Electrostatic Properties of Protein-Protein Complexes

Statistical electrostatic analysis of 37 protein-protein complexes extracted from the previously developed database of protein complexes (ProtCom, http://www.ces.clemson.edu/compbio/protcom) is presented. It is shown that small interfaces have a higher content of charged and polar groups compared to large interfaces. In a vast majority of the cases the average pKa shifts for acidic residues induced by the complex formation are negative, indicating that complex formation stabilizes their ionizable states, whereas the histidines are predicted to destabilize the complex. The individual pKa shifts show the same tendency since 80% of the interfacial acidic groups were found to lower their pKas, whereas only 25% of histidines raise their pKa upon the complex formation. The interfacial groups have been divided into three sets according to the mechanism of their pKa shift, and statistical analysis of each set was performed. It was shown that the optimum pH values (pH of maximal stability) of the complex tend to be the same as the optimum pH values of the complex components. This finding can be used in the homology-based prediction of the 3D structures of protein complexes, especially when one needs to evaluate and rank putative models. It is more likely for a model to be correct if both components of the model complex and the entire complex have the same or at least similar values of the optimum pH

PROTCOM: searchable database of protein complexes enhanced with domain–domain structures

The database of protein complexes (PROTCOM) is a compilation of known 3D structures of protein–protein complexes enriched with artificially created domain–domain structures using the available entries in the Protein Data Bank. The domain–domain structures are generated by parsing single chain structures into loosely connected domains and are important features of the database. The database () could be used for benchmarking purposes of the docking and other algorithms for predicting 3D structures of protein–protein complexes. The database can be utilized as a template database in the homology or threading methods for modeling the 3D structures of unknown protein–protein complexes. PROTCOM provides the scientific community with an integrated set of tools for browsing, searching, visualizing and downloading a pool of protein complexes. The user is given the option to select a subset of entries using a combination of up to 10 different criteria. As on July 2006 the database contains 1770 entries, each of which consists of the known 3D structures and additional relevant information that can be displayed either in text-only or in visual mode

Blind Prediction of Interfacial Water Positions in CAPRI

We report the first assessment of blind predictions of water positions at protein-protein interfaces, performed as part of the CAPRI (Critical Assessment of Predicted Interactions) community-wide experiment. Groups submitting docking predictions for the complex of the DNase domain of colicin E2 and Im2 immunity protein (CAPRI target 47), were invited to predict the positions of interfacial water molecules using the method of their choice. The predictions – 20 groups submitted a total of 195 models – were assessed by measuring the recall fraction of water-mediated protein contacts. Of the 176 high or medium quality docking models – a very good docking performance per se – only 44% had a recall fraction above 0.3, and a mere 6% above 0.5. The actual water positions were in general predicted to an accuracy level no better than 1.5 Å, and even in good models about half of the contacts represented false positives. This notwithstanding, three hotspot interface water positions were quite well predicted, and so was one of the water positions that is believed to stabilize the loop that confers specificity in these complexes. Overall the best interface water predictions was achieved by groups that also produced high quality docking models, indicating that accurate modelling of the protein portion is a determinant factor. The use of established molecular mechanics force fields, coupled to sampling and optimization procedures also seemed to confer an advantage. Insights gained from this analysis should help improve the prediction of protein-water interactions and their role in stabilizing protein complexes

Protein Docking by the Interface Structure Similarity: How Much Structure Is Needed?

The increasing availability of co-crystallized protein-protein complexes provides an opportunity to use template-based modeling for protein-protein docking. Structure alignment techniques are useful in detection of remote target-template similarities. The size of the structure involved in the alignment is important for the success in modeling. This paper describes a systematic large-scale study to find the optimal definition/size of the interfaces for the structure alignment-based docking applications. The results showed that structural areas corresponding to the cutoff values <12 Å across the interface inadequately represent structural details of the interfaces. With the increase of the cutoff beyond 12 Å, the success rate for the benchmark set of 99 protein complexes, did not increase significantly for higher accuracy models, and decreased for lower-accuracy models. The 12 Å cutoff was optimal in our interface alignment-based docking, and a likely best choice for the large-scale (e.g., on the scale of the entire genome) applications to protein interaction networks. The results provide guidelines for the docking approaches, including high-throughput applications to modeled structures.This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grant R01 GM074255

