COMPOSITIONAL ANALYSIS OF PROTEIN SEQUENCES OF DIFFERENT SPECIES

Vinobha C.S.¹, Rajasekaran E.², Rajadurai M.³*
¹Department of Bioinformatics, School of Bioengineering, Faculty of Engg. & Technology, SRM University, Kattankulathur, 603203, Kancheepuram, Tamil Nadu, India
²Department of Bioinformatics, School Biotechnology and Medical Sciences, Karunya University, Karunya Nagar, Coimbatore, 641114, Tamil Nadu, India
³Department of Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, Bishop Heber College, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India.
* Corresponding Author : csvinobha@gmail.com

Received : -     Accepted : -     Published : 21-12-2010
Volume : 2     Issue : 2       Pages : 7 - 11
Int J Bioinformatics Res 2.2 (2010):7-11
DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.9735/0975-3087.2.2.7-11

Keywords : Lantibiotics, bacteriocin, homology modelling, Pocket Identification
Conflict of Interest : None declared

We describe several protein sequence statistics designed to evaluate distinctive attributes of residue content and arrangement in primary structure. As per the global consideration, the compositional biases of clustering different residue types (charged residues, hydrophobic residues) of long runs of charged or uncharged residues, periodic patterns, counts and distribution of homooligopeptides, and unusual spacing between particular residue types. The computer program SEQUANA (statistical analysis of protein sequences) calculates all the statistics for any individual protein sequence input and is available for the WINDOWS environment through electronic mail on request to csvinobha@gmail.com.

[1] Benson D.A., Karsch-Mizrachi I., Lipman D.J., Ostell J., Wheeler D.L. (2008) GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res. 36:D25–D30  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[2] Brendel V., Bucher P., Nourbakhsh I.R., Blaisdell B.E., Karlin S. (1992) Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 89  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[3] Friedberg I., Harder T., Godzik A. (2006) Nucleic Acids Res. 34:W379–W381  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[4] Boutet E., Lieberherr D., Tognolli M., Schneider M., Bairoch A. (2007) Methods Mol. Biol. 406:89–112  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[5] Ponting C.P. (2001) Brief Bioinform. 2:19– 29.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[6] Krogh A., Larsson B., Von Heijne G., Sonnhammer E.L. (2001) J. Mol. Biol. 305:567–580.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[7] Van-Heel M. (1991). J. Mol. Biol. 220:877- 887.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[8] Wu C., Whitson G., McLarty J., Ermongkoncha A., Chang T. C. (1992) Prot. Sci. 1:667-677  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[9] Ferran E.A., Pflugfelder B., Ferrara P., (1994) Prot. Sci. 3:507-521. Hennig M., Darimont B., Sterner R., Kirschner K., Jansonius J.N. (1995) Structure 3:1295-1306  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus