[Home] [Server] [Queue] [About] [Remove] [Statistics]

I-TASSER results for job id S692840

(Click on S692840_results.tar.bz2 to download the tarball file including all modeling results listed on this page. Click on Annotation of I-TASSER Output to read the instructions for how to interpret the results on this page. Model results are kept on the server for 60 days, there is no way to retrieve the modeling data older than 2 months)

  Submitted Sequence in FASTA format


  Predicted Secondary Structure

H:Helix; S:Strand; C:Coil

  Predicted Solvent Accessibility

Values range from 0 (buried residue) to 9 (highly exposed residue)

   Predicted normalized B-factor

(B-factor is a value to indicate the extent of the inherent thermal mobility of residues/atoms in proteins. In I-TASSER, this value is deduced from threading template proteins from the PDB in combination with the sequence profiles derived from sequence databases. The reported B-factor profile in the figure below corresponds to the normalized B-factor of the target protein, defined by B=(B'-u)/s, where B' is the raw B-factor value, u and s are respectively the mean and standard deviation of the raw B-factors along the sequence. Click here to read more about predicted normalized B-factor)

  Top 10 threading templates used by I-TASSER

(I-TASSER modeling starts from the structure templates identified by LOMETS from the PDB library. LOMETS is a meta-server threading approach containing multiple threading programs, where each threading program can generate tens of thousands of template alignments. I-TASSER only uses the templates of the highest significance in the threading alignments, the significance of which are measured by the Z-score, i.e. the difference between the raw and average scores in the unit of standard deviation. The templates in this section are the 10 best templates selected from the LOMETS threading programs. Usually, one template of the highest Z-score is selected from each threading program, where the threading programs are sorted by the average performance in the large-scale benchmark test experiments.)

Rank PDB
14kbbC 0.27 0.23 0.88 2.10Download DMFAKLKEKFFNEIN--
21zrxA 0.35 0.35 1.00 1.07Download KHFNKLVKKVKHTISET
36l4vA 0.24 0.23 1.00 1.23Download GKKTHILKQIAETVKHR
47jgrF 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.65Download EDYEIWKARMLAKAQAK
56wcuA 0.12 0.12 1.00 1.14Download RRMQEMLQRMKQQMQDQ
63v11C 0.19 0.18 0.94 1.63Download -SEKEYVEMLDRLYSKL
75o5jB 0.18 0.35 1.00 1.08Download KKHRKLLRRTRVQRRKL
83um3B 0.18 0.18 1.00 1.60Download EEEDDDMKELENWAGSM
91zrxA 0.35 0.35 1.00 1.07Download KHFNKLVKKVKHTISET
105a5bY 0.18 0.18 1.00 1.50Download DDFTNELKAELDRYKRE
(a)All the residues are colored in black; however, those residues in template which are identical to the residue in the query sequence are highlighted in color. Coloring scheme is based on the property of amino acids, where polar are brightly coloured while non-polar residues are colored in dark shade. (more about the colors used)
(b)Rank of templates represents the top ten threading templates used by I-TASSER.
(c)Ident1 is the percentage sequence identity of the templates in the threading aligned region with the query sequence.
(d)Ident2 is the percentage sequence identity of the whole template chains with query sequence.
(e)Cov represents the coverage of the threading alignment and is equal to the number of aligned residues divided by the length of query protein.
(f)Norm. Z-score is the normalized Z-score of the threading alignments. Alignment with a Normalized Z-score >1 mean a good alignment and vice versa.
(g)Download Align. provides the 3D structure of the aligned regions of the threading templates.
(h)The top 10 alignments reported above (in order of their ranking) are from the following threading programs:
       1: SP3   2: wdPPAS   3: Neff-PPAS   4: SP3   5: Neff-PPAS   6: SP3   7: Neff-PPAS   8: SP3   9: Neff-PPAS   10: SP3   

