Structural quality of unrefined models in protein docking

Structural characterization of protein‐protein interactions is essential for understanding life processes at the molecular level. However, only a fraction of protein interactions have experimentally resolved structures. Thus, reliable computational methods for structural modeling of protein interactions (protein docking) are important for generating such structures and understanding the principles of protein recognition. Template‐based docking techniques that utilize structural similarity between target protein‐protein interaction and cocrystallized protein‐protein complexes (templates) are gaining popularity due to generally higher reliability than that of the template‐free docking. However, the template‐based approach lacks explicit penalties for intermolecular penetration, as opposed to the typical free docking where such penalty is inherent due to the shape complementarity paradigm. Thus, template‐based docking models are commonly assumed to require special treatment to remove large structural penetrations. In this study, we compared clashes in the template‐based and free docking of the same proteins, with crystallographically determined and modeled structures. The results show that for the less accurate protein models, free docking produces fewer clashes than the template‐based approach. However, contrary to the common expectation, in acceptable and better quality docking models of unbound crystallographically determined proteins, the clashes in the template‐based docking are comparable to those in the free docking, due to the overall higher quality of the template‐based docking predictions. This suggests that the free docking refinement protocols can in principle be applied to the template‐based docking predictions as well. Proteins 2016; 85:39–45. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Structural templates for comparative protein docking

Structural characterization of protein‐protein interactions is important for understanding life processes. Because of the inherent limitations of experimental techniques, such characterization requires computational approaches. Along with the traditional protein‐protein docking (free search for a match between two proteins), comparative (template‐based) modeling of protein‐protein complexes has been gaining popularity. Its development puts an emphasis on full and partial structural similarity between the target protein monomers and the protein‐protein complexes previously determined by experimental techniques (templates). The template‐based docking relies on the quality and diversity of the template set. We present a carefully curated, nonredundant library of templates containing 4950 full structures of binary complexes and 5936 protein‐protein interfaces extracted from the full structures at 12 Å distance cut‐off. Redundancy in the libraries was removed by clustering the PDB structures based on structural similarity. The value of the clustering threshold was determined from the analysis of the clusters and the docking performance on a benchmark set. High structural quality of the interfaces in the template and validation sets was achieved by automated procedures and manual curation. The library is included in the Dockground resource for molecular recognition studies at http://dockground.bioinformatics.ku.edu . Proteins 2015; 83:1563–1570. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Multi-LZerD: multiple protein docking for asymmetric complexes

The tertiary structures of protein complexes provide a crucial insight about the molecular mechanisms that regulate their functions and assembly. However, solving protein complex structures by experimental methods is often more difficult than single protein structures. Here, we have developed a novel computational multiple protein docking algorithm, Multi‐LZerD, that builds models of multimeric complexes by effectively reusing pairwise docking predictions of component proteins. A genetic algorithm is applied to explore the conformational space followed by a structure refinement procedure. Benchmark on eleven hetero‐multimeric complexes resulted in near‐native conformations for all but one of them (a root mean square deviation smaller than 2.5Å). We also show that our method copes with unbound docking cases well, outperforming the methodology that can be directly compared with our approach. Multi‐LZerD was able to predict near‐native structures for multimeric complexes of various topologies.Proteins 2012; © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Optimized distance‐dependent atom‐pair‐based potential DOOP for protein structure prediction

The DOcking decoy‐based Optimized Potential (DOOP) energy function for protein structure prediction is based on empirical distance‐dependent atom‐pair interactions. To optimize the atom‐pair interactions, native protein structures are decomposed into polypeptide chain segments that correspond to structural motives involving complete secondary structure elements. They constitute near native ligand–receptor systems (or just pairs). Thus, a total of 8609 ligand–receptor systems were prepared from 954 selected proteins. For each of these hypothetical ligand–receptor systems, 1000 evenly sampled docking decoys with 0–10 Å interface root‐mean‐square‐deviation (iRMSD) were generated with a method used before for protein–protein docking. A neural network‐based optimization method was applied to derive the optimized energy parameters using these decoys so that the energy function mimics the funnel‐like energy landscape for the interaction between these hypothetical ligand–receptor systems. Thus, our method hierarchically models the overall funnel‐like energy landscape of native protein structures. The resulting energy function was tested on several commonly used decoy sets for native protein structure recognition and compared with other statistical potentials. In combination with a torsion potential term which describes the local conformational preference, the atom‐pair‐based potential outperforms other reported statistical energy functions in correct ranking of native protein structures for a variety of decoy sets. This is especially the case for the most challenging ROSETTA decoy set, although it does not take into account side chain orientation‐dependence explicitly. The DOOP energy function for protein structure prediction, the underlying database of protein structures with hypothetical ligand–receptor systems and their decoys are freely available at http://agknapp.chemie.fu‐berlin.de/doop/ . Proteins 2015; 83:881–890. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Assessing predictions of protein-protein interaction: the CAPRI experiment

The Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interactions (CAPRI) experiment was designed in 2000 to test protein docking algorithms in blind predictions of the structure of protein-protein complexes. In four years, 17 complexes offered by crystallographers as targets prior to publication, have been subjected to structure prediction by docking their two components. Models of these complexes were submitted by predictor groups and assessed by comparing their geometry to the X-ray structure and by evaluating the quality of the prediction of the regions of interaction and of the pair wise residue contacts. Prediction was successful on 12 of the 17 targets, most of the failures being due to large conformation changes that the algorithms could not cope with. Progress in the prediction quality observed in four years indicates that the experiment is a powerful incentive to develop new procedures that allow for flexibility during docking and incorporate nonstructural information. We therefore call upon structural biologists who study protein-protein complexes to provide targets for further rounds of CAPRI predictions.     

Protein docking using surface matching and supervised machine learning

Computational prediction of protein complex structures through docking offers a means to gain a mechanistic understanding of protein interactions that mediate biological processes. This is particularly important as the number of experimentally determined structures of isolated proteins exceeds the number of structures of complexes. A comprehensive docking procedure is described in which efficient sampling of conformations is achieved by matching surface normal vectors, fast filtering for shape complementarity, clustering by RMSD, and scoring the docked conformations using a supervised machine learning approach. Contacting residue pair frequencies, residue propensities, evolutionary conservation, and shape complementarity score for each docking conformation are used as input data to a Random Forest classifier. The performance of the Random Forest approach for selecting correctly docked conformations was assessed by cross-validation using a nonredundant benchmark set of X-ray structures for 93 heterodimer and 733 homodimer complexes. The single highest rank docking solution was the correct (near-native) structure for slightly more than one third of the complexes. Furthermore, the fraction of highly ranked correct structures was significantly higher than the overall fraction of correct structures, for almost all complexes. A detailed analysis of the difficult to predict complexes revealed that the majority of the homodimer cases were explained by incorrect oligomeric state annotation. Evolutionary conservation and shape complementarity score as well as both underrepresented and overrepresented residue types and residue pairs were found to make the largest contributions to the overall prediction accuracy. Finally, the method was also applied to docking unbound subunit structures from a previously published benchmark set.     

i‐Patch: Interprotein contact prediction using local network information

Biological processes are commonly controlled by precise protein‐protein interactions. These connections rely on specific amino acids at the binding interfaces. Here we predict the binding residues of such interprotein complexes. We have developed a suite of methods, i‐Patch, which predict the interprotein contact sites by considering the two proteins as a network, with residues as nodes and contacts as edges. i‐Patch starts with two proteins, A and B, which are assumed to interact, but for which the structure of the complex is not available. However, we assume that for each protein, we have a reference structure and a multiple sequence alignment of homologues. i‐Patch then uses the propensities of patches of residues to interact, to predict interprotein contact sites. i‐Patch outperforms several other tested algorithms for prediction of interprotein contact sites. It gives 59% precision with 20% recall on a blind test set of 31 protein pairs. Combining the i‐Patch scores with an existing correlated mutation algorithm, McBASC, using a logistic model gave little improvement. Results from a case study, on bacterial chemotaxis protein complexes, demonstrate that our predictions can identify contact residues, as well as suggesting unknown interfaces in multiprotein complexes. Proteins 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Protein models: The Grand Challenge of protein docking

