Cited by 329Computational Drug Discovery MethodsEnzyme Structure and FunctionProtein Structure and Dynamics

Binding MOAD (Mother Of All Databases)

Open access
Hu, Liegi, Benson, Mark L., Smith, Richard D., Lerner, Michael G., Carlson, Heather A.·2005·Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics

Abstract

Binding MOAD (Mother of All Databases) is the largest collection of high‐quality, protein–ligand complexes available from the Protein Data Bank. At this time, Binding MOAD contains 5331 protein–ligand complexes comprised of 1780 unique protein families and 2630 unique ligands. We have searched the crystallography papers for all 5000+ structures and compiled binding data for 1375 (26%) of the protein–ligand complexes. The binding‐affinity data ranges 13 orders of magnitude. This is the largest collection of binding data reported to date in the literature. We have also addressed the issue of redundancy in the data. To create a nonredundant dataset, one protein from each of the 1780 protein families was chosen as a representative. Representatives were chosen by tightest binding, best resolution, etc. For the 1780 “best” complexes that comprise the nonredundant version of Binding MOAD, 475 (27%) have binding data. This significant collection of protein–ligand complexes will be very useful in elucidating the biophysical patterns of molecular recognition and enzymatic regulation. The complexes with binding‐affinity data will help in the development of improved scoring functions and structure‐based drug discovery techniques. The dataset can be accessed at http://www.BindingMOAD.org . Proteins 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, 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/prot.20512

Cites

200 of 200 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?

  • Filtering Binding MOAD for complexes with at least one zinc ion, experimental Ki or Kd values, no ligand alternate conformations or missing atoms, and no alternate side-chain conformations in receptor residues within 5 Å of any ligand atom yielded 510 complexes downloaded from the Protein Data Bank.

    “This filtering led to a set of 510 complexes, which were downloaded from the Protein Data Bank.32”

    From AutoDock4<sub>Zn</sub>: An Improved AutoDock Force Field for Small-Molecule Docking to Zinc Metalloproteins (2014) · cites this paper as [31]

    The Introduction and Results and Discussion say Binding MOAD contains protein–ligand complexes obtained from the Protein Data Bank, and the Binding-Affinity Data section reports that some have affinity measurements. They do not report the stated zinc and structural filters or a resulting set of 510 complexes; that count and filtering outcome are not supported by this source. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 2

  1. Chen X, Lin Y, Gilson MK. The binding database: overview and user's guide. Biopolymers 2002;61:127-141.
  2. Lamb ML. Targeting the kinome with computational chemistry. In: Spellmeyer DC, editor. Annual Reports in Computational Chemistry, Volume 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier BV; 2005. p 185-202.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hu, L., Benson, M. L., Smith, R. D., Lerner, M. G., & Carlson, H. A.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Carlson, Heather A.
Venue
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-06-21
Volume
60
Issue
3
Pages
333-340
ISSN
  • 0887-3585 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0134
OpenAlex
W2146465875
Cited by
328
References
200
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 21
FWCI
9.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Michigan
  • Medical School, University of Michigan
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM008270, GM065372, T32GM008270, R01GM065372)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
Keywords
protein-ligand complex, binding affinity, Protein Data Bank, crystal structure, molecular recognition, structure-based drug design, protein families
MeSH terms
Biophysics, Kinetics, Ligands, Models, Molecular, Protein Binding, Cluster Analysis, Databases, Bibliographic, Crystallography, X-Ray, Computational Biology, Internet, Databases, Protein, Proteomics

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