CONS-COCOMAPS: a novel tool to measure and visualize the conservation of inter-residue contacts in multiple docking solutions

BackgroundThe development of accurate protein-protein docking programs is making this kind of simulations an effective tool to predict the 3D structure and the surface of interaction between the molecular partners in macromolecular complexes. However, correctly scoring multiple docking solutions is still an open problem. As a consequence, the accurate and tedious screening of many docking models is usually required in the analysis step.MethodsAll the programs under CONS-COCOMAPS have been written in python, taking advantage of python libraries such as SciPy and Matplotlib. CONS-COCOMAPS is freely available as a web tool at the URL:http://www.molnac.unisa.it/BioTools/conscocomaps/.ResultsHere we presented CONS-COCOMAPS, a novel tool to easily measure and visualize the consensus in multiple docking solutions. CONS-COCOMAPS uses the conservation of inter-residue contacts as an estimate of the similarity between different docking solutions. To visualize the conservation, CONS-COCOMAPS uses intermolecular contact maps.ConclusionsThe application of CONS-COCOMAPS to test-cases taken from recent CAPRI rounds has shown that it is very efficient in highlighting even a very weak consensus that often is biologically meaningful.

[1]  Julie Bernauer,et al.  A Collaborative Filtering Approach for Protein-Protein Docking Scoring Functions , 2011, PloS one.

[2]  Dariusz Plewczynski,et al.  VoteDock: Consensus docking method for prediction of protein–ligand interactions , 2011, J. Comput. Chem..

[3]  P. Hogeweg,et al.  Pattern analysis of RNA secondary structure similarity and consensus of minimal-energy folding. , 1989, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  Alexandre M J J Bonvin,et al.  HADDOCK versus HADDOCK: New features and performance of HADDOCK2.0 on the CAPRI targets , 2007, Proteins.

[5]  Kiyoshi Asai,et al.  Robust prediction of consensus secondary structures using averaged base pairing probability matrices , 2007, Bioinform..

[6]  Vittorio Scarano,et al.  COCOMAPS: a web application to analyze and visualize contacts at the interface of biomolecular complexes , 2011, Bioinform..

[7]  James C. Hu,et al.  Assessing methods for identifying pair-wise atomic contacts across binding interfaces. , 2006, Journal of structural biology.

[8]  K. Henrick,et al.  Inference of macromolecular assemblies from crystalline state. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  Susan Jones,et al.  ProtorP: a protein-protein interaction analysis server , 2009, Bioinform..

[10]  J. V. van Dijl,et al.  Proteomics‐based consensus prediction of protein retention in a bacterial membrane , 2005, Proteomics.

[11]  Franca Fraternali,et al.  POPS: a fast algorithm for solvent accessible surface areas at atomic and residue level , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[12]  Keith Wilson,et al.  Structural and mutational analyses of the interaction between the barley alpha-amylase/subtilisin inhibitor and the subtilisin savinase reveal a novel mode of inhibition. , 2008, Journal of molecular biology.

[13]  S. Wodak,et al.  Assessment of blind predictions of protein–protein interactions: Current status of docking methods , 2003, Proteins.

[14]  Nicolas Leulliot,et al.  Structure of the yeast tRNA m7G methylation complex. , 2008, Structure.

[15]  Alexandre M. J. J. Bonvin,et al.  CPORT: A Consensus Interface Predictor and Its Performance in Prediction-Driven Docking with HADDOCK , 2011, PloS one.

[16]  Narayanaswamy Srinivasan,et al.  Nucleic Acids Research Advance Access published June 21, 2007 PIC: Protein Interactions Calculator , 2007 .

[17]  Shabir Najmudin,et al.  Putting an N-terminal end to the Clostridium thermocellum xylanase Xyn10B story: crystal structure of the CBM22-1-GH10 modules complexed with xylohexaose. , 2010, Journal of structural biology.

[18]  Mylène Perderiset,et al.  Structural basis for ARF1‐mediated recruitment of ARHGAP21 to Golgi membranes , 2007, The EMBO journal.

[19]  Dirk Walther,et al.  MolSurfer: a macromolecular interface navigator , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[20]  Arne Elofsson,et al.  TOPCONS: consensus prediction of membrane protein topology , 2009, Nucleic Acids Res..

[21]  Giorgio Valle,et al.  Simple consensus procedures are effective and sufficient in secondary structure prediction. , 2003, Protein engineering.

[22]  Huan-Xiang Zhou,et al.  meta-PPISP: a meta web server for protein-protein interaction site prediction , 2007, Bioinform..

[23]  S. Wodak,et al.  Docking and scoring protein complexes: CAPRI 3rd Edition , 2007, Proteins.

[24]  Sandor Vajda,et al.  ClusPro: an automated docking and discrimination method for the prediction of protein complexes , 2004, Bioinform..

[25]  Mohammad Anwar,et al.  Identification of consensus RNA secondary structures using suffix arrays , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[26]  K. Ginalski,et al.  Protein structure prediction of CASP5 comparative modeling and fold recognition targets using consensus alignment approach and 3D assessment , 2003, Proteins.

[27]  Franca Fraternali,et al.  POPSCOMP: an automated interaction analysis of biomolecular complexes , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[28]  Alessandro Vullo,et al.  Accurate prediction of protein secondary structure and solvent accessibility by consensus combiners of sequence and structure information , 2007, BMC Bioinformatics.

[29]  Jérôme Azé,et al.  A new protein-protein docking scoring function based on interface residue properties , 2007, Bioinform..

[30]  Joël Janin,et al.  Protein-protein docking tested in blind predictions: the CAPRI experiment. , 2010, Molecular bioSystems.

[31]  J. Skolnick,et al.  New benchmark metrics for protein‐protein docking methods , 2011, Proteins.

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

[33]  N. Colloc'h,et al.  Comparison of three algorithms for the assignment of secondary structure in proteins: the advantages of a consensus assignment. , 1993, Protein engineering.

[34]  M. Schroeder,et al.  Using protein binding site prediction to improve protein docking. , 2008, Gene.

[35]  William J. Salerno,et al.  MONSTER: inferring non-covalent interactions in macromolecular structures from atomic coordinate data , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[36]  Colin Kleanthous,et al.  Molecular mimicry enables competitive recruitment by a natively disordered protein. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[37]  Peter F. Stadler,et al.  Prediction of consensus RNA secondary structures including pseudoknots , 2004, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics.