Literature DB >> 15659366

Physicochemical and residue conservation calculations to improve the ranking of protein-protein docking solutions.

Yuhua Duan1, Boojala V B Reddy, Yiannis N Kaznessis.   

Abstract

Many protein-protein docking algorithms generate numerous possible complex structures with only a few of them resembling the native structure. The major challenge is choosing the near-native structures from the generated set. Recently it has been observed that the density of conserved residue positions is higher at the interface regions of interacting protein surfaces, except for antibody-antigen complexes, where a very low number of conserved positions is observed at the interface regions. In the present study we have used this observation to identify putative interacting regions on the surface of interacting partners. We studied 59 protein complexes, used previously as a benchmark data set for docking investigations. We computed conservation indices of residue positions on the surfaces of interacting proteins using available homologous sequences and used this information to filter out from 56% to 86% of generated docked models, retaining near-native structures for further evaluation. We used a reverse filter of conservation score to filter out the majority of nonnative antigen-antibody complex structures. For each docked model in the filtered subsets, we relaxed the conformation of the side chains by minimizing the energy with CHARMM, and then calculated the binding free energy using a generalized Born method and solvent-accessible surface area calculations. Using the free energy along with conservation information and other descriptors used in the literature for ranking docking solutions, such as shape complementarity and pair potentials, we developed a global ranking procedure that significantly improves the docking results by giving top ranks to near-native complex structures.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15659366      PMCID: PMC2253405          DOI: 10.1110/ps.04941505

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Protein Sci        ISSN: 0961-8368            Impact factor:   6.725


  45 in total

1.  Protein docking using continuum electrostatics and geometric fit.

Authors:  J G Mandell; V A Roberts; M E Pique; V Kotlovyi; J C Mitchell; E Nelson; I Tsigelny; L F Ten Eyck
Journal:  Protein Eng       Date:  2001-02

2.  Kinetics of desolvation-mediated protein-protein binding.

Authors:  C J Camacho; S R Kimura; C DeLisi; S Vajda
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 4.033

3.  Scoring docked conformations generated by rigid-body protein-protein docking.

Authors:  C J Camacho; D W Gatchell; S R Kimura; S Vajda
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2000-08-15

4.  BiGGER: a new (soft) docking algorithm for predicting protein interactions.

Authors:  P N Palma; L Krippahl; J E Wampler; J J Moura
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2000-06-01

5.  Protein-protein interfaces: analysis of amino acid conservation in homodimers.

Authors:  W S Valdar; J M Thornton
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2001-01-01

Review 6.  Prediction of protein-protein interactions by docking methods.

Authors:  Graham R Smith; Michael J E Sternberg
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 6.809

Review 7.  Evolutionary predictions of binding surfaces and interactions.

Authors:  Olivier Lichtarge; Mathew E Sowa
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 6.809

8.  DOCK 4.0: search strategies for automated molecular docking of flexible molecule databases.

Authors:  T J Ewing; S Makino; A G Skillman; I D Kuntz
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 3.686

9.  DARWIN: a program for docking flexible molecules.

Authors:  J S Taylor; R M Burnett
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2000-11-01

10.  PUZZLE: a new method for automated protein docking based on surface shape complementarity.

Authors:  M Helmer-Citterich; A Tramontano
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1994-01-21       Impact factor: 5.469

View more
  7 in total

1.  Coevolution at protein complex interfaces can be detected by the complementarity trace with important impact for predictive docking.

Authors:  Hocine Madaoui; Raphaël Guerois
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2008-05-29       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Mathematical models in biology: from molecules to life.

Authors:  Yiannis N Kaznessis
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med       Date:  2011-02-18

3.  A combination of rescoring and refinement significantly improves protein docking performance.

Authors:  Brian Pierce; Zhiping Weng
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2008-07

4.  Consensus scoring for enriching near-native structures from protein-protein docking decoys.

Authors:  Shide Liang; Samy O Meroueh; Guangce Wang; Chao Qiu; Yaoqi Zhou
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2009-05-01

5.  Docking protein domains in contact space.

Authors:  Stefano Lise; Alice Walker-Taylor; David T Jones
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2006-06-21       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Structural interface parameters are discriminatory in recognising near-native poses of protein-protein interactions.

Authors:  Sony Malhotra; Kannan Sankar; Ramanathan Sowdhamini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-03       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Understanding the fabric of protein crystals: computational classification of biological interfaces and crystal contacts.

Authors:  Guido Capitani; Jose M Duarte; Kumaran Baskaran; Spencer Bliven; Joseph C Somody
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 6.937

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.