Skip to main content

Constraining Redundancy to Improve Protein Docking

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 9892))

Abstract

Predicting protein-protein complexes (protein docking) is an important factor for understanding the majority of biochemical processes. In general, protein docking algorithms search through a large number of possible relative placements of the interacting partners, filtering out the majority of the candidates in order to produce a manageable set of candidates that can be examined in greater detail. This is a six-dimensional search through three rotational degrees of freedom and three translational degrees of freedom of one partner (the probe) relative to the other (the target). The standard approach is to use a fixed step both for the rotation (typically 10\(^\circ \) to 15\(^\circ \)) and the translation (typically 1Å). Since proteins are not isotropic, a homogeneous rotational sampling can result in redundancies or excessive displacement of important atoms. A similar problem occurs in the translational sampling, since the small step necessary to find the optimal fit between the two molecules results in structures that differ by so little that they become redundant. In this paper we propose a constraint-based approach that improves the search by eliminating these redundancies and adapting the sampling to the size and shape of the proteins involved. A test on 217 protein complexes from the protein-protein Docking Benchmark Version 5 shows an increase of over 50 % in the average number of non-degenerate acceptable models retained for the most difficult cases. Furthermore, for about 75 % of the complexes in the benchmark, computation time is decreased by half, on average.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Or 289 rotation axes, in some previous implementations, depending on exactly how the points are spread with respect to this cutoff for the hemisphere.

  2. 2.

    The square root of the mean of the squared atomic deviations, in Ångstrom.

References

  1. Chen, R., Li, L., Weng, Z.: ZDOCK: an initial-stage protein-docking algorithm. Proteins Struct. Funct. Bioinf. 52(1), 80–87 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dominguez, C., Boelens, R., Bonvin, A.M.J.J.: HADDOCK: a protein-protein docking approach based on biochemical or biophysical information. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125(7), 1731–1737 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Efron, B.: Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann. Stat. 7(1), 1–26 (1979)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Halperin, I., Ma, B., Wolfson, H., Nussinov, R.: Principles of docking: an overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions. Proteins Struct. Funct. Bioinf. 47(4), 409–443 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hura, G.L., Menon, A.L., Hammel, M., Rambo, R.P., Ii, F.L.P., Tsutakawa, S.E., Jenney Jr., F.E., Classen, S., Frankel, K.A., Hopkins, R.C., et al.: Robust, high-throughput solution structural analyses by small angle x-ray scattering (SAXS). Nat. Methods 6(8), 606–612 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Janin, J.: Assessing predictions of protein-protein interaction: the CAPRI experiment. Protein Sci. 14(2), 278–283 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Katchalski-Katzir, E., Shariv, I., Eisenstein, M., Friesem, A.A., Aflalo, C., Vakser, I.A.: Molecular surface recognition: determination of geometric fit between proteins and their ligands by correlation techniques. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 89(6), 2195–2199 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Krippahl, L., Barahona, P.: Applying constraint programming to rigid body protein docking. In: van Beek, P. (ed.) CP 2005. LNCS, vol. 3709, pp. 373–387. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Krippahl, L., Barahona, P.: Protein docking with predicted constraints. Algorithms Mol. Biol. 10(1), 9 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Krippahl, L., Barahona, P.: Symmetry constraints for modelling homo-oligomers. In: 11th Workshop on Constraint Based Methods for Bioinformatics (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Palma, P.N., Krippahl, L., Wampler, J.E., Moura, J.J.: Bigger: a new (soft) docking algorithm for predicting protein interactions. Proteins 39(4), 372–384 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Roberts, V.A., Thompson, E.E., Pique, M.E., Perez, M.S., Ten Eyck, L.: Dot2: macromolecular docking with improved biophysical models. J. Comput. Chem. 34(20), 1743–1758 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Saff, E.B., Kuijlaars, A.B.: Distributing many points on a sphere. Math. Intell. 19(1), 5–11 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Schneidman-Duhovny, D., Inbar, Y., Polak, V., Shatsky, M., Halperin, I., Benyamini, H., Barzilai, A., Dror, O., Haspel, N., Nussinov, R., et al.: Taking geometry to its edge: fast unbound rigid (and hinge-bent) docking. Proteins Struct. Funct. Bioinf. 52(1), 107–112 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Taylor, J.S., Burnett, R.M.: Darwin: a program for docking flexible molecules. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Bioinf. 41(2), 173–191 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Vreven, T., Moal, I.H., Vangone, A., Pierce, B.G., Kastritis, P.L., Torchala, M., Chaleil, R., Jiménez-García, B., Bates, P.A., Fernandez-Recio, J., et al.: Updates to the integrated protein-protein interaction benchmarks: Docking benchmark version 5 and affinity benchmark version 2. J. Mol. Biol. 427(19), 3031–3041 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by funding from FCT MCTES and NOVA LINCS, UID/CEC/04516/2013.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ludwig Krippahl .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Krippahl, L., Barahona, P. (2016). Constraining Redundancy to Improve Protein Docking. In: Rueher, M. (eds) Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming. CP 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9892. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44953-1_45

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44953-1_45

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44952-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-44953-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics