Dual binding mode of “bitter sugars” to their human bitter taste receptor target

Scientific Reports

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2019, Pages

  Fierro, Fabrizio ^a,b   Giorgetti, Alejandro ^a,c   Carloni, Paolo ^a,b,d   Meyerhof, Wolfgang ^e   Alfonso Prieto, Mercedes ^a,f  

^a FORSCHUNGSZENTRUM JÜLICH   (Germany)

^b RWTH AACHEN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VERONA   (Italy)

^d VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Viet Nam)

^e SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^f HEINRICH HEINE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BENZYL ALCOHOL DERIVATIVE; CARBOHYDRATE; CELL SURFACE RECEPTOR; G PROTEIN COUPLED RECEPTOR; GLUCOSIDE; LIGAND; SALICIN; TAS2R8 PROTEIN, HUMAN; TASTE RECEPTORS, TYPE 2;

BINDING SITE; CELL LINE; CHEMISTRY; DRUG EFFECT; DYSGEUSIA; GENETICS; HUMAN; METABOLISM; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MUTAGENESIS; PATHOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; TASTE; TASTE BUD;

BENZYL ALCOHOLS; BINDING SITES; CELL LINE; DYSGEUSIA; GLUCOSIDES; HUMANS; LIGANDS; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS SIMULATION; MUTAGENESIS; RECEPTORS, CELL SURFACE; RECEPTORS, G-PROTEIN-COUPLED; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; SUGARS; TASTE; TASTE BUDS; TASTE PERCEPTION;

EID: 85067242706     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-44805-z     Document Type: Article

References (146)

1. Lagerstrom, M. C. & Schioth, H. B. Structural diversity of G protein-coupled receptors and significance for drug discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 7, 339–357, 10.1038/nrd2518 (2008).
2. Fredriksson, R., Lagerstrom, M. C., Lundin, L. G. & Schioth, H. B. The G-protein-coupled receptors in the human genome form five main families. Phylogenetic analysis, paralogon groups, and fingerprints. Mol Pharmacol 63, 1256–1272, 10.1124/mol.63.6.1256 (2003).
3. Nordström, K. J., Sällman Almén, M., Edstam, M. M., Fredriksson, R. & Schiöth, H. B. Independent HHsearch, Needleman–Wunsch-based, and motif analyses reveal the overall hierarchy for most of the G protein-coupled receptor families. Mol Biol Evol 28, 2471–2480 (2011).
4. Di Pizio, A. & Niv, M. Y. Computational Studies of Smell and Taste Receptors. Isr J Chem 54, 1205–1218, 10.1002/ijch.201400027 (2014).
5. Di Pizio, A. et al. Comparing Class A GPCRs to bitter taste receptors: Structural motifs, ligand interactions and agonist-to-antagonist ratios. Methods in cell biology 132, 401–427 (2016).
6. Horn, F. et al. GPCRDB information system for G protein-coupled receptors. Nucleic Acids Res 31, 294–297 (2003).
7. Adler, E. et al. A novel family of mammalian taste receptors. Cell 100, 693–702 (2000).
8. Chandrashekar, J. et al. T2Rs function as bitter taste receptors. Cell 100, 703–711 (2000).
9. Mueller, K. L. et al. The receptors and coding logic for bitter taste. Nature 434, 225 (2005).
10. Liu, R. H. Potential synergy of phytochemicals in cancer prevention: mechanism of action. J Nutr 134, 3479S–3485S, 10.1093/jn/134.12.3479S (2004).
11. Weisburger, J. H. Eat to live, not live to eat. Nutrition 16, 767–773 (2000).
12. Bravo, L. Polyphenols: chemistry, dietary sources, metabolism, and nutritional significance. Nutr Rev 56, 317–333 (1998).
13. Mennella, J. A., Spector, A. C., Reed, D. R. & Coldwell, S. E. The bad taste of medicines: overview of basic research on bitter taste. Clin Ther 35, 1225–1246, 10.1016/j.clinthera.2013.06.007 (2013).
14. Anliker, J. A., Bartoshuk, L., Ferris, A. M. & Hooks, L. D. Children’s food preferences and genetic sensitivity to the bitter taste of 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP). Am J Clin Nutr 54, 316–320, 10.1093/ajcn/54.2.316 (1991).
