Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Sequence Databases
Genome Sequence Databases
Mega (Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis)
Protein Sequence Databases
Database Description Reference
Nucleotide Databases
Genome Databases
Miscellaneous Databases
Drug Designing
Conclusion and Future Prospects
References
All Topics
Computer Science

Use of Bioinformatics Tools in Different Spheres of Life Sciences

Profile image of MUHAMMAD SAAD MEHMOODMUHAMMAD SAAD MEHMOOD

2014, Journal of Data Mining in Genomics & Proteomics

https://doi.org/10.4172/2153-0602.1000158
visibility

…

description

13 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

The pace, by which scientific knowledge is being produced and shared today, was never been so fast in the past. Different areas of science are getting closer to each other to give rise new disciplines. Bioinformatics is one of such newly emerging fields, which makes use of computer, mathematics and statistics in molecular biology to archive, retrieve, and analyse biological data. Although yet at infancy, it has become one of the fastest growing fields, and quickly established itself as an integral component of any biological research activity. It is getting popular due to its ability to analyse huge amount of biological data quickly and cost-effectively. Bioinformatics can assist a biologist to extract valuable information from biological data providing various web-and/or computer-based tools, the majority of which are freely available. The present review gives a comprehensive summary of some of these tools available to a life scientist to analyse biological data. Exclusively this review will focus on those areas of biological research, which can be greatly assisted by such tools like analysing a DNA and protein sequence to identify various features, prediction of 3D structure of protein molecules, to study molecular interactions, and to perform simulations to mimic a biological phenomenon to extract useful information from the biological data.

Related papers

Review What is bioinformatics? An introduction and overview
amany abdelfattah
View PDFchevron_right
Computational Biology and Applied Bioinformatics
Leonardo Ulises Guzmán Cruz

Computational Biology and Applied Bioinformatics, 2011

Paran-UTFPR (Brazil). He graduated in Electronic Engineering (1984) and got a MSc degree in Biomedical Engineering (1990), and a PhD in Information Sciences (1996). In 1998 he founded the Bioinformatics Laboratory at UTFPR and since then bioinformatics is one of his main area of research, with special interest in: protein structure prediction methods and algorithms as well as high-performance computing for bioinformatics applications. He has served as a member of program committees of many international conferences and editorial boards of scientific journals. Since 2002, Dr. Lopes holds a research grant from the Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq) in the area of Computer Science.

View PDFchevron_right
Introduction to Bioinformatics by Arthur M. Lesk
Shrivas Chaterji
View PDFchevron_right
Introduction to Bioinformatics - Arthur M. Lesk
Harsh Shinde
View PDFchevron_right
A brief history of bioinformatics
Nicolas Derome

Briefings in Bioinformatics, 2018

It is easy for today's students and researchers to believe that modern bioinformatics emerged recently to assist nextgeneration sequencing data analysis. However, the very beginnings of bioinformatics occurred more than 50 years ago, when desktop computers were still a hypothesis and DNA could not yet be sequenced. The foundations of bioinformatics were laid in the early 1960s with the application of computational methods to protein sequence analysis (notably, de novo sequence assembly, biological sequence databases and substitution models). Later on, DNA analysis also emerged due to parallel advances in (i) molecular biology methods, which allowed easier manipulation of DNA, as well as its sequencing, and (ii) computer science, which saw the rise of increasingly miniaturized and more powerful computers, as well as novel software better suited to handle bioinformatics tasks. In the 1990s through the 2000s, major improvements in sequencing technology, along with reduced costs, gave rise to an exponential increase of data. The arrival of 'Big Data' has laid out new challenges in terms of data mining and management, calling for more expertise from computer science into the field. Coupled with an ever-increasing amount of bioinformatics tools, biological Big Data had (and continues to have) profound implications on the predictive power and reproducibility of bioinformatics results. To overcome this issue, universities are now fully integrating this discipline into the curriculum of biology students. Recent subdisciplines such as synthetic biology, systems biology and whole-cell modeling have emerged from the ever-increasing complementarity between computer science and biology.

View PDFchevron_right
Bioinformatics Across the Sciences
Nigel Yarlett
View PDFchevron_right
Role of Computers in Bioinformatics by Using Different Biological Datasets
Chukka Santh

IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering, 2014

The amount and variety of data in natural sciences increases rapidly. Data abstraction, data manipulation and pattern discovery techniques are of great need in order to deal with such large quantities. Integration between different sources of data is also of major interest, as complex relations may arise. Biology is a good example of a field that provides extensive, highly variable and multi-sources data. The scope of these investigations has now expanded greatly owing to the development of high throughout sequencing techniques and novel statistical and computational methods. These methods require easy-to-use computer programs. We have developed a new software package, molecular genetics analysis to integrate their diverse data and tools under Common Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) by using BLAST, FASTA data searches. One of the most exciting things about being involved in computer programming and biology is that both fields are rich in new techniques and results. The illumina is sequence analyzer in Next Generation Sequence Technology.

