2002
DOI: 10.1002/prot.10232
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new test set for validating predictions of protein–ligand interaction

Abstract: We present a large test set of protein-ligand complexes for the purpose of validating algorithms that rely on the prediction of protein-ligand interactions. The set consists of 305 complexes with protonation states assigned by manual inspection. The following checks have been carried out to identify unsuitable entries in this set: (1) assessing the involvement of crystallographically related protein units in ligand binding; (2) identification of bad clashes between protein side chains and ligand; and (3) asses… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

8
425
0
7

Year Published

2006
2006
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 425 publications
(440 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
8
425
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…[53] 2.3 Molecular docking Selection of dienophiles and generation of initial studies were accomplished by docking simulations, using the GOLD Suite. [54,55,56,57] The docking procedure was conducted according to the following protocol: The built-in genetic algorithm (GA) was used to generate different poses, which were evaluated with the ChemScore scoring function. [58,59] The space of possible poses was limited to relevant ones by inducing hydrogen bond constraints between the dienophile carbonyl oxygen and T40-NH, T40-O γ H and Q106-NH.…”
Section: Enzyme Variantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[53] 2.3 Molecular docking Selection of dienophiles and generation of initial studies were accomplished by docking simulations, using the GOLD Suite. [54,55,56,57] The docking procedure was conducted according to the following protocol: The built-in genetic algorithm (GA) was used to generate different poses, which were evaluated with the ChemScore scoring function. [58,59] The space of possible poses was limited to relevant ones by inducing hydrogen bond constraints between the dienophile carbonyl oxygen and T40-NH, T40-O γ H and Q106-NH.…”
Section: Enzyme Variantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the docking-based virtual screening, three docking programs, DOCK (UCSF) [15,16] , GOLD (Cambridge Crystallographic Data Center) [17][18][19][20] and Glide (Schrödinger, Inc) [21,22] , were used in this study for the purpose of getting unbiased results of docking. The detailed procedures for the virtual screenings using these three docking programs are described in the Supplementary Information.…”
Section: Virtual Screeningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The pharmacophore models were generated from the ligand co-crystallized complex structures of these targets using the LigandScout program [12] , and each PBVS was performed using the program Catalyst [13,14] . To avoid the target dependency of docking programs, three docking programs, namely DOCK [15,16] , GOLD [17][18][19][20] , and Glide [21,22] , were used in the DBVS. The results for eight tested targets indicated that the pharmacophore-based method generally outperforms all three docking methods in retrieving actives from databases.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The utility of iGEMDOCK is well established (78% success rates) from its testing on 305 proteinligand Astex set [24]. Furthermore, the post-screening analysis and clustering of docked poses based on the high energy scores and pharmacological interactions makes iGEMDOCK more relevant for the present studies (table 1) shows the docking result of trimethoprim, paclitaxel and vinblastine with three subunits (AcrA, AcrB and TolC) of S. Typhi.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%