Updates to the Integrated Protein–Protein Interaction Benchmarks: Docking Benchmark Version 5 and Affinity Benchmark Version 2
We present an updated and integrated version of our widely used protein–protein docking and binding affinity benchmarks. The benchmarks consist of non-redundant, high-quality structures of protein–protein complexes along with the unbound structures of their components. Fifty-five new complexes were...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of molecular biology 2015-09, Vol.427 (19), p.3031-3041 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 3041 |
---|---|
container_issue | 19 |
container_start_page | 3031 |
container_title | Journal of molecular biology |
container_volume | 427 |
creator | Vreven, Thom Moal, Iain H. Vangone, Anna Pierce, Brian G. Kastritis, Panagiotis L. Torchala, Mieczyslaw Chaleil, Raphael Jiménez-García, Brian Bates, Paul A. Fernandez-Recio, Juan Bonvin, Alexandre M.J.J. Weng, Zhiping |
description | We present an updated and integrated version of our widely used protein–protein docking and binding affinity benchmarks. The benchmarks consist of non-redundant, high-quality structures of protein–protein complexes along with the unbound structures of their components. Fifty-five new complexes were added to the docking benchmark, 35 of which have experimentally measured binding affinities. These updated docking and affinity benchmarks now contain 230 and 179 entries, respectively. In particular, the number of antibody–antigen complexes has increased significantly, by 67% and 74% in the docking and affinity benchmarks, respectively. We tested previously developed docking and affinity prediction algorithms on the new cases. Considering only the top 10 docking predictions per benchmark case, a prediction accuracy of 38% is achieved on all 55 cases and up to 50% for the 32 rigid-body cases only. Predicted affinity scores are found to correlate with experimental binding energies up to r=0.52 overall and r=0.72 for the rigid complexes.
[Display omitted]
•Large non-redundant data sets are needed for the development of algorithms for protein–protein complex structure and binding affinity prediction.•The previously published docking and affinity structural benchmarks are updated, increasing the number of cases by 31% and 24%, respectively.•State-of-the-art structure and affinity algorithms are tested using the new set of complexes.•The updates improve the balance of the benchmarks and include complexes that are challenging for current algorithms, and will aid the development of improved algorithms. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jmb.2015.07.016 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4677049</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022283615004180</els_id><sourcerecordid>1715659924</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c662t-c58e31ad640d021f2380086010f9561de2238393ffae8a2695f26bce8872ad1e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUstuEzEUtRCIhsIHsEGzZDPDtWfGY4OEVMqrUiVYULaWY99JnCZ2sJ1K3fUf-EO-BKcJoUgIFpbtc885vlc-hDyl0FCg_MWiWaymDQPaNzA0BblHJhSErAVvxX0yAWCsZqLlR-RRSgsA6NtOPCRHjLOWlsKE3Fysrc6YqhyqPMfqzGecxYLY6nMMGZ3_cfN9f7otRm2yC756g97MVzpeppfV22AunZ_9xqqvGNOW1Vfa2-pkHJ13-fovBPaYPBj1MuGT_X5MLt6_-3L6sT7_9OHs9OS8NpyzXJteYEu15R1YYHRkrQAQHCiMsufUIitIK9tx1Cg047IfGZ8aFGJg2lJsj8nrne96M12hNehz1Eu1jq70c62CdurPindzNQtXquPDAJ0sBnRnYNLGqIgGo9H5Vni4bBeDgSkmqGS0aJ7vH43h2wZTViuXDC6X2mPYpMIF6IZOiv6_VDrQnvdSsu5OJzGkFHE8TEFBbYOhFqoEQ22DoWBQBSmaZ3fHPyh-JaEQXu0IWD7hymFUybjyXWhdGS8rG9w_7H8CeX7Kxg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1715659924</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Updates to the Integrated Protein–Protein Interaction Benchmarks: Docking Benchmark Version 5 and Affinity Benchmark Version 2</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Recercat</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Vreven, Thom ; Moal, Iain H. ; Vangone, Anna ; Pierce, Brian G. ; Kastritis, Panagiotis L. ; Torchala, Mieczyslaw ; Chaleil, Raphael ; Jiménez-García, Brian ; Bates, Paul A. ; Fernandez-Recio, Juan ; Bonvin, Alexandre M.J.J. ; Weng, Zhiping</creator><creatorcontrib>Vreven, Thom ; Moal, Iain H. ; Vangone, Anna ; Pierce, Brian G. ; Kastritis, Panagiotis L. ; Torchala, Mieczyslaw ; Chaleil, Raphael ; Jiménez-García, Brian ; Bates, Paul A. ; Fernandez-Recio, Juan ; Bonvin, Alexandre M.J.J. ; Weng, Zhiping</creatorcontrib><description>We present an updated and integrated version of our widely used protein–protein docking and binding affinity benchmarks. The benchmarks consist of non-redundant, high-quality structures of protein–protein complexes along with the unbound structures of their components. Fifty-five new complexes were added to the docking benchmark, 35 of which have experimentally measured binding affinities. These updated docking and affinity benchmarks now contain 230 and 179 entries, respectively. In particular, the number of antibody–antigen complexes has increased significantly, by 67% and 74% in the docking and affinity benchmarks, respectively. We tested previously developed docking and affinity prediction algorithms on the new cases. Considering only the top 10 docking predictions per benchmark case, a prediction accuracy of 38% is achieved on all 55 cases and up to 50% for the 32 rigid-body cases only. Predicted affinity scores are found to correlate with experimental binding energies up to r=0.52 overall and r=0.72 for the rigid complexes.
