Systematic Identification of Novel Protein Domain
Families Associated with Nuclear Functions
Tobias Doerks,1,2,4,5Richard R. Copley,1,4Jo ¨rg Schultz,1,2Chris P. Ponting,3
and Peer Bork1,2
1European Molecular Biology Laboratory, 69114 Heidelberg, Germany;2Max-Delbrueck-Center, 13092 Berlin, Germany;
3Medical Research Council Functional Genetics Unit, University of Oxford, Department of Human Anatomy and Genetics,
Oxford OX1 3QX, UK
A systematic computational analysis of protein sequences containing known nuclear domains led to the
identification of 28 novel domain families. This represents a 26% increase in the starting set of 107 known
nuclear domain families used for the analysis. Most of the novel domains are present in all major eukaryotic
lineages, but 3 are species specific. For about 500 of the 1200 proteins that contain these new domains, nuclear
localization could be inferred, and for 700, additional features could be predicted. For example, we identified a
new domain, likely to have a role downstream of the unfolded protein response; a nematode-specific signalling
domain; and a widespread domain, likely to be a noncatalytic homolog of ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes.
Large proteins are often composed of domains. These are
polypeptide regions that adopt compact three-dimensional
(3D) structures and are often found in diverse molecular con-
texts (Janin and Chothia 1985). The independent evolution-
ary histories of domains found within the same protein lead
to an assumption that the domain is the fundamental unit of
protein structure and function (Doolittle 1995). Domains are
most readily observable in known 3D structures, but because
of the relative paucity of available structural data, the major-
ity of protein domain families have been identified first by
sequence analysis. Many domains are ‘genetically mobile’,
meaning that they can be found associated with different do-
main combinations in different proteins. The term ‘module’ is
sometimes used to distinguish between mobile domains and
those that are invariably found in identical molecular con-
Sequence characterization of domain families represents
a first step toward the determination of their 3D structures
and molecular functions. Domain identification from se-
quence is usually performed on a case-by-case basis, by apply-
ing a variety of automatic methods supplemented with care-
ful manual analysis. The number of protein domain families
characterized from sequence has been increasing steadily over
the years and has led to the development of Web-based re-
sources such as SMART and Pfam (Schultz et al. 1998, Bate-
man et al. 2000) for effective and reliable domain identifica-
We have systematically searched for new domain fami-
lies, using proteins annotated by the SMART (Simple Modular
Architecture Research Tool) database of domains as our start-
ing point. We have targeted our strategy to all proteins that
contain at least one of 107 types of predominantly nuclear
domains in the SMART collection. Crucial to our technique is
the accurate knowledge of known domain boundaries pro-
vided by databases such as SMART and Pfam (Schultz et al.
1998, Bateman et al. 2000). Using sequence regions not cov-
ered by previously characterized domains, we have searched
for homologs in nonredundant sequence databases and used
previously computed domain architectures to determine
which of the initial search regions could correspond to new
domain families. A manual analysis of the various candidate
families led to the final characterization of novel domain
types and their sequence borders.
Classification of the Novel Domains
The protocol described earlier revealed a variety of novel do-
mains that could be classified into four broad categories:
1. Fifteen novel domain families with representatives in di-
verse molecular contexts in different species (Table 1, Part
A). Of these, three have recently been described on sepa-
rate occasions (Table 1, Part A, Callebaut et al. 2001; Clis-
sold and Ponting 2001; Doerks et al. 2001).
2. Three domain families were found to be specific to single
or closely related species (Table 1, Part B).
3. Seven further domain families are likely to be divergent
members of previously recognized families, with weak (but
not statistically significant) similarity to previously de-
scribed domains. (One of these, the BED domain, has been
recently published independently (Aravind 2000)) (Ta-
4. Three additional families were recognized as representing
family-specific N or C-terminal extensions of previously
known domains (Table 1, Part D). These regions always
co-occur with a particular neighboring domain, although
their domain context within the protein as a whole may
vary. Because of their size, they are likely to have well-
defined structures, but might only exist in the context of
the domain that they extend. In three of these cases, the
extension is only found in closely related species. We do
4These authors contributed equally to this work.
E-MAIL firstname.lastname@example.org; FAX 49 622 1517.
Article and publication are at http://www.genome.org/cgi/doi/10.1101/
Abbreviations in bold refer to domains that can be found in the SMART
12:47–56 ©2002 by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press ISSN 1088-9051/01 $5.00; www.genome.org
Table of Novel Domains
Acc. no. of a
Part A.—Domains Present in Different Species
JmjC* Jumonji related family100
140 BRIGHT, jmjN
LRR, C2, TPR
S1, SH2, C2HC,
y, a, c, d, h
CSZ Domain in chromatin
remodeling S1 domain
containing and Zinc
Proteins involved in
regulation of nuclear
Different transcription and
TBC, LysM and other
Protein knases, UBA or
UBX domain containing
proteins and glycanases
Helicases and SANT
TBC, PH, FYVE and other
y, a, c, d, h
40 RRM, PWWP,
TBC, LysM, R3H,
C2H2, UBA, TGc,
y, a, c, d, h Q9SJQ7
y, a, c, d, h Q9UIG2§
Enzyme 30 y, a, c, d, hQ9VNA1§
y, a, c, d, h
DNA-binding20 y, a, c, d, h P25439§
15 y, a, c, d, h
Unknown 25 PHD, SET, PWWPa, c, d, h Q24742§
Unknown25 PHD, SET, PWWPa, c, d, hQ24742§
40 DENN†, TBC,
PLAT, PH, C1,
c, d, h BAB14033
TCH Transcription factors and
c, d, hO15025§
DZFDSRM or ZnF_C2H2
Domain in neuralized-like
Domain in transposases
Unknown 40c, d, h O88531
c, d, hQ19299
? + ?