15. Drewnowski, A. The science and complexity of bitter taste. Nutr Rev 59, 163–169 (2001).
16. Duffy, V. B. & Bartoshuk, L. M. Food acceptance and genetic variation in taste. J Am Diet Assoc 100, 647–655, 10.1016/S0002-8223(00)00191-7 (2000).
17. Beckett, E. L. et al. Bitter taste genetics–the relationship to tasting, liking, consumption and health. Food Funct 5, 3040–3054, 10.1039/c4fo00539b (2014).
18. Ansoleaga, B. et al. Dysregulation of brain olfactory and taste receptors in AD, PSP and CJD, and AD-related model. Neuroscience 248, 369–382, 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.06.034 (2013).
19. Pydi, S. P. et al. Amino Acid Derivatives as Bitter Taste Receptor (T2R) Blockers. J Biol Chem 289, 25054–25066, 10.1074/jbc.M114.576975 (2014).
20. Wolfle, U. et al. Salicin from Willow Bark can Modulate Neurite Outgrowth in Human Neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y Cells. Phytother Res 29, 1494–1500, 10.1002/ptr.5400 (2015).
21. Rozengurt, E. Taste receptors in the gastrointestinal tract. I. Bitter taste receptors and α-gustducin in the mammalian gut. Am J Physiol-Gastr L 291, G171–G177 (2006).
22. Behrens, M. & Meyerhof, W. Gustatory and extragustatory functions of mammalian taste receptors. Physiol Behav 105, 4–13, 10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.02.010 (2011).
23. Deshpande, D. A. et al. Bitter taste receptors on airway smooth muscle bronchodilate by localized calcium signaling and reverse obstruction. Nat Med 16, 1299–1304, 10.1038/nm.2237 (2010).
24. Lee, R. J. & Cohen, N. A. Bitter and sweet taste receptors in the respiratory epithelium in health and disease. J Mol Med 92, 1235–1244, 10.1007/s00109-014-1222-6 (2014).
25. Foster, S. R. et al. Expression, regulation and putative nutrient-sensing function of taste GPCRs in the heart. PLoS One 8, e64579, 10.1371/journal.pone.0064579 (2013).
26. Shaik, F. A. et al. Bitter taste receptors: Extraoral roles in pathophysiology. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 77, 197–204, 10.1016/j.biocel.2016.03.011 (2016).
27. Lu, P., Zhang, C. H., Lifshitz, L. M. & ZhuGe, R. Extraoral bitter taste receptors in health and disease. J Gen Physiol 149, 181–197, 10.1085/jgp.201611637 (2017).
28. Foster, S. R., Roura, E. & Thomas, W. G. Extrasensory perception: odorant and taste receptors beyond the nose and mouth. Pharmacol Ther 142, 41–61, 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2013.11.004 (2014).
29. Ferrer, I. et al. Olfactory Receptors in Non-Chemosensory Organs: The Nervous System in Health and Disease. Front Aging Neurosci 8, 163, 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00163 (2016).
30. Lee, S. J., Depoortere, I. & Hatt, H. Therapeutic potential of ectopic olfactory and taste receptors. Nat Rev Drug Discov 18, 116–138, 10.1038/s41573-018-0002-3 (2019).
31. Fierro, F. et al. Agonist binding to chemosensory receptors: a systematic bioinformatics analysis. Frontiers in molecular biosciences 4, 63 (2017).
32. Isberg, V. et al. GPCRdb: an information system for G protein-coupled receptors. Nucleic Acids Res 44, D356–D364, 10.1093/nar/gkv1178 (2016).
33. Chothia, C. & Lesk, A. M. The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins. EMBO J 5, 823–826 (1986).
34. Piccoli, S., Suku, E., Garonzi, M. & Giorgetti, A. Genome-wide Membrane Protein Structure Prediction. Curr Genomics 14, 324–329, 10.2174/13892029113149990009 (2013).
35. Olivella, M., Gonzalez, A., Pardo, L. & Deupi, X. Relation between sequence and structure in membrane proteins. Bioinformatics 29, 1589–1592 (2013).
36. Cherezov, V. et al. High-resolution crystal structure of an engineered human beta2-adrenergic G protein-coupled receptor. Science 318, 1258–1265, 10.1126/science.1150577 (2007).
37. Marchiori, A. et al. Coarse-Grained/Molecular Mechanics of the TAS2R38 Bitter Taste Receptor: Experimentally-Validated Detailed Structural Prediction of Agonist Binding. Plos One 8, 10.1371/journal.pone.0064675 (2013).