Docking by structural similarity at protein-protein interfaces

Rapid accumulation of experimental data on protein-protein complexes drives the paradigm shift in protein docking from ‘traditional,’ template free approaches to template based techniques. Homology docking algorithms based on sequence similarity between target and template complexes can account for up to 20% of known protein-protein interactions. When highly homologous templates for the target complex are not available, but the structure of the target monomers is known, docking by local structural alignment may provide an adequate solution. Such an algorithm was developed based on the structural comparison of monomers to co-crystallized interfaces. A library of the interfaces was generated from co-crystallized protein-protein complexes in PDB. The partial structure alignment algorithm was validated on the Dockground benchmark sets. The optimal performance of the partial (interface) structure alignment was achieved with the interface residues defined by 12Å distance across the interface. Overall, the partial structural alignment yielded more accurate models than the full structure alignment. Most templates identified by the partial structural alignment had low sequence identity to the target, which makes them hard to detect by sequence-based methods. The results indicate that the structure alignment techniques provide a much needed addition to the docking arsenal, with the combined structural alignment and template free docking success rate significantly surpassing that of the free docking alone

GWIDD: a comprehensive resource for genome-wide structural modeling of protein-protein interactions

Protein-protein interactions are a key component of life processes. The knowledge of the three-dimensional structure of these interactions is important for understanding protein function. Genome-Wide Docking Database (http://gwidd.bioinformatics.ku.edu webcite) offers an extensive source of data for structural studies of protein-protein complexes on genome scale. The current release of the database combines the available experimental data on the structure and characteristics of protein interactions with structural modeling of protein complexes for 771 organisms spanned over the entire universe of life from viruses to humans. The interactions are stored in a relational database with user-friendly interface that includes various search options. The search results can be interactively previewed; the structures, downloaded, along with the interaction characteristics. Keywords: Protein-protein interactions; Structural modeling; Protein docking; Structural genomics; Interactom

Docking by structural similarity at protein-protein interfaces

Rapid accumulation of experimental data on protein-protein complexes drives the paradigm shift in protein docking from ‘traditional,’ template free approaches to template based techniques. Homology docking algorithms based on sequence similarity between target and template complexes can account for up to 20% of known protein-protein interactions. When highly homologous templates for the target complex are not available, but the structure of the target monomers is known, docking by local structural alignment may provide an adequate solution. Such an algorithm was developed based on the structural comparison of monomers to co-crystallized interfaces. A library of the interfaces was generated from co-crystallized protein-protein complexes in PDB. The partial structure alignment algorithm was validated on the Dockground benchmark sets. The optimal performance of the partial (interface) structure alignment was achieved with the interface residues defined by 12Å distance across the interface. Overall, the partial structural alignment yielded more accurate models than the full structure alignment. Most templates identified by the partial structural alignment had low sequence identity to the target, which makes them hard to detect by sequence-based methods. The results indicate that the structure alignment techniques provide a much needed addition to the docking arsenal, with the combined structural alignment and template free docking success rate significantly surpassing that of the free docking alone

Evaluation of AlphaFold-Multimer prediction on multi-chain protein complexes

Motivation Despite near-experimental accuracy on single-chain predictions, there is still scope for improvement among multimeric predictions. Methods like AlphaFold-Multimer and FoldDock can accurately model dimers. However, how well these methods fare on larger complexes is still unclear. Further, evaluation methods of the quality of multimeric complexes are not well established. Results We analysed the performance of AlphaFold-Multimer on a homology-reduced dataset of homo- and heteromeric protein complexes. We highlight the differences between the pairwise and multi-interface evaluation of chains within a multimer. We describe why certain complexes perform well on one metric (e.g. TM-score) but poorly on another (e.g. DockQ). We propose a new score, Predicted DockQ version 2 (pDockQ2), to estimate the quality of each interface in a multimer. Finally, we modelled protein complexes (from CORUM) and identified two highly confident structures that do not have sequence homology to any existing structures. Availability and implementation All scripts, models, and data used to perform the analysis in this study are freely available at https://gitlab.com/ElofssonLab/afm-benchmark

Inhibition of protein interactions: co-crystalized protein–protein interfaces are nearly as good as holo proteins in rigid-body ligand docking

Modulating protein interaction pathways may lead to the cure of many diseases. Known protein–protein inhibitors bind to large pockets on the protein–protein interface. Such large pockets are detected also in the protein–protein complexes without known inhibitors, making such complexes potentially druggable. The inhibitor-binding site is primary defined by the side chains that form the largest pocket in the protein-bound conformation. Low-resolution ligand docking shows that the success rate for the protein-bound conformation is close to the one for the ligand-bound conformation, and significantly higher than for the apo conformation. The conformational change on the protein interface upon binding to the other protein results in a pocket employed by the ligand when it binds to that interface. This proof-of-concept study suggests that rather than using computational pocket-opening procedures, one can opt for an experimentally determined structure of the target co-crystallized protein–protein complex as a starting point for drug design