Second Meeting on the Critical Assessment of
Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction
Introduction
Methods for obtaining information about protein structure from the
amino acid sequence have apparently been advancing rapidly. But just
what can these methods currently deliver? A first large scale
experiment aimed at beginning to answer these questions was conducted
in 1994, and culminated in a meeting at Asilomar, California at the
end of that year. Some 135 predictions were made by 35 different
groups. The results are published in a special issue of Proteins:
Structure, Function and Genetics, volume 23, No 3, November 1995.
Meeting abstracts and predictions are also available.
We now announce the second experiment. As before, the goal is to
obtain an indepth and objective assessment of our current abilities
and inabilities in this area. To this end, participants will predict
as much as possible about a set of soon to be known structures in
advance of the meeting. Sessions will be devoted to presentation of
the results and comparison with experiment, and to the description of
the methods used.
Experiment:
Categories
The prediction experiment will be divided into 4 catagories, 3 as in
CASP1 with one new prediction catagory:
- Comparative modeling:
Where there is a clear sequence
relationship between the target structure and one or more known
structures.
- Fold recognition ('threading'):
Testing a sequence for
compatibility against a library of folds.
- Ab initio structure prediction:
Deriving structures,
approximate or otherwise, from sequence.
- Docking: (new)
Predicting the mode of association of ligands
and proteins.
Collection of Prediction Targets
As before, for the experiment to succeed, it is essential that we
obtain the help of the experimental community. Therefore we would
like to invite Protein crystallographers and NMR spectroscopists to
provide details of structures they expect to have solved before 1st
October 1996. They are also asked to notify the organizers shortly before the structure is
solved.
Rules for Predictors
Participation in the experiment is open to all. In each category there
will be a set of designated core targets. In order for their work to
be considered part of the experiment, predictors will be required to
make submissions on at last three members of that core set. A minimum
amount of information about methods used will also be required from
each predictor.
Target sequences for prediction can be viewed from the database here,
which will be updated as sequences become available from the
experimentalists.
Those interested in the prediction experiment can register and be added to a mailing list. Registered predictors will be notified of changes to the
expiry dates for target sequences - all predictions must be received
before the expiry date to be considered for evalution. Thus there
will be no fixed time lines, each structure being available for a
period dependent on the experimental situation.
Predictions will be sent to the independent assessors and evaluted
according to a set of standard criteria.
All prediction submission will be electronic via web forms or
electronic mail and in machine readable formats which will be
announced later.
Criteria for Assessing the Predictions
A team of independent assessors will evaluate the predicted structures
primarily using numerical criteria that
are currently being debated. Following feed back from the prediction
community, software will be developed to allow these criteria to be
applied to all predictions automatically. As far as possible
assessments will be made from these automatic evaluations,
supplemented where necessary by judgements from the assessors.
Inclusion in the Structure Prediction Databank
All predictions will be entered into the structure prediction databank
currently being established and will be made
public after the meeting.
Meeting:
A meeting will be held 12-16 December, 1996 at Asilomar, California,
USA to evaluate the results of the prediction experiment. The meeting
will be limited to about 170 participants and precedence will be given
to active predictors. It is anticipated that some financial assistance
will be available for the more successful predictors.
Program
There will be lectures by the assessors and the more successful
predictors and a moderated discussion on the state of art in each
category. Emphasis will be on what went right and what went wrong, and
on what progress has been made since the first experiment. In
particular, in what areas further effort is likely to pay off in terms
of improved predictions. There will also be poster sessions and
informal sessions using computer workstations. Broadly one day will be
devoted to each category, depending on the levels of response.
Publication
The proceedings of the meeting will be refereed and published in Proteins.
Timetable
- February 15 '96 - March 1 '96
- Request for comments on draft evaluation criteria.
- March 7 '96 - October 15 '96
- Distribution of targets to predictors as they become available,
withdrawal of structures as they are solved. Collection of
predictions.
- December 12 - 16 '96
- Meeting, Asilomar, California
Organizing Committee
Tim Hubbard Co-chair Centre for Protein Engineering, Cambridge, UK
Steve Bryant Co-chair NCBI, National Library of Medicine, USA
John Moult President CARB, University of Maryland, USA
Jan T. Pedersen CARB, University of Maryland, USA
Krzysztof Fidelis Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, USA
Rod Balhorn Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, USA
Richard Judson Sandia National Laboratory, USA.
CASP2 organisers 25/9/96