Enhancing systematic protein-protein docking methods using ray casting: application to ATTRACT

Systematic protein-protein docking methods need to evaluate a huge number of different probe configurations, thus leading to high computational cost. We present an efficient filter-ray casting filter (RCF)-that enables a notable speed-up of systematic protein-protein docking. The high efficiency of RCF is the outcome of the following factors: (i) extracting of pockets and protrusions on the surfaces of the proteins using visibilities; (ii) a ray casting method that finds aligned receptor pocket/probe protrusion pairs without explicit similarity computations. The RCF method enables the integration of systematic methods and local shape feature matching methods. To verify the efficiency and the accuracy of RCF, we integrated it with a systematic protein-protein docking approach (ATTRACT) based on a reduced protein representation. The test results show that the integrated docking approach is much faster. At the same time, it ranks the lowest ligand root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) (L_rms) solutions higher when docking enzyme-enzyme inhibitor complexes. Consequently, RCF not only enables much faster execution of systematic docking runs but also improves the qualities of docking predictions.     

Scoring optimisation of unbound protein-protein docking including protein binding site predictions

The prediction of the structure of the protein-protein complex is of great importance to better understand molecular recognition processes. During systematic protein-protein docking, the surface of a protein molecule is scanned for putative binding sites of a partner protein. The possibility to include external data based on either experiments or bioinformatic predictions on putative binding sites during docking has been systematically explored. The external data were included during docking with a coarse-grained protein model and on the basis of force field weights to bias the docking search towards a predicted or known binding region. The approach was tested on a large set of protein partners in unbound conformations. The significant improvement of the docking performance was found if reliable data on the native binding sites were available. This was possible even if data for single key amino acids at a binding interface are included. In case of binding site predictions with limited accuracy, only modest improvement compared with unbiased docking was found. The optimisation of the protocol to bias the search towards predicted binding sites was found to further improve the docking performance resulting in approximately 40% acceptable solutions within the top 10 docking predictions compared with 22% in case of unbiased docking of unbound protein structures.     

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.     

Optimal docking area: a new method for predicting protein-protein interaction sites

Understanding energetics and mechanism of protein-protein association remains one of the biggest theoretical problems in structural biology. It is assumed that desolvation must play an essential role during the association process, and indeed protein-protein interfaces in obligate complexes have been found to be highly hydrophobic. However, the identification of protein interaction sites from surface analysis of proteins involved in non-obligate protein-protein complexes is more challenging. Here we present Optimal Docking Area (ODA), a new fast and accurate method of analyzing a protein surface in search of areas with favorable energy change when buried upon protein-protein association. The method identifies continuous surface patches with optimal docking desolvation energy based on atomic solvation parameters adjusted for protein-protein docking. The procedure has been validated on the unbound structures of a total of 66 non-homologous proteins involved in non-obligate protein-protein hetero-complexes of known structure. Optimal docking areas with significant low-docking surface energy were found in around half of the proteins. The 'ODA hot spots' detected in X-ray unbound structures were correctly located in the known protein-protein binding sites in 80% of the cases. The role of these low-surface-energy areas during complex formation is discussed. Burial of these regions during protein-protein association may favor the complexed configurations with near-native interfaces but otherwise arbitrary orientations, thus driving the formation of an encounter complex. The patch prediction procedure is freely accessible at http://www.molsoft.com/oda and can be easily scaled up for predictions in structural proteomics.     

Protein-protein docking with a reduced protein model accounting for side-chain flexibility

A protein-protein docking approach has been developed based on a reduced protein representation with up to three pseudo atoms per amino acid residue. Docking is performed by energy minimization in rotational and translational degrees of freedom. The reduced protein representation allows an efficient search for docking minima on the protein surfaces within. During docking, an effective energy function between pseudo atoms has been used based on amino acid size and physico-chemical character. Energy minimization of protein test complexes in the reduced representation results in geometries close to experiment with backbone root mean square deviations (RMSDs) of approximately 1 to 3 A for the mobile protein partner from the experimental geometry. For most test cases, the energy-minimized experimental structure scores among the top five energy minima in systematic docking studies when using both partners in their bound conformations. To account for side-chain conformational changes in case of using unbound protein conformations, a multicopy approach has been used to select the most favorable side-chain conformation during the docking process. The multicopy approach significantly improves the docking performance, using unbound (apo) binding partners without a significant increase in computer time. For most docking test systems using unbound partners, and without accounting for any information about the known binding geometry, a solution within approximately 2 to 3.5 A RMSD of the full mobile partner from the experimental geometry was found among the 40 top-scoring complexes. The approach could be extended to include protein loop flexibility, and might also be useful for docking of modeled protein structures.     