View PDFchevron_right
Basics of bioinformatics and it’s application for applied life sciences: A national training workshop report-2019
Apoorv Tiwari

International Journal of Chemical Studies, 2019

A variety of bioinformatics tools in the areas of basic and applied life sciences has altered the worldview of bioscience studies over the years. The creation of new and strong bioinformatics techniques devoted to the acquisition, information mining and analysis of biological data enabled basic and applied research in life sciences from molecular biology to the creation of new biomedical tools. These bioinformatics advances cover the emerging biomedical research areas including the development of newer algorithms with predictive applications, genome annotation tools and prediction of function, gene expression analysis, and biological data in the form of advanced databases. Bioinformatics Sub-DIC, at department of molecular biology & genetic engineering, CBSH, Govind ballabh Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand, India having expertise in bioinformatics and conducting training, novel research projects, workshops with the UG, PG and doctorate courses of b...

View PDFchevron_right
Bioinformatics: advancing biotechnology through information technology Part I: molecular biology databases
Biplav Srivastava

2002

This paper is intended as a review of molecular biology databases and other Bioinformatics resources available for biotechnologists aiming to use the wealth of genomic data available today. The genomic data along with associated proteomic and functional data are often distributed across multiple databases, requiring a timeconsuming search by the user. The explosion of information seen in molecular biology has created a veritable maze, through which careful navigation is required for research and innovation in biotechnology. The paper, one of the series, introduces the readers to the major molecular biology databases and bioinformatics tools such as BLAST for similarity searching and RasMol for protein structure visualization. Subsequent papers will take the readers into a journey across bioinformatics and the biotechnological discoveries that are happening with bioinformatics. Advances in computer technologies and the birth of the internet are also part of this revolution in biology. Online databases have given scientists and researchers across the world access to unimaginable volumes of biologically relevant data. Bioinformatics, a truly multidisciplinary science, aims to use the benefits of computer technologies in understanding the biology of life itself.

View PDFchevron_right
Bioinformatics_for_Genetices.(MAZEN SAEED)
Mazen Alzoriqy
View PDFchevron_right

References (162)

