4.7 Article

pyDockEneRes: per-residue decomposition of protein-protein docking energy

Journal

BIOINFORMATICS
Volume 36, Issue 7, Pages 2284-2285

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz884

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Spanish 'Programa Estatal I+D+i' [BIO2016-79930-R]
  2. EU European Regional Development Fund Program Interreg V-A Spain-France-Andorra (POCTEFA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Motivation: Protein-protein interactions are key to understand biological processes at the molecular level. As a complement to experimental characterization of protein interactions, computational docking methods have become useful tools for the structural and energetics modeling of protein-protein complexes. A key aspect of such algorithms is the use of scoring functions to evaluate the generated docking poses and try to identify the best models. When the scoring functions are based on energetic considerations, they can help not only to provide a reliable structural model for the complex, but also to describe energetic aspects of the interaction. This is the case of the scoring function used in pyDock, a combination of electrostatics, desolvation and van der Waals energy terms. Its correlation with experimental binding affinity values of protein-protein complexes was explored in the past, but the per-residue decomposition of the docking energy was never systematically analyzed. Results: Here, we present pyDockEneRes (pyDock Energy per-Residue), a web server that provides pyDock docking energy partitioned at the residue level, giving a much more detailed description of the docking energy landscape. Additionally, pyDockEneRes computes the contribution to the docking energy of the side-chain atoms. This fast approach can be applied to characterize a complex structure in order to identify energetically relevant residues (hot-spots) and estimate binding affinity changes upon mutation to alanine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available