38. Capaldi, S. et al. Allosteric sodium binding cavity in GPR3: a novel player in modulation of Abeta production. Sci Rep 8, 11102, 10.1038/s41598-018-29475-7 (2018).
39. Sandal, M. et al. Evidence for a Transient Additional Ligand Binding Site in the TAS2R46 Bitter Taste Receptor. J Chem Theory Comput 11, 4439–4449, 10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00472 (2015).
40. Munk, C., Harpsoe, K., Hauser, A. S., Isberg, V. & Gloriam, D. E. Integrating structural and mutagenesis data to elucidate GPCR ligand binding. Curr Opin Pharmacol 30, 51–58, 10.1016/j.coph.2016.07.003 (2016).
41. Behrens, M. & Meyerhof, W. Vertebrate Bitter Taste Receptors: Keys for Survival in Changing Environments. J Agric Food Chem, 10.1021/acs.jafc.6b04835 (2017).
42. Meyerhof, W. et al. The molecular receptive ranges of human TAS2R bitter taste receptors. Chem Senses 35, 157–170, 10.1093/chemse/bjp092 (2010).
43. Sainz, E. et al. Functional characterization of human bitter taste receptors. Biochem J 403, 537–543, 10.1042/BJ20061744 (2007).
44. Wiener, A., Shudler, M., Levit, A. & Niv, M. Y. BitterDB: a database of bitter compounds. Nucleic Acids Res 40, D413–D419, 10.1093/nar/gkr755 (2012).
45. Brockhoff, A., Behrens, M., Niv, M. Y. & Meyerhof, W. Structural requirements of bitter taste receptor activation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107, 11110–11115, 10.1073/pnas.0913862107 (2010).
46. Kruse, A. C. et al. Structure and dynamics of the M3 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor. Nature 482, 552–556, 10.1038/nature10867 (2012).
47. Dror, R. O. et al. Structural basis for modulation of a G-protein-coupled receptor by allosteric drugs. Nature 503, 295–+, 10.1038/nature12595 (2013).
48. Granier, S. & Kobilka, B. A new era of GPCR structural and chemical biology. Nat Chem Biol 8, 670–673, 10.1038/nchembio.1025 (2012).
49. Manglik, A. et al. Crystal structure of the micro-opioid receptor bound to a morphinan antagonist. Nature 485, 321–326, 10.1038/nature10954 (2012).
50. Wheatley, M. et al. Lifting the lid on GPCRs: the role of extracellular loops. Br J Pharmacol 165, 1688–1703, 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2011.01629.x (2012).
51. Biarnes, X. et al. Insights into the binding of Phenyltiocarbamide (PTC) agonist to its target human TAS2R38 bitter receptor. PLoS One 5, e12394, 10.1371/journal.pone.0012394 (2010).
52. Bufe, B., Schöley-Pohl, E., Krautwurst, D., Hofmann, T. & Meyerhof, W. Identification of human bitter taste receptors. Am Chem Soc Symp S 867, 45–59 (2003).
53. Thomas, A. et al. The bitter taste receptor TAS2R16 achieves high specificity and accommodates diverse glycoside ligands by using a two-faced binding pocket. Sci Rep-Uk 7, 7753 (2017).
54. Bufe, B., Hofmann, T., Krautwurst, D., Raguse, J. D. & Meyerhof, W. The human TAS2R16 receptor mediates bitter taste in response to beta-glucopyranosides. Nat Genet 32, 397–401, 10.1038/ng1014 (2002).
55. Sakurai, T. et al. Characterization of the beta-D-glucopyranoside binding site of the human bitter taste receptor hTAS2R16. J Biol Chem 285, 28373–28378, 10.1074/jbc.M110.144444 (2010).
56. Sakurai, T. et al. The human bitter taste receptor, hTAS2R16, discriminates slight differences in the configuration of disaccharides. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 402, 595–601, 10.1016/j.bbrc.2010.10.059 (2010).
57. Soranzo, N. et al. Positive selection on a high-sensitivity allele of the human bitter-taste receptor TAS2R16. Curr Biol 15, 1257–1265, 10.1016/j.cub.2005.06.042 (2005).
58. Hinrichs, A. L. et al. Functional variant in a bitter-taste receptor (hTAS2R16) influences risk of alcohol dependence. The American Journal of Human Genetics 78, 103–111 (2006).
