CLUB-MARTINI: Selecting Favourable Interactions amongst Available Candidates, a Coarse-Grained Simulation Approach to Scoring Docking Decoys

Large-scale identification of native binding orientations is crucial for understanding the role of protein-protein interactions in their biological context. Measuring binding free energy is the method of choice to estimate binding strength and reveal the relevance of particular conformations in which proteins interact. In a recent study, we successfully applied coarse-grained molecular dynamics simulations to measure binding free energy for two protein complexes with similar accuracy to full-atomistic simulation, but 500-fold less time consuming. Here, we investigate the efficacy of this approach as a scoring method to identify stable binding conformations from thousands of docking decoys produced by protein docking programs. To test our method, we first applied it to calculate binding free energies of all protein conformations in a CAPRI (Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interactions) benchmark dataset, which included over 19000 protein docking solutions for 15 benchmark targets. Based on the binding free energies, we ranked all docking solutions to select the near-native binding modes under the assumption that the native-solutions have lowest binding free energies. In our top 100 ranked structures, for the ‘easy’ targets that have many near-native conformations, we obtain a strong enrichment of acceptable or better quality structures; for the ‘hard’ targets without near-native decoys, our method is still able to retain structures which have native binding contacts. Moreover, in our top 10 selections, CLUB-MARTINI shows a comparable performance when compared with other state-of-the-art docking scoring functions. As a proof of concept, CLUB-MARTINI performs remarkably well for many targets and is able to pinpoint near-native binding modes in the top selections. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time interaction free energy calculated from MD simulations have been used to rank docking solutions at a large scale.

[1]  Xiaoqin Zou,et al.  A Bayesian statistical approach of improving knowledge‐based scoring functions for protein–ligand interactions , 2014, J. Comput. Chem..

[2]  Shoshana J. Wodak,et al.  Score_set: a CAPRI benchmark for Scoring protein complexes , 2014 .

[3]  Xiao He,et al.  Improving the Scoring of Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity by Including the Effects of Structural Water and Electronic Polarization , 2013, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[4]  David Baker,et al.  Scoring functions for protein-protein interactions. , 2013, Current opinion in structural biology.

[5]  Sheng-You Huang,et al.  Search strategies and evaluation in protein-protein docking: principles, advances and challenges. , 2014, Drug discovery today.

[6]  Ruth Nussinov,et al.  Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions , 2002, Proteins.

[7]  Erik van Dijk,et al.  Coarse-grained versus atomistic simulations: realistic interaction free energies for real proteins , 2014, Bioinform..

[8]  Ozlem Keskin,et al.  A survey of available tools and web servers for analysis of protein-protein interactions and interfaces , 2008, Briefings Bioinform..

[9]  Marc F Lensink,et al.  Docking and scoring protein interactions: CAPRI 2009 , 2010, Proteins.

[10]  Benjamin A. Shoemaker,et al.  Deciphering Protein–Protein Interactions. Part II. Computational Methods to Predict Protein and Domain Interaction Partners , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[11]  Thomas D. Pollard,et al.  A Guide to Simple and Informative Binding Assays , 2010, Molecular biology of the cell.

[12]  Carsten Kutzner,et al.  GROMACS 4:  Algorithms for Highly Efficient, Load-Balanced, and Scalable Molecular Simulation. , 2008, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[13]  Z. Weng,et al.  Integrating atom‐based and residue‐based scoring functions for protein–protein docking , 2011, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[14]  Benjamin A. Shoemaker,et al.  Deciphering Protein–Protein Interactions. Part I. Experimental Techniques and Databases , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[15]  Alexander Tropsha,et al.  Scoring protein interaction decoys using exposed residues (SPIDER): A novel multibody interaction scoring function based on frequent geometric patterns of interfacial residues , 2012, Proteins.

[16]  Patrick England,et al.  The structural basis of Arf effector specificity: the crystal structure of ARF6 in a complex with JIP4 , 2009, The EMBO journal.

[17]  R. Larson,et al.  The MARTINI Coarse-Grained Force Field: Extension to Proteins. , 2008, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[18]  Ilya A Vakser,et al.  Protein-protein docking: from interaction to interactome. , 2014, Biophysical journal.

[19]  Marc F Lensink,et al.  Docking, scoring, and affinity prediction in CAPRI , 2013, Proteins.

[20]  A. Valencia,et al.  Computational methods for the prediction of protein interactions. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[21]  Sarah A. Teichmann,et al.  Principles of protein-protein interactions , 2002, ECCB.

[22]  Kengo Kinoshita,et al.  Blind prediction of interfacial water positions in CAPRI , 2014, Proteins.

[23]  Alexandre M J J Bonvin,et al.  Are scoring functions in protein-protein docking ready to predict interactomes? Clues from a novel binding affinity benchmark. , 2010, Journal of proteome research.

[24]  Alfonso Valencia,et al.  Progress and challenges in predicting protein-protein interaction sites , 2008, Briefings Bioinform..

[25]  S. Wodak,et al.  Docking and scoring protein complexes: CAPRI 3rd Edition , 2007, Proteins.

[26]  Stefano Piana,et al.  Refinement of protein structure homology models via long, all‐atom molecular dynamics simulations , 2012, Proteins.

[27]  D. Tieleman,et al.  The MARTINI force field: coarse grained model for biomolecular simulations. , 2007, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[28]  Marc F Lensink,et al.  Blind predictions of protein interfaces by docking calculations in CAPRI , 2010, Proteins.

[29]  Alex W. Wilkinson,et al.  Computational prediction of protein-protein interactions , 2012 .

[30]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  DrugScorePPI Knowledge-Based Potentials Used as Scoring and Objective Function in Protein-Protein Docking , 2014, PloS one.