   Top 5 final models predicted by I-TASSER

(For each target, I-TASSER simulations generate a large ensemble of structural conformations, called decoys. To select the final models, I-TASSER uses the SPICKER program to cluster all the decoys based on the pair-wise structure similarity, and reports up to five models which corresponds to the five largest structure clusters. The confidence of each model is quantitatively measured by C-score that is calculated based on the significance of threading template alignments and the convergence parameters of the structure assembly simulations. C-score is typically in the range of [-5, 2], where a C-score of a higher value signifies a model with a higher confidence and vice-versa. TM-score and RMSD are estimated based on C-score and protein length following the correlation observed between these qualities. Since the top 5 models are ranked by the cluster size, it is possible that the lower-rank models have a higher C-score in rare cases. Although the first model has a better quality in most cases, it is also possible that the lower-rank models have a better quality than the higher-rank models as seen in our benchmark tests. If the I-TASSER simulations converge, it is possible to have less than 5 clusters generated; this is usually an indication that the models have a good quality because of the converged simulations.)
    (By right-click on the images, you can export image file or change the configurations, e.g. modifying the background color or stopping the spin of your models)
  • Download Model 1
  • C-score=-0.06 (Read more about C-score)
  • Estimated TM-score = 0.71±0.12
  • Estimated RMSD = 0.9±0.9Å

  Proteins structurally close to the target in the PDB (as identified by TM-align)

(After the structure assembly simulation, I-TASSER uses the TM-align structural alignment program to match the first I-TASSER model to all structures in the PDB library. This section reports the top 10 proteins from the PDB that have the closest structural similarity, i.e. the highest TM-score, to the predicted I-TASSER model. Due to the structural similarity, these proteins often have similar function to the target. However, users are encouraged to use the data in the next section 'Predicted function using COACH' to infer the function of the target protein, since COACH has been extensively trained to derive biological functions from multi-source of sequence and structure features which has on average a higher accuracy than the function annotations derived only from the global structure comparison.)

Top 10 Identified stuctural analogs in PDB

to view
RankPDB HitTM-scoreRMSDaIDENaCovAlignment
12wkjA0.879 0.210.0001.000Download
23sdeA0.875 0.320.1181.000Download
33m5kA0.874 0.560.0591.000Download
46y50p0.873 0.210.0591.000Download
56czxA0.870 0.200.0001.000Download
67oqzA0.869 0.210.0591.000Download
71r1kD0.869 0.210.0591.000Download
83h20A0.868 0.330.0591.000Download
96d03E0.867 0.270.0591.000Download
103k1tA0.863 0.210.0001.000Download

(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)RMSDa is the RMSD between residues that are structurally aligned by TM-align.
(d)IDENa 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 function using COFACTOR and COACH

(This section reports biological annotations of the target protein by COFACTOR and COACH based on the I-TASSER structure prediction. While COFACTOR deduces protein functions (ligand-binding sites, EC and GO) using structure comparison and protein-protein networks, COACH is a meta-server approach that combines multiple function annotation results (on ligand-binding sites) from the COFACTOR, TM-SITE and S-SITE programs.)

  Ligand binding sites

to view
Ligand Binding Site Residues
10.22 719 4fe1B CLA Rep, Mult 8,10,11,13,14
20.21 739 4pj0i CLA Rep, Mult 6,7,9,10,11,13,14
30.19 650 2akaA PEPTIDE Rep, Mult 14,15,16,17
40.14 500 4eoyA CA Rep, Mult 5,6,7,8,9

Download the residue-specific ligand binding probability, which is estimated by SVM.
Download the all possible binding ligands and detailed prediction summary.
Download the templates clustering results.
(a)C-score is the confidence score of the prediction. C-score ranges [0-1], where a higher score indicates a more reliable prediction.
(b)Cluster size is the total number of templates in a cluster.
(c)Lig Name is name of possible binding ligand. Click the name to view its information in the BioLiP database.
(d)Rep is a single complex structure with the most representative ligand in the cluster, i.e., the one listed in the Lig Name column.
Mult is the complex structures with all potential binding ligands in the cluster.

