15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      DockQ: A Quality Measure for Protein-Protein Docking Models

      research-article
      1 , 1 , 2 , *
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The state-of-the-art to assess the structural quality of docking models is currently based on three related yet independent quality measures: F nat, LRMS, and iRMS as proposed and standardized by CAPRI. These quality measures quantify different aspects of the quality of a particular docking model and need to be viewed together to reveal the true quality, e.g. a model with relatively poor LRMS (>10Å) might still qualify as 'acceptable' with a descent F nat (>0.50) and iRMS (<3.0Å). This is also the reason why the so called CAPRI criteria for assessing the quality of docking models is defined by applying various ad-hoc cutoffs on these measures to classify a docking model into the four classes: Incorrect, Acceptable, Medium, or High quality. This classification has been useful in CAPRI, but since models are grouped in only four bins it is also rather limiting, making it difficult to rank models, correlate with scoring functions or use it as target function in machine learning algorithms. Here, we present DockQ, a continuous protein-protein docking model quality measure derived by combining F nat, LRMS, and iRMS to a single score in the range [0, 1] that can be used to assess the quality of protein docking models. By using DockQ on CAPRI models it is possible to almost completely reproduce the original CAPRI classification into Incorrect, Acceptable, Medium and High quality. An average PPV of 94% at 90% Recall demonstrating that there is no need to apply predefined ad-hoc cutoffs to classify docking models. Since DockQ recapitulates the CAPRI classification almost perfectly, it can be viewed as a higher resolution version of the CAPRI classification, making it possible to estimate model quality in a more quantitative way using Z-scores or sum of top ranked models, which has been so valuable for the CASP community. The possibility to directly correlate a quality measure to a scoring function has been crucial for the development of scoring functions for protein structure prediction, and DockQ should be useful in a similar development in the protein docking field. DockQ is available at http://github.com/bjornwallner/DockQ/

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Toremifene interacts with and destabilizes the Ebola virus glycoprotein

          Ebola viruses (EBOVs) are responsible for repeated outbreaks of fatal infections, including the recent deadly epidemic in West Africa. There are currently no approved therapeutic drugs or vaccines for the disease. EBOV has a membrane envelope decorated by trimers of a glycoprotein (GP, cleaved by furin to form GP1 and GP2 subunits) which is solely responsible for host cell attachment, endosomal entry and membrane fusion1–7. GP is thus a primary target for the development of antiviral drugs. Here we report the first unliganded structure of EBOV GP, and complexes with an anticancer drug toremifene and the painkiller ibuprofen. The high-resolution apo structure gives a more complete and accurate picture of the molecule, and allows conformational changes introduced by antibody and receptor binding to be deciphered8–10. Unexpectedly both toremifene and ibuprofen bind in a cavity between the attachment (GP1) and fusion (GP2) subunits at the entrance to a large tunnel that links with equivalent tunnels from the other monomers of the trimer at the 3-fold axis. Protein-drug interactions, with both GP1 and GP2, are predominately hydrophobic. Residues lining the binding site are highly conserved amongst filoviruses except Marburg virus (MARV), suggesting that MARV may not bind these drugs. Thermal shift assays show up to a 14 °C decrease in protein melting temperature upon toremifene binding, while ibuprofen has only a marginal effect and is a less potent inhibitor. The results suggest that inhibitor binding destabilizes GP and triggers premature release of GP2, therefore preventing fusion between the viral and endosome membranes. Thus these complex structures reveal the mechanism of inhibition and may guide the development of more powerful anti-EBOV drugs.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            MaxSub: an automated measure for the assessment of protein structure prediction quality.

            Evaluating the accuracy of predicted models is critical for assessing structure prediction methods. Because this problem is not trivial, a large number of different assessment measures have been proposed by various authors, and it has already become an active subfield of research (Moult et al. (1997,1999) and CAFASP (Fischer et al. 1999) prediction experiments have demonstrated that it has been difficult to choose one single, 'best' method to be used in the evaluation. Consequently, the CASP3 evaluation was carried out using an extensive set of especially developed numerical measures, coupled with human-expert intervention. As part of our efforts towards a higher level of automation in the structure prediction field, here we investigate the suitability of a fully automated, simple, objective, quantitative and reproducible method that can be used in the automatic assessment of models in the upcoming CAFASP2 experiment. Such a method should (a) produce one single number that measures the quality of a predicted model and (b) perform similarly to human-expert evaluations. MaxSub is a new and independently developed method that further builds and extends some of the evaluation methods introduced at CASP3. MaxSub aims at identifying the largest subset of C(alpha) atoms of a model that superimpose 'well' over the experimental structure, and produces a single normalized score that represents the quality of the model. Because there exists no evaluation method for assessment measures of predicted models, it is not easy to evaluate how good our new measure is. Even though an exact comparison of MaxSub and the CASP3 assessment is not straightforward, here we use a test-bed extracted from the CASP3 fold-recognition models. A rough qualitative comparison of the performance of MaxSub vis-a-vis the human-expert assessment carried out at CASP3 shows that there is a good agreement for the more accurate models and for the better predicting groups. As expected, some differences were observed among the medium to poor models and groups. Overall, the top six predicting groups ranked using the fully automated MaxSub are also the top six groups ranked at CASP3. We conclude that MaxSub is a suitable method for the automatic evaluation of models.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Docking and scoring protein complexes: CAPRI 3rd Edition.