[Display omitted]
•Large non-redundant data sets are needed for the development of algorithms for protein–protein complex structure and binding affinity prediction.•The previously published docking and affinity structural benchmarks are updated, increasing the number of cases by 31% and 24%, respectively.•State-of-the-art structure and affinity algorithms are tested using the new set of complexes.•The updates improve the balance of the benchmarks and include complexes that are challenging for current algorithms, and will aid the development of improved algorithms.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-2836</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1089-8638</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2015.07.016</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26231283</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Animals ; Antibody–antigen ; binding capacity ; Binding free energy ; Conformational change ; Enginyeria electrònica ; Estructura ; Humans ; Molecular Docking Simulation ; Polynucleotide Adenylyltransferase - chemistry ; Polynucleotide Adenylyltransferase - metabolism ; prediction ; Protein Binding ; Protein Conformation ; Protein Interaction Mapping - methods ; Protein Structure ; Protein-protein interactions ; Proteins - chemistry ; Proteins - metabolism ; Protein–protein complex structure ; Protein–protein interface ; Proteïnes ; Software ; Thermodynamics ; Vaccinia virus - chemistry ; Vaccinia virus - metabolism ; Viral Proteins - chemistry ; Viral Proteins - metabolism ; Àrees temàtiques de la UPC</subject><ispartof>Journal of molecular biology, 2015-09, Vol.427 (19), p.3031-3041</ispartof><rights>2015</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.</rights><rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c662t-c58e31ad640d021f2380086010f9561de2238393ffae8a2695f26bce8872ad1e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c662t-c58e31ad640d021f2380086010f9561de2238393ffae8a2695f26bce8872ad1e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022283615004180$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,3537,26951,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26231283$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Vreven, Thom</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moal, Iain H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vangone, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pierce, Brian G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kastritis, Panagiotis L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Torchala, Mieczyslaw</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chaleil, Raphael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiménez-García, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bates, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernandez-Recio, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bonvin, Alexandre M.J.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weng, Zhiping</creatorcontrib><title>Updates to the Integrated Protein–Protein Interaction Benchmarks: Docking Benchmark Version 5 and Affinity Benchmark Version 2</title><title>Journal of molecular biology</title><addtitle>J Mol Biol</addtitle><description>We present an updated and integrated version of our widely used protein–protein docking and binding affinity benchmarks. The benchmarks consist of non-redundant, high-quality structures of protein–protein complexes along with the unbound structures of their components. Fifty-five new complexes were added to the docking benchmark, 35 of which have experimentally measured binding affinities. These updated docking and affinity benchmarks now contain 230 and 179 entries, respectively. In particular, the number of antibody–antigen complexes has increased significantly, by 67% and 74% in the docking and affinity benchmarks, respectively. We tested previously developed docking and affinity prediction algorithms on the new cases. Considering only the top 10 docking predictions per benchmark case, a prediction accuracy of 38% is achieved on all 55 cases and up to 50% for the 32 rigid-body cases only. Predicted affinity scores are found to correlate with experimental binding energies up to r=0.52 overall and r=0.72 for the rigid complexes.