59. Kingsbury, J. M. Poisonous plants of the United States and Canada. Soil Science 98, 349 (1964).
60. Meyerhof, W. Elucidation of mammalian bitter taste. Rev Physiol Bioch P 154, 37–72, 10.1007/s10254-005-0041-0 (2005).
61. Chan, H. S. et al. Exploring a new ligand binding site of G protein-coupled receptors. Chemical Science 9, 6480–6489 (2018).
62. Campa, D. et al. Bitter taste receptor polymorphisms and human aging. PLoS One 7, e45232, 10.1371/journal.pone.0045232 (2012).
63. Risso, D. S. et al. A bio-cultural approach to the study of food choice: The contribution of taste genetics, population and culture. Appetite 114, 240–247, 10.1016/j.appet.2017.03.046 (2017).
64. Li, H., Jeong, Y.-M., Kim, S. Y., Kim, M.-K. & Kim, D.-S. Arbutin inhibits TCCSUP human bladder cancer cell proliferation via up-regulation of p21. Die Pharmazie-An International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 66, 306–309 (2011).
65. Jones, R. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug prescribing: past, present, and future. The American Journal of Medicine 110, S4–S7 (2001).
66. Kong, C. S. et al. Salicin, an Extract from White Willow Bark, Inhibits Angiogenesis by Blocking the ROS-ERK Pathways. Phytotherapy research 28, 1246–1251 (2014).
67. Chen, Z. et al. Insights into the binding of agonist and antagonist to TAS2R16 receptor: a molecular simulation study. Molecular Simulation 44, 322–329 (2018).
68. Neri, M., Anselmi, C., Cascella, M., Maritan, A. & Carloni, P. Coarse-grained model of proteins incorporating atomistic detail of the active site. Phys Rev Lett 95, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.218102 (2005).
69. Neri, M. et al. Microseconds dynamics simulations of the outer-membrane protease T. Biophys J 94, 71–78, 10.1529/biophysj.107.116301 (2008).
70. Leguebe, M. et al. Hybrid molecular mechanics/coarse-grained simulations for structural prediction of G-protein coupled receptor/ligand complexes. PLoS One 7, e47332, 10.1371/journal.pone.0047332 (2012).
71. Tarenzi, T., Calandrini, V., Potestio, R., Giorgetti, A. & Carloni, P. Open boundary simulations of proteins and their hydration shells by Hamiltonian adaptive resolution scheme. J Chem Theory Comput 13, 5647–5657 (2017).
72. Bateman, A. et al. The Pfam protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res 32, D138–141, 10.1093/nar/gkh121 (2004).
73. Pei, J. & Grishin, N. V. PROMALS: towards accurate multiple sequence alignments of distantly related proteins. Bioinformatics 23, 802–808, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm017 (2007).
74. Ballesteros, J. A. & Weinstein, H. [19] Integrated methods for the construction of three-dimensional models and computational probing of structure-function relations in G protein-coupled receptors. Methods in neurosciences 25, 366–428 (1995).
75. Sandal, M. et al. GOMoDo: A GPCRs Online Modeling and Docking Webserver. Plos One 8, 10.1371/journal.pone.0074092 (2013).
76. Soding, J. Protein homology detection by HMM-HMM comparison. Bioinformatics 21, 951–960, 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti125 (2005).
77. Soding, J., Biegert, A. & Lupas, A. N. The HHpred interactive server for protein homology detection and structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res 33, W244–248, 10.1093/nar/gki408 (2005).
78. Eswar, N., Eramian, D., Webb, B., Shen, M. Y. & Sali, A. Protein structure modeling with MODELLER. Methods Mol Biol 426, 145–159, 10.1007/978-1-60327-058-8_8 (2008).
79. Venkatakrishnan, A. J. et al. Molecular signatures of G-protein-coupled receptors. Nature 494, 185–194, 10.1038/nature11896 (2013).
80. Melo, F., Sanchez, R. & Sali, A. Statistical potentials for fold assessment. Protein Sci 11, 430–448, 10.1002/pro.110430 (2002).
81. Shen, M. Y. & Sali, A. Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures. Protein Sci 15, 2507–2524, 10.1110/ps.062416606 (2006).
82. Chen, V. B. et al. MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography 66, 12–21 (2010).
83. Wang, Y. et al. PubChem: a public information system for analyzing bioactivities of small molecules. Nucleic Acids Res 37, W623–W633 (2009).