Characterization of life processes at the molecular level requires structural details of protein–protein interactions (PPIs). The number of experimentally determined protein structures accounts only for a fraction of known proteins. This gap has to be bridged by modeling, typically using experimentally determined structures as templates to model related proteins. The fraction of experimentally determined PPI structures is even smaller than that for the individual proteins, due to a larger number of interactions than the number of individual proteins, and a greater difficulty of crystallizing protein–protein complexes. The approaches to structural modeling of PPI (docking) often have to rely on modeled structures of the interactors, especially in the case of large PPI networks. Structures of modeled proteins are typically less accurate than the ones determined by X‐ray crystallography or nuclear magnetic resonance. Thus the utility of approaches to dock these structures should be assessed by thorough benchmarking, specifically designed for protein models. To be credible, such benchmarking has to be based on carefully curated sets of structures with levels of distortion typical for modeled proteins. This article presents such a suite of models built for the benchmark set of the X‐ray structures from the Dockground resource ( http://dockground.bioinformatics.ku.edu ) by a combination of homology modeling and Nudged Elastic Band method. For each monomer, six models were generated with predefined C^α root mean square deviation from the native structure (1, 2, …, 6 Å). The sets and the accompanying data provide a comprehensive resource for the development of docking methodology for modeled proteins. Proteins 2014; 82:278–287. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

iATTRACT: Simultaneous global and local interface optimization for protein–protein docking refinement

Protein‐protein interactions are abundant in the cell but to date structural data for a large number of complexes is lacking. Computational docking methods can complement experiments by providing structural models of complexes based on structures of the individual partners. A major caveat for docking success is accounting for protein flexibility. Especially, interface residues undergo significant conformational changes upon binding. This limits the performance of docking methods that keep partner structures rigid or allow limited flexibility. A new docking refinement approach, iATTRACT, has been developed which combines simultaneous full interface flexibility and rigid body optimizations during docking energy minimization. It employs an atomistic molecular mechanics force field for intermolecular interface interactions and a structure‐based force field for intramolecular contributions. The approach was systematically evaluated on a large protein‐protein docking benchmark, starting from an enriched decoy set of rigidly docked protein–protein complexes deviating by up to 15 Å from the native structure at the interface. Large improvements in sampling and slight but significant improvements in scoring/discrimination of near native docking solutions were observed. Complexes with initial deviations at the interface of up to 5.5 Å were refined to significantly better agreement with the native structure. Improvements in the fraction of native contacts were especially favorable, yielding increases of up to 70%. Proteins 2015; 83:248–258. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Monte Carlo refinement of rigid-body protein docking structures with backbone displacement and side-chain optimization

Structures of hitherto unknown protein complexes can be predicted by docking the solved protein monomers. Here, we present a method to refine initial docking estimates of protein complex structures by a Monte Carlo approach including rigid-body moves and side-chain optimization. The energy function used is comprised of van der Waals, Coulomb, and atomic contact energy terms. During the simulation, we gradually shift from a novel smoothed van der Waals potential, which prevents trapping in local energy minima, to the standard Lennard-Jones potential. Following the simulation, the conformations are clustered to obtain the final predictions. Using only the first 100 decoys generated by a fast Fourier transform (FFT)-based rigid-body docking method, our refinement procedure is able to generate near-native structures (interface RMSD <2.5 A) as first model in 14 of 59 cases in a benchmark set. In most cases, clear binding funnels around the native structure can be observed. The results show the potential of Monte Carlo refinement methods and emphasize their applicability for protein-protein docking.     

Hidden partners: Using cross‐docking calculations to predict binding sites for proteins with multiple interactions

Protein‐protein interactions control a large range of biological processes and their identification is essential to understand the underlying biological mechanisms. To complement experimental approaches, in silico methods are available to investigate protein‐protein interactions. Cross‐docking methods, in particular, can be used to predict protein binding sites. However, proteins can interact with numerous partners and can present multiple binding sites on their surface, which may alter the binding site prediction quality. We evaluate the binding site predictions obtained using complete cross‐docking simulations of 358 proteins with 2 different scoring schemes accounting for multiple binding sites. Despite overall good binding site prediction performances, 68 cases were still associated with very low prediction quality, presenting individual area under the specificity‐sensitivity ROC curve (AUC) values below the random AUC threshold of 0.5, since cross‐docking calculations can lead to the identification of alternate protein binding sites (that are different from the reference experimental sites). For the large majority of these proteins, we show that the predicted alternate binding sites correspond to interaction sites with hidden partners, that is, partners not included in the original cross‐docking dataset. Among those new partners, we find proteins, but also nucleic acid molecules. Finally, for proteins with multiple binding sites on their surface, we investigated the structural determinants associated with the binding sites the most targeted by the docking partners.     

