CiteULike is a free online bibliography manager. Register and you can start organising your references online.

A comparison of SCOP and CATH with respect to domain-domain interactions. Export

Proteins (16 July 2007)

Citation Format

[Posts]

View FullText article


gulkur's tags for this article

0cath 0scop comparison

X Reviews [Write a review of this article]

X Find related articles from these CiteULike users

X Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

X Posting History

X Abstract

The analysis and prediction of protein-protein interaction sites from structural data are restricted by the limited availability of structural complexes that represent the complete protein-protein interaction space. The domain classification schemes CATH and SCOP are normally used independently in the analysis and prediction of protein domain-domain interactions. In this article, the effect of different domain classification schemes on the number and type of domain-domain interactions observed in structural data is systematically evaluated for the SCOP and CATH hierarchies. Although there is a large overlap in domain assignments between SCOP and CATH, 23.6% of CATH interfaces had no SCOP equivalent and 37.3% of SCOP interfaces had no CATH equivalent in a nonredundant set. Therefore, combining both classifications gives an increase of between 23.6 and 37.3% in domain-domain interfaces. It is suggested that if possible, both domain classification schemes should be used together, but if only one is selected, SCOP provides better coverage than CATH. Employing both SCOP and CATH reduces the false negative rate of predictive methods, which employ homology matching to structural data to predict protein-protein interaction by an estimated 6.5%. Proteins 2007. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.


X BibTeX record

X RIS record


Privacy Statement | Terms & Conditions
CiteULike organises scholarly (or academic) papers or literature and provides bibliographic (which means it makes bibliographies) for universities and higher education establishments. It helps undergraduates and postgraduates. People studying for PhDs or in postdoctoral (postdoc) positions. The service is similar in scope to EndNote or RefWorks or any other reference manager like BibTeX, but it is a social bookmarking service for scientists and humanities researchers.