Lost in folding space? Comparing four variants of the thermodynamic model for RNA secondary structure prediction

Janssen S, Schudoma C, Steger G, Giegerich R (2011)
BMC Bioinformatics 12(1): 429.

Zeitschriftenaufsatz | Veröffentlicht | Englisch
 
Download
OA
Autor/in
; ; ;
Abstract / Bemerkung
BACKGROUND:Many bioinformatics tools for RNA secondary structure analysis are based on a thermodynamic model of RNA folding. They predict a single, "optimal" structure by free energy minimization, they enumerate near-optimal structures, they compute base pair probabilities and dot plots, representative structures of different abstract shapes, or Boltzmann probabilities of structures and shapes. Although all programs refer to the same physical model, they implement it with considerable variation for different tasks, and little is known about the effects of heuristic assumptions and model simplifications used by the programs on the outcome of the analysis.RESULTS:We extract four different models of the thermodynamic folding space which underlie the programs RNAfold, RNAshapes, and RNAsubopt. Their differences lie within the details of the energy model and the granularity of the folding space. We implement probabilistic shape analysis for all models, and introduce the shape probability shift as a robust measure of model similarity. Using four data sets derived from experimentally solved structures, we provide a quantitative evaluation of the model differences.CONCLUSIONS:We find that search space granularity affects the computed shape probabilities less than the over- or underapproximation of free energy by a simplified energy model. Still, the approximations perform similar enough to implementations of the full model to justify their continued use in settings where computational constraints call for simpler algorithms. On the side, we observe that the rarely used level 2 shapes, which predict the complete arrangement of helices, multiloops, internal loops and bulges, include the "true" shape in a rather small number of predicted high probability shapes. This calls for an investigation of new strategies to extract high probability members from the (very large) level 2 shape space of an RNA sequence. We provide implementations of all four models, written in a declarative style that makes them easy to be modified. Based on our study, future work on thermodynamic RNA folding may make a choice of model based on our empirical data. It can take our implementations as a starting point for further program development.
Erscheinungsjahr
2011
Zeitschriftentitel
BMC Bioinformatics
Band
12
Ausgabe
1
Seite(n)
429
ISSN
1471-2105
Finanzierungs-Informationen
Article Processing Charge funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and the Open Access Publication Fund of Bielefeld University.
Page URI
https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2410526

Zitieren

Janssen S, Schudoma C, Steger G, Giegerich R. Lost in folding space? Comparing four variants of the thermodynamic model for RNA secondary structure prediction. BMC Bioinformatics. 2011;12(1):429.
Janssen, S., Schudoma, C., Steger, G., & Giegerich, R. (2011). Lost in folding space? Comparing four variants of the thermodynamic model for RNA secondary structure prediction. BMC Bioinformatics, 12(1), 429. doi:10.1186/1471-2105-12-429
Janssen, S., Schudoma, C., Steger, G., and Giegerich, R. (2011). Lost in folding space? Comparing four variants of the thermodynamic model for RNA secondary structure prediction. BMC Bioinformatics 12, 429.
Janssen, S., et al., 2011. Lost in folding space? Comparing four variants of the thermodynamic model for RNA secondary structure prediction. BMC Bioinformatics, 12(1), p 429.
S. Janssen, et al., “Lost in folding space? Comparing four variants of the thermodynamic model for RNA secondary structure prediction”, BMC Bioinformatics, vol. 12, 2011, pp. 429.
Janssen, S., Schudoma, C., Steger, G., Giegerich, R.: Lost in folding space? Comparing four variants of the thermodynamic model for RNA secondary structure prediction. BMC Bioinformatics. 12, 429 (2011).
Janssen, Stefan, Schudoma, Christian, Steger, Gerhard, and Giegerich, Robert. “Lost in folding space? Comparing four variants of the thermodynamic model for RNA secondary structure prediction”. BMC Bioinformatics 12.1 (2011): 429.
Alle Dateien verfügbar unter der/den folgenden Lizenz(en):
Copyright Statement:
This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. [...]
Volltext(e)
Access Level
OA Open Access
Zuletzt Hochgeladen
2019-09-06T08:57:58Z
MD5 Prüfsumme
85c792fe2ace3095c1be4936eb12f364

Link(s) zu Volltext(en)
Access Level
Restricted Closed Access

Export

Markieren/ Markierung löschen
Markierte Publikationen

Open Data PUB

Web of Science

Dieser Datensatz im Web of Science®

Quellen

PMID: 22051375
PubMed | Europe PMC

Suchen in

Google Scholar