Cited by 17Protein Structure and DynamicsComputational Drug Discovery MethodsEnzyme Structure and Function

Computational feasibility of an exhaustive search of side-chain conformations in protein-protein docking

Open access
Dauzhenka, Taras, Kundrotas, Petras J., Vakser, Ilya A.·2018·Journal of Computational Chemistry

Abstract

Protein-protein docking procedures typically perform the global scan of the proteins relative positions, followed by the local refinement of the putative matches. Because of the size of the search space, the global scan is usually implemented as rigid-body search, using computationally inexpensive intermolecular energy approximations. An adequate refinement has to take into account structural flexibility. Since the refinement performs conformational search of the interacting proteins, it is extremely computationally challenging, given the enormous amount of the internal degrees of freedom. Different approaches limit the search space by restricting the search to the side chains, rotameric states, coarse-grained structure representation, principal normal modes, and so on. Still, even with the approximations, the refinement presents an extreme computational challenge due to the very large number of the remaining degrees of freedom. Given the complexity of the search space, the advantage of the exhaustive search is obvious. The obstacle to such search is computational feasibility. However, the growing computational power of modern computers, especially due to the increasing utilization of Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) with large amount of specialized computing cores, extends the ranges of applicability of the brute-force search methods. This proof-of-concept study demonstrates computational feasibility of an exhaustive search of side-chain conformations in protein pocking. The procedure, implemented on the GPU architecture, was used to generate the optimal conformations in a large representative set of protein-protein complexes. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jcc.25381

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Despite significant progress, the local refinement problem remains a challenge, especially in cases of conformational changes in the backbone.

    “However, despite significant progress in this direction [26–29], the problem remains a challenge, especially in cases of conformational changes in the backbone.”

    From Challenges in protein docking (2020) · cites this paper as [26]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. [5]Brown JB Dukka KC Tomita E Akutsu T Genome Inform 2006 17 3 12 17503351
  2. [19]Eriksson O Zhou Y Elofsson A In International Workshop on Algorithms in Bioinformatics Springer Berlin, Heidelberg 2001 128 141
  3. [23]Majumder T Pande PP Kalyanaraman A IEEE Des Test 2014 31 8 18
  4. [25]Kannan S Ganji R Proc IEEE Congress Evolutionary Comput 18–23 July 2010 Barcelona 2010 1 8
  5. [27]Pechan I Feher B Proc 21st IEEE Int Conf Field Programmable Logic Applications 5–7 Sept 2011 Chania 2011 474 477
  6. [28]Sukhwani B Herbordt MC GPGPU-2: Proc 2nd Workshop on General Purpose Processing on Graphics Processing Units ACM New York, NY 2009 19 27
  7. [29]Katchalski-Katzir E Shariv I Eisenstein M Friesem AA Aflalo C Vakser IA Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1992 89 2195 2199 1549581 PMC48623
  8. [35]Dang HV Schmidt B Hildebrandt A Hildebrandt AK Parallel, Distributed and Network-based Processing: 22nd Euromicro International Conference 12 – 14 Feb 2014 Torino 2014 1 8
  9. [39]Moghadasi M Mirzaei H Mamonov A Vakili P Vajda S Paschalidis I Kozakov D J Chem Inf Model 2015 55 872 881 25714358 PMC4734134

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dauzhenka, T., Kundrotas, P. J., & Vakser, I. A.
Affiliations
University of Kansas (US)
Corresponding author
  • Kundrotas, Petras J.
  • Vakser, Ilya A.
Venue
Journal of Computational Chemistry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-09-15
Volume
39
Issue
24
Pages
2012-2021
ISSN
  • 0192-8651 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-987X
OpenAlex
W2891474722
Cited by
17
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2
FWCI
0.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Computational Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (R01GM074255)
  • National Science Foundation (DBI1262621, DBI1565107, CNS133789)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
Keywords
protein-protein docking, exhaustive search, GPU acceleration, structural flexibility, protein-protein complex, search space complexity
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Feasibility Studies, Protein Binding, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Computational Biology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review