Strengths and weaknesses of data-driven docking in critical assessment of prediction of interactions

Proteins: Structure, Function and Bioinformatics

Volumn 78, Issue 15, 2010, Pages 3242-3249

  de Vries, Sjoerd J ^a   Melquiond, Adrien S J ^a   Kastritis, Panagiotis L ^a   Karaca, Ezgi ^a   Bordogna, Annalisa ^b   van Dijk, Marc ^a   Rodrigues, João P G L M ^a   Bonvin, Alexandre M J J ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MILANO BICOCCA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Experimental restraints; Haddock; Interface prediction; Multi body docking; Scoring; Web server

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; MOLECULAR DOCKING; MUTAGENESIS; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SCORING SYSTEM; STOICHIOMETRY;

COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; DATABASES, PROTEIN; ESCHERICHIA COLI PROTEINS; MODELS, CHEMICAL; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN INTERACTION MAPPING; RNA; RNA-BINDING PROTEINS; SOFTWARE;

MELANOGRAMMUS;

EID: 77957961606     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: 10970134     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.22814     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Ritchie DW. Recent progress and future directions in protein-protein docking. Curr Protein Pept Sci 2008;9:1-15.
2. Vajda S, Kozakov D. Convergence and combination of methods in protein-protein docking. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2009;19:164-170.
3. Hart TN, Read RJ. A multiple-start Monte Carlo docking method. Proteins 1992;13:206-222.
4. Dominguez C, Boelens R, Bonvin AM. HADDOCK: a protein-protein docking approach based on biochemical or biophysical information. J Am Chem Soc 2003;125:1731-1737.
5. de Vries SJ, van Dijk AD, Krzeminski M, van Dijk M, Thureau A, Hsu V, Wassenaar T, Bonvin AMJJ. HADDOCK versus HADDOCK: new features and performance of HADDOCK2.0 on the CAPRI targets. Proteins 2007;69:726-733.
6. van Dijk AD, Boelens R, Bonvin AM. Data-driven docking for the study of biomolecular complexes. FEBS J 2005;272:293-312.
7. Melquiond ASJ, Bonvin AMJJ. Data-driven docking: using external information to spark the biomolecular rendez-vous. In: Zacharias M, editor. Protein-protein complexes: analysis, modeling and drug design. London: Imperial College Press; 2010. pp 183-209.
8. van Dijk AD, de Vries SJ, Dominguez C, Chen H, Zhou HX, Bonvin AM. Data-driven docking: HADDOCK's adventures in CAPRI. Proteins 2005;60:232-238.
9. de Vries SJ, Van Dijk M, Bonvin AMJJ. The HADDOCK web server for data-driven biomolecular docking. Nat Protocols 2010;5:883-897.
10. Karaca E, Melquiond ASJ, de Vries SJ, Kastritis PL, Bonvin AMJJ. Building macromolecular assemblies by information-driven docking: introducing the HADDOCK multi-body docking server. Mol Cell Proteomics 2010.
11. Sali A, Blundell TL. Comparative protein modeling by satisfaction of spatial restraints. J Mol Biol 1993;234:779-815.
12. Fiser A, Do RK, Sali A. Modeling of loops in protein structures. Prot Sci 2000;9:1753-1773.
13. Zhang Y. I-TASSER server for protein 3D structure prediction. BMC Bioinformatics 2008;9.
14. Jorgensen WL, Tirado-rives J. The OPLS Potential functions for proteins. Energy minimizations for crystals of cyclin peptides and crambin. J Am Chem Soc 1988;110:1657-1666.
15. Fernandez-Recio J, Totrov M, Abagyan R. Identification of protein-protein interaction sites from docking energy landscapes. J Mol Biol 2004;335:843-865.
