The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Empirical Scoring Functions for Advanced Protein−Ligand Docking with PLANTS
Abstract
In this paper we present two empirical scoring functions, PLANTS(CHEMPLP) and PLANTS(PLP), designed for our docking algorithm PLANTS (Protein-Ligand ANT System), which is based on ant colony optimization (ACO). They are related, regarding their functional form, to parts of already published scoring functions and force fields. The parametrization procedure described here was able to identify several parameter settings showing an excellent performance for the task of pose prediction on two test sets comprising 298 complexes in total. Up to 87% of the complexes of the Astex diverse set and 77% of the CCDC/Astex clean listnc (noncovalently bound complexes of the clean list) could be reproduced with root-mean-square deviations of less than 2 A with respect to the experimentally determined structures. A comparison with the state-of-the-art docking tool GOLD clearly shows that this is, especially for the druglike Astex diverse set, an improvement in pose prediction performance. Additionally, optimized parameter settings for the search algorithm were identified, which can be used to balance pose prediction reliability and search speed.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Numerical recipes in C: the art of scientific computing
(1993) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.30-5638 · Cited by 17,933
All-Atom Empirical Potential for Molecular Modeling and Dynamics Studies of Proteins
MacKerell, A. D., Bashford, D., Bellott, M., Dunbrack, R. L., Evanseck, J. D., Field, M. J., Fischer, S., Gao, J., Guo, H., Ha, S., et al. (1998) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · doi:10.1021/jp973084f · Cited by 14,311
Friesner, R. A., Murphy, R. B., Repasky, M. P., Frye, L. L., Greenwood, J. R., Halgren, T. A., Sanschagrin, P. C., & Mainz, D. T. (2006) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm051256o · Cited by 6,851
Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking 1 1Edited by F. E. Cohen
Jones, G., Willett, P., Glen, R. C., Leach, A. R., & Taylor, R. (1997) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1006/jmbi.1996.0897 · Cited by 6,763
Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications
Kitchen, D. B., Decornez, H., Furr, J. R., & Bajorath, J. (2004) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd1549 · Cited by 4,150
Dorigo, M., & Stützle, T. (2004) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1290.001.0001 · Cited by 3,330
Self-citationA solution for the best rotation to relate two sets of vectors
Kabsch, W. (1976) · Acta Crystallographica Section A · doi:10.1107/s0567739476001873 · Cited by 3,187
Improved protein–ligand docking using GOLD
Verdonk, M. L., Cole, J. C., Hartshorn, M. J., Murray, C. W., & Taylor, R. D. (2003) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.10465 · Cited by 3,067
Validation of the general purpose tripos 5.2 force field
Clark, M., Cramer, R. D., & Van Opdenbosch, N. (1989) · Journal of Computational Chemistry · doi:10.1002/jcc.540100804 · Cited by 2,812
Hoos (2000) · doi:10.1016/s0167-739x(00)00043-1 · Cited by 2,737
Cited by
Molecular Docking and Structure-Based Drug Design Strategies
Ferreira, L., Dos Santos, R., Oliva, G., & Andricopulo, A. (2015) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules200713384 · Cited by 2,528
Software for molecular docking: a review
Pagadala, N. S., Syed, K., & Tuszynski, J. (2017) · Biophysical Reviews · doi:10.1007/s12551-016-0247-1 · Cited by 1,522
Protein–Ligand Scoring with Convolutional Neural Networks
Ragoza, M., Hochuli, J., Idrobo, E., Sunseri, J., & Koes, D. R. (2017) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.6b00740 · Cited by 774
Virtual Screening Strategies in Drug Discovery: A Critical Review
Lavecchia, A., & Giovanni, C. (2013) · Current Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.2174/09298673113209990001 · Cited by 686
Salmaso, V., & Moro, S. (2018) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2018.00923 · Cited by 666
Key Topics in Molecular Docking for Drug Design
Torres, P. H. M., Sodero, A. C. R., Jofily, P., & Silva-Jr, F. P. (2019) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms20184574 · Cited by 641
Use of molecular docking computational tools in drug discovery
(2021) · Progress in Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1016/bs.pmch.2021.01.004 · Cited by 621
