Prediction of the structure of a receptor–protein complex using a binary docking method

TO validate procedures of rational drug design, it is important to develop computational methods that predict binding sites between a protein and a ligand molecule. Many small molecules have been tested using such programs, but examination of protein–protein and peptide–protein interactions has been sparse. We were able to test such applications once the structures of both the maltosebinding protein1 (MBP) and the ligand-binding domain of the aspartate receptor2, which binds MBP, became available. Here we predict the binding site of MBP to its receptor using a 'binary docking' technique in which two MBP octapeptide sequences containing mutations that eliminate maltose chemotaxis are independently docked to the receptor. The peptides in the docked solutions superimpose on their original positions in the structure of MBP and allow the formation of an MBP–receptor complex. The consistency of the computational and biological results supports this approach for predicting protein–protein and peptide–protein interactions.

[1]  Johann Gasteiger,et al.  A new model for calculating atomic charges in molecules , 1978 .

[2]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[3]  P. Goodford A computational procedure for determining energetically favorable binding sites on biologically important macromolecules. , 1985, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  M. Manson,et al.  Mutations in tar suppress defects in maltose chemotaxis caused by specific malE mutations , 1986, Journal of bacteriology.

[5]  D. Koshland,et al.  Additive and independent responses in a single receptor: Aspartate and maltose stimuli on the tar protein , 1987, Cell.

[6]  D. Koshland,et al.  Global flexibility in a sensory receptor: a site-directed cross-linking approach. , 1987, Science.

[7]  C. Wolff,et al.  Maltose chemoreceptor of Escherichia coli: interaction of maltose-binding protein and the tar signal transducer , 1988, Journal of bacteriology.

[8]  D. Goodsell,et al.  Automated docking of substrates to proteins by simulated annealing , 1990, Proteins.

[9]  Joanne I. Yeh,et al.  Three-dimensional structures of the ligand-binding domain of the bacterial aspartate receptor with and without a ligand. , 1995, Science.

[10]  D. Koshland,et al.  Intrasubunit signal transduction by the aspartate chemoreceptor. , 1991, Science.

[11]  F. Quiocho,et al.  The 2.3-A resolution structure of the maltose- or maltodextrin-binding protein, a primary receptor of bacterial active transport and chemotaxis. , 1992 .

[12]  P. Gardina,et al.  Aspartate and maltose-binding protein interact with adjacent sites in the Tar chemotactic signal transducer of Escherichia coli , 1992, Journal of bacteriology.

[13]  Binne Zwanenburg,et al.  A two-step chirality transfer from (−)-endo- to (−)-exo-tricyclo[5.2.1.026]deca-4,8-dien-3-one , 1993 .