Predicting protein complex geometries with a neural network

A major challenge of the protein docking problem is to define scoring functions that can distinguish near‐native protein complex geometries from a large number of non‐native geometries (decoys) generated with noncomplexed protein structures (unbound docking). In this study, we have constructed a neural network that employs the information from atom‐pair distance distributions of a large number of decoys to predict protein complex geometries. We found that docking prediction can be significantly improved using two different types of polar hydrogen atoms. To train the neural network, 2000 near‐native decoys of even distance distribution were used for each of the 185 considered protein complexes. The neural network normalizes the information from different protein complexes using an additional protein complex identity input neuron for each complex. The parameters of the neural network were determined such that they mimic a scoring funnel in the neighborhood of the native complex structure. The neural network approach avoids the reference state problem, which occurs in deriving knowledge‐based energy functions for scoring. We show that a distance‐dependent atom pair potential performs much better than a simple atom‐pair contact potential. We have compared the performance of our scoring function with other empirical and knowledge‐based scoring functions such as ZDOCK 3.0, ZRANK, ITScore‐PP, EMPIRE, and RosettaDock. In spite of the simplicity of the method and its functional form, our neural network‐based scoring function achieves a reasonable performance in rigid‐body unbound docking of proteins. Proteins 2010. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Combinations of protein-chemical complex structures reveal new targets for established drugs

Biological networks are powerful tools for predicting undocumented relationships between molecules. The underlying principle is that existing interactions between molecules can be used to predict new interactions. Here we use this principle to suggest new protein-chemical interactions via the network derived from three-dimensional structures. For pairs of proteins sharing a common ligand, we use protein and chemical superimpositions combined with fast structural compatibility screens to predict whether additional compounds bound by one protein would bind the other. The method reproduces 84% of complexes in a benchmark, and we make many predictions that would not be possible using conventional modeling techniques. Within 19,578 novel predicted interactions are 7,793 involving 718 drugs, including filaminast, coumarin, alitretonin and erlotinib. The growth rate of confident predictions is twice that of experimental complexes, meaning that a complete structural drug-protein repertoire will be available at least ten years earlier than by X-ray and NMR techniques alone.     

GWYRE: A Resource for Mapping Variants onto Experimental and Modeled Structures of Human Protein Complexes

Rapid progress in structural modeling of proteins and their interactions is powered by advances in knowledge-based methodologies along with better understanding of physical principles of protein structure and function. The pool of structural data for modeling of proteins and protein–protein complexes is constantly increasing due to the rapid growth of protein interaction databases and Protein Data Bank. The GWYRE (Genome Wide PhYRE) project capitalizes on these developments by advancing and applying new powerful modeling methodologies to structural modeling of protein–protein interactions and genetic variation. The methods integrate knowledge-based tertiary structure prediction using Phyre2 and quaternary structure prediction using template-based docking by a full-structure alignment protocol to generate models for binary complexes. The predictions are incorporated in a comprehensive public resource for structural characterization of the human interactome and the location of human genetic variants. The GWYRE resource facilitates better understanding of principles of protein interaction and structure/function relationships. The resource is available at http://www.gwyre.org.     