Metal-binding20a, d, h
Part B.—Domains Species–Specific
FBD Domain in FBOX and
Plant mutator transposase
zinc finger domain
Unknown160 FBOX, LRRcap,
SPK SET and PHD domain
containing proteins and
(Table continues on following page.)
Doerks et al.
not consider these sequence families to be modules, and
we do not discuss them further.
Alignments of the novel domains, the proteins they are found
in, and their phyletic distribution are publicly available in the
SMART database (http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de/).
Of the total 28 regions discovered, 8 were found by
simple single-pass BLAST searches. For the remaining 20,
PSI-BLAST searches were necessary to provide statistically
significant links between proteins with different domain
architectures. This is broadly consistent with the reported
three-fold sensitivity of PSI-BLAST over BLAST (Park et al.
Conserved protein domains are most useful when they
can be used to make predictions of likely function. For the
domains presented here, this was possible to varying degrees.
We provide three examples to illustrate the more important
categories described earlier, and show the types of (necessarily
Table of Novel Domains (Continued)
Acc. no. of a
Part C.—Domains, Newly Recognized Divergent Subfamilies
ZnF_BED* BED zinc finger, Related
to C2H2/C2H2 zinc
fingers (based on
Catalytic domain of
related to phosphatase
superfamily (based on
RING finger and WD
proteins and DEXDc
helicases, related to the
UBCc domain (revealed
by hmm searches)
and PHD domain
related to archaeal
defined by PFAM
(revealed by PSI-Blast
results with less
(E = 0.041))
Zinc finger, PHD domain
and WD repeats
related to SANT
domain (after the
Q9SR68 bridges to
(E = 0.002))
Zinc finger in DBF-like
proteins, related to
C2H2 zinc fingers
(revealed by pattern
similarity and hmm
searches, E value = 1.4)
C4-zinc finger and HLH
kinase subfamily of
choline kinases (after
the second iteration
P35790 bridges to
choline kinases, defined
by PFAM (E = 0.003))
y, a, c, d, h Q9LWM2
Phosphatase 70BRCT, DSRM,
y, a, c, d, h Q9PTJ8
60 S_TKc, RING,
y, a, c, d, hQ9QZ05§
y, a, c, d, h Q9S7R9
60 C2H2, PHD, WD Virus, a, c, dQ9V5Y9
10BRCT, AT_Hooky, d, h O93843
Enzyme 70ZnF_C4, HLH,
Eu, c, d Q9VBT6
(Table continues on following page.)
conjectural) functional information that can be inferred from
the present identifications.
A Widespread Module in Diverse Species: A Novel
Domain in Peptide N-glycanases and Other Putative
The majority of our novel domains are found in diverse spe-
cies and in different protein contexts without significant se-
quence similarity to other domains. A particularly interesting
example is described here.
A hypothetical Arabidopsis protein (SpTREMBL accession:
Q9MAT3) is predicted to contain two N-terminal zinc finger
motifs (ZnF_C2H2), followed by a UBA domain (Hofmann
and Bucher 1996). A predicted coiled-coil region links this to
a C-terminal half that contains no currently described do-
mains. PSI-BLAST searches initiated with this C-terminal re-
gion show significant sequence similarity (E-value <10–5) to
UBX domain-containing proteins and metazoan homologs of
Searching of preliminary protein predictions from the
Plasmodium falciparum genome, with the conserved region
identified in an Arabidopsis sequence (SpTREMBL accession
no. Q9FKI1), revealed an additional association with a UBCc
domain-containing protein (E-value 3 ? 10–4).
We refer to these homologous regions as PUG domains,
after the Peptide:N-Glycanases and other putative nuclear
UBA or UBX domain-containing proteins. PNGases are be-
lieved to have a role in the unfolded protein response (UPR)
(Suzuki et al. 2000). The UPR results in increased levels of
transcription of endoplasmic reticulum (ER)-resident protein-
coding genes, following accumulation of unfolded proteins in
the ER. The PUG domain is found to co-occur in proteins with
three domains that are central to ubiquitin-mediated prote-
olysis: UBA, in Arabidopsis, UBCc in Plasmodium, and UBX in
mammals and Arabidopsis. This indicates that PUG domain-
containing proteins might link the UPR to ubiquitin-
mediated protein degradation. Other links between the UPR
and UBQ-mediated proteolysis have been shown previously
(Travers et al. 2000).
The candidate orthologs of PNGases in Saccharaomyces
cerevisiae, Saccharomyces pombe, and Arabidopsis do not appear
to encode this domain, indicating its presence in these pro-
teins is a metazoan innovation. Of these putative PNGases,
only the S. cerevisiae protein has been directly characterized; it
appears to be localized to the nucleus, with a lower level oc-
curring in the cytosol (Suzuki et al. 2000). As the apparent
orthologs in metazoan genomes appear to be present singly,
rather than as multiple paralogs (which might imply func-
tional variation), it seems likely that the proteins encoded by
them will have a similar cellular localization.
