Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions - PubMed (original) (raw)
Review
. 2002 Jun 1;47(4):409-43.
doi: 10.1002/prot.10115.
Affiliations
- PMID: 12001221
- DOI: 10.1002/prot.10115
Review
Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions
Inbal Halperin et al. Proteins. 2002.
Abstract
The docking field has come of age. The time is ripe to present the principles of docking, reviewing the current state of the field. Two reasons are largely responsible for the maturity of the computational docking area. First, the early optimism that the very presence of the "correct" native conformation within the list of predicted docked conformations signals a near solution to the docking problem, has been replaced by the stark realization of the extreme difficulty of the next scoring/ranking step. Second, in the last couple of years more realistic approaches to handling molecular flexibility in docking schemes have emerged. As in folding, these derive from concepts abstracted from statistical mechanics, namely, populations. Docking and folding are interrelated. From the purely physical standpoint, binding and folding are analogous processes, with similar underlying principles. Computationally, the tools developed for docking will be tremendously useful for folding. For large, multidomain proteins, domain docking is probably the only rational way, mimicking the hierarchical nature of protein folding. The complexity of the problem is huge. Here we divide the computational docking problem into its two separate components. As in folding, solving the docking problem involves efficient search (and matching) algorithms, which cover the relevant conformational space, and selective scoring functions, which are both efficient and effectively discriminate between native and non-native solutions. It is universally recognized that docking of drugs is immensely important. However, protein-protein docking is equally so, relating to recognition, cellular pathways, and macromolecular assemblies. Proteins function when they are bound to other molecules. Consequently, we present the review from both the computational and the biological points of view. Although large, it covers only partially the extensive body of literature, relating to small (drug) and to large protein-protein molecule docking, to rigid and to flexible. Unfortunately, when reviewing these, a major difficulty in assessing the results is the non-uniformity in the formats in which they are presented in the literature. Consequently, we further propose a way to rectify it here.
Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Similar articles
- Combinatorial docking approach for structure prediction of large proteins and multi-molecular assemblies.
Inbar Y, Benyamini H, Nussinov R, Wolfson HJ. Inbar Y, et al. Phys Biol. 2005 Nov 9;2(4):S156-65. doi: 10.1088/1478-3975/2/4/S10. Phys Biol. 2005. PMID: 16280621 - Improving CAPRI predictions: optimized desolvation for rigid-body docking.
Fernández-Recio J, Abagyan R, Totrov M. Fernández-Recio J, et al. Proteins. 2005 Aug 1;60(2):308-13. doi: 10.1002/prot.20575. Proteins. 2005. PMID: 15981266 - MIAX: a new paradigm for modeling biomacromolecular interactions and complex formation in condensed phases.
Del Carpio-Muñoz CA, Ichiishi E, Yoshimori A, Yoshikawa T. Del Carpio-Muñoz CA, et al. Proteins. 2002 Sep 1;48(4):696-732. doi: 10.1002/prot.10122. Proteins. 2002. PMID: 12211037 - Managing protein flexibility in docking and its applications.
B-Rao C, Subramanian J, Sharma SD. B-Rao C, et al. Drug Discov Today. 2009 Apr;14(7-8):394-400. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2009.01.003. Epub 2009 Feb 3. Drug Discov Today. 2009. PMID: 19185058 Review. - Protein-protein docking dealing with the unknown.
Moreira IS, Fernandes PA, Ramos MJ. Moreira IS, et al. J Comput Chem. 2010 Jan 30;31(2):317-42. doi: 10.1002/jcc.21276. J Comput Chem. 2010. PMID: 19462412 Review.
Cited by
- DockRank: ranking docked conformations using partner-specific sequence homology-based protein interface prediction.
Xue LC, Jordan RA, El-Manzalawy Y, Dobbs D, Honavar V. Xue LC, et al. Proteins. 2014 Feb;82(2):250-67. doi: 10.1002/prot.24370. Epub 2013 Oct 17. Proteins. 2014. PMID: 23873600 Free PMC article. - Implications of Porphyromonas gingivalis peptidyl arginine deiminase and gingipain R in human health and diseases.
Chow YC, Yam HC, Gunasekaran B, Lai WY, Wo WY, Agarwal T, Ong YY, Cheong SL, Tan SA. Chow YC, et al. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2022 Sep 29;12:987683. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2022.987683. eCollection 2022. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2022. PMID: 36250046 Free PMC article. Review. - A Consensus Data Mining secondary structure prediction by combining GOR V and Fragment Database Mining.
Sen TZ, Cheng H, Kloczkowski A, Jernigan RL. Sen TZ, et al. Protein Sci. 2006 Nov;15(11):2499-506. doi: 10.1110/ps.062125306. Epub 2006 Sep 25. Protein Sci. 2006. PMID: 17001039 Free PMC article. - Protein-protein docking using region-based 3D Zernike descriptors.
Venkatraman V, Yang YD, Sael L, Kihara D. Venkatraman V, et al. BMC Bioinformatics. 2009 Dec 9;10:407. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-10-407. BMC Bioinformatics. 2009. PMID: 20003235 Free PMC article. - Selectivity and specificity of substrate binding in methionyl-tRNA synthetase.
Datta D, Vaidehi N, Zhang D, Goddard WA 3rd. Datta D, et al. Protein Sci. 2004 Oct;13(10):2693-705. doi: 10.1110/ps.04792204. Protein Sci. 2004. PMID: 15388861 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials