Most proteins fold into 3D structures that determine how they function and orchestrate the biological processes of the cell. Recent developments in computational methods for protein structure predictions have reached the accuracy of experimentally determined models. Although this has been independently verified, the implementation of these methods across structural-biology applications remains to be tested. Here, we evaluate the use of AlphaFold2 (AF2) predictions in the study of characteristic structural elements; the impact of missense variants; function and ligand binding site predictions; modeling of interactions; and modeling of experimental structural data. For 11 proteomes, an average of 25% additional residues can be confidently modeled when compared with homology modeling, identifying structural features rarely seen in the Protein Data Bank. AF2-based predictions of protein disorder and complexes surpass dedicated tools, and AF2 models can be used across diverse applications equally well compared with experimentally determined structures, when the confidence metrics are critically considered. In summary, we find that these advances are likely to have a transformative impact in structural biology and broader life-science research.

Traditional approaches to protein-protein docking sample the binding modes with no regard to similar experimentally determined structures (templates) of protein-protein complexes. Emerging template-based docking approaches utilize such similar complexes to determine the docking predictions. The docking problem assumes the knowledge of the participating proteins' structures. Thus, it provides the possibility of aligning the structures of the proteins and the template complexes. The progress in the development of template-based docking and the vast experience in template-based modeling of individual proteins show that, generally, such approaches are more reliable than the free modeling. The key aspect of this modeling paradigm is the availability of the templates. The current common perception is that due to the difficulties in experimental structure determination of protein-protein complexes, the pool of docking templates is insignificant, and thus a broad application of template-based docking is possible only at some future time. The results of our large scale, systematic study show that, surprisingly, in spite of the limited number of proteinprotein complexes in the Protein Data Bank, docking templates can be found for complexes representing almost all the known proteinprotein interactions, provided the components themselves have a known structure or can be homology-built. About one-third of the templates are of good quality when they are compared to experimental structures in test sets extracted from the Protein Data Bank and would be useful starting points in modeling the complexes. This finding dramatically expands our ability to model protein interactions, and has far-reaching implications for the protein docking field in general.protein modeling | protein recognition | structural bioinformatics | structure alignment P rotein-protein interactions (PPI) are a key component of life processes at the molecular level, and the number detected in genome-wide studies is fast growing. We want to understand their properties and be able to manipulate them for structure-based drug design. For this purpose, we must characterize PPI structurally, but their study by X-ray and NMR methods is demanding and slow, and computational methods appear to be a necessary complement.The structural predictions of PPI generally rely on docking procedures that can be roughly divided into: (i) template-free docking, where many or all the possible binding modes of two proteins are explored with no a priori knowledge of the structure of the complex, and (ii) template-based docking, where the similarity with previously known complexes determines the prediction. Template-free docking methods rely on the geometric and chemicalphysical complementarity of the protein surfaces (1), now often supplemented by statistical potentials (2, 3), and subject to a variety of constraints (4). The template-free modeling can also be applied to prediction of domain-domain structures (5, 6). The Critical Assessment of Predicted Interactions (CAPRI) blind predi...

We present the results for CAPRI Round 30, the first joint CASP-CAPRI experiment, which brought together experts from the protein structure prediction and protein-protein docking communities. The Round comprised 25 targets from amongst those submitted for the CASP11 prediction experiment of 2014. The targets included mostly homodimers, a few homotetramers, and two heterodimers, and comprised protein chains that could readily be modeled using templates from the Protein Data Bank. On average 24 CAPRI groups and 7 CASP groups submitted docking predictions for each target, and 12 CAPRI groups per target participated in the CAPRI scoring experiment. In total more than 9500 models were assessed against the 3D structures of the corresponding target complexes. Results show that the prediction of homodimer assemblies by homology modeling techniques and docking calculations is quite successful for targets featuring large enough subunit interfaces to represent stable associations. Targets with ambiguous or inaccurate oligomeric state assignments, often featuring crystal contact-sized interfaces, represented a confounding factor. For those, a much poorer prediction performance was achieved, while nonetheless often providing helpful clues on the correct oligomeric state of the protein. The prediction performance was very poor for genuine tetrameric targets, where the inaccuracy of the homology-built subunit models and the smaller pair-wise interfaces severely limited the ability to derive the correct assembly mode. Our analysis also shows that docking procedures tend to perform better than standard homology modeling techniques and that highly accurate models of the protein components are not always required to identify their association modes with acceptable accuracy.

Most proteins fold into 3D structures that determine how they function and orchestrate the biological processes of the cell. Recent developments in computational methods have led to protein structure predictions that have reached the accuracy of experimentally determined models. While this has been independently verified, the implementation of these methods across structural biology applications remains to be tested. Here, we evaluate the use of AlphaFold 2 (AF2) predictions in the study of characteristic structural elements; the impact of missense variants; function and ligand binding site predictions; modelling of interactions; and modelling of experimental structural data. For 11 proteomes, an average of 25% additional residues can be confidently modelled when compared to homology modelling, identifying structural features rarely seen in the PDB. AF2-based predictions of protein disorder and protein complexes surpass state-of-the-art tools and AF2 models can be used across diverse applications equally well compared to experimentally determined structures, when the confidence metrics are critically considered. In summary, we find that these advances are likely to have a transformative impact in structural biology and broader life science research.

We present the results for CAPRI Round 46, the third joint CASP‐CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round comprised a total of 20 targets including 14 homo‐oligomers and 6 heterocomplexes. Eight of the homo‐oligomer targets and one heterodimer comprised proteins that could be readily modeled using templates from the Protein Data Bank, often available for the full assembly. The remaining 11 targets comprised 5 homodimers, 3 heterodimers, and two higher‐order assemblies. These were more difficult to model, as their prediction mainly involved “ab‐initio” docking of subunit models derived from distantly related templates. A total of ~30 CAPRI groups, including 9 automatic servers, submitted on average ~2000 models per target. About 17 groups participated in the CAPRI scoring rounds, offered for most targets, submitting ~170 models per target. The prediction performance, measured by the fraction of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted across all predictors groups, was very good to excellent for the nine easy targets. Poorer performance was achieved by predictors for the 11 difficult targets, with medium and high quality models submitted for only 3 of these targets. A similar performance “gap” was displayed by scorer groups, highlighting yet again the unmet challenge of modeling the conformational changes of the protein components that occur upon binding or that must be accounted for in template‐based modeling. Our analysis also indicates that residues in binding interfaces were less well predicted in this set of targets than in previous Rounds, providing useful insights for directions of future improvements.