4.4 Article

A scoring function for docking ligands to low-resolution protein structures

Journal

JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 26, Issue 4, Pages 374-383

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcc.20175

Keywords

ligand docking; low-resolution protein structures; binding site; scoring function; eraser algorithm

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [RR-12225] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a docking method that uses a scoring function for protein-ligand docking that is designed to maximize the docking success rate for low-resolution protein structures. We find that the resulting scoring function parameters are very different depending on whether they were optimized for high- or low-resolution protein structures. We show that this docking method can be successfully applied to predict the ligand-binding site of low-resolution structures. For a set of 25 protein-ligand complexes, in 76% of the cases, more than 50% of ligand-contacting residues are correctly predicted (using receptor crystal structures where the binding site is unspecified). Using decoys of the receptor structures having a 4 Angstrom RMSD from the native structure, for the same set of complexes, in 72% of the cases, we obtain at least one correctly predicted ligand-contacting residue. Furthermore, using an 81-protein-ligand set described by Jain, in 76 (93.8%) cases, the algorithm correctly predicts more than 50% of the ligand-contacting residues when native protein structures are used. Using 3 Angstrom RMSD from native decoys, in all but two cases (97.5%), the algorithm predicts at least one ligand-binding residue correctly. Finally, compared to the previously published Dolores method, for 298 protein-ligand pairs, the number of cases in which at least half of the specific contacts are correctly predicted is more than four times greater. (C) 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available