  1. Mount DW (2004) Sequence and genome analysis. New York: Cold Spring.
  2. Hesper B, Hogeweg P (1970) Bioinformatica:een werkconcept. Kameleon 1: 28-9.
  3. Hogeweg P (2011) The roots of bioinformatics in theoretical biology. PLoS Comput Biol 7: e1002021.
  4. Peitsch MC (1996) ProMod and Swiss-Model: Internet-based tools for automated comparative protein modelling. Biochem Soc Trans 24: 274-279.
  5. Dibyajyoti S, Bin ET, Swati P (2013) Bioinformatics: The effects on the cost of drug discovery. Galle Med J 18: 44-50.
  6. Ouzounis CA, Valencia A (2003) Early bioinformatics: the birth of a discipline--a personal view. Bioinformatics 19: 2176-2190.
  7. Molatudi M, Molotja N, Pouris A (2009) A bibliometric study of bioinformatics research in South Africa. Scientometrics 81: 47-59.
  8. Ouzounis CA (2012) Rise and demise of bioinformatics? Promise and progress. PLoS Comput Biol 8: e1002487.
  9. Geer RC, Sayers EW (2003) Entrez: making use of its power. Brief Bioinform 4: 179-184.
  10. Parmigiani G, Garrett ES, Irizarry RA, Zeger SL (2003) The analysis of gene expression data: an overview of methods and software, Springer, New York.
  11. Hoersch S, Leroy C, Brown NP, Andrade MA, Sander C (2000) The GeneQuiz web server: protein functional analysis through the Web. Trends Biochem Sci 25: 33-35.
  12. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schäffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, et al. (1997) Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 25: 3389-3402.
  13. Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ (1994) CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res 22: 4673-4680.
  14. Clamp M, Cuff J, Searle SM, Barton GJ (2004) The Jalview Java alignment editor. Bioinformatics 20: 426-427.
  15. Thomas P, Starlinger J, Vowinkel A, Arzt S, Leser U (2012) GeneView: a comprehensive semantic search engine for PubMed. Nucleic Acids Res 40: W585-591.
  16. Page RD (2001) TreeView. Glasgow University, Glasgow, UK.
  17. Zhang Y, Phillips CA, Rogers GL, Baker EJ, Chesler EJ, et al. (2014) On finding bicliques in bipartite graphs: a novel algorithm and its application to the integration of diverse biological data types. BMC Bioinformatics 15: 110.
  18. Stoilov I, Akarsu AN, Alozie I, Child A, Barsoum-Homsy M, et al. (1998) Sequence analysis and homology modeling suggest that primary congenital glaucoma on 2p21 results from mutations disrupting either the hinge region or the conserved core structures of cytochrome P4501B1. Am J Hum Genet 62: 573-584.
  19. Tekaia F, Gordon SV, Garnier T, Brosch R, Barrell BG, et al. (1999) Analysis of the proteome of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in silico. Tuber Lung Dis 79: 329-342.
  20. Mehmood MA, Xiao X, Hafeez FY, Gai Y, Wang F (2011) Molecular characterization of the modular chitin binding protein Cbp50 from Bacillus thuringiensis serovar konkukian. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 100: 445-453.
  21. Sehar U, Mehmood MA, Hussain K, Nawaz S, Nadeem S, et al. (2013) Domain wise docking analyses of the modular chitin binding protein CBP50 from Bacillus thuringiensis serovar konkukian S4. Bioinformation 9: 901-907.
  22. Kingsford CL, Ayanbule K, Salzberg SL (2007) Rapid, accurate, computational discovery of Rho-independent transcription terminators illuminates their relationship to DNA uptake. Genome Biol 8: R22.
  23. Salamov AA, Solovyev VV (2000) Ab initio gene finding in Drosophila genomic DNA. Genome Res 10: 516-522.
  24. Lencz T, Guha S, Liu C, Rosenfeld J, Mukherjee S, et al. (2013) Genome-wide association study implicates NDST3 in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Nat Commun 4: 2739.
  25. Peng Z, Lu Y, Li L, Zhao Q, Feng Q, et al. (2013) The draft genome of the fast- growing non-timber forest species moso bamboo (Phyllostachys heterocycla). Nat Genet 45: 456-461, 461e1-2.
  26. Khan FA, Phillips CD, Baker RJ (2014) Timeframes of speciation, reticulation, and hybridization in the bulldog bat explained through phylogenetic analyses of all genetic transmission elements. Syst Biol 63: 96-110.
  27. Freckleton RP, Harvey PH, Pagel M (2002) Phylogenetic analysis and comparative data: a test and review of evidence. Am Nat 160: 712-726.
  28. Price MN, Dehal PS, Arkin AP (2010) FastTree 2--approximately maximum- likelihood trees for large alignments. PLoS One 5: e9490. Volume 5 • Issue 2 • 1000158
  29. J Data Mining Genomics Proteomics ISSN: 2153-0602 JDMGP, an open access journal
  30. Bast F (2013) Sequence similarity search, multiple sequence alignment, model selection, distance matrix and phylogeny reconstruction. Nat Protoc.
  31. Ahmad N, Michoux F, Nixon PJ (2012) Investigating the production of foreign membrane proteins in tobacco chloroplasts: expression of an algal plastid terminal oxidase. PLoS One 7: e41722.
  32. Chen Y, Wang F, Xu J, Mehmood MA, Xiao X (2011) Physiological and evolutionary studies of NAP systems in Shewanella piezotolerans WP3. ISME J 5: 843-855.
  33. Boeckmann B, Bairoch A, Apweiler R, Blatter MC, Estreicher A, et al. (2003) The SWISS-PROT protein knowledgebase and its supplement TrEMBL in 2003. Nucleic Acids Res 31: 365-370.