84. Dominguez, C., Boelens, R. & Bonvin, A. M. HADDOCK: a protein-protein docking approach based on biochemical or biophysical information. J Am Chem Soc 125, 1731–1737, 10.1021/ja026939x (2003).
85. De Vries, S. J., van Dijk, M. & Bonvin, A. M. J. J. The HADDOCK web server for data-driven biomolecular docking. Nat Protoc 5, 883–897, 10.1038/nprot.2010.32 (2010).
86. Le Guilloux, V., Schmidtke, P. & Tuffery, P. Fpocket: an open source platform for ligand pocket detection. BMC Bioinformatics 10, 168, 10.1186/1471-2105-10-168 (2009).
87. Schmidtke, P., Le Guilloux, V., Maupetit, J. & Tuffery, P. fpocket: online tools for protein ensemble pocket detection and tracking. Nucleic Acids Res 38, W582–W589, 10.1093/nar/gkq383 (2010).
88. Daura, X. et al. Peptide folding: when simulation meets experiment. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 38, 236–240 (1999).
89. Humphrey, W., Dalke, A. & Schulten, K. VMD: visual molecular dynamics. Journal of molecular graphics 14, 33–38 (1996).
90. Michino, M. et al. Community-wide assessment of GPCR structure modelling and ligand docking: GPCR Dock 2008. Nat Rev Drug Discov 8, 455–463, 10.1038/nrd2877 (2009).
91. Katritch, V., Rueda, M., Lam, P. C., Yeager, M. & Abagyan, R. GPCR 3D homology models for ligand screening: lessons learned from blind predictions of adenosine A2a receptor complex. Proteins 78, 197–211, 10.1002/prot.22507 (2010).
92. Kufareva, I., Katritch, V., Participants of, G. D., Stevens, R. C. & Abagyan, R. Advances in GPCR modeling evaluated by the GPCR Dock 2013 assessment: meeting new challenges. Structure 22, 1120–1139, 10.1016/j.str.2014.06.012 (2014).
93. Kufareva, I. et al. Status of GPCR modeling and docking as reflected by community-wide GPCR Dock 2010 assessment. Structure 19, 1108–1126, 10.1016/j.str.2011.05.012 (2011).
94. Beuming, T. & Sherman, W. Current assessment of docking into GPCR crystal structures and homology models: successes, challenges, and guidelines. J Chem Inf Model 52, 3263–3277, 10.1021/ci300411b (2012).
95. Scott, W. R. P. et al. The GROMOS biomolecular simulation program package. J Phys Chem A 103, 3596–3607, 10.1021/jp984217f (1999).
96. Berendsen, H. J. C., Grigera, J. R. & Straatsma, T. P. The Missing Term in Effective Pair Potentials. J Phys Chem-Us 91, 6269–6271, 10.1021/j100308a038 (1987).
97. Plazinski, W., Lonardi, A. & Hünenberger, P. H. Revision of the GROMOS 56A6CARBO force field: Improving the description of ring-conformational equilibria in hexopyranose-based carbohydrates chains. Journal of computational chemistry 37, 354–365 (2016).
98. Schuttelkopf, A. W. & van Aalten, D. M. PRODRG: a tool for high-throughput crystallography of protein-ligand complexes. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 60, 1355–1363, 10.1107/S0907444904011679 (2004).
99. Lemkul, J. A., Allen, W. J. & Bevan, D. R. Practical considerations for building GROMOS-compatible small-molecule topologies. Journal of chemical information and modeling 50, 2221–2235 (2010).
100. Bayly, C. I., Cieplak, P., Cornell, W. & Kollman, P. A. A well-behaved electrostatic potential based method using charge restraints for deriving atomic charges: the RESP model. The Journal of Physical Chemistry 97, 10269–10280 (1993).
101. Frisch, M. J. et al. Gaussian 09, revision A. 1. Gaussian Inc. Wallingford CT 27, 34 (2009).
102. Wang, J., Wang, W., Kollman, P. A. & Case, D. A. Antechamber: an accessory software package for molecular mechanical calculations. J. Am. Chem. Soc 222, U403 (2001).
103. Go, N. & Abe, H. Non-Interacting Local-Structure Model of Folding and Unfolding Transition in Globular-Proteins.1. Formulation. Biopolymers 20, 991–1011, 10.1002/bip.1981.360200511 (1981).
