Orientational sampling and rigid‐body minimization in molecular docking

The biological activities of proteins depends on specific molecular recognition and binding. Computational methods for predicting binding modes can facilitate the discovery and design of ligands and yeild information on the factors governing complementarity. The DOCK suite of programs has been applied to several systems; here, the degree of orientational sampling required to reproduce and identify known binding modes, with and without rigid‐body energy minimization, is investigated for four complexes. There is a tradeoff between sampling and minimization. The known binding modes can be identified with intensive sampling alone (10,000 to 20,000 orientations generated per system) or with moderate sampling combined with minimization. Optimization improves energies significantly, particularly when steric clashes are present, and brings many orientations closer to the experimentally observed position. Whether or not minimization is performed, however, sampling must be sufficient to find at least one structure in the vicinity of the presumed true binding mode. Hybrid approaches combining docking and minimization are promising and will become more viable with the use of faster algorithms and the judicious selection of fewer orientations for minimization. © 1993 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  G J Williams,et al.  The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures. , 1977, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  J M Blaney,et al.  A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. , 1982, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  J. Bolin,et al.  Crystal structures of Escherichia coli and Lactobacillus casei dihydrofolate reductase refined at 1.7 A resolution. I. General features and binding of methotrexate. , 1982, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[4]  D C Rees,et al.  Crystallographic studies on apocarboxypeptidase A and the complex with glycyl-L-tyrosine. , 1983, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  M. L. Connolly Solvent-accessible surfaces of proteins and nucleic acids. , 1983, Science.

[6]  U. Singh,et al.  A NEW FORCE FIELD FOR MOLECULAR MECHANICAL SIMULATION OF NUCLEIC ACIDS AND PROTEINS , 1984 .

[7]  A Wlodawer,et al.  Nuclear magnetic resonance and neutron diffraction studies of the complex of ribonuclease A with uridine vanadate, a transition-state analogue. , 1985, Biochemistry.

[8]  P. Kollman,et al.  An all atom force field for simulations of proteins and nucleic acids , 1986, Journal of computational chemistry.

[9]  R. Fletcher Practical Methods of Optimization , 1988 .

[10]  Conrad C. Huang,et al.  The MIDAS display system , 1988 .

[11]  M. N. Vyas,et al.  Sugar and signal-transducer binding sites of the Escherichia coli galactose chemoreceptor protein. , 1988, Science.

[12]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Automated docking with grid‐based energy evaluation , 1992 .

[13]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  Molecular docking using shape descriptors , 1992 .