Modelling protein docking using shape complementarity, electrostatics and biochemical information.

A protein docking study was performed for two classes of biomolecular complexes: six enzyme/inhibitor and four antibody/antigen. Biomolecular complexes for which crystal structures of both the complexed and uncomplexed proteins are available were used for eight of the ten test systems. Our docking experiments consist of a global search of translational and rotational space followed by refinement of the best predictions. Potential complexes are scored on the basis of shape complementarity and favourable electrostatic interactions using Fourier correlation theory. Since proteins undergo conformational changes upon binding, the scoring function must be sufficiently soft to dock unbound structures successfully. Some degree of surface overlap is tolerated to account for side-chain flexibility. Similarly for electrostatics, the interaction of the dispersed point charges of one protein with the Coulombic field of the other is measured rather than precise atomic interactions. We tested our docking protocol using the native rather than the complexed forms of the proteins to address the more scientifically interesting problem of predictive docking. In all but one of our test cases, correctly docked geometries (interface Calpha RMS deviation </=2 A from the experimental structure) are found during a global search of translational and rotational space in a list that was always less than 250 complexes and often less than 30. Varying degrees of biochemical information are still necessary to remove most of the incorrectly docked complexes.

[1]  Chymotrypsinogen: 2.5-angstrom crystal structure, comparison with alpha-chymotrypsin, and implications for zymogen activation. , 1970, Biochemistry.

[2]  N. Xuong,et al.  Chymotrypsinogen: 2,5-Å crystal structure, comparison with α-chymotrypsin, and implications for zymogen activation , 1970 .

[3]  Eaton E. Lattman,et al.  Optimal sampling of the rotation function , 1972 .

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

[5]  R. Huber,et al.  Crystal structure of bovine trypsinogen at 1-8 A resolution. II. Crystallographic refinement, refined crystal structure and comparison with bovine trypsin. , 1977, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  W. Kabsch A discussion of the solution for the best rotation to relate two sets of vectors , 1978 .

[7]  Y. Satow,et al.  Crystal structure of a bacterial protein proteinase inhibitor (Streptomyces subtilisin inhibitor) at 2.6 A resolution. , 1979, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[9]  J. Warwicker,et al.  Calculation of the electric potential in the active site cleft due to alpha-helix dipoles. , 1982, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  W. Bode,et al.  Refined 2.5 A X-ray crystal structure of the complex formed by porcine kallikrein A and the bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor. Crystallization, Patterson search, structure determination, refinement, structure and comparison with its components and with the bovine trypsin-pancreatic trypsin inhibit , 1983, Journal of molecular biology.

[11]  W. Bode,et al.  Refined 2 A X-ray crystal structure of porcine pancreatic kallikrein A, a specific trypsin-like serine proteinase. Crystallization, structure determination, crystallographic refinement, structure and its comparison with bovine trypsin. , 1983, Journal of molecular biology.

[12]  R. Huber,et al.  The Geometry of the Reactive Site and of the Peptide Groups in Trypsin, Trypsinogen and its Complexes with Inhibitors , 1983 .

[13]  Michael J. E. Sternberg,et al.  Regular representation of irregular charge distributions , 1984 .

[14]  M J Sternberg,et al.  Electrostatic interactions in globular proteins. Different dielectric models applied to the packing of alpha-helices. , 1984, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  R. Huber,et al.  The crystal and molecular structure of the third domain of silver pheasant ovomucoid (OMSVP3). , 1985, European journal of biochemistry.

[16]  R. H. Ritchie,et al.  Dielectric effects in biopolymers: The theory of ionic saturation revisited , 1985 .

[17]  A. Tulinsky,et al.  The refinement and the structure of the dimer of alpha-chymotrypsin at 1.67-A resolution. , 1985, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[18]  B C Finzel,et al.  Three-dimensional structure of an antibody-antigen complex. , 1987, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  M. James,et al.  Crystal and molecular structure of the serine proteinase inhibitor CI-2 from barley seeds. , 1988, Biochemistry.

[20]  B. Honig,et al.  Calculation of electrostatic potentials in an enzyme active site , 1987, Nature.

[21]  A Wlodawer,et al.  Comparison of two highly refined structures of bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor. , 1987, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  Randy J. Read,et al.  Crystal and molecular structures of the complex of α-chymotrypsin with its inhibitor Turkey ovomucoid third domain at 1.8 Å resolution , 1987 .

[23]  B. Honig,et al.  Calculation of the total electrostatic energy of a macromolecular system: Solvation energies, binding energies, and conformational analysis , 1988, Proteins.

