Cargando…

Is It Reliable to Take the Molecular Docking Top Scoring Position as the Best Solution without Considering Available Structural Data?

Molecular docking is the most frequently used computational method for studying the interactions between organic molecules and biological macromolecules. In this context, docking allows predicting the preferred pose of a ligand inside a receptor binding site. However, the selection of the “best” sol...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ramírez, David, Caballero, Julio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6102569/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29710787
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules23051038
_version_ 1783349193745629184
author Ramírez, David
Caballero, Julio
author_facet Ramírez, David
Caballero, Julio
author_sort Ramírez, David
collection PubMed
description Molecular docking is the most frequently used computational method for studying the interactions between organic molecules and biological macromolecules. In this context, docking allows predicting the preferred pose of a ligand inside a receptor binding site. However, the selection of the “best” solution is not a trivial task, despite the widely accepted selection criterion that the best pose corresponds to the best energy score. Here, several rigid-target docking methods were evaluated on the same dataset with respect to their ability to reproduce crystallographic binding orientations, to test if the best energy score is a reliable criterion for selecting the best solution. For this, two experiments were performed: (A) to reconstruct the ligand-receptor complex by performing docking of the ligand in its own crystal structure receptor (defined as self-docking), and (B) to reconstruct the ligand-receptor complex by performing docking of the ligand in a crystal structure receptor that contains other ligand (defined as cross-docking). Root-mean square deviation (RMSD) was used to evaluate how different the obtained docking orientation is from the corresponding co-crystallized pose of the same ligand molecule. We found that docking score function is capable of predicting crystallographic binding orientations, but the best ranked solution according to the docking energy is not always the pose that reproduces the experimental binding orientation. This happened when self-docking was achieved, but it was critical in cross-docking. Taking into account that docking is typically used with predictive purposes, during cross-docking experiments, our results indicate that the best energy score is not a reliable criterion to select the best solution in common docking applications. It is strongly recommended to choose the best docking solution according to the scoring function along with additional structural criteria described for analogue ligands to assure the selection of a correct docking solution.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6102569
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61025692018-11-13 Is It Reliable to Take the Molecular Docking Top Scoring Position as the Best Solution without Considering Available Structural Data? Ramírez, David Caballero, Julio Molecules Article Molecular docking is the most frequently used computational method for studying the interactions between organic molecules and biological macromolecules. In this context, docking allows predicting the preferred pose of a ligand inside a receptor binding site. However, the selection of the “best” solution is not a trivial task, despite the widely accepted selection criterion that the best pose corresponds to the best energy score. Here, several rigid-target docking methods were evaluated on the same dataset with respect to their ability to reproduce crystallographic binding orientations, to test if the best energy score is a reliable criterion for selecting the best solution. For this, two experiments were performed: (A) to reconstruct the ligand-receptor complex by performing docking of the ligand in its own crystal structure receptor (defined as self-docking), and (B) to reconstruct the ligand-receptor complex by performing docking of the ligand in a crystal structure receptor that contains other ligand (defined as cross-docking). Root-mean square deviation (RMSD) was used to evaluate how different the obtained docking orientation is from the corresponding co-crystallized pose of the same ligand molecule. We found that docking score function is capable of predicting crystallographic binding orientations, but the best ranked solution according to the docking energy is not always the pose that reproduces the experimental binding orientation. This happened when self-docking was achieved, but it was critical in cross-docking. Taking into account that docking is typically used with predictive purposes, during cross-docking experiments, our results indicate that the best energy score is not a reliable criterion to select the best solution in common docking applications. It is strongly recommended to choose the best docking solution according to the scoring function along with additional structural criteria described for analogue ligands to assure the selection of a correct docking solution. MDPI 2018-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6102569/ /pubmed/29710787 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules23051038 Text en © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Ramírez, David
Caballero, Julio
Is It Reliable to Take the Molecular Docking Top Scoring Position as the Best Solution without Considering Available Structural Data?
title Is It Reliable to Take the Molecular Docking Top Scoring Position as the Best Solution without Considering Available Structural Data?
title_full Is It Reliable to Take the Molecular Docking Top Scoring Position as the Best Solution without Considering Available Structural Data?
title_fullStr Is It Reliable to Take the Molecular Docking Top Scoring Position as the Best Solution without Considering Available Structural Data?
title_full_unstemmed Is It Reliable to Take the Molecular Docking Top Scoring Position as the Best Solution without Considering Available Structural Data?
title_short Is It Reliable to Take the Molecular Docking Top Scoring Position as the Best Solution without Considering Available Structural Data?
title_sort is it reliable to take the molecular docking top scoring position as the best solution without considering available structural data?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6102569/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29710787
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules23051038
work_keys_str_mv AT ramirezdavid isitreliabletotakethemoleculardockingtopscoringpositionasthebestsolutionwithoutconsideringavailablestructuraldata
AT caballerojulio isitreliabletotakethemoleculardockingtopscoringpositionasthebestsolutionwithoutconsideringavailablestructuraldata