              The performance of methods for predicting protein-protein interactions at the atomic scale is assessed by evaluating blind predictions performed during 2005-2007 as part of Rounds 6-12 of the community-wide experiment on Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interactions (CAPRI). These Rounds also included a new scoring experiment, where a larger set of models contributed by the predictors was made available to groups developing scoring functions. These groups scored the uploaded set and submitted their own best models for assessment. The structures of nine protein complexes including one homodimer were used as targets. These targets represent biologically relevant interactions involved in gene expression, signal transduction, RNA, or protein processing and membrane maintenance. For all the targets except one, predictions started from the experimentally determined structures of the free (unbound) components or from models derived by homology, making it mandatory for docking methods to model the conformational changes that often accompany association. In total, 63 groups and eight automatic servers, a substantial increase from previous years, submitted docking predictions, of which 1994 were evaluated here. Fifteen groups submitted 305 models for five targets in the scoring experiment. Assessment of the predictions reveals that 31 different groups produced models of acceptable and medium accuracy-but only one high accuracy submission-for all the targets, except the homodimer. In the latter, none of the docking procedures reproduced the large conformational adjustment required for correct assembly, underscoring yet again that handling protein flexibility remains a major challenge. In the scoring experiment, a large fraction of the groups attained the set goal of singling out the correct association modes from incorrect solutions in the limited ensembles of contributed models. But in general they seemed unable to identify the best models, indicating that current scoring methods are probably not sensitive enough. With the increased focus on protein assemblies, in particular by structural genomics efforts, the growing community of CAPRI predictors is engaged more actively than ever in the development of better scoring functions and means of modeling conformational flexibility, which hold promise for much progress in the future. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                25 August 2016
                2016
                : 11
                : 8
                : e0161879
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Bioinformatics Division, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
                [2 ]Swedish e-Science Research Center, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
                Weizmann Institute of Science, ISRAEL
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                • Conceptualization: BW.

                • Funding acquisition: BW.

                • Investigation: SB BW.

                • Methodology: BW.

                • Resources: BW.

                • Software: SB BW.

                • Supervision: BW.

                • Writing – original draft: SB BW.

                • Writing – review & editing: SB BW.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3772-8279
                Article
                PONE-D-16-07789
                10.1371/journal.pone.0161879
                4999177
                27560519
                972a86b2-9f99-4754-804a-0a8c2c2a3b70
                © 2016 Basu, Wallner

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 23 February 2016
                : 12 August 2016
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 0, Pages: 9
                Funding
                Funded by: Vetenskapsrådet (SE)
                Award ID: 2012-5270
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Swedish e-Science Research Center
                Award Recipient :
                This work was funded by the Swedish Research Council (621-2012-5270) and the Swedish e-Science Research Center. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Molecular Biology
                Macromolecular Structure Analysis
                Protein Structure
                Protein Structure Prediction
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Biochemistry
                Proteins
                Protein Structure
                Protein Structure Prediction
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Molecular Biology
                Macromolecular Structure Analysis
                Protein Structure
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Biochemistry
                Proteins
                Protein Structure
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Database and Informatics Methods
                Biological Databases
                Protein Structure Databases
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Molecular Biology
                Macromolecular Structure Analysis
                Protein Structure
                Protein Structure Databases
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Biochemistry
                Proteins
                Protein Structure
                Protein Structure Databases
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Genetics
                Genomics
                Structural Genomics
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Molecular Biology
                Macromolecular Structure Analysis
                Protein Structure
                Protein Structure Determination
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Biochemistry
                Proteins
                Protein Structure
                Protein Structure Determination
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Biochemistry
                Proteins
                Protein Complexes
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Biochemistry
                Proteins
                Protein Interactions
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Molecular Biology
                Macromolecular Structure Analysis
                Protein Structure
                Protein Structure Comparison
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Biochemistry
                Proteins
                Protein Structure
                Protein Structure Comparison
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article