Additional HMMer2 searches, using an HMM derived
from these PUG domain sequences, showed marginal similar-
ity to IRE1p-like kinases (SpTREMBL accession: Q9SHL6) (E-
value: 0.21) within a region known to be homologous to the
C-terminal tail of 2?-5? oligo (A)-dependent ribonuclease
(Zhou et al. 1993) (see Fig. 1). Although of only marginal
significance, the similarity also extends to cellular function
because IRE1p-like kinases are known to initiate the UPR
(Shamu and Walter 1996). The C-terminal tail of IRE1p is
required for induction of the UPR (Shamu and Walter 1996),
and has been shown to possess site-specific endoribonuclease
activity (Sidrauski and Walter 1997). This activity is consis-
tent with the C-terminal location for RNase activity found in
its homolog, 2?-5? oligo (A)-dependent ribonuclease (Bork and
Sander 1993). Consequently, we tentatively suggest the pres-
Table of Novel Domains (Continued)
Acc. no. of a
Part D.—Family Specific Extensions of Known Domains
AWSAssociated with SET
E value = 0.52)
Domain associated with
Associated with zinc
25 SET, PWWP,
y, a, c, d, hP46995
Unknown20 HOXa Q38897
First column, domain name; second column, domain description (e.g., associated domains or well-described proteins); third column, approxi-
mate domain length (number of amino acids); fourth column, secondary structure prediction (Rost et al. 1994) (?: domain consists of ?-helices;
?: domain consists of ?-strands; ?/?: domain consists of ?-helices and ?-strands); fifth column, predicted function of novel domain; sixth
column, number of proteins containing the novel domain; seventh column, names of associated domains (domain names are according to the
Simple Modular Architecture Research Tool (http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de) (Schultz et al. 1998, 2000) or the domain is defined by Pfam
(Bateman et al. 2000)†; eighth column, species representives containing the novel domain. Abbreviations: eu, eubacteria; virus, viruses;
y, yeast; a, Arabidopsis thaliana; c, Caenorhabditis elegans; d, Drosophila melanogaster; h, Homo sapiens. The ninth column, gives the accession
number of representative protein and region of the detected domain in amino acids.
*Novel domain is accepted, in press, or published recently.
§Additional HMM searches are needed to define all novel domain-containing proteins.
+The more conserved parts of the domains FYRN and FYRC were called ATA1 and ATA2 in human ALR protein (Prasad et al. 1997) and FYR
(merged in one domain) in plant proteins (Balciunas and Ronne 2000), respectively.
Doerks et al.
50 Genome Research
ence of divergent PUG domains in
the C termini of IRE1p-like kinases.
Further analysis of the meta-
zoan PNGase sequences revealed a
conserved region that is also pre-
sent in multiple copies in hypo-
thetical Caenorhabditis elegans pro-
teins (e.g., four copies in C17B7.5).
This domain was not found in the
initial rounds of searching because
it does not occur with any of our
starting set of nuclear domains. We
have included this domain in the
SMART collection and have named
it PAW (domain present in PNGases
and other worm proteins).
Novel Modules Found
in Narrow Phyletic Ranges:
A Nematode-Specific Putative
in C. elegans
Lineage-specific expansions of pro-
tein domain families (i.e., a large
increase in the number of a particu-
lar domain in one genome com-
pared with other genomes) are a
widespread phenomenon (e.g.,
International Human Genome Se-
quencing Consortium 2001). In ex-
treme cases, it may not be possible
to establish links between a domain
that is widespread in one organism
and known domains seen in other
species. Such cases may represent
genuine ‘invention’ of new do-
mains, or, perhaps more likely, in-
stances where the tempo of mo-
lecular evolution has risen to the
extent that sequence similarity
with known domains is no longer
detectable. Alternative scenarios of
massive loss from other lineages are
less parsimonious. Three (i.e.,
∼11%) of our new domains appear
to occur in very restricted phyloge-
netic lineages; these exclude spe-
cies-specific N- or C-terminal ex-
tensions of known domains (see
Table 1, Part B).
PSI-BLAST searching with
the region C-terminal to a SET do-
main (Cui et al. 1998) of the hypo-
thetical protein Y43F11A.5 (Sp-
TREMBL accession: Q9U2G8) de-
tected a novel domain found in
many different predicted proteins
from C. elegans but thus far in no
other species. The domain is ∼120
residues in length, and found asso-
ciated with the catalytic domain of
caspases (CASc), protein kinases of
undetermined specificity (STYKc),
UBX domain-containing proteins (F13M7, CG5469), HOX domain containing proteins (F3M18,
MLN1), UBA/Zinc-finger-domain-containing proteins (K24G6, T8011), and hypothetical zinc metallo-
proteinase (MXH1) and multiple sequence alignment of PUG-like domains in serine/threonine protein
kinases / RNAses (F26K24, MJB20, K16H17, IRE1mm, ERN1, IRE1sc, YQG4, SPAC167, CG4583,
RN5Ahs, RN5Amm). First column, protein names; second column, species names (at, Arabidopsis
thaliana; ce, Caenorhabditis elegans; dm, Drosophila melanogaster; hs, Homo sapiens; mm, Mus muscu-
lus; pf, Plasmodium falciparum; sc, Saccharomyces cerevisiae; sp, Schizosaccharomyces pombe); third
column, start of the domain in the respective sequences; rightmost column, database accession num-
bers. Conserved positively charged residues are shown in pink; conserved hydrophobic residues are
shown in blue; other conserved residues are shown in bold. The predicted secondary structure taken
from the consensus of the alignments (B/H, strand/helix predicted with expected average accuracy
>82%; b/h, strand/helix predicted with expected average accuracy <82%) (Rost et al. 1994) is shown
below, respectively (consistent secondary structure in bold letters). The consensus sequence (conserved
in 80% of the sequences) for both alignments is shown below; s, l, p, h, c, -, L, N, and F indicate small,
aliphatic, hydrophobic, polar, charged, negatively charged residues, conserved Leucines, Asparagine,
and Phenylalanin. (B) Domain architecture of proteins containing the PUG domain (green) and the
PUG-like domain (green dark horizontal pattern). Only proteins with distinct modular organizations are
shown. The domain names are those of the Simple Modular Architecture Research Tool (http://
smart.embl-heidelberg.de) (Schultz et al. 1998, 2000). C2H2, zinc finger C2H2 DNA-binding domain;
PAW, domain in PNGases and other worm proteins; PQQ, ?-propeller repeat; S_TKc, serine/threonine
protein kinase catalytic domain; TGc, transglutaminase/protease-like homologs catalytic domain; UBA,
biquitin-associated domain; UBCc, catalytic domain of ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes; UBX, domain
present in ubiquitin regulatory proteins; TM, transmembrane region.