Large oligomeric complex structures can be computationally assembled by efficiently combining docked interfaces

Macromolecular oligomeric assemblies are involved in many biochemical processes of living organisms. The benefits of such assemblies in crowded cellular environments include increased reaction rates, efficient feedback regulation, cooperativity and protective functions. However, an atom‐level structural determination of large assemblies is challenging due to the size of the complex and the difference in binding affinities of the involved proteins. In this study, we propose a novel combinatorial greedy algorithm for assembling large oligomeric complexes from information on the approximate position of interaction interfaces of pairs of monomers in the complex. Prior information on complex symmetry is not required but rather the symmetry is inferred during assembly. We implement an efficient geometric score, the transformation match score, that bypasses the model ranking problems of state‐of‐the‐art scoring functions by scoring the similarity between the inferred dimers of the same monomer simultaneously with different binding partners in a (sub)complex with a set of pregenerated docking poses. We compiled a diverse benchmark set of 308 homo and heteromeric complexes containing 6 to 60 monomers. To explore the applicability of the method, we considered 48 sets of parameters and selected those three sets of parameters, for which the algorithm can correctly reconstruct the maximum number, namely 252 complexes (81.8%) in, at least one of the respective three runs. The crossvalidation coverage, that is, the mean fraction of correctly reconstructed benchmark complexes during crossvalidation, was 78.1%, which demonstrates the ability of the presented method to correctly reconstruct topology of a large variety of biological complexes. Proteins 2015; 83:1887–1899. © 2015 The Authors. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

How to choose templates for modeling of protein complexes: Insights from benchmarking template-based docking

Comparative docking is based on experimentally determined structures of protein-protein complexes (templates), following the paradigm that proteins with similar sequences and/or structures form similar complexes. Modeling utilizing structure similarity of target monomers to template complexes significantly expands structural coverage of the interactome. Template-based docking by structure alignment can be performed for the entire structures or by aligning targets to the bound interfaces of the experimentally determined complexes. Systematic benchmarking of docking protocols based on full and interface structure alignment showed that both protocols perform similarly, with top 1 docking success rate 26%. However, in terms of the models' quality, the interface-based docking performed marginally better. The interface-based docking is preferable when one would suspect a significant conformational change in the full protein structure upon binding, for example, a rearrangement of the domains in multidomain proteins. Importantly, if the same structure is selected as the top template by both full and interface alignment, the docking success rate increases 2-fold for both top 1 and top 10 predictions. Matching structural annotations of the target and template proteins for template detection, as a computationally less expensive alternative to structural alignment, did not improve the docking performance. Sophisticated remote sequence homology detection added templates to the pool of those identified by structure-based alignment, suggesting that for practical docking, the combination of the structure alignment protocols and the remote sequence homology detection may be useful in order to avoid potential flaws in generation of the structural templates library.     

MULTIPROSPECTOR: an algorithm for the prediction of protein-protein interactions by multimeric threading

In this postgenomic era, the ability to identify protein-protein interactions on a genomic scale is very important to assist in the assignment of physiological function. Because of the increasing number of solved structures involving protein complexes, the time is ripe to extend threading to the prediction of quaternary structure. In this spirit, a multimeric threading approach has been developed. The approach is comprised of two phases. In the first phase, traditional threading on a single chain is applied to generate a set of potential structures for the query sequences. In particular, we use our recently developed threading algorithm, PROSPECTOR. Then, for those proteins whose template structures are part of a known complex, we rethread on both partners in the complex and now include a protein-protein interfacial energy. To perform this analysis, a database of multimeric protein structures has been constructed, the necessary interfacial pairwise potentials have been derived, and a set of empirical indicators to identify true multimers based on the threading Z-score and the magnitude of the interfacial energy have been established. The algorithm has been tested on a benchmark set comprised of 40 homodimers, 15 heterodimers, and 69 monomers that were scanned against a protein library of 2478 structures that comprise a representative set of structures in the Protein Data Bank. Of these, the method correctly recognized and assigned 36 homodimers, 15 heterodimers, and 65 monomers. This protocol was applied to identify partners and assign quaternary structures of proteins found in the yeast database of interacting proteins. Our multimeric threading algorithm correctly predicts 144 interacting proteins, compared to the 56 (26) cases assigned by PSI-BLAST using a (less) permissive E-value of 1 (0.01). Next, all possible pairs of yeast proteins have been examined. Predictions (n = 2865) of protein-protein interactions are made; 1138 of these 2865 interactions have counterparts in the Database of Interacting Proteins. In contrast, PSI-BLAST made 1781 predictions, and 1215 have counterparts in DIP. An estimation of the false-negative rate for yeast-predicted interactions has also been provided. Thus, a promising approach to help assist in the assignment of protein-protein interactions on a genomic scale has been developed.