Cited by 178Protein Structure and DynamicsProtein Interaction Studies and Fluorescence AnalysisRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms

Ligand binding to proteins: The binding landscape model

Open access
Miller, David W., Dill, Ken A.·1997·Protein Science

Abstract

Models of ligand binding are often based on four assumptions: (1) steric fit: that binding is determined mainly by shape complementarity; (2) native binding: that ligands mainly bind to native states; (3) locality: that ligands perturb protein structures mainly at the binding site; and (4) continuity: that small changes in ligand or protein structure lead to small changes in binding affinity. Using a generalization of the 2D HP lattice model, we study ligand binding and explore these assumptions. We first validate the model by showing that it reproduces typical binding behaviors. We observe ligand‐induced denaturation, ANS and heme‐like binding, and “lock‐and‐key” and “induced‐fit” specific binding behaviors characterized by Michaelis‐Menten or more cooperative types of binding isotherms. We then explore cases where the model predicts violations of the standard assumptions. For example, very different binding modes can result from two ligands of identical shape. Ligands can sometimes bind highly denatured states more tightly than native states and yet have Michaelis‐Menten isotherms. Even low‐population binding to denatured states can cause changes in global stability, hydrogen‐exchange rates, and thermal B‐factors, contrary to expectations, but in agreement with experiments. We conclude that ligand binding, similar to protein folding, may be better described in terms of energy landscapes than in terms of simpler mass‐action models.

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/pro.5560061011

Cites

53 of 53 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miller, D. W., & Dill, K. A.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Dill, Ken A.
Venue
Protein Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-10
Volume
6
Issue
10
Pages
2166-2179
ISSN
  • 0961-8368 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-896X
OpenAlex
W2166523933
Cited by
178
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Protein Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (9255688)
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Interaction Studies and Fluorescence Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Keywords
ligand binding, HP lattice model, protein denaturation, induced fit, cooperative binding, hydrogen exchange, energy landscape, binding affinity, protein folding
MeSH terms
Hemeproteins, Hydrogen, Ligands, Mathematics, Models, Biological, Probability, Protein Binding, Protein Denaturation, Thermodynamics, Protein Folding

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