(A) Multiple sequence alignment of PUG domains of N-glycanases (PNG1mm, PNG1dm),
and the SET methyltransferase domain. Multiple tandem cop-
ies of the domain may be present in the same sequence (Fig.
2). We named this domain SPK [associated with SET, PHD
(Aasland et al. 1995), protein Kinase]. The alignment is pro-
vided on the Web (see http://www.embl-heidelberg.de/
Further analysis of nucleic acid sequence databases re-
vealed SPK domains in the Caenorhabditis briggsae sequence,
in regions for which no proteins have been predicted (e.g.,
NCBI GI:11095060, data not shown). No other species were
found to contain the domain. It is possible that the domain
exists in nematode lineages other than Caenorhabditis, but is
simply not found due to insufficient sequence coverage of
The association of SPK with SET, PHD, catalytic protein
kinases or caspase domains (see Fig. 2) hints at an important
role in metabolic, developmental, or evolutionary processes
that are unique to Caenorhabditis. However, none of the pu-
tative proteins in which the domain has been found have
been characterized by any experimental technique other than
RNAi screening. All homologs tested by RNAi are wild type
according to wormbase (http://www.wormbase.org/). This
technique would not be expected to reveal more subtle phe-
notypes associated with later developmental stages.
Modules in New Contexts: A Noncatalytic Subfamily
of Ubiquitin-Conjugating Enzyme Homologs
The protocol presented here detects regions of homology be-
tween sequences where no domains have previously been as-
signed. Some of our newly identified regions appear to be
distantly related to known domains, but correspond to new
molecular contexts. Such cases indicate potential changes of
domain function or add new insights to the function of the
proteins in which the domain has been newly identified. An
increasing number of known domains are being realized as
members of wider superfamilies because of the availability of
3D structures. For example, the UBX domain has recently
been reclassified as a subfamily of the ubiquitin fold super-
family (Buchberger et al. 2001). In addition to protein struc-
ture determination, carefully applied sensitive sequence
searching methods can also provide such insights. This is ex-
emplified by the following example detected in this study.
The mouse GCN2 eIF2? kinase and histidyl-tRNA syn-
thetase (SpTREMBL accession: Q9QZ05) is an essential com-
ponent of translation control (Jentsch et al. 1991; Sattleger et
al. 1998). A PSI-BLAST search initiated with the region N-
terminal to an inactive protein kinase domain (see Fig. 3) in
the GCN2 protein revealed significant similarity to presumed
orthologs in other eukaryotic species from yeast to verte-
brates. Further PSI-BLAST iterations and additional HMM
searches reveal significant similarity to WD-repeat-containing
proteins; yeast DEAD (DEXD)-like helicases; UPF0029, an un-
characterized protein family from the Pfam database (acces-
sion no. PF01205); a range of hypothetical proteins; and
many RING finger-containing proteins. We called the newly
defined region RWD after the better characterized RING fin-
ger and WD-domain-containing-proteins and DEAD-like he-
licases. PSI-BLAST searches initiated with different seeds also
revealed homology with ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes
(UBCc) domain, (e.g. SpTREMBL acc: Q94721 hits Q9SDY5 on
iteration 3, E value = 9 ? 10–4), although the catalytic cys-
teine critical for ubiquitin-conjugating activity is not con-
served in most members of the novel subfamily (see http://
This observation is particularly interesting in light of previous
experimental studies on A07 (SpTREMBL accession: Q9QZR0),
a protein that includes both an RWD and a RING finger do-
main, that have shown that a region between 85 and 363
amino acids in A07 (including the RING finger) binds ubiq-
uitin-conjugating enzyme E2 and acts as a substrate for E2-
dependent ubiquitination (Lorick et al. 1999).
main. Only proteins with distinct modular organizations are shown.
The domain names are those of the Simple Modular Architecture
Research Tool (http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de) (Schultz et al. 1998,
2000). CASc, catalytic domain of caspases; PHD, PHD C4HC3 zinc
finger; SET, (Su(var)3–9, Enhancer-of-zeste, Trithorax) domain;
STYKc, catalytic domain of protein kinases. The UCH-2 (ubiquitin car-
boxy-terminal hydrolase family 2) domain is defined by Pfam (Bate-
man et al. 2000)
Domain architecture of proteins containing the SPK do-
main. Only proteins with distinct modular organizations are shown.
The domain names are according to the Simple Modular Architecture
Research Tool (http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de) (Schultz et al. 1998,
2000). DEAD (DEXDc)-like helicases superfamily (N-terminal do-
main); HELICc, helicase superfamily (C-terminal domain); RING, RING
finger domain; STYKc, protein kinases (unclassified specificity); UBA,
ubiquitin-associated domain; WD40, WD40 repeats. The RING finger
domain in the dashed box is not recognized by SMART or Pfam. The
STYKc domain in the dashed box is degenerated (partial and non-
catalytic). The IBR (In between Ring fingers) domain and UPF29 (un-
characterized protein family) are defined by Pfam (Bateman et al.
2000). The HisRS (histidyl-tRNA synthetase) domain is defined by
literature (Sattleger et al. 1998).
Domain architecture of proteins containing the RWD do-
Doerks et al.
52 Genome Research
Predictions of Function
On the basis of reports in the literature and/or co-occurrence
with previously identified domains, some functional features
can be predicted for 78.6% of our newly identified set of 28
domain families. This represents an increase in the state of
functional prediction for ∼700 proteins (i.e., the total number
of distinct proteins that are covered by novel domains with a
putative function; see Table 1, Parts A–D). The predicted func-
tions represent a variety of different cellular processes and
molecular functions such as DNA/RNA- or metal-binding pro-
Five further cases of function prediction are outlined as
The CSZ domain-containing protein SPT6 and orthologs regu-
late transcription through establishment or maintenance of
chromatin structure (Chiang et al. 1996; Winston 2001). A
histone-binding capability for SPT6 has been experimentally
confirmed (Bortvin et al. 1996). Here the CSZ domain is as-
sociated with an S1– and two SH2 domains, which are un-
likely responsible for histone or chromatin binding. By this
process of elimination, we predict a histone- or chromatin-
binding function for the novel CSZ domain. The presence of
HhH motifs in some copies of the CSZ domain raises the al-
ternative or complementary possibility of a DNA and/or RNA
We identified a novel domain as a tandem repeat in sev-
eral hypothetical human proteins, as a single copy associated
with PHD and TFS2M in the Drosophila gene CG6525, and as
the Drosophila brahma and kismet genes. The kismet protein
in Drosophila and its orthologs have been shown to be chro-
matin-remodeling factors, required for segmentation and seg-
mentation identity. Our domain includes a recently reported
conserved region (BRK) in brahma and kismet that is thought
to bind chromatin (Daubresse et al 1999). We thus propose a
chromatin-binding function for the newly identified domain.
Protein Interaction Domains
Recent studies reveal the interaction of the RPR domain in
protein pcf11 with the C-terminal domain of the largest sub-
unit of RNA polymerase II (Yuryev et al. 1996). Consequently,
a similar function, or, less specifically, a protein-interaction
function, is predicted for the RPR domain.
PSP domains appear to be protein-binding domains. The
PSP domain-containing protein Cus1p is a component of a
spliceosomal complex, associated with U2 snRNA (Gozani et
al. 1996). Cus1p interacts directly with the snRNP Hsh155p
by a region that overlaps with the PSP domain (Pauling et al.
The nuclear factor 90 (NF90) is a substrate and regulator
of the eukaryotic initiation factor 2 kinase double-stranded
RNA-activated protein kinase. The novel DZF domain in NF90
overlaps with a region known as NF45 homology domain,
which is assumed to be responsible for conformation estab-
lishing of NF90 in the complex, where it may bind NF45 or
other proteins (Parker et al. 2001). Thus, it is assumed that the
DZF domain is a protein–protein interaction domain.
Several other functional predictions for novel domains
are proposed in Table 1. Even where no functional role is
postulated, delineation of conserved domain boundaries pro-
vides a starting point from which to undertake further experi-
ments aimed at elucidating molecular function and cellular
Predicted Localization of the Novel Domains
Context can also be used to predict whether a novel domain
is associated with a certain cellular localization. For example,
some of our novel domains are only found with representa-
tives from our initial set of predominantly nuclear domains
(i.e., those used to seed the searching procedure). This logic
indicates a putative nuclear function and role for 10 of the
domain families presented here, representing ∼500 proteins.
Others among the novel domain families are likely to have
roles in both nucleus and cytoplasm.
Novel Domains Related to Human Diseases
Four (14%) of the newly discovered domain families and one
of the family-specific domain extensions occur in proteins
whose deficiencies are implicated in severe human diseases.
The respective genes or chromosomal regions are known to be
responsible for cancer, neurodegenerative processes, or chro-
mosomal aberrations (Table 2).
Although the extent to which the domains themselves
are responsible for the phenotypic affects observed with these
diseases is not known, the new domains are likely to assist in
ascertaining the normal functions of these genes, and by im-
plication, a better understanding of their dysfunction.
Some well-characterized signaling domains, such as SH2 or
PH, are present in a huge number of proteins and occur in
combination with a large number of other domains. The fact
that they are so widespread no doubt facilitated their early
detection and characterization. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the
domains found in the present analysis have more limited dis-
tributions than examples such as those. Even so, each new
domain is found, on average, in 4.0 different architectures in
∼30 proteins. More widespread domains have been detected
by our approach [e.g., the BRK domain occurs in more than
seven different settings and a total of 30 proteins (Table 1,
Only three (11%) of the newly discovered domains are
species specific; of these, two are limited to plants and one is
nematode specific (Table 1, Part B). This could simply reflect
the fact that even when species-specific pathways exist, pro-
teins involved in them are likely to be recruited from preex-
isting components. Alternatively, species-specific domains
Extensions Which are Putatively Correlated with Phenotypic
Table of Novel Domains or Family-Specific
syndrome (Stec et al.
(Orti et al. 2000)
(Nakamura et al.
(Djabali et al. 1992)
RWD CAB88085 ---
aAccession number of related protein.
bAccession number of disease in OMIM database.
may more likely be found only with other species-specific
domains, rather than with domains found in a large phyletic
range, and so would be underrepresented in the results of the
search methods applied here.
In general, we cannot answer the question of whether
the domains presented here have distant homologs that are
not detectable using present methods (in common with any
other new domain discovery report). The general evolution-
ary principle of reuse of preexisting components indicates
that this is likely. However, we believe that, even if this is the
case, the domains presented here, by dint of considerable se-
quence variation, are likely to have acquired new biological
functions that are worthy of independent investigation.
