Cited by 37Protein Structure and DynamicsComputational Drug Discovery MethodsEnzyme Structure and Function

Pre- and post-docking sampling of conformational changes using ClustENM and HADDOCK for protein-protein and protein-DNA systems

Open access
Kurkcuoglu, Zeynep, Bonvin, Alexandre M. J. J.·2020·Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics

Abstract

Incorporating the dynamic nature of biomolecules in the modeling of their complexes is a challenge, especially when the extent and direction of the conformational changes taking place upon binding is unknown. Estimating whether the binding of a biomolecule to its partner(s) occurs in a conformational state accessible to its unbound form ("conformational selection") and/or the binding process induces conformational changes ("induced-fit") is another challenge. We propose here a method combining conformational sampling using ClustENM-an elastic network-based modeling procedure-with docking using HADDOCK, in a framework that incorporates conformational selection and induced-fit effects upon binding. The extent of the applied deformation is estimated from its energetical costs, inspired from mechanical tensile testing on materials. We applied our pre- and post-docking sampling of conformational changes to the flexible multidomain protein-protein docking benchmark and a subset of the protein-DNA docking benchmark. Our ClustENM-HADDOCK approach produced acceptable to medium quality models in 7/11 and 5/6 cases for the protein-protein and protein-DNA complexes, respectively. The conformational selection (sampling prior to docking) has the highest impact on the quality of the docked models for the protein-protein complexes. The induced-fit stage of the pipeline (post-sampling), however, improved the quality of the final models for the protein-DNA complexes. Compared to previously described strategies to handle conformational changes, ClustENM-HADDOCK performs better than two-body docking in protein-protein cases but worse than a flexible multidomain docking approach. However, it does show a better or similar performance compared to previous protein-DNA docking approaches, which makes it a suitable alternative.

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.25802

Cites

90 of 111 references verified21 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?

  • Evidence points to the conformational selection binding mechanism, which allows one to precompute the conformational ensemble of the interacting molecule(s) and dock the separate conformers with limited conformational search.

    “In a long-standing debate between the proponents of the “induced-fit” and the “conformational selection” binding mechanisms [21–23], the evidence pointing to the latter allows one to precompute the conformational ensemble of the interacting molecule(s) and dock the separate conformers with limited conformational search [24,25].”

    From Challenges in protein docking (2020) · cites this paper as [25]

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
Kurkcuoglu, Z., & Bonvin, A. M. J. J.
Affiliations
Utrecht University (NL)
Corresponding author
  • Kurkcuoglu, Zeynep
  • Bonvin, Alexandre M. J. J.
Venue
Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-09-03
Volume
88
Issue
2
Pages
292-306
ISSN
  • 0887-3585 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0134
OpenAlex
W2969910143
Cited by
37
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
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, protein-DNA docking, conformational selection, induced fit, haddock, elastic network model, conformational sampling, flexible docking, multidomain proteins
MeSH terms
Algorithms, DNA, Nucleic Acid Conformation, Protein Binding, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Reproducibility of Results, Computational Biology, Protein Interaction Mapping, Molecular Docking Simulation

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