A web interface for easy flexible protein-protein docking with ATTRACT.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: de Vries SJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4317529 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A web interface for easy flexible protein-protein docking with ATTRACT.
de Vries Sjoerd J SJ Schindler Christina E M CE Chauvot de Beauchêne Isaure I Zacharias Martin M
Biophysical journal 20150201 3
Protein-protein docking programs can give valuable insights into the structure of protein complexes in the absence of an experimental complex structure. Web interfaces can facilitate the use of docking programs by structural biologists. Here, we present an easy web interface for protein-protein docking with the ATTRACT program. While aimed at nonexpert users, the web interface still covers a considerable range of docking applications. The web interface supports systematic rigid-body protein dock ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The similarity between folding and binding led us to posit the concept that the number of protein-protein interface motifs in nature is limited, and interacting protein pairs can use similar interface architectures repeatedly, even if their global folds completely vary. Thus, known protein-protein interface architectures can be used to model the complexes between two target proteins on the proteome scale, even if their global structures differ. This powerful concept is combined with a flexible refinement and global energy assessment tool. The accuracy of the method is highly dependent on the structural diversity of the interface architectures in the template dataset. Here, we validate this knowledge-based combinatorial method on the Docking Benchmark and show that it efficiently finds high-quality models for benchmark complexes and their binding regions even in the absence of template interfaces having sequence similarity to the targets. Compared to "classical" docking, it is computationally faster; as the number of target proteins increases, the difference becomes more dramatic. Further, it is able to distinguish binders from nonbinders. These features allow performing large-scale network modeling. The results on an independent target set (proteins in the p53 molecular interaction map) show that current method can be used to predict whether a given protein pair interacts. Overall, while constrained by the diversity of the template set, this approach efficiently produces high-quality models of protein-protein complexes. We expect that with the growing number of known interface architectures, this type of knowledge-based methods will be increasingly used by the broad proteomics community.
| S-EPMC7448677 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Treating flexibility in molecular docking is a major challenge in cell biology research. Here we describe the background and the principles of existing flexible protein-protein docking methods, focusing on the algorithms and their rational. We describe how protein flexibility is treated in different stages of the docking process: in the preprocessing stage, rigid and flexible parts are identified and their possible conformations are modeled. This preprocessing provides information for the subsequent docking and refinement stages. In the docking stage, an ensemble of pre-generated conformations or the identified rigid domains may be docked separately. In the refinement stage, small-scale movements of the backbone and side-chains are modeled and the binding orientation is improved by rigid-body adjustments. For clarity of presentation, we divide the different methods into categories. This should allow the reader to focus on the most suitable method for a particular docking problem.
| S-EPMC2574623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Many important cellular processes are carried out by protein complexes. To provide physical pictures of interacting proteins, many computational protein-protein prediction methods have been developed in the past. However, it is still difficult to identify the correct docking complex structure within top ranks among alternative conformations.We present a novel protein docking algorithm that utilizes imperfect protein-protein binding interface prediction for guiding protein docking. Since the accuracy of protein binding site prediction varies depending on cases, the challenge is to develop a method which does not deteriorate but improves docking results by using a binding site prediction which may not be 100% accurate. The algorithm, named PI-LZerD (using Predicted Interface with Local 3D Zernike descriptor-based Docking algorithm), is based on a pair wise protein docking prediction algorithm, LZerD, which we have developed earlier. PI-LZerD starts from performing docking prediction using the provided protein-protein binding interface prediction as constraints, which is followed by the second round of docking with updated docking interface information to further improve docking conformation. Benchmark results on bound and unbound cases show that PI-LZerD consistently improves the docking prediction accuracy as compared with docking without using binding site prediction or using the binding site prediction as post-filtering.We have developed PI-LZerD, a pairwise docking algorithm, which uses imperfect protein-protein binding interface prediction to improve docking accuracy. PI-LZerD consistently showed better prediction accuracy over alternative methods in the series of benchmark experiments including docking using actual docking interface site predictions as well as unbound docking cases.