Identification of near-native structures by clustering protein docking conformations

Most state-of-the-art protein-protein docking algorithms use the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) technique to sample the six-dimensional translational and rotational space. Scoring functions including shape complementarity, electrostatics, and desolvation are usually exploited in ranking the docking conformations. While these rigid-body docking methods provide good performance in bound docking, using unbound structures as input frequently leads to a high number of false positive hits. For the purpose of better selecting correct docking conformations, we structurally cluster the docking decoys generated by four widely-used FFT-based protein-protein docking methods. In all cases, the selection based on cluster size outperforms the ranking based on the inherent scoring function. If we cluster decoys from different servers together, only marginal improvement is obtained in comparison with clustering decoys from the best individual server. A collection of multiple decoy sets of comparable quality will be the key to improve the clustering result from meta-docking servers.     

PIE—Efficient filters and coarse grained potentials for unbound protein–protein docking

Identifying correct binding modes in a large set of models is an important step in protein–protein docking. We identified protein docking filter based on overlap area that significantly reduces the number of candidate structures that require detailed examination. We also developed potentials based on residue contacts and overlap areas using a comprehensive learning set of 640 two‐chain protein complexes with mathematical programming. Our potential showed substantially better recognition capacity compared to other publicly accessible protein docking potentials in discriminating between native and nonnative binding modes on a large test set of 84 complexes independent of our training set. We were able to rank a near‐native model on the top in 43 cases and within top 10 in 51 cases. We also report an atomic potential that ranks a near‐native model on the top in 46 cases and within top 10 in 58 cases. Our filter+potential is well suited for selecting a small set of models to be refined to atomic resolution. Proteins 2010. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

FireDock: fast interaction refinement in molecular docking

Here, we present FireDock, an efficient method for the refinement and rescoring of rigid-body docking solutions. The refinement process consists of two main steps: (1) rearrangement of the interface side-chains and (2) adjustment of the relative orientation of the molecules. Our method accounts for the observation that most interface residues that are important in recognition and binding do not change their conformation significantly upon complexation. Allowing full side-chain flexibility, a common procedure in refinement methods, often causes excessive conformational changes. These changes may distort preformed structural signatures, which have been shown to be important for binding recognition. Here, we restrict side-chain movements, and thus manage to reduce the false-positive rate noticeably. In the later stages of our procedure (orientation adjustments and scoring), we smooth the atomic radii. This allows for the minor backbone and side-chain movements and increases the sensitivity of our algorithm. FireDock succeeds in ranking a near-native structure within the top 15 predictions for 83% of the 30 enzyme-inhibitor test cases, and for 78% of the 18 semiunbound antibody-antigen complexes. Our refinement procedure significantly improves the ranking of the rigid-body PatchDock algorithm for these cases. The FireDock program is fully automated. In particular, to our knowledge, FireDock's prediction results are comparable to current state-of-the-art refinement methods while its running time is significantly lower. The method is available at http://bioinfo3d.cs.tau.ac.il/FireDock/.     

Refinement of unbound protein docking studies using biological knowledge

In this work we present two methods for the reranking of protein-protein docking studies. One scoring method searches the InterDom database for domains that are available in the proteins to be docked and evaluates the interaction of these domains in other complexes of known structure. The second one analyzes the interface of each proposed conformation with regard to the conservation of Phe, Met, and Trp and their polar neighbor residues. The special relevance of these residues is based on a publication by Ma et al. (Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003;100:5772-5777), who compared the conservation of all residues in the interface region to the conservation on the rest of the protein's surface. The scoring functions were tested on 30 unbound docking test cases. The evaluation of the methods is based on the ability to rerank the output of a Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT) docking. Both were able to improve the ranking of the docking output. The best improvement was achieved for enzyme-inhibitor examples. Especially the domain-based scoring function was successful and able to place a near-native solution on one of the first six ranks for 13 of 17 (76%) enzyme-inhibitor complexes [in 53% (nine complexes) even on the first rank]. The method evaluating residue conservation allowed us to increase the number of good solutions within the first 100 ranks out of approximately 9000 in 82% of the 17 enzyme-inhibitor test cases, and for seven (41%) out of 17 enzyme-inhibitor complexes, a near native solution was placed within the first seven ranks.     

