0.969	1.03	III	complex9.pdb.gz	61,100,106,108,136,137,138,139
10	0.07	1q5k0	0.900	1.97	0.343	0.959	1.24	III	complex10.pdb.gz	14,15,50,159,161,162,163,164,165,173,174,206,207,208,209,210,212,213,236,237,238,239,241

	Click on the radio buttons to visualize predicted binding site and residues.
(a)	Cscore^LB is the confidence score of predicted binding site. Cscore^LB values range in between [0-1]; where a higher score indicates a more reliable ligand-binding site prediction.
(b)	BS-score is a measure of local similarity (sequence & structure) between template binding site and predicted binding site in the query structure. Based on large scale benchmarking analysis, we have observed that a BS-score >1 reflects a significant local match between the predicted and template binding site.
(c)	TM-score is a measure of global structural similarity between query and template protein.
(d)	RMSD^a the RMSD between residues that are structurally aligned by TM-align.
(e)	IDEN^a is the percentage sequence identity in the structurally aligned region.
(f)	Cov. represents the coverage of global structural alignment and is equal to the number of structurally aligned residues divided by length of the query protein.

[Click result.zip to download all results on this page]

References:
1.	Wei Zheng, Chengxin Zhang, Yang Li, Robin Pearce, Eric W. Bell, Yang Zhang. Folding non-homology proteins by coupling deep-learning contact maps with I-TASSER assembly simulations. In preparation, 2020.