For the past 20 years, the Clusters of Orthologous Genes (COG) database had been a popular tool for microbial genome annotation and comparative genomics. Initially created for the purpose of evolutionary classification of protein families, the COG have been used, apart from straightforward functional annotation of sequenced genomes, for such tasks as (i) unification of genome annotation in groups of related organisms; (ii) identification of missing and/or undetected genes in complete microbial genomes; (iii) analysis of genomic neighborhoods, in many cases allowing prediction of novel functional systems; (iv) analysis of metabolic pathways and prediction of alternative forms of enzymes; (v) comparison of organisms by COG functional categories; and (vi) prioritization of targets for structural and functional characterization. Here we review the principles of the COG approach and discuss its key advantages and drawbacks in microbial genome analysis.

BACKGROUND: Viruses are the most abundant and genetically diverse biological entities on earth, yet the repertoire of viral proteins remains poorly explored. As the number of sequenced virus genomes grows into the thousands, and the number of viral proteins into the hundreds of thousands, we report a systematic computational analysis of the point of first-contact between viruses and their hosts, namely viral transmembrane (TM) proteins. RESULTS: The complement of α-helical TM proteins in double-stranded DNA viruses infecting bacteria and archaea reveals large-scale trends that differ from those of their hosts. Viruses typically encode a substantially lower fraction of TM proteins than archaea or bacteria, with the notable exception of viruses with virions containing a lipid component such as a lipid envelope, internal lipid core, or inner membrane vesicle. Compared to bacteriophages, archaeal viruses are substantially enriched in membrane proteins. However, this feature is not always stable throughout the evolution of a viral lineage; for example, TM proteins are not part of the common heritage shared between Lipothrixviridae and Rudiviridae. In contrast to bacteria and archaea, viruses almost completely lack proteins with complicated membrane topologies composed of more than 4 TM segments, with the few detected exceptions being obvious cases of relatively recent horizontal transfer from the host. CONCLUSIONS: The dramatic differences between the membrane proteomes of cells and viruses stem from the fact that viruses do not depend on essential membranes for energy transformation, ion homeostasis, nutrient transport and signaling.

Accurate inference of orthologous genes is a pre-requisite for most comparative genomics studies, and is also important for functional annotation of new genomes. Identification of orthologous gene sets typically involves phylogenetic tree analysis, heuristic algorithms based on sequence conservation, synteny analysis, or some combination of these approaches. The most direct tree-based methods typically rely on the comparison of an individual gene tree with a species tree. Once the two trees are accurately constructed, orthologs are straightforwardly identified by the definition of orthology as those homologs that are related by speciation, rather than gene duplication, at their most recent point of origin. Although ideal for the purpose of orthology identification in principle, phylogenetic trees are computationally expensive to construct for large numbers of genes and genomes, and they often contain errors, especially at large evolutionary distances. Moreover, in many organisms, in particular prokaryotes and viruses, evolution does not appear to have followed a simple 'tree-like' mode, which makes conventional tree reconciliation inapplicable. Other, heuristic methods identify probable orthologs as the closest homologous pairs or groups of genes in a set of organisms. These approaches are faster and easier to automate than tree-based methods, with efficient implementations provided by graph-theoretical algorithms enabling comparisons of thousands of genomes. Comparisons of these two approaches show that, despite conceptual differences, they produce similar sets of orthologs, especially at short evolutionary distances. Synteny also can aid in identification of orthologs. Often, tree-based, sequence similarity- and synteny-based approaches can be combined into flexible hybrid methods.

MOTIVATION: Identifying orthologous genes in multiple genomes is a fundamental task in comparative genomics. Construction of intergenomic symmetrical best matches (SymBets) and joining them into clusters is a popular method of ortholog definition, embodied in several software programs. Despite their wide use, the computational complexity of these programs has not been thoroughly examined. RESULTS: In this work, we show that in the standard approach of iteration through all triangles of SymBets, the memory scales with at least the number of these triangles, O(g(3)) (where g = number of genomes), and construction time scales with the iteration through each pair, i.e. O(g(6)). We propose the EdgeSearch algorithm that iterates over edges in the SymBet graph rather than triangles of SymBets, and as a result has a worst-case complexity of only O(g(3)log g). Several optimizations reduce the run-time even further in realistically sparse graphs. In two real-world datasets of genomes from bacteriophages (POGs) and Mollicutes (MOGs), an implementation of the EdgeSearch algorithm runs about an order of magnitude faster than the original algorithm and scales much better with increasing number of genomes, with only minor differences in the final results, and up to 60 times faster than the popular OrthoMCL program with a 90% overlap between the identified groups of orthologs. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: C++ source code freely available for download at ftp.ncbi.nih.gov/pub/wolf/COGs/COGsoft/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary materials are available at Bioinformatics online.

SUMMARY: The Evolutionary Trace Annotation (ETA) Server predicts enzymatic activity. ETA starts with a structure of unknown function, such as those from structural genomics, and with no prior knowledge of its mechanism uses the phylogenetic Evolutionary Trace (ET) method to extract key functional residues and propose a function-associated 3D motif, called a 3D template. ETA then searches previously annotated structures for geometric template matches that suggest molecular and thus functional mimicry. In order to maximize the predictive value of these matches, ETA next applies distinctive specificity filters -- evolutionary similarity, function plurality and match reciprocity. In large scale controls on enzymes, prediction coverage is 43% but the positive predictive value rises to 92%, thus minimizing false annotations. Users may modify any search parameter, including the template. ETA thus expands the ET suite for protein structure annotation, and can contribute to the annotation efforts of metaservers. AVAILABILITY: The ETA Server is a web application available at (http://mammoth.bcm.tmc.edu/eta/).

BACKGROUND: Structural genomics projects such as the Protein Structure Initiative (PSI) yield many new structures, but often these have no known molecular functions. One approach to recover this information is to use 3D templates - structure-function motifs that consist of a few functionally critical amino acids and may suggest functional similarity when geometrically matched to other structures. Since experimentally determined functional sites are not common enough to define 3D templates on a large scale, this work tests a computational strategy to select relevant residues for 3D templates. RESULTS: Based on evolutionary information and heuristics, an Evolutionary Trace Annotation (ETA) pipeline built templates for 98 enzymes, half taken from the PSI, and sought matches in a non-redundant structure database. On average each template matched 2.7 distinct proteins, of which 2.0 share the first three Enzyme Commission digits as the template's enzyme of origin. In many cases (61%) a single most likely function could be predicted as the annotation with the most matches, and in these cases such a plurality vote identified the correct function with 87% accuracy. ETA was also found to be complementary to sequence homology-based annotations. When matches are required to both geometrically match the 3D template and to be sequence homologs found by BLAST or PSI-BLAST, the annotation accuracy is greater than either method alone, especially in the region of lower sequence identity where homology-based annotations are least reliable. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that knowledge of evolutionarily important residues improves functional annotation among distant enzyme homologs. Since, unlike other 3D template approaches, the ETA method bypasses the need for experimental knowledge of the catalytic mechanism, it should prove a useful, large scale, and general adjunct to combine with other methods to decipher protein function in the structural proteome.

SUMMARY: The Evolutionary Trace Viewer (ETV) provides a one-stop environment in which to run, visualize and interpret Evolutionary Trace (ET) predictions of functional sites in protein structures. ETV is implemented using Java to run across different operating systems using Java Web Start technology. AVAILABILITY: The ETV is available for download from our website at http://mammoth.bcm.tmc.edu/traceview/index.html. This webpage also links to sample trace results and a user manual that describes ET Viewer functions in detail.