Principles of flexible protein-protein docking

Treating flexibility in molecular docking is a major challenge in cell biology research. Here we describe the background and the principles of existing flexible protein-protein docking methods, focusing on the algorithms and their rational. We describe how protein flexibility is treated in different stages of the docking process: in the preprocessing stage, rigid and flexible parts are identified and their possible conformations are modeled. This preprocessing provides information for the subsequent docking and refinement stages. In the docking stage, an ensemble of pre-generated conformations or the identified rigid domains may be docked separately. In the refinement stage, small-scale movements of the backbone and side-chains are modeled and the binding orientation is improved by rigid-body adjustments. For clarity of presentation, we divide the different methods into categories. This should allow the reader to focus on the most suitable method for a particular docking problem.     

Towards the prediction of protein interaction partners using physical docking

Deciphering the whole network of protein interactions for a given proteome (‘interactome’) is the goal of many experimental and computational efforts in Systems Biology. Separately the prediction of the structure of protein complexes by docking methods is a well‐established scientific area. To date, docking programs have not been used to predict interaction partners. We provide a proof of principle for such an approach. Using a set of protein complexes representing known interactors in their unbound form, we show that a standard docking program can distinguish the true interactors from a background of 922 non‐redundant potential interactors. We additionally show that true interactions can be distinguished from non‐likely interacting proteins within the same structural family. Our approach may be put in the context of the proposed ‘funnel‐energy model’; the docking algorithm may not find the native complex, but it distinguishes binding partners because of the higher probability of favourable models compared with a collection of non‐binders. The potential exists to develop this proof of principle into new approaches for predicting interaction partners and reconstructing biological networks.     

BSP-SLIM: a blind low-resolution ligand-protein docking approach using predicted protein structures

We developed BSP‐SLIM, a new method for ligand–protein blind docking using low‐resolution protein structures. For a given sequence, protein structures are first predicted by I‐TASSER; putative ligand binding sites are transferred from holo‐template structures which are analogous to the I‐TASSER models; ligand–protein docking conformations are then constructed by shape and chemical match of ligand with the negative image of binding pockets. BSP‐SLIM was tested on 71 ligand–protein complexes from the Astex diverse set where the protein structures were predicted by I‐TASSER with an average RMSD 2.92 Å on the binding residues. Using I‐TASSER models, the median ligand RMSD of BSP‐SLIM docking is 3.99 Å which is 5.94 Å lower than that by AutoDock; the median binding‐site error by BSP‐SLIM is 1.77 Å which is 6.23 Å lower than that by AutoDock and 3.43 Å lower than that by LIGSITE^CSC. Compared to the models using crystal protein structures, the median ligand RMSD by BSP‐SLIM using I‐TASSER models increases by 0.87 Å, while that by AutoDock increases by 8.41 Å; the median binding‐site error by BSP‐SLIM increase by 0.69Å while that by AutoDock and LIGSITE^CSC increases by 7.31 Å and 1.41 Å, respectively. As case studies, BSP‐SLIM was used in virtual screening for six target proteins, which prioritized actives of 25% and 50% in the top 9.2% and 17% of the library on average, respectively. These results demonstrate the usefulness of the template‐based coarse‐grained algorithms in the low‐resolution ligand–protein docking and drug‐screening. An on‐line BSP‐SLIM server is freely available at http://zhanglab.ccmb.med.umich.edu/BSP‐SLIM . Proteins 2012. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Interplay between binding affinity and kinetics in protein–protein interactions

To clarify the interplay between the binding affinity and kinetics of protein–protein interactions, and the possible role of intrinsically disordered proteins in such interactions, molecular simulations were carried out on 20 protein complexes. With bias potential and reweighting techniques, the free energy profiles were obtained under physiological affinities, which showed that the bound‐state valley is deep with a barrier height of 12 ? 33 RT. From the dependence of the affinity on interface interactions, the entropic contribution to the binding affinity is approximated to be proportional to the interface area. The extracted dissociation rates based on the Arrhenius law correlate reasonably well with the experimental values (Pearson correlation coefficient R = 0.79). For each protein complex, a linear free energy relationship between binding affinity and the dissociation rate was confirmed, but the distribution of the slopes for intrinsically disordered proteins showed no essential difference with that observed for ordered proteins. A comparison with protein folding was also performed. Proteins 2016; 84:920–933. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Automatic identification and representation of protein binding sites for molecular docking.

