×

zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Toward the fast blind docking of a peptide to a target protein by using a four-body statistical pseudo-potential. (English) Zbl 1403.92197
Summary: In vitro molecular evolution creates a lot of peptide aptamers that bind to each target protein. In many cases, their binding sites on a protein surface are not known. Then, predicting the binding sites through computation within a reasonable time is desirable. With this aim, we have developed a novel system of fast and robust blind docking of a peptide to a fixed protein structure at low computational costs. Our algorithm is based on the following scheme. Representing each of the amino acid residues by a single point corresponding to its side-chain center, the structure of a target protein and that of a ligand peptide are coarse-grained. The peptide, which is described as a flexible bead model, is movable along the grid-points which are set surrounding the protein. An arbitrary state of the protein-peptide complex is subjected to Delaunay tessellation. Then, the fitness of a peptide-coordination to the protein is measured by a four-body statistical pseudo-potential. Through 1000 trials of a simple hill-climbing optimization, the best 15 peptide-coordinations with the 1st–15th highest fitness values are selected as candidates for the putative coordination. Retrieving the available 28 protein-peptide complexes from the Protein Databank, we carried out the blind docking test for each system. The best 15 peptide-coordinations fell into several clusters by the cluster analysis based on their spatial distribution. We found that, in most cases, the largest cluster or second largest cluster correspond to nearly correct binding sites, and that the mean (\({\pm}\) standard deviation) of GTGD over all the 28 cases is 4.8 Å (\({\pm}\)3.8 Å), where GTGD represents the distance from the putative binding site to the correct binding site.
Reviewer: Reviewer (Berlin)

MSC:
92D20 Protein sequences, DNA sequences
92C40 Biochemistry, molecular biology
68U05 Computer graphics; computational geometry (digital and algorithmic aspects)
Software:
AutoDock
PDF BibTeX XML Cite
Full Text: DOI
References:
[1] Arun Prasad, P.; Gautham, N., A new peptide docking strategy using a Mean field technique with mutually orthogonal Latin square sampling, J. comput. aided mol. des., 22, 815-829, (2008)
[2] Bandyopadhyay, D.; Snoeyink, J., Almost-Delaunay simplices: nearest neighbor relations for imprecise points, (), 410-419 · Zbl 1317.68244
[3] Deutsch, C.; Krishnamoorthy, B., Four-body scoring function for mutagenesis, Bioinformatics, 23, 3009-3015, (2007)
[4] Ghersi, D., Sanchez, R., 2008. Improving accuracy and efficiency of blind protein – ligand docking by focusing on predicted binding sites. Proteins, July 17 [Epub ahead of print].
[5] Hetenyi, C.; van der Spoel, D., Efficient docking of peptides to proteins without prior knowledge of the binding site, Protein sci., 11, 1729-1737, (2002)
[6] Hetenyi, C.; van der Spoel, D., Blind docking of drug-sized compounds to proteins with up to a thousand residues, FEBS lett., 580, 1447-1450, (2006)
[7] Kitamura, K., Yoshida, C., Kinoshita, C., Kadowaki, T., Takahashi, Y., Tayama, T., Kawakubo, T., Naimuddin, M., Salimullah, Md., Nemoto, N., Hanada, K., Husimi, Y., Yamamoto, K., Nishigaki, K., 2009. Development of systemic in vitro evolution and its application to generation of peptide aptamer-based inhibitors of cathepsin E. J. Mol. Biol. 387, 1186-1198.
[8] Krishnamoorthy, B.; Tropsha, A., Development of a four-body statistical pseudo-potential to discriminate native from non-native protein conformations, Bioinformatics, 19, 1540-1548, (2003)
[9] Masso, M.; Vaisman, I.I., Accurate prediction of enzyme mutant activity based on a multibody statistical potential, Bioinformatics, 23, 3155-3161, (2007)
[10] Masso, M.; Vaisman, I.I., Computational mutagenesis studies of protein structure function correlations, Proteins, 64, 234-245, (2006)
[11] Mersich, C.; Jungbauer, A., Generation of bioactive peptides by biological libraries, J. chromatogr. B, 861, 160-170, (2008)
[12] Morris, G.M.; Goodsell, D.S.; Huey, R.; Olson, A.J., Distributed automated docking of flexible ligands to proteins: parallel applications of autodock 2.4, J. comput. aided mol. des., 10, 293-304, (1996)
[13] Munson, P.J.; Singh, R.K., Statistical significance of hierarchical multi-body potentials based on Delaunay tessellation and their application in sequence-structure alignment, Protein sci., 6, 1467-1481, (1997)
[14] Preparata, F.P.; Shamos, M.I., Computational geometry: an introduction, (1985), Springer New York · Zbl 0759.68037
[15] Shoichet, B.K.; Kuntz, I.D., Matching chemistry and shape in molecular docking, Protein eng., 6, 723-732, (1993)
[16] Tropsha, A.; Singh, R.K.; Vaisman, I.I., Delaunay tessellation of proteins: four body nearest neighbor propensities of amino acid residues, J. comput. biol., 3, 213-222, (1996)
[17] Tropsha, A., Vaismann, I.I., Zheng, W., 1998. Compositional preferences in quadruplets of nearest neighbor residues in protein structures: statistical geometry analysis. IEEE International Joint Symposia on Intelligence and Systems. pp. 163.
[18] Valencia, C.A.; Cotten, S.W.; Dong, B.; Liu, R., Mrna-display-based selections for proteins with desired functions: a protease-substrate case study, Biotechnol. prog., 24, 561-569, (2008)
[19] Wang, J.; Kollman, P.A.; Kuntz, I.D., Flexible ligand docking: a multistep strategy approach, Proteins, 36, 1-19, (1999)
[20] Warren, G.L.; Andrews, C.W.; Capelli, A.M.; Clarke, B.; LaLonde, J.; Lambert, M.H.; Lindvall, M.; Nevins, N.; Semus, S.F.; Senger, S.; Tedesco, G.; Wall, I.D.; Woolven, J.M.; Peishoff, C.E.; Head, M.S., A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions, J. med. chem., 49, 5912-5931, (2006)
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.