  34. UniProt Consortium (2014) Activities at the Universal Protein Resource (UniProt). Nucleic Acids Res 42: D191-198.
  35. Wu CH, Yeh LS, Huang H, Arminski L, Castro-Alvear J, et al. (2003) The Protein Information Resource. Nucleic Acids Res 31: 345-347.
  36. Benson DA, Karsch-Mizrachi I, Lipman DJ, Ostell J, Wheeler DL (2008) GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res 36: D25-30.
  37. Kanz C, Aldebert P, Althorpe N, Baker W, Baldwin A, et al. (2005) The EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database. Nucleic Acids Res 33: D29-33.
  38. Miyazaki S, Sugawara H, Gojobori T, Tateno Y (2003) DNA Data Bank of Japan (DDBJ) in XML. Nucleic Acids Res 31: 13-16.
  39. Berman HM, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat TN, et al. (2000) The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res 28: 235-242.
  40. Finn RD, Bateman A, Clements J, Marco Punta, Penny C Coggill, et al. (2014) Pfam: the protein families database. Nucl Acids Res 42: D222-D230.
  41. Gonzalez S, Binato R, Guida L, Mencalha AL, Abdelhay E4 (2014) Conserved transcription factor binding sites suggest an activator basal promoter and a distal inhibitor in the galanin gene promoter in mouse ES cells. Gene 538: 228- 234.
  42. Fox NK, Brenner SE, Chandonia JM (2014) SCOPe: Structural Classification of Proteins--extended, integrating SCOP and ASTRAL data and classification of new structures. Nucleic Acids Res 42: D304-309.
  43. Pearl F, Todd A, Sillitoe I, Dibley M, Redfern O, et al. (2005) The CATH Domain Structure Database and related resources Gene3D and DHS provide comprehensive domain family information for genome analysis. Nucleic Acids Res 33: D247-251.
  44. Sigrist CJ, de Castro E, Cerutti L, Cuche BA, Hulo N, et al. (2013) New and continuing developments at PROSITE. Nucleic Acids Res 41: D344-347.
  45. Huang JY, Brutlag DL (2001) The EMOTIF database. Nucleic Acids Res 29: 202-204.
  46. UniProt Consortium (2008) The universal protein resource (UniProt). Nucleic Acids Res 36: D190-195.
  47. Kinjo AR, Suzuki H, Yamashita R, Ikegawa Y, Kudou T, et al. (2012) Protein Data Bank Japan (PDBj): maintaining a structural data archive and resource description framework format. Nucleic Acids Res 40: D453-460.
  48. Benson DA, Karsch-Mizrachi I, Clark K, Lipman DJ, Ostell J, et al. (2012) GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res 40: D48-53.
  49. Bowes JB, Snyder KA, Segerdell E, Jarabek CJ, Azam K, et al. (2010) Xenbase: gene expression and improved integration. Nucleic Acids Res 38: D607-612.
  50. St Pierre SE, Ponting L, Stefancsik R, McQuilton P; FlyBase Consortium (2014) FlyBase 102--advanced approaches to interrogating FlyBase. Nucleic Acids Res 42: D780-788.
  51. Chou KC, Elrod DW (1999) Protein subcellular location prediction. Protein Eng 12: 107-118.
  52. Barker WC, Garavelli JS, Huang H, McGarvey PB, Orcutt BC, et al. (2000) The protein information resource (PIR). Nucleic Acids Res 28: 41-44.
  53. UniProt Consortium (2010) The Universal Protein Resource (UniProt) in 2010. Nucleic Acids Res 38: D142-148.
  54. Berman H, Henrick K, Nakamura H, Markley JL (2007) The worldwide Protein Data Bank (wwPDB): ensuring a single, uniform archive of PDB data. Nucleic Acids Res 35: D301-303.
  55. Burge SW, Daub J, Eberhardt R, Tate J, Barquist L, et al. (2013) Rfam 11.0: 10 years of RNA families. Nucleic Acids Res 41: D226-232.
  56. Orchard S, Ammari M, Aranda B, Breuza L, Briganti L, et al. (2014) The MIntAct project--IntAct as a common curation platform for 11 molecular interaction databases. Nucleic Acids Res 42: D358-363.
  57. Zanzoni A, Montecchi-Palazzi L, Quondam M, Ausiello G, Helmer-Citterich M, et al. (2002) MINT: a Molecular INTeraction database. FEBS Lett 513: 135-140.
  58. Joshi-Tope G, Gillespie M, Vastrik I, D'Eustachio P, Schmidt E, et al. (2005) Reactome: a knowledgebase of biological pathways. Nucleic Acids Res 33: D428-432.
  59. Saier MH Jr, Tran CV, Barabote RD (2006) TCDB: the Transporter Classification Database for membrane transport protein analyses and information. Nucleic Acids Res 34: D181-186.
  60. Saier MH Jr, Reddy VS, Tamang DG, Västermark A (2014) The transporter classification database. Nucleic Acids Res 42: D251-258.
  61. Lombard V, Golaconda Ramulu H, Drula E, Coutinho PM, Henrissat B (2014) The carbohydrate-active enzymes database (CAZy) in 2013. Nucleic Acids Res 42: D490-495.
  62. Subramaniam S, Fahy E, Gupta S, Sud M, Byrnes RW, et al. (2011) Bioinformatics and systems biology of the lipidome. Chem Rev 111: 6452-6490.
  63. Huang T, He ZS, Cui WR, Cai YD, Shi XH, et al. (2013) A sequence-based approach for predicting protein disordered regions. Protein Pept Lett 20: 243- 248.
  64. Zakeri P, Jeuris B, Vandebril R, Moreau Y (2014) Protein fold recognition using geometric kernel data fusion. Bioinformatics 30: 1850-1857.
  65. Yao L, Evans JA, Rzhetsky A (2010) Novel opportunities for computational biology and sociology in drug discovery. Trends Biotechnol 28: 161-170.
  66. Sutcliffe MJ, Haneef I, Carney D, Blundell TL (1987) Knowledge based modelling of homologous proteins, Part I: Three-dimensional frameworks derived from the simultaneous superposition of multiple structures. Protein Eng 1: 377-384.