In conclusion, we have identified a total of 28 novel
domain families, 4 of which have been independently re-
ported in the recent literature. Some of the domains are likely
to be found in proteins localized to the nucleus. The predicted
functions range from enzymatic activities to nucleotide bind-
ing. The systematic search for novel domains led to a 26%
increase over the known nuclear domains that have been dis-
covered in the last 15 yr, when the C2H2 zinc finger was first
described (Miller et al. 1985).
The novel domains were all detectable using standard
search methods (i.e., PSI-BLAST), within default E-value
thresholds. The novelty of our approach has been to search
using all candidate sequences that could contain a new do-
main of interest. In contrast, it would appear from our results
that only using well-characterized sequences to search pre-
vents the detection of some domains.
Although the majority of domains reported here are
present in a wide variety of species, indicating that they have
crucial biological roles, they are, on average, present in fewer
proteins than previously reported domains. Taken together
with the increasing volumes of data being produced by ge-
nome projects, targeted approaches to domain detection,
such as those presented here, must have a role in enumerating
the evolutionarily conserved components required for life.
Definition of Nuclear Domains
A subset of SMART database families represents domains often
found in nuclear proteins, as defined by annotation in se-
quence databases (Schultz et al. 2000). The computer pro-
gram, Meta-A(nnotator) (Eisenhaber and Bork 1998),
which assigns protein localizations based on Swiss-Prot an-
notations, was used to predict the most likely localization for
a domain family. A domain family was included in this analy-
sis if more than 80% of Swiss-Prot entries of proteins con-
taining the domain were annotated by Meta-A as nuclear. By
this method, 86 domains were assigned a nuclear location.
Eleven suspected false positives were removed following lit-
erature searches, and an additional 32 signaling domains with
partial nuclear localization were added when literature
searches could confirm this assignment.
Thus, a set of 107 predominantly nuclear domain fami-
lies was derived (see http://www.embl-heidelberg.de/∼doerks/
nuclear_subset.html/). Many domains, such as those with
RNA-binding functions, are found in proteins that translocate
between the cytoplasm and the nucleus or are found in both
cytoplasmic and nuclear proteins. Consequently, some of
these ‘nuclear’ domain families may contain cytoplasmic pro-
tein representatives. However, according to our protocol,
based on Swiss-Prot annotations, the majority of proteins
containing these domains will possess a significant popula-
tion in the nucleus.
Automatic Screening for New Domains
All proteins containing one or more domains represented in
the nuclear subset were extracted from public sequence data-
bases, and their complete domain structure characterized us-
ing SMART. Regions not annotated using known SMART do-
main models were extracted, along with their domain context
(i.e., position in the protein relative to other domains). Inter-
domain sequences shorter than 30 amino acids were regarded
as less likely to represent novel globular domains (although
such short domains do exist) and discarded. Noncontiguous
regions of the same sequence were analyzed independently of
each other. All of these sequence regions were then clustered
into groups using the grouper program of the SEALS package
with a default single linkage clustering threshold of 50 bits
(Walker and Koonin 1997). The longest member of each of
these groups was filtered for coiled-coil and low complexity
sequences (Lupas et al. 1991; Wootton and Federhen 1996)
and then used to search a nonredundant sequence database,
using the iterative search algorithm PSI-BLAST (Altschul et
al. 1997), with an E-value inclusion threshold of E<0.001.
Eight search rounds were performed, unless the database
searching procedure converged in a prior iteration (see
Altschul et al. 1997 for details of the PSI-BLAST procedure).
The domain organizations of all homologs identified by PSI-
BLAST searches were retrieved from the precalculated SMART
database. The homologous regions identified in the searches
were considered as the candidate domain family. Candidate
regions that were found in different domain contexts (see
following) in different proteins indicated a possible novel
module family. These families were analyzed further using the
methods described as follows.
Manual Confirmation and Refinement
of Predicted Domains
To be considered as a module (i.e., a genetically mobile do-
main), homologous sequences were required to be present in
at least two diverse molecular contexts (‘domain architec-
tures’). Domain architectures (i.e., the linear arrangement of
domains within a protein) were predicted using the SMART
and Pfam databases. When a sequence contained no predicted
domain other than that of the candidate family, this, too, was
regarded as a distinct architecture. When a sequence invari-
ably occurred either N- or C-terminal to a single known do-
main, it was regarded as an extension of the known domain.
Inaccurate prediction of gene structure (i.e., artificial fu-
sion of adjacent genes) might lead to new domain architec-
tures being counted spuriously. Domain architectures were
inspected manually for such apparently erroneous fusions; for
example, protein sequences containing both nuclear and ex-
tracellular domains were excluded. Similarly, a sequence was
discarded if it had no homologs of similar domain architec-
ture, but instead was similar to several pairs of nonhomolo-
gous proteins and each pair corresponded to the presumed
erroneously fused gene.
At this stage, multiple alignments were generated
(Thompson et al 1994) for all candidate domains. In conjunc-
tion with known locations of domains and other sequence
features (e.g., N and C termini, transmembrane regions), these
were used to define the borders of the putative new domains.
