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.

[1]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  Protein–protein docking benchmark version 4.0 , 2010, Proteins.

[2]  Xavier Barril,et al.  Ensemble Docking from Homology Models. , 2010, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[3]  O. Schueler‐Furman,et al.  Improved side‐chain modeling for protein–protein docking , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[4]  Martin Zacharias,et al.  Binding site prediction and improved scoring during flexible protein–protein docking with ATTRACT , 2010, Proteins.

[5]  Martin Zacharias,et al.  Flexible docking and refinement with a coarse‐grained protein model using ATTRACT , 2013, Proteins.

[6]  K. Hinsen.  Analysis of domain motions by approximate normal mode calculations , 1998, Proteins.

[7]  P. Wolynes,et al.  The energy landscapes and motions of proteins. , 1991, Science.

[8]  M. Zacharias,et al.  Accounting for loop flexibility during protein–protein docking , 2005, Proteins.

[9]  Jeffrey J. Gray,et al.  Protein-protein docking with simultaneous optimization of rigid-body displacement and side-chain conformations. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Folding funnels and binding mechanisms. , 1999, Protein engineering.

[11]  Martin Zacharias,et al.  iATTRACT: Simultaneous global and local interface optimization for protein–protein docking refinement , 2015, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics.

[12]  C. Simmerling,et al.  ff14SB: Improving the Accuracy of Protein Side Chain and Backbone Parameters from ff99SB. , 2015, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[13]  Ian W. Davis,et al.  The backrub motion: how protein backbone shrugs when a sidechain dances. , 2006, Structure.

[14]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Conformational Heterogeneity of Unbound Proteins Enhances Recognition in Protein-Protein Encounters. , 2016, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

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

[16]  Sally R. Ellingson,et al.  Multi-conformer ensemble docking to difficult protein targets. , 2015, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[17]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Flexible ligand docking to multiple receptor conformations: a practical alternative. , 2008, Current opinion in structural biology.

[18]  M. Zacharias,et al.  Accounting for global protein deformability during protein-protein and protein-ligand docking. , 2005, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[19]  R. Abagyan,et al.  ICM‐DISCO docking by global energy optimization with fully flexible side‐chains , 2003, Proteins.

[20]  Martin Zacharias,et al.  Energy minimization in low‐frequency normal modes to efficiently allow for global flexibility during systematic protein–protein docking , 2008, Proteins.

[21]  Ruth Nussinov,et al.  FireDock: Fast interaction refinement in molecular docking , 2007, Proteins.

[22]  Oliver F. Lange,et al.  Application of Enhanced Sampling Monte Carlo Methods for High-Resolution Protein-Protein Docking in Rosetta , 2015, PloS one.

[23]  X. Zou,et al.  Ensemble docking of multiple protein structures: Considering protein structural variations in molecular docking , 2006, Proteins.

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

[25]  Oliver Korb,et al.  Potential and Limitations of Ensemble Docking , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[26]  Martin Zacharias,et al.  Protein–protein docking with a reduced protein model accounting for side‐chain flexibility , 2003, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[27]  Martin Zacharias,et al.  Accounting for conformational changes during protein-protein docking. , 2010, Current opinion in structural biology.

[28]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  A combination of rescoring and refinement significantly improves protein docking performance , 2008, Proteins.

[29]  Dima Kozakov,et al.  Protein–protein docking by fast generalized Fourier transforms on 5D rotational manifolds , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[30]  David Baker,et al.  Protein–protein docking predictions for the CAPRI experiment , 2003, Proteins.

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

[32]  Oliver F. Lange,et al.  Replica Exchange Improves Sampling in Low-Resolution Docking Stage of RosettaDock , 2013, PloS one.

[33]  L. Krippahl,et al.  BiGGER: A new (soft) docking algorithm for predicting protein interactions , 2000, Proteins.

[34]  Jonathan W. Essex,et al.  Ensemble Docking into Multiple Crystallographically Derived Protein Structures: An Evaluation Based on the Statistical Analysis of Enrichments , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[35]  E. Di Cera,et al.  Conformational selection is a dominant mechanism of ligand binding. , 2013, Biochemistry.

[36]  M. Nilges,et al.  Complementarity of structure ensembles in protein-protein binding. , 2004, Structure.

[37]  Jeffrey J. Gray,et al.  Conformer selection and induced fit in flexible backbone protein-protein docking using computational and NMR ensembles. , 2008, Journal of molecular biology.

[38]  Colin A. Smith,et al.  Backrub-like backbone simulation recapitulates natural protein conformational variability and improves mutant side-chain prediction. , 2008, Journal of molecular biology.

[39]  David W Ritchie,et al.  Recent progress and future directions in protein-protein docking. , 2008, Current protein & peptide science.

[40]  R. Nussinov,et al.  The role of dynamic conformational ensembles in biomolecular recognition. , 2009, Nature chemical biology.

[41]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Induced Fit, Conformational Selection and Independent Dynamic Segments: an Extended View of Binding Events Opinion , 2022 .

[42]  S. Kim,et al.  "Soft docking": matching of molecular surface cubes. , 1991, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[44]  Isaure Chauvot de Beauchêne,et al.  A web interface for easy flexible protein-protein docking with ATTRACT. , 2015, Biophysical journal.