Ligand-binding site prediction of proteins based on known fragment-fragment interactions

Bioinformatics

Volumn 26, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 1493-1499

  Kasahara, Kota ^a   Kinoshita, Kengo ^b,c   Takagi, Toshihisa ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

^b TOHOKU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^c JAPAN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AGENCY   (Japan)

^d NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENETICS   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LIGAND; PROTEIN;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BINDING SITE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; METABOLISM; PROTEIN DATABASE; PROTEIN TERTIARY STRUCTURE;

ALGORITHMS; BINDING SITES; DATABASES, PROTEIN; LIGANDS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, TERTIARY; PROTEINS;

EID: 77954185430     PISSN: 13674803     EISSN: 14602059     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq232     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Berman, H. et al. (2003) Announcing the worldwide Protein Data Bank. Nature Struct. Biol., 10, 980.
2. Boer, D.R. et al. (2001) SuperStar: Comparison of CSD and PDB-based interaction fields as a basis for the prediction of protein-ligand interactions. J. Mol. Biol., 312, 275-287.
3. Brady, G.P. and Stouten, P.F.W. (2000) Fast prediction and visualization of protein binding pockets with PASS. J. Comp. Aid. Mol. Des., 14, 383-401.
4. Caflisch, A. et al. (1993) Multiple copy simultaneous search and construction of ligands inbinding-sites-applicationtoinhibitorsofhiv-1asparticproteinase. J.Med.Chem., 36, 2142-2167.
5. Campbell, S.J. et al. (2003) Ligand binding: functional site location, similarity and docking. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., 13, 389-395.
6. Clark, M. et al. (1989) Validation of the general-purpose tripos 5.2 force-field. J. Comput. Chem., 10, 982-1012.
7. Denessiouk, K.A. and Johnson, M.S. (2000) When fold is not important: A common structural framework for adenine and AMP binding in 12 unrelated protein families. Protein Struct. Funct. Genet., 38, 310-326.
8. Denessiouk, K. A. et al. (2001) Adenine recognition: A motif present in ATP-, CoA-, NAD-, NADP-, and FAD-dependent proteins. Protein Struct. Funct. Genet., 44, 282-291.
9. Gohlke, H. et al. (2000) Knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions. J Mol. Biol., 295, 337-356.
10. Huang, B.D. and Schroeder, M. (2006) LIGSITE(csc): predicting ligand binding sites using the Connolly surface and degree of conservation. BMC Struct. Biol., 6, Article no. 19.
11. Juncker, A.S. et al. (2009) Sequence-based feature prediction and annotation of proteins. Genome Biol., 10,6.
12. Kellenberger, E. et al. (2006) sc-PDB: an annotated database of druggable binding sites from the protein data bank. J. Chem. Inform. Model., 46, 717-727.
13. Kinoshita, K. and Nakamura, H. (2003) Protein informatics towards function identification. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., 13, 396-400.
14. Kinoshita, K. and Nakamura, H. (2005) Identification of the ligand binding sites on the molecular surface of proteins. Protein Sci., 14, 711-718.
15. Kinoshita, K. et al. (1999) Structural motif of phosphate-binding site common to various protein superfamilies: all-against-all structural comparison of protein-mononucleotide complexes. Protein Engineer., 12, 11-14.
16. Kobayashi, N. and Go, N. (1997) ATP binding proteins with different folds share a common ATP-binding structural motif. Nat. Struct. Biol., 4, 6-7.
17. Kristiansen, M. et al. (2004) Identification, synthesis, and characterization of new glycogen phosphorylase inhibitors binding to the allosteric AMP site. J. Med. Chem., 47, 3537-3545.
18. Laurie, A.T.R. and Jackson, R.M. (2005) Q-SiteFinder: an energy-based method for the prediction of protein-ligand binding sites. Bioinformatics, 21, 1908-1916.
19. Lee, D. et al. (2007) Predicting protein function from sequence and structure. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol., 8, 995-1005.
20. Loewenstein, Y. et al. (2009) Protein function annotation by homology-based inference. Genome Biol., 10, 207.
21. Morita, M. et al. (2008) Highly accurate method for ligand-binding site prediction in unbound state (apo) protein structures. Protein Struct. Funct. Bioinform., 73, 468-479.
22. Morris, G.M. et al. (2009) AutoDock4 and AutoDockTools4: automated docking with selective receptor flexibility. J. Comput. Chem., 30, 2785-2791.
23. Muegge, I. and Martin, Y.C. (1999) Ageneral and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: a simplified potential approach. J. Med. Chem., 42, 791-804.
24. Saito, M. et al. (2006) An empirical approach for detecting nucleotide-binding sites on proteins. Protein Engineer. Des. Select., 19, 67-75.
25. Schubert, C.R. and Stultz, C.M. (2009) The multi-copy simultaneous search methodology: a fundamental tool for structure-based drug design. J. Comput. Aid. Mol. Des., 23, 475-489.
26. Shionyu-Mitsuyama, C. et al. (2003) An empirical approach for structure-based prediction of carbohydrate-binding sites on proteins. Protein Engineer., 16, 467-478.
27. Sotriffer, C. and Klebe, G. (2002) Identification and mapping of small-molecule binding sites in proteins: computational tools for structure-based drug design. Farmaco, 57, 243-251.
28. Thornton, J.M. et al. (2000) From structure to function: approaches and limitations. Nat. Struct. Biol., 7, 991-994.
29. Toyoshima, C. et al. (2004) Lumenal gating mechanism revealed in calcium pump crystal structures with phosphate analogues. Nature, 432, 361-368.
30. Verdonk, M.L. et al. (1999) SuperStar: A knowledge-based approach for identifying interaction sites in proteins. J. Mol. Biol., 289, 1093-1108.
31. Vitali, J. et al. (1999) Three-dimensional structure of the Gly121Tyr dimeric form of ornithine decarboxylase from Lactobacillus 30a. Acta Crystallogr. D. Biol. Crystallogr., 55, 1978-1985.
32. Zhou, H.Y. and Zhou, Y.Q. (2002) Distance-scaled, finite ideal-gas reference state improves structure-derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction. Protein Sci., 11, 2714-2726.