ASPDock: protein-protein docking algorithm using atomic solvation parameters model.
BACKGROUND
Atomic Solvation Parameters (ASP) model has been proven to be a very successful method of calculating the binding free energy of protein complexes. This suggests that incorporating it into docking algorithms should improve the accuracy of prediction. In this paper we propose an FFT-based algorithm to calculate ASP scores of protein complexes and develop an ASP-based protein-protein docking method (ASPDock).


RESULTS
The ASPDock is first tested on the 21 complexes whose binding free energies have been determined experimentally. The results show that the calculated ASP scores have stronger correlation (r ≈ 0.69) with the binding free energies than the pure shape complementarity scores (r ≈ 0.48). The ASPDock is further tested on a large dataset, the benchmark 3.0, which contain 124 complexes and also shows better performance than pure shape complementarity method in docking prediction. Comparisons with other state-of-the-art docking algorithms showed that ASP score indeed gives higher success rate than the pure shape complementarity score of FTDock but lower success rate than Zdock3.0. We also developed a softly restricting method to add the information of predicted binding sites into our docking algorithm. The ASP-based docking method performed well in CAPRI rounds 18 and 19.


CONCLUSIONS
ASP may be more accurate and physical than the pure shape complementarity in describing the feature of protein docking.
Biomolecular Physics and Modelling Group, Department of Physics, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, Hubei, PR China.
Lin
L
Li
Dachuan
D
Guo
Yangyu
Y
Huang
Shiyong
S
Liu
Yi
Y
Xiao
D000465:Algorithms; D011485:Protein Binding; D017434:Protein Structure, Tertiary; D011506:Proteins / Q000737:chemistry*; D013816:Thermodynamics
D011506:Proteins
Nucleic Acids Res. 2006 Aug 07;34(13):3698-707
16893954
Proteins. 1999 May 15;35(3):364-73
10328272
Proteins. 1997;Suppl 1:226-30
9485517
J Mol Biol. 1997 Nov 7;273(4):927-48
9367782
Proteins. 2003 Jul 1;52(1):24-7
12784363
Protein Sci. 2002 Feb;11(2):280-91
11790838
Proteins. 2008 Aug;72(2):557-79
18247354
Proteins. 2003 Jul 1;52(1):19-23
12784362
Proteins. 2000 May 1;39(2):178-94
10737939
J Am Chem Soc. 2003 Feb 19;125(7):1731-7
12580598
Proteins. 2008 Nov 15;73(3):705-9
18491384
Proteins. 2000 Jun 1;39(4):372-84
10813819
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992 Mar 15;89(6):2195-9
1549581
Nature. 1986 Jan 16-22;319(6050):199-203
3945310
Proteins. 2008 Mar;70(4):1506-17
17910060
Protein Sci. 1992 Feb;1(2):227-35
1304905
BMC Bioinformatics. 2008 Mar 13;9:148
18366628
Proteins. 2003 Jul 1;52(1):80-7
12784371
Proteins. 2006 Mar 1;62(4):934-46
16395666
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1987 May;84(10):3086-90
3472198
Proteins. 2007 Jun 1;67(4):1078-86
17373710
J Mol Biol. 1998 Feb 13;276(1):265-85
9514726
Proteins. 2007 Aug 1;68(2):503-15
17444519
Proteins. 2003 Jul 1;52(1):2-9
12784359
Proteins. 2005 Aug 1;60(2):319-23
15981260
Proteins. 2004 Jul 1;56(1):130-42
15162493
Proteins. 1994 Dec;20(4):320-9
7731951
J Mol Biol. 1991 May 5;219(1):79-102
2023263
Proteins. 2010 Nov 15;78(15):3242-9
20718048
Protein Sci. 2002 Mar;11(3):571-87
11847280
J Mol Biol. 1997 Sep 12;272(1):106-20
9299341
J Mol Biol. 2004 Jan 16;335(3):843-65
14687579
Protein Eng. 1996 Jan;9(1):37-41
9053900
Proteins. 2002 May 15;47(3):281-94
11948782
J Comput Chem. 2005 Mar;26(4):334-43
15643653
Proteins. 2007 Nov 15;69(3):511-20
17623839
J Mol Graph. 1993 Jun;11(2):139-41
8347567
J Mol Biol. 2003 Aug 1;331(1):281-99
12875852
Protein Eng. 2001 Feb;14(2):105-13
11297668
Biophys J. 2008 Nov 15;95(10):4988-99
18487293
Proteins. 2003 Jul 1;52(1):33-40
12784365
J Mol Graph. 1995 Dec;13(6):331-6
8820301
Proteins. 2002 Dec 1;49(4):483-92
12402358