| S-EPMC3287255 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The ClusPro server (https://cluspro.org) is a widely used tool for protein-protein docking. The server provides a simple home page for basic use, requiring only two files in Protein Data Bank (PDB) format. However, ClusPro also offers a number of advanced options to modify the search; these include the removal of unstructured protein regions, application of attraction or repulsion, accounting for pairwise distance restraints, construction of homo-multimers, consideration of small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) data, and location of heparin-binding sites. Six different energy functions can be used, depending on the type of protein. Docking with each energy parameter set results in ten models defined by centers of highly populated clusters of low-energy docked structures. This protocol describes the use of the various options, the construction of auxiliary restraints files, the selection of the energy parameters, and the analysis of the results. Although the server is heavily used, runs are generally completed in <4 h.
| S-EPMC5540229 | biostudies-literature
Project description:MotivationBinding-induced conformational changes challenge current computational docking algorithms by exponentially increasing the conformational space to be explored. To restrict this search to relevant space, some computational docking algorithms exploit the inherent flexibility of the protein monomers to simulate conformational selection from pre-generated ensembles. As the ensemble size expands with increased flexibility, these methods struggle with efficiency and high false positive rates.ResultsHere, we develop and benchmark RosettaDock 4.0, which efficiently samples large conformational ensembles of flexible proteins and docks them using a novel, six-dimensional, coarse-grained score function. A strong discriminative ability allows an eight-fold higher enrichment of near-native candidate structures in the coarse-grained phase compared to RosettaDock 3.2. It adaptively samples 100 conformations each of the ligand and the receptor backbone while increasing computational time by only 20-80%. In local docking of a benchmark set of 88 proteins of varying degrees of flexibility, the expected success rate (defined as cases with ≥50% chance of achieving 3 near-native structures in the 5 top-ranked ones) for blind predictions after resampling is 77% for rigid complexes, 49% for moderately flexible complexes and 31% for highly flexible complexes. These success rates on flexible complexes are a substantial step forward from all existing methods. Additionally, for highly flexible proteins, we demonstrate that when a suitable conformer generation method exists, the method successfully docks the complex.Availability and implementationAs a part of the Rosetta software suite, RosettaDock 4.0 is available at https://www.rosettacommons.org to all non-commercial users for free and to commercial users for a fee.Supplementary informationSupplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
| S-EPMC6184633 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Protein-protein docking algorithms aim to predict the structure of a complex given the atomic structures of the proteins that assemble it. The docking procedure usually consists of two main steps: docking candidate generation and their refinement. The refinement stage aims to improve the accuracy of the candidate solutions and to identify near-native solutions among them. During protein-protein interaction, both side chains and backbone change their conformation. Refinement methods should model these conformational changes in order to obtain a more accurate model of the complex. Handling protein backbone flexibility is a major challenge for docking methodologies, since backbone flexibility adds a huge number of degrees of freedom to the search space. FiberDock is the first docking refinement web server, which accounts for both backbone and side-chain flexibility. Given a set of up to 100 potential docking candidates, FiberDock models the backbone and side-chain movements that occur during the interaction, refines the structures and scores them according to an energy function. The FiberDock web server is free and available with no login requirement at http://bioinfo3d.cs.tau.ac.il/FiberDock/.
| S-EPMC2896170 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We developed a method called residue contact frequency (RCF), which uses the complex structures generated by the protein-protein docking algorithm ZDOCK to predict interface residues. Unlike interface prediction algorithms that are based on monomers alone, RCF is binding partner specific. We evaluated the performance of RCF using the area under the precision-recall (PR) curve (AUC) on a large protein docking Benchmark. RCF (AUC = 0.44) performed as well as meta-PPISP (AUC = 0.43), which is one of the best monomer-based interface prediction methods. In addition, we test a support vector machine (SVM) to combine RCF with meta-PPISP and another monomer-based interface prediction algorithm Evolutionary Trace to further improve the performance. We found that the SVM that combined RCF and meta-PPISP achieved the best performance (AUC = 0.47). We used RCF to predict the binding interfaces of proteins that can bind to multiple partners and RCF was able to correctly predict interface residues that are unique for the respective binding partners. Furthermore, we found that residues that contributed greatly to binding affinity (hotspot residues) had significantly higher RCF than other residues.