  Enzyme Commission (EC) numbers and active sites

to view
TM-scoreRMSDaIDENaCovEC NumberActive Site Residues
10.3711ecmB0.861 0.310.1181.000  NA
20.3551vlvA0.849 0.480.1181.000  NA
30.3531x54A0.846 0.360.0591.000  NA
40.3522ordA0.850 0.350.0001.000  NA
50.3473l76A0.841 0.230.1761.000  NA

 Click on the radio buttons to visualize predicted active site residues.
(a)CscoreEC is the confidence score for the EC number prediction. CscoreEC 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)RMSDa is the RMSD between residues that are structurally aligned by TM-align.
(d)IDENa 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.

  Gene Ontology (GO) terms
Top 10 homologous GO templates in PDB 
RankCscoreGOTM-scoreRMSDaIDENaCovPDB HitAssociated GO Terms
1 0.380.8793 0.31 0.06 1.003m5kA GO:0016491
2 0.360.8614 0.31 0.12 1.001ecmB GO:0004106 GO:0005737 GO:0009094 GO:0046417
3 0.350.8493 0.48 0.12 1.001vlvA GO:0006526 GO:0005737 GO:0016740 GO:0004585 GO:0008652 GO:0006520 GO:0006591 GO:0009348 GO:0016597 GO:0016743
4 0.350.8689 0.21 0.06 1.001r1kD GO:0003677 GO:0003700 GO:0003707 GO:0004879 GO:0004884 GO:0005496 GO:0005634 GO:0006355 GO:0035076 GO:0043401
5 0.340.8583 0.45 0.12 1.001vimA GO:0005529 GO:0005975 GO:0016853
6 0.340.7656 0.32 0.00 1.001tueE GO:0003677 GO:0006275 GO:0006355 GO:0016032
7 0.340.8609 0.23 0.00 1.002wnzA GO:0005737 GO:0008747 GO:0019262 GO:0016829 GO:0005975 GO:0003824 GO:0008152
8 0.340.8533 0.32 0.00 1.002nnuA GO:0003677 GO:0006275 GO:0006355 GO:0016032
9 0.320.8626 0.21 0.00 1.003k1tA GO:0016874
10 0.320.8604 0.21 0.18 1.002e54A GO:0006526 GO:0003992 GO:0005737 GO:0008483 GO:0006525 GO:0016740 GO:0008652 GO:0030170 GO:0003824

Consensus prediction of GO terms
Molecular Function GO:0016491 GO:0004106 GO:0004585 GO:0016597 GO:0004884 GO:0003677 GO:0003700 GO:0005496 GO:0005529
GO-Score 0.38 0.36 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.34
Biological Process GO:0009094 GO:0006526 GO:0006591 GO:0035076 GO:0006355 GO:0043401 GO:0005975
GO-Score 0.36 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.34
Cellular Component GO:0009348 GO:0005634
GO-Score 0.35 0.35

(a)CscoreGO is a combined measure for evaluating global and local similarity between query and template protein. It's range is [0-1] and higher values indicate more confident predictions.
(b)TM-score is a measure of global structural similarity between query and template protein.
(c)RMSDa is the RMSD between residues that are structurally aligned by TM-align.
(d)IDENa 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.
(f)The second table shows a consensus GO terms amongst the top scoring templates. The GO-Score associated with each prediction is defined as the average weight of the GO term, where the weights are assigned based on CscoreGO of the template.

[Click on S692840_results.tar.bz2 to download the tarball file including all modeling results listed on this page]

Please cite the following articles when you use the I-TASSER server:
  • 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. Cell Reports Methods, 1: 100014 (2021).
  • Chengxin Zhang, Peter L. Freddolino, and Yang Zhang. COFACTOR: improved protein function prediction by combining structure, sequence and protein-protein interaction information. Nucleic Acids Research, 45: W291-299 (2017).
  • Jianyi Yang, Yang Zhang. I-TASSER server: new development for protein structure and function predictions, Nucleic Acids Research, 43: W174-W181, 2015.