The SUPERFAMILY 2.0 database: a significant proteome update and a new webserver.

Here, we present a major update to the SUPERFAMILY database and the webserver. We describe the addition of new SUPERFAMILY 2.0 profile HMM library containing a total of 27 623 HMMs. The database now includes Superfamily domain annotations for millions of protein sequences taken from the Universal Protein Recourse Knowledgebase (UniProtKB) and the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). This addition constitutes about 51 and 45 million distinct protein sequences obtained from UniProtKB and NCBI respectively. Currently, the database contains annotations for 63 244 and 102 151 complete genomes taken from UniProtKB and NCBI respectively. The current sequence collection and genome update is the biggest so far in the history of SUPERFAMILY updates. In order to the deal with the massive wealth of information, here we introduce a new SUPERFAMILY 2.0 webserver (http://supfam.org). Currently, the webserver mainly focuses on the search, retrieval and display of Superfamily annotation for the entire sequence and genome collection in the database.

The SUPERFAMILY 1.75 database in 2014: a doubling of data.

We present updates to the SUPERFAMILY 1.75 (http://supfam.org) online resource and protein sequence collection. The hidden Markov model library that provides sequence homology to SCOP structural domains remains unchanged at version 1.75. In the last 4 years SUPERFAMILY has more than doubled its holding of curated complete proteomes over all cellular life, from 1400 proteomes reported previously in 2010 up to 3258 at present. Outside of the main sequence collection, SUPERFAMILY continues to provide domain annotation for sequences provided by other resources such as: UniProt, Ensembl, PDB, much of JGI Phytozome and selected subcollections of NCBI RefSeq. Despite this growth in data volume, SUPERFAMILY now provides users with an expanded and daily updated phylogenetic tree of life (sTOL). This tree is built with genomic-scale domain annotation data as before, but constantly updated when new species are introduced to the sequence library. Our Gene Ontology and other functional and phenotypic annotations previously reported have stood up to critical assessment by the function prediction community. We have now introduced these data in an integrated manner online at the level of an individual sequence, and--in the case of whole genomes--with enrichment analysis against a taxonomically defined background.

Genome3D: exploiting structure to help users understand their sequences.

Genome3D (http://www.genome3d.eu) is a collaborative resource that provides predicted domain annotations and structural models for key sequences. Since introducing Genome3D in a previous NAR paper, we have substantially extended and improved the resource. We have annotated representatives from Pfam families to improve coverage of diverse sequences and added a fast sequence search to the website to allow users to find Genome3D-annotated sequences similar to their own. We have improved and extended the Genome3D data, enlarging the source data set from three model organisms to 10, and adding VIVACE, a resource new to Genome3D. We have analysed and updated Genome3D's SCOP/CATH mapping. Finally, we have improved the superposition tools, which now give users a more powerful interface for investigating similarities and differences between structural models.

A proteome quality index.

We present the Proteome Quality Index (PQI; http://pqi-list.org), a much-needed resource for users of bacterial and eukaryotic proteomes. Completely sequenced genomes for which there is an available set of protein sequences (the proteome) are given a one- to five-star rating supported by 11 different metrics of quality. The database indexes over 3000 proteomes at the time of writing and is provided via a website for browsing, filtering and downloading. Previous to this work, there was no systematic way to account for the large variability in quality of the thousands of proteomes, and this is likely to have profoundly influenced the outcome of many published studies, in particular large-scale comparative analyses. The lack of a measure of proteome quality is likely due to the difficulty in producing one, a problem that we have approached by integrating multiple metrics. The continued development and improvement of the index will require the contribution of additional metrics by us and by others; the PQI provides a useful point of reference for the scientific community, but it is only the first step towards a 'standard' for the field.