Molecular docking is a popular way to screen for novel drug compounds. The method involves aligning small molecules to a protein structure and estimating their binding affinity. To do this rapidly for tens of thousands of molecules requires an effective representation of the binding region of the target protein. This paper presents an algorithm for representing a protein's binding site in a way that is specifically suited to molecular docking applications. Initially the protein's surface is coated with a collection of molecular fragments that could potentially interact with the protein. Each fragment, or probe, serves as a potential alignment point for atoms in a ligand, and is scored to represent that probe's affinity for the protein. Probes are then clustered by accumulating their affinities, where high affinity clusters are identified as being the "stickiest" portions of the protein surface. The stickiest cluster is used as a computational binding "pocket" for docking. This method of site identification was tested on a number of ligand-protein complexes; in each case the pocket constructed by the algorithm coincided with the known ligand binding site. Successful docking experiments demonstrated the effectiveness of the probe representation.     

Monte Carlo replica‐exchange based ensemble docking of protein conformations

A replica‐exchange Monte Carlo (REMC) ensemble docking approach has been developed that allows efficient exploration of protein–protein docking geometries. In addition to Monte Carlo steps in translation and orientation of binding partners, possible conformational changes upon binding are included based on Monte Carlo selection of protein conformations stored as ordered pregenerated conformational ensembles. The conformational ensembles of each binding partner protein were generated by three different approaches starting from the unbound partner protein structure with a range spanning a root mean square deviation of 1–2.5 Å with respect to the unbound structure. Because MC sampling is performed to select appropriate partner conformations on the fly the approach is not limited by the number of conformations in the ensemble compared to ensemble docking of each conformer pair in ensemble cross docking. Although only a fraction of generated conformers was in closer agreement with the bound structure the REMC ensemble docking approach achieved improved docking results compared to REMC docking with only the unbound partner structures or using docking energy minimization methods. The approach has significant potential for further improvement in combination with more realistic structural ensembles and better docking scoring functions. Proteins 2017; 85:924–937. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Geometric and chemical patterns of interaction in protein--ligand complexes and their application in docking

We present a new method for representing the binding site of a protein receptor that allows the use of the DOCK approach to screen large ensembles of receptor conformations for ligand binding. The site points are constructed from templates of what we called "attached points" (ATPTS). Each template (one for each type of amino acid) is composed of a set of representative points that are attached to side-chain and backbone atoms through internal coordinates, carry chemical information about their parent atoms and are intended to cover positions that might be occupied by ligand atoms when complexed to the protein. This method is completely automatic and proved to be extremely fast. With the aim of obtaining an experimental basis for this approach, the Protein Data Bank was searched for proteins in complex with small molecules, to study the geometry of the interactions between the different types of protein residues and the different types of ligand atoms. As a result, well-defined patterns of interaction were obtained for most amino acids. These patterns were then used for constructing a set of templates of attached points, which constitute the core of the ATPTS approach. The quality of the ATPTS representation was demonstrated by using this method, in combination with the DOCK matching and orientation algorithms, to generate correct ligand orientations for >1000 protein--ligand complexes.     

Great interactions: How binding incorrect partners can teach us about protein recognition and function

Protein–protein interactions play a key part in most biological processes and understanding their mechanism is a fundamental problem leading to numerous practical applications. The prediction of protein binding sites in particular is of paramount importance since proteins now represent a major class of therapeutic targets. Amongst others methods, docking simulations between two proteins known to interact can be a useful tool for the prediction of likely binding patches on a protein surface. From the analysis of the protein interfaces generated by a massive cross‐docking experiment using the 168 proteins of the Docking Benchmark 2.0, where all possible protein pairs, and not only experimental ones, have been docked together, we show that it is also possible to predict a protein's binding residues without having any prior knowledge regarding its potential interaction partners. Evaluating the performance of cross‐docking predictions using the area under the specificity‐sensitivity ROC curve (AUC) leads to an AUC value of 0.77 for the complete benchmark (compared to the 0.5 AUC value obtained for random predictions). Furthermore, a new clustering analysis performed on the binding patches that are scattered on the protein surface show that their distribution and growth will depend on the protein's functional group. Finally, in several cases, the binding‐site predictions resulting from the cross‐docking simulations will lead to the identification of an alternate interface, which corresponds to the interaction with a biomolecular partner that is not included in the original benchmark. Proteins 2016; 84:1408–1421. © 2016 The Authors Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.