  67. Bates PA, Sternberg MJ (1999) Model building by comparison at CASP3: using expert knowledge and computer automation. Proteins Suppl 3: 47-54.
  68. Sali A, Blundell T (1994) Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. Protein Struc Dist Anal 64: 86.
  69. Gasteiger E, Gattiker A, Hoogland C, Ivanyi I, Appel RD, et al. (2003) ExPASy: The proteomics server for in-depth protein knowledge and analysis. Nucleic Acids Res 31: 3784-3788.
  70. Roy A, Kucukural A, Zhang Y (2010) I-TASSER: a unified platform for automated protein structure and function prediction. Nat Protoc 5: 725-738.
  71. Eswar N, Webb B, Martin-Renom MA, Shen MY, Pieper U, et al. (2006) Comparative protein structure modeling using Modeller. Curr Protoc Bioinformatics.
  72. Trott O, Olson AJ (2010) AutoDock Vina: improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading. J Comput Chem 31: 455-461.
  73. Sehar U, Mehmood MA, Nawaz S, Nadeem S, Hussain K, et al. (2013) Three dimensional (3D) structure prediction and substrate-protein interaction study of the chitin binding protein CBP24 from B. thuringiensis. Bioinformation 9: 725- 729.
  74. Butt AM, Batool M, Tong Y (2011) Homology modeling, comparative genomics and functional annotation of Mycoplasma genitalium hypothetical protein MG_237. Bioinformation 7: 299-303.
  75. Ali M, Mehmood MA, Hussain K (2013) Functional annotation of the cda1 gene from Bacillus thuringiensis through homology modeling and molecular docking. Pak J Life Soc Sci 11:190-195.
  76. Wang L, Huang C, Yang MQ, Yang JY (2010) BindN+ for accurate prediction of DNA and RNA-binding residues from protein sequence features. BMC Syst Biol 4 Suppl 1: S3.
  77. Vinayagam A, Zirin J, Roesel C, Hu Y, Yilmazel B, et al. (2014) Integrating protein-protein interaction networks with phenotypes reveals signs of interactions. Nat Methods 11: 94-99.
  78. Lu L, Lu H, Skolnick J (2002) MULTIPROSPECTOR: an algorithm for the prediction of protein-protein interactions by multimeric threading. Proteins 49: 350-364.
  79. Xenarios I, Salwínski L, Duan XJ, Higney P, Kim SM, et al. (2002) DIP, the Database of Interacting Proteins: a research tool for studying cellular networks of protein interactions. Nucleic Acids Res 30: 303-305.
  80. Hosur R, Xu J, Bienkowska J, Berger B (2011) iWRAP: An interface threading approach with application to prediction of cancer-related protein-protein interactions. J Mol Biol 405: 1295-1310.
  81. Zhang QC, Petrey D, Deng L, Qiang L, Shi Y, et al. (2012) Structure-based prediction of protein-protein interactions on a genome-wide scale. Nature 490: 556-560.
  82. Valente GT, Acencio ML, Martins C, Lemke N (2013) The development of a universal in silico predictor of protein-protein interactions. PLoS One 8: e65587.
  83. Zhang Z, Li Y, Lin B, Schroeder M, Huang B (2011) Identification of cavities on protein surface using multiple computational approaches for drug binding site prediction. Bioinformatics 27: 2083-2088.
  84. de Vries SJ, van Dijk M, Bonvin AM (2010) The HADDOCK web server for data- driven biomolecular docking. Nat Protoc 5: 883-897.
  85. Plewczynski D, Łaźniewski M, Augustyniak R, Ginalski K (2011) Can we trust docking results? Evaluation of seven commonly used programs on PDBbind database. J Comput Chem 32: 742-755.
  86. Singh R, Xu J, Berger B (2008) Global alignment of multiple protein interaction networks with application to functional orthology detection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105: 12763-12768.
  87. Liao CS, Lu K, Baym M, Singh R, Berger B (2009) IsoRankN: spectral methods for global alignment of multiple protein networks. Bioinformatics 25: i253-258.
  88. Khan M, Masoud MS, Qasim M, Khan MA, Zubair M, et al. (2013) Molecular screening of phytochemicals from Amelanchier Alnifolia against HCV NS3 protease/helicase using computational docking techniques. Bioinformation 9: 978-982.
  89. Klingström T, Plewczynski D (2011) Protein-protein interaction and pathway databases, a graphical review. Brief Bioinform 12: 702-713.
  90. Bader GD, Betel D, Hogue CW (2003) BIND: the Biomolecular Interaction Network Database. Nucleic Acids Res 31: 248-250.
  91. Licata L, Briganti L, Peluso D, Perfetto L, Iannuccelli M, et al. (2012) MINT, the molecular interaction database: 2012 update. Nucleic Acids Res 40: D857-861.
  92. Cordeiro MN, Speck-Planche A (2012) Computer-aided drug design, synthesis and evaluation of new anti-cancer drugs. Curr Top Med Chem 12: 2703-2704.
  93. Katara P (2013) Role of bioinformatics and pharmacogenomics in drug discovery and development process. Network Modeling Analysis in Health Informatics and Bioinformatics 2: 225-30.
  94. Yamanishi Y, Kotera M, Kanehisa M, Goto S (2010) Drug-target interaction prediction from chemical, genomic and pharmacological data in an integrated framework. Bioinformatics 26: i246-254.
  95. Boruah L, Das A, Nainwal LM, Agarwal N, Shankar B (2013) In-Silico Drug Design: A revolutionary approach to change the concept of current Drug Discovery Process. Ind J Pharm Biologi Res 1: 60-73.
  96. Lee HM, Giguere PM, Roth BL (2014) DREADDs: novel tools for drug discovery and development. Drug Discov Today 19: 469-473.
  97. Wishart DS (2005) Bioinformatics in drug development and assessment. Drug Metab Rev 37: 279-310.
