Achieving reliability and high accuracy in automated protein docking: ClusPro, PIPER, SDU, and stability analysis in CAPRI rounds 13-19

Proteins: Structure, Function and Bioinformatics

Volumn 78, Issue 15, 2010, Pages 3124-3130

  Kozakov, Dima ^a   Hall, David R ^a   Beglov, Dmitri ^a   Brenke, Ryan ^a   Comeau, Stephen R ^b   Shen, Yang ^a,c   Li, Keyong ^c   Zheng, Jiefu ^c   Vakili, Pirooz ^c   Paschalidis, Ioannis Ch ^c   Vajda, Sandor ^a  

^a Boston University   (United States)

^b Dyax Corp   (United States)

^c BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Clustering; Docking server; Energy funnel; Fast Fourier transform; Global optimization; Pairwise potential; PIPER; Scoring function; SDU; Structure refinement

Indexed keywords

COLICIN; DIMER; RNA METHYLTRANSFERASE; TRYPSIN;

ARTICLE; COMPLEX FORMATION; CONFORMATIONAL TRANSITION; CRYSTALLIZATION; FOURIER TRANSFORMATION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR DOCKING; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; PROTEIN TARGETING; RELIABILITY; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY;

ALGORITHMS; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; MODELS, CHEMICAL; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS SIMULATION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN MULTIMERIZATION; PROTEINS; SOFTWARE;

EID: 77957963055     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: 10970134     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.22835     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Kozakov D, Brenke R, Comeau SR, Vajda S. Piper: an FFT-based protein docking program with pairwise potentials. Proteins 2006;65: 392-406.
2. Chuang G-Y, Kozakov D, Brenke R, Comeau SR, Vajda S. DARS (Decoys As the Reference State) potentials for protein-protein docking. Biophys J 2008;95:4217-4227.
3. Kozakov D, Clodfelter K, Vajda S, Camacho C. Optimal clustering for detecting near-native conformations in protein docking. Biophys J 2005;89:867-875.
4. Kozakov D, Schueler-Furman O, Vajda S. Discrimination of near-native structures in protein-protein docking by testing the stability of local minima. Proteins 2008;72:993-1004.
5. Shen Y, Paschalidis IC, Vakili P, Vajda S. Protein docking by the underestimation of free energy funnels in the space of encounter complexes. PLoS Comput Biol 2008;4:e1000191.
6. Camacho C, Gatchell D, Kimura S, Vajda S. Scoring docked conformations generated by rigid-body protein-protein docking. Proteins 2000;40:525-537.
7. Li L, Cheng R, Weng Z. RDOCK: refinement of rigid-body protein docking predictions. Proteins 2003;53:693-707.
8. Comeau S, Gatchell D, Vajda S, Camacho C. ClusPro: an automated docking and discrimination method for the prediction of protein complexes. Bioinformatics 2004;20:45-50.
9. Moont G, Gabb H, Sternberg M. Use of pair potentials across protein interfaces in screening predicted docked complexes. Proteins 1999;35:364-373.
10. Murphy J, Gatchell D, Prasad J, Vajda S. Combination of scoring functions improves discrimination in protein-protein docking. Proteins 2003;53:840-854.
11. Lu H, Lu L, Skolnick J. Development of unified statistical potentials describing protein-protein interactions. Biophys J 2003;84:1895-1901.
12. Liu S, Zhang C, Zhou H, Zhou Y. A physical reference state unifies the structure-derived potential of mean force for protein folding and binding. Proteins 2004;56:93-101.
13. Eswar N, Webb B, Marti-Renom MA, Madhusudhan MS, Eramian D, Shen M-Y, Pieper U, Sali A. Comparative protein structure modeling using MODELLER. Curr Protoc Bioinformatics 2006; Chapter 5:Unit 5.6.
14. Zhang Y. I-tasser server for protein 3d structure prediction. BMC Bioinformatics 2008;9:40.
15. Meenan NAG, Sharma A, Fleishman SJ, Macdonald CJ, 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 U S A 2010;107:10080-10085.
16. 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.