104. Giorgetti, A. & Carloni, P. In Protein Modelling 165–174 (Springer International Publishing, 2014).
105. Suku, E., Fierro, F., Giorgetti, A., Alfonso-Prieto, M. & Carloni, P. Multi-scale simulations of membrane proteins: the case of bitter taste receptors. Journal of Science: Advanced Materials and Devices (2017).
106. Schneider, J. et al. Predicting ligand binding poses for low-resolution membrane protein models: Perspectives from multiscale simulations. Biochemical and biophysical research communications 498, 366–374 (2018).
107. Van Der Spoel, D. et al. GROMACS: fast, flexible, and free. J Comput Chem 26, 1701–1718, 10.1002/jcc.20291 (2005).
108. Lee, B. & Richards, F. M. The interpretation of protein structures: estimation of static accessibility. J Mol Biol 55, 379-IN374 (1971).
109. Bohacek, R. S. & McMartin, C. Definition and display of steric, hydrophobic, and hydrogen-bonding properties of ligand binding sites in proteins using Lee and Richards accessible surface: validation of a high-resolution graphical tool for drug design. J Med Chem 35, 1671–1684 (1992).
110. Graziano, G. On the size dependence of hydrophobic hydration. Journal of the Chemical Society, Faraday Transactions 94, 3345–3352 (1998).
111. Lindahl, E., Hess, B. & Van Der Spoel, D. GROMACS 3.0: a package for molecular simulation and trajectory analysis. Molecular modeling annual 7, 306–317 (2001).
112. Colquhoun, D. Binding, gating, affinity and efficacy: the interpretation of structure-activity relationships for agonists and of the effects of mutating receptors. Br J Pharmacol 125, 924–947 (1998).
113. Strange, P. G. Agonist binding, agonist affinity and agonist efficacy at G protein-coupled receptors. Br J Pharmacol 153, 1353–1363, 10.1038/sj.bjp.0707672 (2008).
114. Kenakin, T. Drug efficacy at G protein-coupled receptors. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 42, 349–379, 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.42.091401.113012 (2002).
115. Singh, N., Pydi, S. P., Upadhyaya, J. & Chelikani, P. Structural basis of activation of bitter taste receptor T2R1 and comparison with Class A G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). J Biol Chem 286, 36032–36041, 10.1074/jbc.M111.246983 (2011).
116. Raghavan, V., Bollmann, P. & Jung, G. S. A critical investigation of recall and precision as measures of retrieval system performance. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 7, 205–229 (1989).
117. Manning, C. D. & Schütze, H. Foundations of statistical natural language processing. Vol. 999 (MIT Press, 1999).
118. Davis, J. & Goadrich, M. In Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning. 233–240 (ACM).
119. Saito, T. & Rehmsmeier, M. The precision-recall plot is more informative than the ROC plot when evaluating binary classifiers on imbalanced datasets. PLoS One 10, e0118432, 10.1371/journal.pone.0118432 (2015).
120. Loris, R., Maes, D., Poortmans, F., Wyns, L. & Bouckaert, J. A structure of the complex between concanavalin A and methyl-3, 6-di-O-(α-D-mannopyranosyl)-α-D-mannopyranoside reveals two binding modes. J Biol Chem 271, 30614–30618 (1996).
121. Feinberg, H., Castelli, R., Drickamer, K., Seeberger, P. H. & Weis, W. I. Multiple modes of binding enhance the affinity of DC-SIGN for high mannose N-linked glycans found on viral glycoproteins. J Biol Chem 282, 4202–4209 (2007).
122. Angulo, J. et al. Saturation Transfer Difference (STD) NMR Spectroscopy Characterization of Dual Binding Mode of a Mannose Disaccharide to DC-SIGN. ChemBioChem 9, 2225–2227 (2008).
123. Marcelo, F. et al. Delineating Binding Modes of Gal/GalNAc and Structural Elements of the Molecular Recognition of Tumor-Associated Mucin Glycopeptides by the Human Macrophage Galactose-Type Lectin. Chemistry–A European Journal 20, 16147–16155 (2014).
124. Bourne, Y. et al. Crosslinking of mammalian lectin (galectin-1) by complex biantennary saccharides. Nature Structural and Molecular Biology 1, 863 (1994).
125. Katritch, V. et al. Allosteric sodium in class A GPCR signaling. Trends Biochem Sci 39, 233–244, 10.1016/j.tibs.2014.03.002 (2014).
126. Di Pizio, A., Shoshan-Galeczki, Y. B., Hayes, J. E. & Niv, M. Y. Bitter and sweet tasting molecules: it’s complicated. Neuroscience letters (2018).