[Display omitted]
•Large non-redundant data sets are needed for the development of algorithms for protein–protein complex structure and binding affinity prediction.•The previously published docking and affinity structural benchmarks are updated, increasing the number of cases by 31% and 24%, respectively.•State-of-the-art structure and affinity algorithms are tested using the new set of complexes.•The updates improve the balance of the benchmarks and include complexes that are challenging for current algorithms, and will aid the development of improved algorithms.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Antibody–antigen</subject><subject>binding capacity</subject><subject>Binding free energy</subject><subject>Conformational change</subject><subject>Enginyeria electrònica</subject><subject>Estructura</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Molecular Docking Simulation</subject><subject>Polynucleotide Adenylyltransferase - chemistry</subject><subject>Polynucleotide Adenylyltransferase - metabolism</subject><subject>prediction</subject><subject>Protein Binding</subject><subject>Protein Conformation</subject><subject>Protein Interaction Mapping - methods</subject><subject>Protein Structure</subject><subject>Protein-protein interactions</subject><subject>Proteins - chemistry</subject><subject>Proteins - metabolism</subject><subject>Protein–protein complex structure</subject><subject>Protein–protein interface</subject><subject>Proteïnes</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Thermodynamics</subject><subject>Vaccinia virus - chemistry</subject><subject>Vaccinia virus - metabolism</subject><subject>Viral Proteins - chemistry</subject><subject>Viral Proteins - metabolism</subject><subject>Àrees temàtiques de la UPC</subject><issn>0022-2836</issn><issn>1089-8638</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>XX2</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUstuEzEUtRCIhsIHsEGzZDPDtWfGY4OEVMqrUiVYULaWY99JnCZ2sJ1K3fUf-EO-BKcJoUgIFpbtc885vlc-hDyl0FCg_MWiWaymDQPaNzA0BblHJhSErAVvxX0yAWCsZqLlR-RRSgsA6NtOPCRHjLOWlsKE3Fysrc6YqhyqPMfqzGecxYLY6nMMGZ3_cfN9f7otRm2yC756g97MVzpeppfV22AunZ_9xqqvGNOW1Vfa2-pkHJ13-fovBPaYPBj1MuGT_X5MLt6_-3L6sT7_9OHs9OS8NpyzXJteYEu15R1YYHRkrQAQHCiMsufUIitIK9tx1Cg047IfGZ8aFGJg2lJsj8nrne96M12hNehz1Eu1jq70c62CdurPindzNQtXquPDAJ0sBnRnYNLGqIgGo9H5Vni4bBeDgSkmqGS0aJ7vH43h2wZTViuXDC6X2mPYpMIF6IZOiv6_VDrQnvdSsu5OJzGkFHE8TEFBbYOhFqoEQ22DoWBQBSmaZ3fHPyh-JaEQXu0IWD7hymFUybjyXWhdGS8rG9w_7H8CeX7Kxg</recordid><startdate>20150925</startdate><enddate>20150925</enddate><creator>Vreven, Thom</creator><creator>Moal, Iain H.</creator><creator>Vangone, Anna</creator><creator>Pierce, Brian G.</creator><creator>Kastritis, Panagiotis L.</creator><creator>Torchala, Mieczyslaw</creator><creator>Chaleil, Raphael</creator><creator>Jiménez-García, Brian</creator><creator>Bates, Paul A.</creator><creator>Fernandez-Recio, Juan</creator><creator>Bonvin, Alexandre M.J.J.</creator><creator>Weng, Zhiping</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope><scope>XX2</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150925</creationdate><title>Updates to the Integrated Protein–Protein Interaction Benchmarks: Docking Benchmark Version 5 and Affinity Benchmark Version 2</title><author>Vreven, Thom ; Moal, Iain H. ; Vangone, Anna ; Pierce, Brian G. ; Kastritis, Panagiotis L. ; Torchala, Mieczyslaw ; Chaleil, Raphael ; Jiménez-García, Brian ; Bates, Paul A. ; Fernandez-Recio, Juan ; Bonvin, Alexandre M.J.J. ; Weng, Zhiping</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c662t-c58e31ad640d021f2380086010f9561de2238393ffae8a2695f26bce8872ad1e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Antibody–antigen</topic><topic>binding capacity</topic><topic>Binding free energy</topic><topic>Conformational change</topic><topic>Enginyeria electrònica</topic><topic>Estructura</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Molecular Docking Simulation</topic><topic>Polynucleotide Adenylyltransferase - chemistry</topic><topic>Polynucleotide Adenylyltransferase - metabolism</topic><topic>prediction</topic><topic>Protein Binding</topic><topic>Protein Conformation</topic><topic>Protein Interaction Mapping - methods</topic><topic>Protein Structure</topic><topic>Protein-protein interactions</topic><topic>Proteins - chemistry</topic><topic>Proteins - metabolism</topic><topic>Protein–protein complex structure</topic><topic>Protein–protein interface</topic><topic>Proteïnes</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Thermodynamics</topic><topic>Vaccinia virus - chemistry</topic><topic>Vaccinia virus - metabolism</topic><topic>Viral Proteins - chemistry</topic><topic>Viral Proteins - metabolism</topic><topic>Àrees temàtiques de la UPC</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vreven, Thom</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moal, Iain H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vangone, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pierce, Brian G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kastritis, Panagiotis L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Torchala, Mieczyslaw</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chaleil, Raphael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiménez-García, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bates, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernandez-Recio, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bonvin, Alexandre M.J.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weng, Zhiping</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><collection>Recercat</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of molecular biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vreven, Thom</au><au>Moal, Iain H.</au><au>Vangone, Anna</au><au>Pierce, Brian G.</au><au>Kastritis, Panagiotis L.</au><au>Torchala, Mieczyslaw</au><au>Chaleil, Raphael</au><au>Jiménez-García, Brian</au><au>Bates, Paul A.</au><au>Fernandez-Recio, Juan</au><au>Bonvin, Alexandre M.J.J.</au><au>Weng, Zhiping</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Updates to the Integrated Protein–Protein Interaction Benchmarks: Docking Benchmark Version 5 and Affinity Benchmark Version 2</atitle><jtitle>Journal of molecular biology</jtitle><addtitle>J Mol Biol</addtitle><date>2015-09-25</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>427</volume><issue>19</issue><spage>3031</spage><epage>3041</epage><pages>3031-3041</pages><issn>0022-2836</issn><eissn>1089-8638</eissn><abstract>We present an updated and integrated version of our widely used protein–protein docking and binding affinity benchmarks. The benchmarks consist of non-redundant, high-quality structures of protein–protein complexes along with the unbound structures of their components. Fifty-five new complexes were added to the docking benchmark, 35 of which have experimentally measured binding affinities. These updated docking and affinity benchmarks now contain 230 and 179 entries, respectively. In particular, the number of antibody–antigen complexes has increased significantly, by 67% and 74% in the docking and affinity benchmarks, respectively. We tested previously developed docking and affinity prediction algorithms on the new cases. Considering only the top 10 docking predictions per benchmark case, a prediction accuracy of 38% is achieved on all 55 cases and up to 50% for the 32 rigid-body cases only. Predicted affinity scores are found to correlate with experimental binding energies up to r=0.52 overall and r=0.72 for the rigid complexes.
[Display omitted]
•Large non-redundant data sets are needed for the development of algorithms for protein–protein complex structure and binding affinity prediction.•The previously published docking and affinity structural benchmarks are updated, increasing the number of cases by 31% and 24%, respectively.•State-of-the-art structure and affinity algorithms are tested using the new set of complexes.•The updates improve the balance of the benchmarks and include complexes that are challenging for current algorithms, and will aid the development of improved algorithms.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>26231283</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jmb.2015.07.016</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-2836 |
ispartof | Journal of molecular biology, 2015-09, Vol.427 (19), p.3031-3041 |
issn | 0022-2836 1089-8638 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4677049 |
source | MEDLINE; Recercat; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Algorithms Animals Antibody–antigen binding capacity Binding free energy Conformational change Enginyeria electrònica Estructura Humans Molecular Docking Simulation Polynucleotide Adenylyltransferase - chemistry Polynucleotide Adenylyltransferase - metabolism prediction Protein Binding Protein Conformation Protein Interaction Mapping - methods Protein Structure Protein-protein interactions Proteins - chemistry Proteins - metabolism Protein–protein complex structure Protein–protein interface Proteïnes Software Thermodynamics Vaccinia virus - chemistry Vaccinia virus - metabolism Viral Proteins - chemistry Viral Proteins - metabolism Àrees temàtiques de la UPC |
title | Updates to the Integrated Protein–Protein Interaction Benchmarks: Docking Benchmark Version 5 and Affinity Benchmark Version 2 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T04%3A30%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Updates%20to%20the%20Integrated%20Protein%E2%80%93Protein%20Interaction%20Benchmarks:%20Docking%20Benchmark%20Version%205%20and%20Affinity%20Benchmark%20Version%202&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20molecular%20biology&rft.au=Vreven,%20Thom&rft.date=2015-09-25&rft.volume=427&rft.issue=19&rft.spage=3031&rft.epage=3041&rft.pages=3031-3041&rft.issn=0022-2836&rft.eissn=1089-8638&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jmb.2015.07.016&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1715659924%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1715659924&rft_id=info:pmid/26231283&rft_els_id=S0022283615004180&rfr_iscdi=true |