Cargando…
Benchmarking pK(a )prediction
BACKGROUND: pK(a )values are a measure of the protonation of ionizable groups in proteins. Ionizable groups are involved in intra-protein, protein-solvent and protein-ligand interactions as well as solubility, protein folding and catalytic activity. The pK(a )shift of a group from its intrinsic valu...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1513386/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16749919 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2091-7-18 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: pK(a )values are a measure of the protonation of ionizable groups in proteins. Ionizable groups are involved in intra-protein, protein-solvent and protein-ligand interactions as well as solubility, protein folding and catalytic activity. The pK(a )shift of a group from its intrinsic value is determined by the perturbation of the residue by the environment and can be calculated from three-dimensional structural data. RESULTS: Here we use a large dataset of experimentally-determined pK(a)s to analyse the performance of different prediction techniques. Our work provides a benchmark of available software implementations: MCCE, MEAD, PROPKA and UHBD. Combinatorial and regression analysis is also used in an attempt to find a consensus approach towards pK(a )prediction. The tendency of individual programs to over- or underpredict the pK(a )value is related to the underlying methodology of the individual programs. CONCLUSION: Overall, PROPKA is more accurate than the other three programs. Key to developing accurate predictive software will be a complete sampling of conformations accessible to protein structures. |
---|