Combination of scoring schemes for protein docking

BackgroundDocking algorithms are developed to predict in which orientation two proteins are likely to bind under natural conditions. The currently used methods usually consist of a sampling step followed by a scoring step. We developed a weighted geometric correlation based on optimised atom specific weighting factors and combined them with our previously published amino acid specific scoring and with a comprehensive SVM-based scoring function.ResultsThe scoring with the atom specific weighting factors yields better results than the amino acid specific scoring. In combination with SVM-based scoring functions the percentage of complexes for which a near native structure can be predicted within the top 100 ranks increased from 14% with the geometric scoring to 54% with the combination of all scoring functions. Especially for the enzyme-inhibitor complexes the results of the ranking are excellent. For half of these complexes a near-native structure can be predicted within the first 10 proposed structures and for more than 86% of all enzyme-inhibitor complexes within the first 50 predicted structures.ConclusionWe were able to develop a combination of different scoring schemes which considers a series of previously described and some new scoring criteria yielding a remarkable improvement of prediction quality.

[1]  F. Melo,et al.  Novel knowledge-based mean force potential at atomic level. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  C. DeLisi,et al.  Determination of atomic desolvation energies from the structures of crystallized proteins. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  C. Chothia,et al.  The atomic structure of protein-protein recognition sites. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  Bobby Schnabel,et al.  A modular system of algorithms for unconstrained minimization , 1985, TOMS.

[5]  C. Deane,et al.  Protein Interactions , 2002, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[6]  Michael Schroeder,et al.  Using residue propensities and tightness of fit to improve rigid-body protein-docking , 2005, German Conference on Bioinformatics.

[7]  Vera Grimm.  Untersuchung eines wissensbasierten Potentials zur Bewertung von Protein-Protein-Docking-Studien , 2003 .

[8]  Dietmar Schomburg,et al.  Optimised amino acid specific weighting factors for unbound protein docking , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[9]  R. Raz,et al.  ProMate: a structure based prediction program to identify the location of protein-protein binding sites. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  Patrick Aloy,et al.  The third dimension for protein interactions and complexes. , 2002, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[11]  P E Bourne,et al.  Protein structure alignment by incremental combinatorial extension (CE) of the optimal path. , 1998, Protein engineering.

[12]  J. Thornton,et al.  Protein–protein interfaces: Analysis of amino acid conservation in homodimers , 2001, Proteins.

[13]  Gideon Schreiber,et al.  A novel method for scoring of docked protein complexes using predicted protein-protein binding sites. , 2004, Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS.

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

[15]  R M Jackson,et al.  Comparison of protein–protein interactions in serine protease‐inhibitor and antibody‐antigen complexes: Implications for the protein docking problem , 2008, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

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

[17]  J. Janin,et al.  Dissecting protein–protein recognition sites , 2002, Proteins.

[18]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  A protein–protein docking benchmark , 2003, Proteins.

[19]  Olav Zimmermann.  Untersuchungen zur Vorhersage der nativen Orientierung von Protein-Komplexen mit Fourier-Korrelationsmethoden , 2003 .

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

[21]  M J Sternberg,et al.  Use of pair potentials across protein interfaces in screening predicted docked complexes , 1999, Proteins.

[22]  Z. Weng,et al.  Protein–protein docking benchmark 2.0: An update , 2005, Proteins.

[23]  John E. Dennis,et al.  Numerical methods for unconstrained optimization and nonlinear equations , 1983, Prentice Hall series in computational mathematics.

[24]  Stephen R. Comeau,et al.  PIPER: An FFT‐based protein docking program with pairwise potentials , 2006, Proteins.

[25]  Patrick Caffrey,et al.  Conserved Amino Acid Residues Correlating With Ketoreductase Stereospecificity in Modular Polyketide Synthases , 2003, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[26]  Michie Ad.  Analysis and classification of protein structure. , 1997 .

[27]  Bingding Huang.  Using residue propensities and tightness of fit to improve rigid-body protein-protein docking , 2005 .