[24]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Using shape complementarity as an initial screen in designing ligands for a receptor binding site of known three-dimensional structure. , 1988, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[25]  M. James,et al.  Structural comparison of two serine proteinase-protein inhibitor complexes: eglin-c-subtilisin Carlsberg and CI-2-subtilisin Novo. , 1988, Biochemistry.

[26]  G. Cohen,et al.  Structure of an antibody-antigen complex: crystal structure of the HyHEL-10 Fab-lysozyme complex. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  K. Sharp,et al.  Electrostatic interactions in macromolecules: theory and applications. , 1990, Annual review of biophysics and biophysical chemistry.

[28]  R N Bracewell,et al.  Numerical Transforms , 1990, Science.

[29]  William H. Press,et al.  Numerical Recipes: FORTRAN , 1988 .

[30]  Y. Satow,et al.  Refined crystal structure of the complex of subtilisin BPN' and Streptomyces subtilisin inhibitor at 1.8 A resolution. , 1991, Journal of molecular biology.

[31]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Protein docking and complementarity. , 1991, Journal of molecular biology.

[32]  Larry Wall,et al.  Programming Perl , 1991 .

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

[34]  T. Bhat,et al.  Crystallographic refinement of the three-dimensional structure of the FabD1.3-lysozyme complex at 2.5-A resolution. , 1991, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[35]  B. Honig,et al.  A rapid finite difference algorithm, utilizing successive over‐relaxation to solve the Poisson–Boltzmann equation , 1991 .

[36]  D. Schomburg,et al.  Three-dimensional structure of the complexes between bovine chymotrypsinogen A and two recombinant variants of human pancreatic secretory trypsin inhibitor (Kazal-type). , 1991, Journal of molecular biology.

[37]  J. Janin,et al.  Protein‐protein recognition analyzed by docking simulation , 1991, Proteins.

[38]  M J Sternberg,et al.  New algorithm to model protein-protein recognition based on surface complementarity. Applications to antibody-antigen docking. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[39]  E. Katchalski‐Katzir,et al.  Molecular surface recognition: determination of geometric fit between proteins and their ligands by correlation techniques. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[40]  D Schomburg,et al.  Three-dimensional structure of a recombinant variant of human pancreatic secretory trypsin inhibitor (Kazal type). , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[41]  J Navaza,et al.  Three-dimensional structures of the free and the antigen-complexed Fab from monoclonal anti-lysozyme antibody D44.1. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[42]  A Tramontano,et al.  PUZZLE: a new method for automated protein docking based on surface shape complementarity. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[43]  C. Aflalo,et al.  Hydrophobic docking: A proposed enhancement to molecular recognition techniques , 1994, Proteins.

[44]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Shape complementarity at protein–protein interfaces , 1994, Biopolymers.

[45]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  Detailed ab initio prediction of lysozyme–antibody complex with 1.6 Å accuracy , 1994, Nature Structural Biology.

[46]  Kim A. Sharp,et al.  Electrostatic interactions in macromolecules , 1994 .

[47]  J. Janin,et al.  Protein-protein recognition. , 1995, Progress in biophysics and molecular biology.

[48]  O. Ptitsyn Structures of folding intermediates. , 1995, Current opinion in structural biology.

[49]  K. Watanabe,et al.  Dissection of protein-carbohydrate interactions in mutant hen egg-white lysozyme complexes and their hydrolytic activity. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[50]  R. Laskowski SURFNET: a program for visualizing molecular surfaces, cavities, and intermolecular interactions. , 1995, Journal of molecular graphics.

[51]  M J Sternberg,et al.  A continuum model for protein-protein interactions: application to the docking problem. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[52]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Molecular surface complementarity at protein-protein interfaces: the critical role played by surface normals at well placed, sparse, points in docking. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[53]  M. Swindells,et al.  Protein clefts in molecular recognition and function. , 1996, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[54]  S Vajda,et al.  Prediction of protein complexes using empirical free energy functions , 1996, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[55]  Andrew J. Martin,et al.  Antibody-antigen interactions: contact analysis and binding site topography. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[56]  D. Schomburg,et al.  Hydrogen bonding and molecular surface shape complementarity as a basis for protein docking. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[57]  J. Cherfils,et al.  Molecular docking programs successfully predict the binding of a β-lactamase inhibitory protein to TEM-1 β-lactamase , 1996, Nature Structural Biology.

[58]  I D Kuntz,et al.  Predicting the structure of protein complexes: a step in the right direction. , 1996, Chemistry & biology.

[59]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  Meeting review: the Second meeting on the Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction (CASP2), Asilomar, California, December 13-16, 1996. , 1997, Folding & design.