4.6 Article

Predicting Protein Ligand Binding Sites by Combining Evolutionary Sequence Conservation and 3D Structure

期刊

PLOS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
卷 5, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000585

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [T32 HG003284, GM076275, P50 GM071508, CA041086]
  2. NSF [MCB0093399, IIS-0612231]
  3. Leverhulme Trust
  4. BBSRC
  5. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
  6. Division of Computing and Communication Foundations [0937139] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Identifying a protein's functional sites is an important step towards characterizing its molecular function. Numerous structure-and sequence-based methods have been developed for this problem. Here we introduce ConCavity, a small molecule binding site prediction algorithm that integrates evolutionary sequence conservation estimates with structure-based methods for identifying protein surface cavities. In large-scale testing on a diverse set of single-and multi-chain protein structures, we show that ConCavity substantially outperforms existing methods for identifying both 3D ligand binding pockets and individual ligand binding residues. As part of our testing, we perform one of the first direct comparisons of conservation-based and structure-based methods. We find that the two approaches provide largely complementary information, which can be combined to improve upon either approach alone. We also demonstrate that ConCavity has state-of-the-art performance in predicting catalytic sites and drug binding pockets. Overall, the algorithms and analysis presented here significantly improve our ability to identify ligand binding sites and further advance our understanding of the relationship between evolutionary sequence conservation and structural and functional attributes of proteins. Data, source code, and prediction visualizations are available on the ConCavity web site (http://compbio.cs.princeton.edu/concavity/).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据