  98. Kitchen DB, Decornez H, Furr JR, Bajorath J (2004) Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications. Nat Rev Drug Discov 3: 935-949.
  99. Reddy RN, Mutyala R, Aparoy P, Reddanna P, Reddy MR (2007) Computer aided drug design approaches to develop cyclooxygenase based novel anti- inflammatory and anti-cancer drugs. Curr Pharm Des 13: 3505-3517.
  100. Jayakanthan M, Wadhwa G, Mohan TM, Ponnusamy B, Durai S, et al. (2009) Computer-aided drug design for cancer-causing H-Ras p21 mutant protein. Lett Drug Des Discov 6: 14-20.
  101. Kim J, Gao L, Tan K (2012) Multi-analyte network markers for tumor prognosis. PLoS One 7: e52973.
  102. Wu CC, D'Argenio D, Asgharzadeh S, Triche T (2012) TARGETgene: a tool for identification of potential therapeutic targets in cancer. PLoS One 7: e43305.
  103. Berg EL (2014) Systems biology in drug discovery and development. Drug Discov Today 19: 113-125.
  104. McDermott JE, Diamond DL, Corley C, Rasmussen AL, Katze MG, et al. (2012) Topological analysis of protein co-abundance networks identifies novel host targets important for HCV infection and pathogenesis. BMC Syst Biol 6: 28.
  105. Makhmoudova A, Williams D, Brewer D, Massey S, Patterson J, et al. (2014) Identification of multiple phosphorylation sites on maize endosperm starch branching enzyme IIb, a key enzyme in amylopectin biosynthesis. J Biol Chem 289: 9233-9246.
  106. Hub JS, de Groot BL (2008) Mechanism of selectivity in aquaporins and aquaglyceroporins. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105: 1198-1203.
  107. Kannan S, Zacharias M (2014) Role of tryptophan side chain dynamics on the Trp-cage mini-protein folding studied by molecular dynamics simulations. PLoS One 9: e88383.
  108. Isin B, Estiu G, Wiest O, Oltvai ZN (2012) Identifying ligand binding conformations of the β2-adrenergic receptor by using its agonists as computational probes. PLoS One 7: e50186.
  109. Csermely P, Korcsmáros T, Kiss HJ, London G, Nussinov R (2013) Structure and dynamics of molecular networks: a novel paradigm of drug discovery: a comprehensive review. Pharmacol Ther 138: 333-408.
  110. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ (1990) Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215: 403-410.
  111. Finn RD, Clements J, Eddy SR (2011) HMMER web server: interactive sequence similarity searching. Nucleic Acids Res 39: W29-37.
  112. Sievers F, Wilm A, Dineen D, Gibson TJ, Karplus K, et al. (2011) Fast, scalable generation of high-quality protein multiple sequence alignments using Clustal Omega. Mol Syst Biol 7: 539.
  113. Ganesan N, Bennett NF, Velauthapillai M, Pattabiraman N, Squier R, et al. (2005) Web-based interface facilitating sequence-to-structure analysis of BLAST alignment reports. Biotechniques 39: 186, 188.
  114. Gasteiger E, Hoogland C, Gattiker A, Ron D Appel, Amos Bairoch, et al. (2005) In: The proteomics protocols handbook; Protein identification and analysis tools on the ExPASy server. Springer 571-607.
  115. Allen JE, Salzberg SL (2005) JIGSAW: integration of multiple sources of evidence for gene prediction. Bioinformatics 21: 3596-3603.
  116. Weckx S, Del-Favero J, Rademakers R, Claes L, Cruts M, et al. (2005) novoSNP, a novel computational tool for sequence variation discovery. Genome Res 15: 436-442.
  117. Münch R, Hiller K, Grote A, Scheer M, Klein J, et al. (2005) Virtual Footprint and PRODORIC: an integrative framework for regulon prediction in prokaryotes. Bioinformatics 21: 4187-4189.
  118. Unniraman S, Prakash R, Nagaraja V (2002) Conserved economics of transcription termination in eubacteria. Nucleic Acids Res 30: 675-684.
  119. Burge C, Karlin S (1997) Prediction of complete gene structures in human genomic DNA. J Mol Biol 268: 78-94.
  120. Kumar S, Tamura K, Nei M (1994) MEGA: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis software for microcomputers. Comput Appl Biosci 10: 189-191.
  121. Adachi J, Hasegawa M (1992) MOLPHY, programs for molecular phylogenetics I: PROTML, maximum likelihood inference of protein phylogeny. Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Tokyo.
  122. Yang Z (1997) PAML: a program package for phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. Comput Appl Biosci 13: 555-556.
  123. Felsenstein J (1993) PHYLIP phylogeny inference package. Department of Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle.
  124. Boc A, Diallo AB, Makarenkov V (2012) T-REX: a web server for inferring, validating and visualizing phylogenetic trees and networks. Nucleic Acids Res 40: W573-579.
  125. Page RD (1996) TreeView: an application to display phylogenetic trees on personal computers. Comput Appl Biosci 12: 357-358.
  126. Waterhouse AM, Procter JB, Martin DM, Clamp M, Barton GJ (2009) Jalview Version 2--a multiple sequence alignment editor and analysis workbench. Bioinformatics 25: 1189-1191. Volume 5 • Issue 2 • 1000158
  127. J Data Mining Genomics Proteomics ISSN: 2153-0602 JDMGP, an open access journal
  128. Leinonen R, Akhtar R, Birney E, Bower L, Cerdeno-Tárraga A, et al. (2011) The European Nucleotide Archive. Nucleic Acids Res 39: D28-31.
  129. Quevillon E, Silventoinen V, Pillai S, Harte N, Mulder N, et al. (2005) InterProScan: protein domains identifier. Nucleic Acids Res 33: W116-120.