In 10 cases, HMM-based searches of databases using HMMer2
(Eddy 1998) were needed to detect additional family mem-
bers. The results were checked manually for consistency, with
respect to amino acid conservation and phyletic distribution,
to exclude false positives, which would be expected from our
10 HMM searches, given the E-value threshold of 0.1. Newly
detected sequences were incorporated into the alignment,
and the search procedure iterated. When these further analy-
ses led to the identification of distant, but significant, simi-
larity to annotated Pfam or SMART domains, the candidate
Doerks et al.
domain was not pursued further. In cases in which we were
unable to connect a family to a known domain with signifi-
cant sequence similarity, but in which hits with marginal
similarity were present, we recorded the family as represent-
ing possible divergent members of previously known protein
We thank the scientists and funding agencies comprising the
international Malaria Genome Project for making sequence
data from the genome of Plasmedium falciparum (3D7) public
prior to publication of the completed sequence. The Sanger
Centre (UK) provided sequence for chromosomes 1, 3–9, and
13, with financial support from the Wellcome Trust. A con-
sortium composed of The Institute for Genome Research,
along with the Naval Medical Research Center (USA), se-
quenced chromosomes 2, 10, 11, and 14, with support from
NIAID/NIH, the Burroughs Wellcome Fund, and the Depart-
ment of Defense. The Stanford Genome Technology Center
(USA) sequenced chromosome 12, with support from the Bur-
roughs Wellcome Fund. The Plasmodium Genome Database
is a collaborative effort of investigators at the University of
Pennsylvania (USA) and Monash University (Melbourne, Aus-
tralia), supported by the Burroughs Wellcome Fund
The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part
by payment of page charges. This article must therefore be
hereby marked “advertisement” in accordance with 18 USC
section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Aasland, R., Gibson, T.J., and Stewart, A.F. 1995. The PHD finger:
Implications for chromatin-mediated transcriptional regulation.
Trends Biochem. Sci. 20: 56–59.
Altschul, S.F., Madden, T.L., Schaffer, A.A., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z.,
Miller, W., and Lipman, D.J. 1997. Gapped BLAST and
PSI-BLAST: A new generation of protein database search
programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 25: 3389–3402.
Aravind, L. 2000. The BED finger, a novel DNA-binding domain in
chromatin-boundary-element-binding proteins and transposases.
Trends Biochem. Sci. 25: 421–423.
Balciunas, D. and Ronne, H. 2000. Evidence of domain swapping
within the jumonji family of transcription factors. Trends
Biochem. Sci. 25: 274–276.
Bateman, A., Birney, E., Durbin, R., Eddy, S.R., Howe, K.L., and
Sonnhammer, E.L. 2000. The Pfam protein families database.
Nucleic Acids Res. 28: 263–266.
Bork, P. and Sander, C. 1993. A hybrid protein kinase-RNase in an
interferon-induced pathway? FEBS Lett. 334: 149–152.
Bortvin, A. and Winston, F. 1996. Evidence that Spt6p controls
chromatin structure by a direct interaction with histones. Science
Buchberger, A., Howard, M.J., Proctor, M., and Bycroft, M. 2001. The
UBX domain: A widespread ubiquitin-like module. J. Mol. Biol.
Callebaut, I., de Gunzburg, J., Goud, B., and Mornon, J. 2001. RUN
domains: A new family of domains involved in Ras-like GTPase
signaling. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26: 79–83.
Chiang, P.W., Wang, S., Smithivas, P., Song, W.J., Ramamoorthy, S.,
Hillman, J., Puett, S., Van Keuren, M.L., Crombez, E., Kumar,
A.,et al. 1996. Identification and analysis of the human and
murine putative chromatin structure regulator SUPT6H and
Supt6h. Genomics 34: 328–333.
Clissold., P.M. and Ponting, C.P. 2001. JmjC: Cupin metalloenzyme-
like domains in jumonji, hairless and phospholipase A2?. Trends
Biochem. Sci. 26: 7–9.
Cui, X., De Vivo, I., Slany, R., Miyamoto, A., Firestein, R., and
Cleary, M.L. 1998. Association of SET domain and
myotubularin-related proteins modulates growth control. Nat.
Genet. 18: 331–337.
Daubresse., G., Deuring, R., Moore, L., Papoulas, O., Zakrajsek, I.,
Waldrip, W.R., Scott, M.P., Kennison, J.A., and Tamkun, J.W.
1999. The Drosophila kismet gene is related to chromatin-
remodeling factors and is required for both
segmentation and segment identity. Development
Djabali, M., Selleri, L., Parry, P., Bower, M., Young, B.D., and Evans,
G.A. 1992. A trithorax-like gene is interrupted by chromo-
some 11q23 translocations in acute leukaemias Nat. Genet.
Doerks, T., Copley, R.R., and Bork, P. 2001. DDT, a novel domain in
different transcription and chromosome remodeling factors.
Trends Biochem. Sci. 26: 145–146.
Doolittle, R.F. 1995. The multiplicity of domains in proteins. Annu.
Rev. Biochem. 64: 287–314.
Eddy, S.R. 1998. Profile hidden Markov models. Bioinformatics
Eisenhaber, F. and Bork, P. 1998. Wanted: Subcellular localization of
proteins based on sequence. Trends Cell Biol. 8: 169–170.
Gozani, O., Feld, R., and Reed, R. 1996. Evidence that
sequence-independent binding of highly conserved U2 snRNP
proteins upstream of the branch site is required for assembly of
spliceosomal complex A. Genes & Dev. 10: 233–243.
Hofmann K. and Bucher, P. 1996. The UBA domain: A sequence
motif present in multiple enzyme classes of the ubiquitination
pathway. Trends Biochem. Sci. 21: 172–173.
International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium. 2001. Initial
sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature
Janin, J. and Chothia, C. 1985. Domains in proteins: Definitions,
location, and structural principles. Methods Enzymol.
Jentsch, S., Seufert, W., and Hauser, H.-P. 1991. Genetic analysis of
the ubiquitin system. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1089: 127–139.
Lorick, K.L., Jensen, J.P., Fang, S., Ong, A.M., Hatakeyama, S., and
Weissmann, A.M. 1999. RING fingers mediate
ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme (E2)-dependent ubiquitination.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 96: 11364–11369.
Lupas, A., Van Dyke, M., and Stock, J. 1991. Predicting coiled coils
from protein sequences. Science 252: 1162–1164.
Miller, J., McLachlan, A.D., and Klug, A. 1985. Repetitive
zinc-binding domains in the protein transcription factor IIIA
from Xenopus oocytes. EMBO J. 4: 1609–1614.
Nakamura, H., Yoshida, M., Tsuiki, H., Ito, K., Ueno, M., Nakao, M.,
Oka, K., Tada, M., Kochi, M., Kuratsu, J., et al. 1998.
Identification of a human homolog of the Drosophila neuralized
gene within the 10q25.1 malignant astrocytoma deletion region.
Oncogene 16: 1009–1019.
Orti, R., Rachidi, M., Vialard, F., Toyama, K., Lopes, C., Taudien, S.,
Rosenthal, A., Yaspo, M.-L., Sinet, P.M., and Delabar, J.M. 2000.
Characterization of a novel gene, C21orf6, mapping to a critical
region of chromosome 21q22.1 involved in the monosomy 21
phenotype and of its murine ortholog, orf5. Genomics
Park, J., Karplus, K., Barrett, C., Hughey, R., Haussler, D., Hubbard,
T., and Chothia, C. 1998. Sequence comparisons using multiple
sequences detect three times as many remote homologues as
pairwise methods. J. Mol. Biol. 284: 1201–1210.
Parker, L.M., Fierro-Monti, I., and Mathews M.B. 2001. Nuclear
factor 90 is a substrate and regulator of the eukaryotic initiation
factor 2 kinase double-stranded rna-activated protein kinase. J.
Biol. Chem. 276: 32522–32530.
Pauling, M.H., McPheeters, D.S., and Ares Jr., M. 2000 Functional
Cus1p is found with Hsh155p in a multiprotein splicing factor
associated with U2 snRNA. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20: 2176–2185.
Prasad, R., Zhadanov, A.B., Sedkov, Y., Bullrich, F., Druck, T.,
Rallapalli, R., Yano, T., Alder, H., Croce, C.M., Huebner, K. et al.
1997. Structure and expression pattern of human ALR, a novel
gene with strong homology to ALL-1 involved in acute leukemia
and to Drosophila trithorax. Oncogene 15: 549–560.
Rost, B, Sander, C., and Schneider, R. 1994. PHD—An automatic
mail server for protein secondary structure prediction. Comput.
Appl. Biosci. 10: 53–60.
Sattleger, E., Hinnebusch, A.G., and Barthelmess, I.B. 1998. cpc-3,
the Neurospora crassa homologue of yeast GCN2, encodes a
polypeptide with juxtaposed eIF2? kinase and histidyl-tRNA
synthetase-related domains required for general amino acid
control. J. Biol. Chem. 273: 20404–20416.
Schultz, J., Milpetz, F., Bork, P., and Ponting, C.P. 1998. SMART, a
simple modular architecture research tool: Identification of
signalling domains. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 95: 5857–5864.
Schultz, J., Copley, R., Doerks, T., Ponting, C., and Bork, P. 2000.
SMART: A web-based tool for the study of genetically mobile
domains. Nucleic Acids Res. 28: 231–234.
Shamu, C.E. and Walter, P. 1996. Oligomerization and Download full-text
phosphorylation of the Ire1p kinase during intracellular
signaling from the endoplasmic reticulum to the nucleus. EMBO
J. 15: 3028–3039.
Sidrauski, C. and Walter, P. 1997. The transmembrane kinase Ire1p
is a site-specific endonuclease that initiates mRNA splicing in the
unfolded protein response. Cell 90: 1031–1039.
Stec, I, Wright, T.J., van Ommen, G.J.B., de Boer, P.A.J., van
Haeringen, A., Moorman, A.F.M, Altherr, M.R., and den Dunnen,
J.T. 1998. WHSC1, a 90 kb SET domain-containing gene,
expressed in early development and homologous to a Drosophila
dysmorphy gene maps in the Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome critical
region and is fused to IgH in t(4;14) multiple myeloma. Hum.
Mol. Genet. 7: 1071–1082.
Suzuki, T., Park, H., Hollingsworth, N.M., Sternglanz R., and Lennarz
W.J. 2000. PNG1, a yeast gene encoding a highly conserved
peptide:N-glycanase. J. Cell. Biol. 149: 1039–1052.
Thompson, J.D., Higgins, D.G., and Gibson, T.J. 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.
Travers, K.J., Patil, C.K., Wodicka, L., Lockhart, D.J., Weissman, J.S.,
and Walter, P. 2000. Functional and genomic analyses reveal an
essential coordination between the unfolded protein response
and ER-associated degradation. Cell 101: 249–258.
Walker, D.R. and Koonin E.V. 1997. SEALS: A system for easy
analysis of lots of sequences. Ismb 5: 333–339.
Winston, F. 2001. Control of eukaryotic transcription elongation.
Genome Biol. 2: 1006.1–1006.3.
Wootton, J.C. and Federhen, S. 1996. Analysis of compositionally
biased regions in sequence databases. Methods Enzymol.
Yuryev A., Patturajan M., Litingtung Y., Joshi R.V., Gentile C.,
Gebara M., and Corden J.L. 1996. The C-terminal domain of the
largest subunit of RNA polymerase II interacts with a novel set of
serine/arginine-rich proteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 93: 6975–6980.
Zhou, A., Hassel, B.A., and Silverman R.H. 1993. Expression cloning
of 2–5A-dependent RNAase: A uniquely regulated mediator of
interferon action. Cell 72: 753–765.
Received June 29, 2001; accepted in revised form October 16, 2001.
Doerks et al.
56 Genome Research