16. Leulliot N, Chaillet M, Durand D, Ulryck N, Blondeau K, van Tilbeurgh H. Structure of the yeast tRNA m7G methylation complex. Structure 2008;16:52-61.
17. de Vries SJ, van Dijk AD, Bonvin AM. WHISCY: what information does surface conservation yield? Application to data-driven docking. Proteins 2006;63:479-489.
18. Tong Y, Chugha P, Hota PK, Alviani RS, Li M, Tempel W, Shen L, Park HW, Buck M. Binding of Rac1,Rnd1, and RhoDtoa novel Rho GT Pase interaction motif destabilizes dimerization of the plexin-B1 effector domain. J Biol Chem 2007;282:37215-37224.
19. Micheelsen PO, Vevodova J, De Maria L, Ostergaard PR, Friis EP, Wilson K, Skjot M. Structural and mutational analyses of the interaction between the barley alpha-amylase/subtilisin inhibitor and the subtilisin savinase reveal a novel mode of inhibition. J Mol Biol 2008;380:681-690.
20. de Vries SJ. How proteins get in touch. Interface prediction and docking of protein complexes. PhD thesis, Utrecht University, 2009.
21. Kufareva I, Budagyan L, Raush E, Totrov M, Abagyan R. PIER: protein interface recognition for structural proteomics. Proteins 2007;67:400-417.
22. Neuvirth H, Raz R, Schreiber G. ProMate: a structure based prediction program to identify the location of protein-protein binding sites. J Mol Biol 2004;338:181-199.
23. Chen H, Zhou HX. Prediction of interface residues in protein-protein complexes by a consensus neural network method: test against NMR data. Proteins 2005;61:21-35.
24. Porollo A, Meller J. Prediction-based fingerprints of protein-protein interactions. Proteins 2007;66:630-645.
25. Liang S, Zhang C, Liu S, Zhou Y. Protein binding site prediction using an empirical scoring function. Nucleic Acids Res 2006;34: 3698-3707.
26. Vallee F, Kadziola A, Bourne Y, Juy M, Rodenburg KW, Svensson B, Haser R. Barley alpha-amylase bound to its endogenous protein inhibitor BASI: crystal structure of the complex at 1.9 A resolution. Structure 1998;6:649-659.
27. Tong J, Jiang P, Lu ZH. RISP: a web-based server for prediction of RNA-binding sites in proteins. Comput Methods Prog Biomed 2008;90:148-153.
28. Terribilini M, Sander JD, Lee JH, Zaback P, Jernigan RL, Honavar V, Dobbs D. RNABindR: a server for analyzing and predicting RNA-binding sites in proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 2007;35:W578-W584.
29. Kumar M, Gromiha MM, Raghava GP. Prediction of RNA binding sites in a protein using SVM and PSSM profile. Proteins 2008;71: 189-194.
30. Isabet T, Montagnac G, Regazzoni K, Raynal B, El Khadali F, England P, Franco M, Chavrier P, Houdusse A, Menetrey J. The structural basis of Arf effector specificity: the crystal structure of ARF6 in a complex with JIP4. EMBO J 2009;28:2835-2845.
31. O'Shea EK, Klemm JD, Kim PS, Alber T. X-ray structure of the GCN4 leucine zipper, a two-stranded, parallel coiled coil. Science 1991;254:539-544.
32. Strelkov SV, Herrmann H, Geisler N, Wedig T, Zimbelmann R, Aebi U, Burkhard P. Conserved segments 1A and 2B of the intermediate filament dimer: their atomic structures and role in filament assembly. EMBO J 2002;21:1255-1266.
33. Shiba T, Koga H, Shin HW, Kawasaki M, Kato R, Nakayama K, Wakatsuki S. Structural basis for Rab11-dependent membrane recruitment of a family of Rab11-interacting protein 3 (FIP3)/Arfophilin-1. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006;103:15416-15421.