127. Burney, P. R., Nordwald, E. M., Hickman, K., Kaar, J. L. & Pfaendtner, J. Molecular dynamics investigation of the ionic liquid/enzyme interface: Application to engineering enzyme surface charge. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 83, 670–680 (2015).
128. Sprenger, K., Plaks, J., Kaar, J. & Pfaendtner, J. Elucidating sequence and solvent specific design targets to protect and stabilize enzymes for biocatalysis in ionic liquids. Phys Chem Chem Phys 19, 17426–17433 (2017).
129. Poulos, T. L. & Howard, A. J. Crystal structures of metyrapone- and phenylimidazole-inhibited complexes of cytochrome P-450cam. Biochemistry 26, 8165–8174 (1987).
130. Badger, J. et al. Structural analysis of a series of antiviral agents complexed with human rhinovirus 14. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85, 3304–3308 (1988).
131. Holtz, K. M. et al. Alternate modes of binding in two crystal structures of alkaline phosphatase-inhibitor complexes. Protein Science 9, 907–915 (2000).
132. Dohnálek, J. et al. A distinct binding mode of a hydroxyethylamine isostere inhibitor of HIV-1 protease. Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography 57, 472–476 (2001).
133. Wojtczak, A., Cody, V., Luft, J. R. & Pangborn, W. Structure of rat transthyretin (rTTR) complex with thyroxine at 2.5 Å resolution: first non-biased insight into thyroxine binding reveals different hormone orientation in two binding sites. Acta Crystallographica Section D: Biological Crystallography 57, 1061–1070 (2001).
134. Uytterhoeven, K., Sponer, J. & Van Meervelt, L. Two 1: 1 binding modes for distamycin in the minor groove of d(GGCCAATTGG). Eur J Biochem 269, 2868–2877 (2002).
135. Rosenfeld, R. J. et al. Conformational changes in nitric oxide synthases induced by chlorzoxazone and nitroindazoles: crystallographic and computational analyses of inhibitor potency. Biochemistry 41, 13915–13925 (2002).
136. Lewis, P. J. et al. On the detection of multiple-binding modes of ligands to proteins, from biological, structural, and modeling data. J Comput Aid Mol Des 17, 129–134 (2003).
137. Nazaré, M. et al. Probing the subpockets of factor Xa reveals two binding modes for inhibitors based on a 2-carboxyindole scaffold: a study combining structure-activity relationship and X-ray crystallography. Journal of medicinal chemistry 48, 4511–4525 (2005).
138. Baumgartner, R. et al. Dual binding mode of a novel series of DHODH inhibitors. Journal of medicinal chemistry 49, 1239–1247 (2006).
139. Vogtherr, M. et al. NMR characterization of kinase p38 dynamics in free and ligand-bound forms. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 45, 993–997 (2006).
140. Kim, M. et al. Crystal structure of papain-E64-c complex. Binding diversity of E64-c to papain S2 and S3 subsites. Biochemical Journal 287, 797–803 (1992).
141. Arnatt, C. K. & Zhang, Y. G. Protein-Coupled Estrogen Receptor (GPER) Agonist Dual Binding Mode Analyses Toward Understanding of Its Activation Mechanism: A Comparative Homology Modeling Approach. Molecular informatics 32, 647–658 (2013).
142. Nash, M. A., Smith, S. P., Fontes, C. M. & Bayer, E. A. Single versus dual-binding conformations in cellulosomal cohesin–dockerin complexes. Curr Opin Struc Biol 40, 89–96 (2016).
143. Zhu, Z. et al. Discovery of Novel Hydroxamates as Highly Potent Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Converting Enzyme Inhibitors: Part I. Discovery of Two Binding Modes. Journal of medicinal chemistry 51, 725–736 (2008).
144. Pilger, J. et al. A Combination of Spin Diffusion Methods for the Determination of Protein–Ligand Complex Structural Ensembles. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 54, 6511–6515 (2015).
145. Singh, R. P. et al. Dual binding mode of antithyroid drug methimazole to mammalian heme peroxidases–structural determination of the lactoperoxidase–methimazole complex at 1.97 Å resolution. FEBS open bio 6, 640–650 (2016).
146. Jobst, M. A. et al. Resolving dual binding conformations of cellulosome cohesin-dockerin complexes using single-molecule force spectroscopy. Elife 4, e10319 (2015).