• No se han encontrado resultados

CAPITULO III: El camino a la liberación

3.1. La dimensión estética

3.1.1. El arte en la industria cultural

When assessing whether a contact is conserved between two alignment positions, it is necessary to take into account gaps th a t have been included in the multiple structure alignment. A conserved contact is the percentage of all the contacts ob­ served between two alignment positions. However, it is not possible to assess the contact statu s between residues corresponding to gaps in the alignment. Therefore, a residue-residue comparison for a given structure is considered void if either one of

Chapter 2. Inter-Residue Contacts for Structural Comparison 63

th e residues equates to a gap in the alignm ent. The degree of contact conservation (CC) for a given alignm ent position (i, j) can therefore be defined in equation 2.1.

_ Number of structures with residues in contact

Number of structures w ith residues present in both alignment positions

However, if this measure is to be employed as an assessment of contact con­ servation, it is also necessary to take into account th e num ber of stru ctu res used for th e calculation. Otherwise, if only one stru ctu re had residues present in both alignm ent positions (i, j) then a single contact in this stru ctu re would be considered as 100% conserved despite only being derived from a single structure. Therefore an additional measure of alignm ent conservation (AC) was also calculated for each alignm ent position (i, j) (see equation 2.2).

_ Number of structures with residues present in both alignm ent positions Number of structures in alignm ent

Since contact m aps are sym m etrical ab o u t the diagonal axis, th e two halves of the plots could be used to display a different statistical analysis of the contacts observed in the same m ultiple stru ctu re alignm ent. In the case of the conserved contact m ap, the degree of plot intensity reflects the contact conservation in the top-right half and alignm ent conservation in the bottom -left half. An example of the plot generated by C O C O P L O T is shown in figure 2.4. This is derived from the C O RA m ultiple stru ctu re alignm ent of three representative stru ctu res in the oxidoreductase superfam ily found in the a jd-roll architecture of CATH (classification code 3.10.30.70).

Chapter 2. Inter-Residue Contacts for Structural Comparison 64

F ig u r e 2.4: A consensus contact map (COCOPLOT, I. Sillitoe) for a multiple structure alignment from the oxidoreductase superfamily in the a^-roll architecture (3.10.30.70). The top-right half of the plot indicates the degree of conservation of contacts with plot intensity increasing for a higher proportion of contacts between positions in the alignment. The bottom-left half indicates the degree of conserva­ tion between the alignment positions regardless of inter-residue distance. The plot intensity increases with a higher proportion of structures included in those alignment positions, thus gaps in the alignment are shown as pale bands and intersecting gaps as white blocks.

Chapter 2. Inter-Residue Contacts for Structural Comparison 65

A v e ra g e D is ta n c e a n d S t a n d a r d D e v ia tio n

In addition to generating plots solely based on contacts, C O C O P L O T was also w ritten to generate distance plots, where all inter-residue distances are calculated and the m agnitude of the distance is indicated by th e plot intensity. In th e case of the consensus plots from the m ultiple stru c tu ra l alignm ents, th e distance was taken to be the average inter-residue distance between the two positions in the alignm ent. Again this distance was only calculated for stru ctu res w ith residues present in bo th alignm ent positions (i, j) being considered.

To com plem ent the m easure of average distance, the stan d ard deviation for these values was also calculated and displayed in th e opposing half of th e plot. An exam ­ ple of this plot is illu strated in figure 2.5 using the same m ultiple stru ctu re align­ ment from figure 2.4. The stan d ard deviation also provides a useful m easure of the conservation of inter-residue distances between alignm ent positions, regardless of the distance itself. Thus, insights can be gained into the conservation of sections of stru ctu re th a t may not necessarily be in contact. As expected, a correlation between low average distance and low stan d ard deviation is observed in m ost cases, which is especially noticeable between secondary stru ctu re interactions. This presents more evidence for the use of contacts as a m easure of stru ctu ral homology since th e most conserved regions of stru ctu re are usually found close in 3D space.

Interestingly, there are examples where the distances between regions of the m ultiple stru ctu re alignm ent are well conserved (low stan d ard deviation) despite being spatially d istan t (high average distance). Since th e representative proteins used in this alignm ent all display less th a n 35% sequence identity, conserved features are likely to be th e result of genuine stru c tu ra l or functional constraints ra th e r th an lack of evolutionary distance. This type of highly conserved long-range constraint is unusual w ithin such evolutionarily d istan t proteins and could therefore be of use when assessing a new stru ctu re for evolutionary relationships. However, due to th e small num ber of stru ctu ral relatives in m any superfam ilies, th e m ajority of these m ultiple stru c tu ra l alignm ents only contain between two and four structures (see section 2.7). This relatively low num ber of stru ctu res negates th e use of the stan d ard deviation m easure for anything other th a n a qualitative investigative tool.

Chapter 2. Inter-Residue Contacts for Structural Comparison 66 13 •-1 ’ I '■ 26 37 ■ ■ ' ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ ' T " - 49 61 ... 73 85 , . . . . 97 ...... 109 121 A L IG N M E N T M A T R IX CATH 3.10.30.70 MINSEODIS 8 LENGTH 121 AV_LOWER 8.0 0.0 0.0 STRUCTURES 4 AV.U PPER 20.0 2.0 0.3 CONTACTS 100 156 SD_LOWER 0.5

4.0 0.6 CONTACTS all 265 SD .U P PE R 3.0 ■ 6.0 0.9 STRUCTURES 1a2vA2 ___ 8 .0 1.2 1av402 _ 1 0.0 1.5 1 oacA4 12.0 1.8 1kslA2 1 4.0 2.1 _ 16.0 2 .4 1 8.0 __2 .7 2 0 .0 __3.0

1 Av. DIst. S id D ev. |

F ig u r e 2.5; A consensus distance plot (I. Sillitoe, COCOPLOT) for the oxidoreduc­ tase superfainily in the a /?-roll architecture of CATH (classification code 3.10.30.70). The top-right half of the plot illustrates the average distance between alignment po­ sitions with plot intensity increasing with shorter distances. The bottom -left half of the plot illustrates the standard deviation for these alignment positions a.s the plot intensity increases where the structural variability decreases.

Chapter 2. Inter-Residue Contacts for Structural Comparison 67