34. Li JJ, Williams BL, Haire LF, Goldberg M, Walker E, Durocher D, Yaffe MB, Jackson SP, Smerdon SJ. Structural and functional versatility of the FHA domain in DNA-damage signaling by the tumor suppressor kinase Chk2. Mol Cell 2002;9:1045-1054.
35. Sreerama YN, Gowda LR. Antigenic determinants and reactive sites of a trypsin/chymotrypsin double-headed inhibitor from horse gram (Dolichos biflorus). Biochimica Et Biophysica Acta Prot Struct Mol Enzymology 1997;1343:235-242.
36. Laskowski M, Qasim MA. What can the structures of enzyme-inhibitor complexes tell us about the structures of enzyme substrate complexes? Biochim Biophys Acta 2000;1477:324-337.
37. Katz BA, Finer-Moore J, Mortezaei R, Rich DH, Stroud RM. Episelection: novel Ki approximately nanomolar inhibitors of serine proteases selected by binding or chemistry on an enzyme surface. Biochemistry 1995;34:8264-8280.
38. Bao R, Zhou CZ, Jiang C, Lin SX, Chi CW, Chen Y. The ternary structure of the double-headed arrowhead protease inhibitor API-A complexed with two trypsins reveals a novel reactive site conformation. J Biol Chem 2009;284:26676-26684.
39. Meenan NAG, Sharma A, Fleishman SJ, MacDonald C, Morel B, Boetzel R, Moore GR, Baker D, Kleanthous C. The structural and energetic basis for high selectivity in a high affinity protein-protein interaction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010;107:10080-10085.
40. Montalvao RW, Cavalli A, Salvatella X, Blundell TL, Vendruscolo M. Structure determination of protein-protein complexes using NMR chemical shifts: case of an endonuclease colicin-immunity protein complex. J Am Chem Soc 2008;130:15990-15996.
41. Ko TP, Liao CC, Ku WY, Chak KF, Yuan HS. The crystal structure of the DNase domain of colicin E7 in complex with its inhibitor Im7 protein. Structure 1999;7:91-102.
42. Li W, Hamill SJ, Hemmings AM, Moore GR, James R, Kleanthous C. Dual recognition and the role of specificity-determining residues in colicin E9 DNase-immunity protein interactions. Biochemistry (NY) 1998;37:11771-11779.
43. Kuhlmann UC, Pommer AJ, Moore GR, James R, Kleanthous C. Specificity in protein-protein interactions: the structural basis for dual recognition in endonuclease colicin-immunity protein complexes. J Mol Biol 2000;301:1163-1178.
44. Krachler AM, Sharma A, Kleanthous C. Self-association of TPR domains: lessons learned from a designed, consensus-based TPR oligomer. Proteins 2010;78:2131-2143.
45. Main ER, Xiong Y, Cocco MJ, D'Andrea L, Regan L. Design of stable alpha-helical arrays from an idealized TPR motif. Structure 2003;11:497-508.
46. Kajander T, Cortajarena AL, Mochrie S, Regan L. Structure and stability of designed TPR protein superhelices: unusual crystal packing and implications for natural TPR proteins. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 2007;63:800-811.
47. Inbar Y, Benyamini H, Nussinov R, Wolfson HJ. Prediction of multimolecular assemblies by multiple docking. J Mol Biol 2005;349: 435-447.
48. Sircar A, Gray JJ. SnugDock: paratope structural optimization during antibody-antigen docking compensates for errors in antibody homology models. PLoS Comput Biol 2010;6:e1000644.
49. Ben-Zeev E, Kowalsman N, Ben-Shimon A, Segal D, Atarot T, Noivirt O, Shay T, Eisenstein M. Docking to single-domain and multiple-domain proteins: old and new challenges. Proteins 2005;60:195-201.
50. Hendrix DK, Klein TE, Kuntz ID. Macromolecular docking of a three-body system: the recognition of human growth hormone by its receptor. Protein Sci 1999;8:1010-1022.
51. DeLano WL. The PyMOL molecular graphics system. http://www.pymol.org, 2002.