Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparison of the true hits among the top 10 predicted sites for ANCESCON, evolutionary trace (ET), simple conservation (SC), and conservation difference (CD) methods

From: Reconstruction of ancestral protein sequences and its applications

Protein Family

PDB ID#

Ligand/ substrate

Number of sites

*

**

***

ANCESCON

ET

SC

CD

adkinase

1aky

AP5

188

42

20

18

3

9.5

9.1

8

gef

1bkd

H-Ras

245

47

4

0

3

3

3

2

globin

1a6g

HEM

147

21

1

1

2

5.5

6

6

pdz

1be9

+

81

15

2

1

6

4

4

2

ph

1mai

I3P

109

11

2

0

2

2

3

2

ptb

1shc

PTR

157

27

2

1

6

5

5

9

ras

821p

GTN

185

29

10

9

2

5.6

8.7

5

sh2

1a09

ACE

83

17

2

1

3

5

4

4

sh3

1nlo

ACE

57

9

1

1

2

5

4

0

subtilase

1av7

SBL

278

22

8

4

5

4.6

3.8

4

  1. #:Representative protein structure
  2. *: Number of sites within 5Å to ligand or substrates
  3. **: Number of invariant sites, which may contain gaps
  4. ***: Number of invariant sites within 5 Å to ligand or substrates
  5. +: C-terminal peptide of protein CRIPT
Back to article page

BMC Ecology and Evolution

ISSN: 2730-7182

Contact us