| S-EPMC3936310 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this work, we validate and analyze the results of previously published cross docking experiments and classify failed dockings based on the conformational changes observed in the receptors. We show that a majority of failed experiments (i.e. 25 out of 33, involving four different receptors: cAPK, CDK2, Ricin and HIVp) are due to conformational changes in side chains near the active site. For these cases, we identify the side chains to be made flexible during docking calculation by superimposing receptors and analyzing steric overlap between various ligands and receptor side chains. We demonstrate that allowing these side chains to assume rotameric conformations enables the successful cross docking of 19 complexes (ligand all atom RMSD < 2.0 A) using our docking software FLIPDock. The number of side receptor side chains interacting with a ligand can vary according to the ligand's size and shape. Hence, when starting from a complex with a particular ligand one might have to extend the region of potential interacting side chains beyond the ones interacting with the known ligand. We discuss distance-based methods for selecting additional side chains in the neighborhood of the known active site. We show that while using the molecular surface to grow the neighborhood is more efficient than Euclidian-distance selection, the number of side chains selected by these methods often remains too large and additional methods for reducing their count are needed. Despite these difficulties, using geometric constraints obtained from the network of bonded and non-bonded interactions to rank residues and allowing the top ranked side chains to be flexible during docking makes 22 out of 25 complexes successful.
| S-EPMC4828239 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Conventional protein-protein docking algorithms usually rely on heavy candidate sampling and re-ranking, but these steps are time-consuming and hinder applications that require high-throughput complex structure prediction, e.g., structure-based virtual screening. Existing deep learning methods for protein-protein docking, despite being much faster, suffer from low docking success rates. In addition, they simplify the problem to assume no conformational changes within any protein upon binding (rigid docking). This assumption precludes applications when binding-induced conformational changes play a role, such as allosteric inhibition or docking from uncertain unbound model structures. To address these limitations, we present GeoDock, a multi-track iterative transformer network to predict a docked structure from separate docking partners. Unlike deep learning models for protein structure prediction that input multiple sequence alignments (MSAs), GeoDock inputs just the sequences and structures of the docking partners, which suits the tasks when the individual structures are given. GeoDock is flexible at the protein residue level, allowing the prediction of conformational changes upon binding. For a benchmark set of rigid targets, GeoDock obtains a 41% success rate, outperforming all the other tested methods. For a more challenging benchmark set of flexible targets, GeoDock achieves a similar number of top-model successes as the traditional method ClusPro [1], but fewer than ReplicaDock2 [2]. GeoDock attains an average inference speed of under one second on a single GPU, enabling its application in large-scale structure screening. Although binding-induced conformational changes are still a challenge owing to limited training and evaluation data, our architecture sets up the foundation to capture this backbone flexibility. Code and a demonstration Jupyter notebook are available at https://github.com/Graylab/GeoDock.
| S-EPMC10327054 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Scoring docking solutions is a difficult task, and many methods have been developed for this purpose. In docking, only a handful of the hundreds of thousands of models generated by docking algorithms are acceptable, causing difficulties when developing scoring functions. Today's best scoring functions can significantly increase the number of top-ranked models but still fail for most targets. Here, we examine the possibility of utilizing predicted interface residues to score docking models generated during the scan stage of a docking algorithm. Many methods have been developed to infer the regions of a protein surface that interact with another protein, but most have not been benchmarked using docking algorithms. This study systematically tests different interface prediction methods for scoring >300.000 low-resolution rigid-body template free docking decoys. Overall we find that contact-based interface prediction by BIPSPI is the best method to score docking solutions, with >12% of first ranked docking models being acceptable. Additional experiments indicated precision as a high-importance metric when estimating interface prediction quality, focusing on docking constraints production. Finally, we discussed several limitations for adopting interface predictions as constraints in a docking protocol.
| S-EPMC9314140 | biostudies-literature