Chen, Y.-C. (2015) · Trends in Pharmacological Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tips.2014.12.001 · Cited by 611
Receptor–ligand molecular docking
Guedes, I. A., de Magalhães, C. S., & Dardenne, L. E. (2014) · Biophysical Reviews · doi:10.1007/s12551-013-0130-2 · Cited by 606
Delfosse, V., Grimaldi, M., Pons, J.-L., Boulahtouf, A., le Maire, A., Cavailles, V., Labesse, G., Bourguet, W., & Balaguer, P. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1203574109 · Cited by 405
Vinardo: A Scoring Function Based on Autodock Vina Improves Scoring, Docking, and Virtual Screening
Quiroga, R., & Villarreal, M. A. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0155183 · Cited by 398
Improving scoring-docking-screening powers of protein-ligand scoring functions using random forest
Wang, C., & Zhang, Y. (2017) · Journal of Computational Chemistry · doi:10.1002/jcc.24667 · Cited by 334
Molegro Virtual Docker for Docking
Bitencourt-Ferreira, G., & de Azevedo, W. F. (2019) · Methods in Molecular Biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-9752-7_10 · Cited by 331
Schneider, N., Lange, G., Hindle, S., Klein, R., & Rarey, M. (2013) · Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design · doi:10.1007/s10822-012-9626-2 · Cited by 306
Docking Challenge: Protein Sampling and Molecular Docking Performance
Elokely, K. M., & Doerksen, R. J. (2013) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci400040d · Cited by 287
Molecular Docking: Principles, Advances, and Its Applications in Drug Discovery
Muhammed, M. T., & Aki-Yalcin, E. (2024) · Letters in Drug Design & Discovery · doi:10.2174/1570180819666220922103109 · Cited by 267
How good are AlphaFold models for docking-based virtual screening?
Scardino, V., Di Filippo, J. I., & Cavasotto, C. N. (2023) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2022.105920 · Cited by 207
Bauer, M. R., Ibrahim, T. M., Vogel, S. M., & Boeckler, F. M. (2013) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci400115b · Cited by 200
A marine microbiome antifungal targets urgent-threat drug-resistant fungi
Zhang, F., Zhao, M., Braun, D. R., Ericksen, S. S., Piotrowski, J. S., Nelson, J., Peng, J., Ananiev, G. E., Chanana, S., Barns, K., et al. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abd6919 · Cited by 177
Bai, Q., Liu, S., Tian, Y., Xu, T., Banegas‐Luna, A. J., Pérez‐Sánchez, H., Huang, J., Liu, H., & Yao, X. (2022) · WIREs Computational Molecular Science · doi:10.1002/wcms.1581 · Cited by 156
Zinc ions modulate protein tyrosine phosphatase 1B activity
Bellomo, E., Massarotti, A., Hogstrand, C., & Maret, W. (2014) · Metallomics · doi:10.1039/c4mt00086b · Cited by 108
Ericksen, S. S., Wu, H., Zhang, H., Michael, L. A., Newton, M. A., Hoffmann, F. M., & Wildman, S. A. (2017) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00153 · Cited by 107
Deep contrastive learning enables genome-wide virtual screening
Jia, Y., Gao, B., Tan, J., Zheng, J., Hong, X., Zhu, W., Tan, H., Xiao, Y., Tan, L., Cai, H., et al. (2026) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.ads9530 · Cited by 66
Pottel, J., Therrien, E., Gleason, J. L., & Moitessier, N. (2014) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci400550m · Cited by 48
Ranking power of the SQM/COSMO scoring function on carbonic anhydrase II-inhibitor complexes.
Pecina, A., Brynda, J., Vrzal, L., Gnanasekaran, R., Hořejší, M., Eyrilmez, S. M., Řezáč, J., Lepšík, M., Řezáčová, P., Hobza, P., et al. (2018) · ChemPhysChem · doi:10.1002/cphc.201701104 · Cited by 36
Minisini, M., Di Giorgio, E., Kerschbamer, E., Dalla, E., Faggiani, M., Franforte, E., Meyer-Almes, F.-J., Ragno, R., Antonini, L., Mai, A., et al. (2022) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkac081 · Cited by 28
Cescon, E., Bolcato, G., Federico, S., Bissaro, M., Valentini, A., Ferlin, M. G., Spalluto, G., Sturlese, M., & Moro, S. (2020) · ACS Medicinal Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1021/acsmedchemlett.0c00028 · Cited by 19
Scoring Functions for Protein–Ligand Interactions
Sotriffer, C. (2012) · Protein‐Ligand Interactions · doi:10.1002/9783527645947.ch12 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Korb, O., Stützle, T., & Exner, T. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2009-01-06
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 84-96
- ISSN
- 1549-9596 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-960X
- OpenAlex
- W1988437166
- Cited by
- 1,349
- References
- 44
- FWCI
- 31.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
