Cargando…

Native or Non-Native Protein–Protein Docking Models? Molecular Dynamics to the Rescue

[Image: see text] Molecular docking excels at creating a plethora of potential models of protein–protein complexes. To correctly distinguish the favorable, native-like models from the remaining ones remains, however, a challenge. We assessed here if a protocol based on molecular dynamics (MD) simula...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jandova, Zuzana, Vargiu, Attilio Vittorio, Bonvin, Alexandre M. J. J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Chemical Society 2021
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8444332/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34342983
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00336
_version_ 1784568469121925120
author Jandova, Zuzana
Vargiu, Attilio Vittorio
Bonvin, Alexandre M. J. J.
author_facet Jandova, Zuzana
Vargiu, Attilio Vittorio
Bonvin, Alexandre M. J. J.
author_sort Jandova, Zuzana
collection PubMed
description [Image: see text] Molecular docking excels at creating a plethora of potential models of protein–protein complexes. To correctly distinguish the favorable, native-like models from the remaining ones remains, however, a challenge. We assessed here if a protocol based on molecular dynamics (MD) simulations would allow distinguishing native from non-native models to complement scoring functions used in docking. To this end, the first models for 25 protein–protein complexes were generated using HADDOCK. Next, MD simulations complemented with machine learning were used to discriminate between native and non-native complexes based on a combination of metrics reporting on the stability of the initial models. Native models showed higher stability in almost all measured properties, including the key ones used for scoring in the Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interaction (CAPRI) competition, namely the positional root mean square deviations and fraction of native contacts from the initial docked model. A random forest classifier was trained, reaching a 0.85 accuracy in correctly distinguishing native from non-native complexes. Reasonably modest simulation lengths of the order of 50–100 ns are sufficient to reach this accuracy, which makes this approach applicable in practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8444332
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher American Chemical Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84443322021-09-20 Native or Non-Native Protein–Protein Docking Models? Molecular Dynamics to the Rescue Jandova, Zuzana Vargiu, Attilio Vittorio Bonvin, Alexandre M. J. J. J Chem Theory Comput [Image: see text] Molecular docking excels at creating a plethora of potential models of protein–protein complexes. To correctly distinguish the favorable, native-like models from the remaining ones remains, however, a challenge. We assessed here if a protocol based on molecular dynamics (MD) simulations would allow distinguishing native from non-native models to complement scoring functions used in docking. To this end, the first models for 25 protein–protein complexes were generated using HADDOCK. Next, MD simulations complemented with machine learning were used to discriminate between native and non-native complexes based on a combination of metrics reporting on the stability of the initial models. Native models showed higher stability in almost all measured properties, including the key ones used for scoring in the Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interaction (CAPRI) competition, namely the positional root mean square deviations and fraction of native contacts from the initial docked model. A random forest classifier was trained, reaching a 0.85 accuracy in correctly distinguishing native from non-native complexes. Reasonably modest simulation lengths of the order of 50–100 ns are sufficient to reach this accuracy, which makes this approach applicable in practice. American Chemical Society 2021-08-03 2021-09-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8444332/ /pubmed/34342983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00336 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Permits non-commercial access and re-use, provided that author attribution and integrity are maintained; but does not permit creation of adaptations or other derivative works (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Jandova, Zuzana
Vargiu, Attilio Vittorio
Bonvin, Alexandre M. J. J.
Native or Non-Native Protein–Protein Docking Models? Molecular Dynamics to the Rescue
title Native or Non-Native Protein–Protein Docking Models? Molecular Dynamics to the Rescue
title_full Native or Non-Native Protein–Protein Docking Models? Molecular Dynamics to the Rescue
title_fullStr Native or Non-Native Protein–Protein Docking Models? Molecular Dynamics to the Rescue
title_full_unstemmed Native or Non-Native Protein–Protein Docking Models? Molecular Dynamics to the Rescue
title_short Native or Non-Native Protein–Protein Docking Models? Molecular Dynamics to the Rescue
title_sort native or non-native protein–protein docking models? molecular dynamics to the rescue
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8444332/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34342983
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00336
work_keys_str_mv AT jandovazuzana nativeornonnativeproteinproteindockingmodelsmoleculardynamicstotherescue
AT vargiuattiliovittorio nativeornonnativeproteinproteindockingmodelsmoleculardynamicstotherescue
AT bonvinalexandremjj nativeornonnativeproteinproteindockingmodelsmoleculardynamicstotherescue