Simulated unbound structures for benchmarking of protein docking in the Dockground resource

BMC Bioinformatics

Tatsiana Kirys³  Anatoly M. Ruvinsky²  Deepak Singla⁴  Alexander V. Tuzikov³  Petras J. Kundrotas⁴  Ilya A. Vakser¹ 

[1] Department of Molecular Biosciences, The University of Kansas, Lawrence 66045, KS, USA

[2] Schrödinger, Inc., Cambridge 02142, MA, USA

[3] United Institute of Informatics Problems, National Academy of Sciences, Minsk, 220012, Belarus

[4] Center for Computational Biology, The University of Kansas, Lawrence 66047, KS, USA

关键词: Conformational analysis;    Molecular recognition;    Protein docking;    Protein interactions;   

Others  :  1230595
DOI  :  10.1186/s12859-015-0672-3

 received in 2015-03-23, accepted in 2015-07-10,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Proteins play an important role in biological processes in living organisms. Many protein functions are based on interaction with other proteins. The structural information is important for adequate description of these interactions. Sets of protein structures determined in both bound and unbound states are essential for benchmarking of the docking procedures. However, the number of such proteins in PDB is relatively small. A radical expansion of such sets is possible if the unbound structures are computationally simulated.

Results

The DOCKGROUND public resource provides data to improve our understanding of protein–protein interactions and to assist in the development of better tools for structural modeling of protein complexes, such as docking algorithms and scoring functions. A large set of simulated unbound protein structures was generated from the bound structures. The modeling protocol was based on 1 ns Langevin dynamics simulation. The simulated structures were validated on the ensemble of experimentally determined unbound and bound structures. The set is intended for large scale benchmarking of docking algorithms and scoring functions.

Conclusions

A radical expansion of the unbound protein docking benchmark set was achieved by simulating the unbound structures. The simulated unbound structures were selected according to criteria from systematic comparison of experimentally determined bound and unbound structures. The set is publicly available at http://dockground.compbio.ku.edu.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Kirys et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Figure 2.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Vakser IA. Protein-protein docking: From interaction to interactome. Biophys J. 2014; 107:1785-1793.
• [2]Vakser IA. Low-resolution structural modeling of protein interactome. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2013; 23:198-205.
• [3]Sudha G, Nussinov R, Srinivasan N. An overview of recent advances in structural bioinformatics of protein-protein interactions and a guide to their principles. Prog Bioph Mol Biol. 2014; 116:141-150.
• [4]Ruvinsky AM, Kirys T, Tuzikov AV, Vakser IA. Side-chain conformational changes upon protein-protein association. J Mol Biol. 2011; 408:356-365.
• [5]Lensink MF, Wodak SJ. Docking, scoring, and affinity prediction in CAPRI. Proteins. 2013; 81:2082-2095.
• [6]Szilagyi A, Zhang Y. Template-based structure modeling of protein–protein interactions. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2014; 24:10-23.
• [7]Rodrigues JPGLM, Bonvin AMJJ. Integrative computational modeling of protein interactions. FEBS J. 2014; 281:1988-2003.
• [8]Vakser IA. Protein docking for low-resolution structures. Protein Eng. 1995; 8:371-377.
• [9]Vajda S, Hall DR, Kozakov D. Sampling and scoring: A marriage made in heaven. Proteins. 2013; 81:1874-1884.
• [10]Mirzaei H, Beglov D, Paschalidis IC, Vajda S, Vakili P, Kozakov D. Rigid body energy minimization on manifolds for molecular docking. J Chem Theory Comput. 2012; 8:4374-4380.
• [11]Wang C, Bradley P, Baker D. Protein–protein docking with backbone flexibility. J Mol Biol. 2007; 373:503-519.
• [12]Ruvinsky AM, Kirys T, Tuzikov AV, Vakser IA. Ensemble-based characterization of unbound and bound states on protein energy landscape. Protein Sci. 2013; 22:734-744.
• [13]Gao Y, Douguet D, Tovchigrechko A, Vakser IA. DOCKGROUND system of databases for protein recognition studies: Unbound structures for docking. Proteins. 2007; 69:845-851.
• [14]Hwang H, Vreven T, Janin J, Weng Z. Protein–protein docking benchmark version 4.0. Proteins. 2010; 78:3111-3114.
• [15]Douguet D, Chen HC, Tovchigrechko A, Vakser IA. DOCKGROUND resource for studying protein-protein interfaces. Bioinformatics. 2006; 22:2612-2618.
• [16]Canutescu AA, Shelenkov AA, Dunbrack RL. A graph-theory algorithm for rapid protein side-chain prediction. Protein Sci. 2003; 12:2001-2014.
• [17]Zhu H, Domingues FS, Sommer I, Lengauer T. NOXclass: Prediction of protein-protein interaction types. BMC Bioinformatics. 2006; 7:27. BioMed Central Full Text
• [18]Karplus M, McCammon JA. Molecular dynamics simulations of biomolecules. Nature Struct Biol. 2002; 9:646-652.
• [19]Meinhold L, Smith JC, Kitao A, Zewail AH. Picosecond fluctuating protein energy landscape mapped by pressure–temperature molecular dynamics simulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104:17261-17265.
• [20]Kohn JE, Afonine PV, Ruscio JZ, Adams PD, Head-Gordon T. Evidence of functional protein dynamics from X-Ray crystallographic ensembles. PLoS Comp Biol. 2010; 6:e1000911.
• [21]Ludvigsen S, Shen HY, Kjaer M, Madsen JC, Poulsen FM. Refinement of the three-dimensional solution structure of barley serine proteinase inhibitor 2 and comparison with the structures in crystals. J Mol Biol. 1991; 222:621-635.
• [22]Dauter Z, Betzel C, Genov N, Pipon N, Wilson KS. Complex between the subtilisin from a mesophilic bacterium and the leech inhibitor eglin-C. Acta Cryst B. 1991; 47(Pt 5):707-730.
• [23]Gaspari Z, Varnai P, Szappanos B, Perczel A. Reconciling the lock-and-key and dynamic views of canonical serine protease inhibitor action. FEBS Lett. 2010; 584:203-206.
• [24]Nooren IMA, Thornton JM. Structural characterisation and functional significance of transient protein–protein interactions. J Mol Biol. 2003; 325:991-1018.
• [25]Holland DR, Cousens LS, Meng W, Matthews BW. Nerve growth factor in different crystal forms displays structural flexibility and reveals zinc binding sites. J Mol Biol. 1994; 239:385-400.