  130. Martens L, Hermjakob H, Jones P, Adamski M, Taylor C, et al. (2005) PRIDE: the proteomics identifications database. Proteomics 5: 3537-3545.
  131. Flicek P, Amode MR, Barrell D, Beal K, Brent S, et al. (2012) Ensembl 2012. Nucleic Acids Res 40: D84-90.
  132. Rajoka MI, Idrees S, Khalid S, Ehsan B (2014) Medherb: An Interactive Bioinformatics Database and Analysis Resource for Medicinally Important Herbs. Curr Bioinform 9: 23-27.
  133. Matthews L, Gopinath G, Gillespie M, Caudy M, Croft D, et al. (2009) Reactome knowledgebase of human biological pathways and processes. Nucleic Acids Res 37: D619-622.
  134. Gaudet P, Fey P, Basu S, Bushmanova YA, Dodson R, et al. (2011) dictyBase update 2011: web 2.0 functionality and the initial steps towards a genome portal for the Amoebozoa. Nucleic Acids Res 39: D620-624.
  135. Kanehisa M (2002) The KEGG database. Silico Simulation of Biological Processes 247: 91-103.
  136. Yang K, Dinasarapu AR, Reis ES, Deangelis RA, Ricklin D, et al. (2013) CMAP: Complement Map Database. Bioinformatics 29: 1832-1833.
  137. Dinasarapu AR, Saunders B, Ozerlat I, Azam K, Subramaniam S (2011) Signaling gateway molecule pages--a data model perspective. Bioinformatics 27: 1736-1738.
  138. Schaefer CF, Anthony K, Krupa S, Buchoff J, Day M, et al. (2009) PID: the Pathway Interaction Database. Nucleic Acids Res 37: D674-679.
  139. Wishart DS, Tzur D, Knox C, Eisner R, Guo AC, et al. (2007) HMDB: the Human Metabolome Database. Nucleic Acids Res 35: D521-526.
  140. Sillitoe I, Cuff AL, Dessailly BH, Dawson NL, Furnham N, et al. (2013) New functional families (FunFams) in CATH to improve the mapping of conserved functional sites to 3D structures. Nucleic Acids Res 41: D490-498.
  141. Källberg M, Wang H, Wang S, Peng J, Wang Z, et al. (2012) Template-based protein structure modeling using the RaptorX web server. Nat Protoc 7: 1511- 1522.
  142. Cuff JA, Clamp ME, Siddiqui AS, Finlay M, Barton GJ (1998) JPred: a consensus secondary structure prediction server. Bioinformatics 14: 892-893.
  143. Rost B, Sander C, Schneider R (1994) PHD--an automatic mail server for protein secondary structure prediction. Comput Appl Biosci 10: 53-60.
  144. Bystroff C, Thorsson V, Baker D (2000) HMMSTR: a hidden Markov model for local sequence-structure correlations in proteins. J Mol Biol 301: 173-190.
  145. Raghava G (2002) APSSP2: A combination method for protein secondary structure prediction based on neural network and example based learning. CASP5 A-132.
  146. Kelley LA, Sternberg MJ (2009) Protein structure prediction on the Web: a case study using the Phyre server. Nat Protoc 4: 363-371.
  147. Letunic I, Doerks T, Bork P (2012) SMART 7: recent updates to the protein domain annotation resource. Nucleic Acids Res 40: D302-305.
  148. Morris GM, Huey R, Lindstrom W, Sanner MF, Belew RK, et al. (2009) AutoDock4 and AutoDockTools4: Automated docking with selective receptor flexibility. J Comput Chem 30: 2785-2791.
  149. Environment MO (2009) Chemical Computing Group. Montreal, Canada.
  150. Franceschini A, Szklarczyk D, Frankild S, Kuhn M, Simonovic M, et al. (2013) STRING v9.1: protein-protein interaction networks, with increased coverage and integration. Nucleic Acids Res 41: D808-815.
  151. Di Lena P, Wu G, Martelli PL, Casadio R, Nardini C (2013) MIMO: an efficient tool for molecular interaction maps overlap. BMC Bioinformatics 14: 159.
  152. Flannick J, Novak A, Srinivasan BS, McAdams HH, Batzoglou S (2006) Graemlin: general and robust alignment of multiple large interaction networks. Genome Res 16: 1169-1181.
  153. Kelley BP, Yuan B, Lewitter F, Sharan R, Stockwell BR, et al. (2004) PathBLAST: a tool for alignment of protein interaction networks. Nucleic Acids Res 32: W83-88.
  154. Adamcsek B, Palla G, Farkas IJ, Derényi I, Vicsek T (2006) CFinder: locating cliques and overlapping modules in biological networks. Bioinformatics 22: 1021-1023.
  155. Bader GD, Hogue CW (2003) An automated method for finding molecular complexes in large protein interaction networks. BMC Bioinformatics 4: 2.
  156. Gao Z, Li H, Zhang H, Liu X, Kang L, et al. (2008) PDTD: a web-accessible protein database for drug target identification. BMC Bioinformatics 9: 104.
  157. Law V, Knox C, Djoumbou Y, Jewison T, Guo AC, et al. (2014) DrugBank 4.0: shedding new light on drug metabolism. Nucleic Acids Res 42: D1091-1097.
  158. Chen X, Ji ZL, Chen YZ (2002) TTD: Therapeutic Target Database. Nucleic Acids Res 30: 412-415.
  159. Magariños MP1, Carmona SJ, Crowther GJ, Ralph SA, Roos DS, et al. (2012) TDR Targets: a chemogenomics resource for neglected diseases. Nucleic Acids Res 40: D1118-1127.
  160. Günther S, Kuhn M, Dunkel M, Campillos M, Senger C, et al. (2008) SuperTarget and Matador: resources for exploring drug-target relationships. Nucleic Acids Res 36: D919-922.
  161. Gaulton A, Bellis LJ, Bento AP, Chambers J, Davies M, et al. (2012) ChEMBL: a large-scale bioactivity database for drug discovery. Nucleic Acids Res 40: D1100-1107.
  162. Case DA, Cheatham TE 3rd, Darden T, Gohlke H, Luo R, et al. (2005) The Amber biomolecular simulation programs. J Comput Chem 26: 1668-1688.

