Cited by 41Computational Drug Discovery MethodsProtein Structure and DynamicsEnzyme Structure and Function

An Augmented Pocketome: Detection and Analysis of Small-Molecule Binding Pockets in Proteins of Known 3D Structure

Open access
Bhagavat, Raghu, Sankar, Santhosh, Srinivasan, Narayanaswamy, Chandra, Nagasuma·2018·Structure

Abstract

Protein-ligand interactions form the basis of most cellular events. Identifying ligand binding pockets in proteins will greatly facilitate rationalizing and predicting protein function. Ligand binding sites are unknown for many proteins of known three-dimensional (3D) structure, creating a gap in our understanding of protein structure-function relationships. To bridge this gap, we detect pockets in proteins of known 3D structures, using computational techniques. This augmented pocketome (PocketDB) consists of 249,096 pockets, which is about seven times larger than what is currently known. We deduce possible ligand associations for about 46% of the newly identified pockets. The augmented pocketome, when subjected to clustering based on similarities among pockets, yielded 2,161 site types, which are associated with 1,037 ligand types, together providing fold-site-type-ligand-type associations. The PocketDB resource facilitates a structure-based function annotation, delineation of the structural basis of ligand recognition, and provides functional clues for domains of unknown functions, allosteric proteins, and druggable pockets.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.str.2018.02.001

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • High-confidence proteome-wide structural predictions open the door for a large expansion of predicted protein pockets.

    “High-confidence proteome-wide structural predictions open the door for a large expansion of predicted protein pockets35,36.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 42 · Cited by 41

Authors
Bhagavat, R., Sankar, S., Srinivasan, N., & Chandra, N.
Affiliations
Indian Institute of Science Bangalore (IN)
Corresponding author
Chandra, Nagasuma
Venue
Structure
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-03
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
499-512.e2
ISSN
0969-2126 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2791384094
Cited by
41
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Structure (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NOT FOUND REPOSITORY (Indian Institute of Science Bangalore) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Department of Biotechnology
  • Department of Science and Technology
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
Keywords
binding pocket, protein-ligand interactions, ligand recognition, domain of unknown function, allosteric proteins, druggable pockets
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Binding Sites, Models, Molecular, Protein Binding, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Computational Biology, Databases, Protein

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