3.9 Article

Evaluation of the coarse-grained OPEP force field for protein-protein docking

期刊

BMC BIOPHYSICS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s13628-016-0029-y

关键词

Protein-protein docking; Coarse graining; Rescoring; Flexible docking

资金

  1. International NRW Research School BioStruct
  2. Ministry of Innovation, Science and Research of the State North Rhine-Westphalia
  3. Heinrich Heine University of Dusseldorf
  4. Entrepreneur Foundation at the Heinrich Heine University of Dusseldorf

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Knowing the binding site of protein-protein complexes helps understand their function and shows possible regulation sites. The ultimate goal of protein-protein docking is the prediction of the three-dimensional structure of a protein-protein complex. Docking itself only produces plausible candidate structures, which must be ranked using scoring functions to identify the structures that are most likely to occur in nature. Methods: In this work, we rescore rigid body protein-protein predictions using the optimized potential for efficient structure prediction (OPEP), which is a coarse-grained force field. Using a force field based on continuous functions rather than a grid-based scoring function allows the introduction of protein flexibility during the docking procedure. First, we produce protein-protein predictions using ZDOCK, and after energy minimization via OPEP we rank them using an OPEP-based soft rescoring function. We also train the rescoring function for different complex classes and demonstrate its improved performance for an independent dataset. Results: The trained rescoring function produces a better ranking than ZDOCK for more than 50 % of targets, rising to over 70 % when considering only enzyme/inhibitor complexes. Conclusions: This study demonstrates for the first time that energy functions derived from the coarse-grained OPEP force field can be employed to rescore predictions for protein-protein complexes.

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

3.9
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