Related papers

Bioinformatics: Application of Information Technology in Biological Science
Dr. Mohammad Alamgeer

Bioinformatics was applied in the creation and maintenance of a database to store biological information at the beginning of the "genomic revolution", such as nucleotide and amino acid sequences. Development of this type of database involved not only design issues but the development of complex interfaces whereby researchers could both access existing data as well as submit new or revised data. Bioinformatics and computational biology are frequently integrated with experimental studies as well, with bioinformatics emphasizing informatics and statistics, while computational biology emphasizes development of theoretical methods, mathematical modeling, and computational simulation techniques to find solution for genetic problems. Bioinformatics studies include analysis and integration of genomics data, prediction of protein function from sequence, and comparisons of protein ligands to identify target effects of drugs. Computational biology includes simulation of protein motion and folding and how proteins interact with each other.

View PDFchevron_right
Introduction to Bioinformatics
magendira mani vinayagam

Bioinformatics is the application of computer science and information technology to the field of biology.

View PDFchevron_right
bioinformatics
KAPIL PATIL

Essential Bioinformatics is a concise yet comprehensive textbook of bioinformatics that provides a broad introduction to the entire field. Written specifically for a life science audience, the basics of bioinformatics are explained, followed by discussions of the stateof-the-art computational tools available to solve biological research problems. All key areas of bioinformatics are covered including biological databases, sequence alignment, gene and promoter prediction, molecular phylogenetics, structural bioinformatics, genomics, and proteomics. The book emphasizes how computational methods work and compares the strengths and weaknesses of different methods. This balanced yet easily accessible text will be invaluable to students who do not have sophisticated computational backgrounds. Technical details of computational algorithms are explained with a minimum use of mathematical formulas; graphical illustrations are used in their place to aid understanding. The effective synthesis of existing literature as well as in-depth and up-to-date coverage of all key topics in bioinformatics make this an ideal textbook for all bioinformatics courses taken by life science students and for researchers wishing to develop their knowledge of bioinformatics to facilitate their own research.

View PDFchevron_right
Bioinformatics- Tools and applications
Dr. Parul Thapar

2018

A research not only requires the collection of results and data, but also interpretation of that data is an essential step in fulfilling the objectives of a research. Bioinformatics is a part of computer science which is involved in discoveries related to biological science. Bioinformatics is an emerging field of science which is progressing in every field of life science i.e. biotechnology, molecular biology, agriculture, medicine and other such areas. The present paper highlights the advancement of computer science in uplifting the areas of research related to biological sciences and its contribution in analysis and interpretation of data related to research. Keywords-Bioinformatics, biological science, computer science, data analysis, interpretation of results and research and development.

View PDFchevron_right
A Primer on Bioinformatics
philip adebo

International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, 2018

Today biological research is experiencing explosive growth in academic, industry, and government sectors. Bioinformatics has emerged to make sense of such high volume and complex data. It is an interdisciplinary field that combines computer science, biology, engineering, and mathematics in order to develop methods, techniques, and tools for analyzing and interpreting biological data. It uses computational approaches to solve complex biological problems and analyze large-volume of biological data. This paper provides a primer on bioinformatics.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Computer Science

    • Cited by

    Metagenomic applications in exploration and development of novel enzymes from nature: a review
    Anto Budiharjo

    Journal of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology

    Background Microbial community has an essential role in various fields, especially the industrial sector. Microbes produce metabolites in the form of enzymes, which are one of the essential compounds for industrial processes. Unfortunately, there are still numerous microbes that cannot be identified and cultivated because of the limitations of the culture-based method. The metagenomic approach is a solution for researchers to overcome these problems. The main body of the abstract Metagenomics is a strategy used to analyze the genomes of microbial communities in the environment directly. Metagenomics application used to explore novel enzymes is essential because it allows researchers to obtain data on microbial diversity, reaching of 99% and various types of genes encoding an enzyme that has not yet been identified. Basic methods in metagenomics have been developed and are commonly used in various studies. A basic understanding of metagenomics for researchers is needed, especially yo...

    View PDFchevron_right
    A brief account on enzyme mining using metagenomic approach
    Hiral Chaudhari

    Frontiers in Systems Biology

    Metagenomics is an approach for directly analyzing the genomes of microbial communities in the environment. The use of metagenomics to investigate novel enzymes is critical because it allows researchers to acquire data on microbial diversity, with a 99% success rate, and different kinds of genes encode an enzyme that has yet to be found. Basic metagenomic approaches have been created and are widely used in numerous studies. To promote the success of the advance research, researchers, particularly young researchers, must have a fundamental understanding of metagenomics. As a result, this review was conducted to provide a thorough insight grasp of metagenomics. It also covers the application and fundamental methods of metagenomics in the discovery of novel enzymes, focusing on recent studies. Moreover, the significance of novel biocatalysts anticipated from varied microbial metagenomes and their relevance to future research for novel industrial applications, the ramifications of Next-...

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved