The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Information-driven protein-DNA docking using HADDOCK: it is a matter of flexibility
Open accessAbstract
Intrinsic flexibility of DNA has hampered the development of efficient protein-DNA docking methods. In this study we extend HADDOCK (High Ambiguity Driven DOCKing) [C. Dominguez, R. Boelens and A. M. J. J. Bonvin (2003) J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125, 1731-1737] to explicitly deal with DNA flexibility. HADDOCK uses non-structural experimental data to drive the docking during a rigid-body energy minimization, and semi-flexible and water refinement stages. The latter allow for flexibility of all DNA nucleotides and the residues of the protein at the predicted interface. We evaluated our approach on the monomeric repressor-DNA complexes formed by bacteriophage 434 Cro, the Escherichia coli Lac headpiece and bacteriophage P22 Arc. Starting from unbound proteins and canonical B-DNA we correctly predict the correct spatial disposition of the complexes and the specific conformation of the DNA in the published complexes. This information is subsequently used to generate a library of pre-bent and twisted DNA structures that served as input for a second docking round. The resulting top ranking solutions exhibit high similarity to the published complexes in terms of root mean square deviations, intermolecular contacts and DNA conformation. Our two-stage docking method is thus able to successfully predict protein-DNA complexes from unbound constituents using non-structural experimental data to drive the docking.
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
HADDOCK: A Protein−Protein Docking Approach Based on Biochemical or Biophysical Information
Dominguez, C., Boelens, R., & Bonvin, A. M. J. J. (2003) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja026939x · Cited by 3,187
Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions
Halperin, I., Ma, B., Wolfson, H., & Nussinov, R. (2002) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.10115 · Cited by 1,294
CAPRI: A Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interactions
Janin, J., Henrick, K., Moult, J., Eyck, L. T., Sternberg, M. J. E., Vajda, S., Vakser, I., & Wodak, S. J. (2003) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.10381 · Cited by 703
Structure and Flexibility Adaptation in Nonspecific and Specific Protein-DNA Complexes
Kalodimos, C. G., Biris, N., Bonvin, A. M. J. J., Levandoski, M. M., Guennuegues, M., Boelens, R., & Kaptein, R. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1097064 · Cited by 543
Self-citation
Cited by
Moitessier, N., Englebienne, P., Lee, D., Lawandi, J., & Corbeil, C. R. (2008) · British Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0707515 · Cited by 514
Allosteric communication between protomers of dopamine class A GPCR dimers modulates activation
Han, Y., Moreira, I. S., Urizar, E., Weinstein, H., & Javitch, J. A. (2009) · Nature Chemical Biology · doi:10.1038/nchembio.199 · Cited by 339
Nithin, C., Ghosh, P., & Bujnicki, J. M. (2018) · Genes · doi:10.3390/genes9090432 · Cited by 48
Metadata
- Authors
- van Dijk, M.
- Venue
- Nucleic Acids Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-06-28
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3317-3325
- ISSN
- 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
- 1362-4962
- OpenAlex
- W2099857980
- Cited by
- 188
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 4.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Information-driven protein-DNA docking using HADDOCK: it is a matter of flexibility. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/nar/gkl412
- The paper
- van Dijk, M. (2006). Information-driven protein-DNA docking using HADDOCK: it is a matter of flexibility. Nucleic Acids Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl412
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.