Search

Reliably scoring and ranking candidate models of protein complexes and assigning their oligomeric state from the structure of the crystal lattice represent outstanding challenges. A community-wide effort was launched to tackle these challenges. The latest resources on protein complexes and interfaces were exploited to derive a benchmark dataset consisting of 1677 homodimer protein crystal structures, including a balanced mix of physiological and non-physiological complexes. The non-physiological complexes in the benchmark were selected to bury a similar or larger interface area than their physiological counterparts, making it more difficult for scoring functions to differentiate between them. Next, 252 functions for scoring protein-protein interfaces previously developed by 13 groups were collected and evaluated for their ability to discriminate between physiological and non-physiological complexes. A simple consensus score generated using the best performing score of each of the 13 groups, and a cross-validated Random Forest (RF) classifier were created. Both approaches showed excellent performance, with an area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.93 and 0.94, respectively, outperforming individual scores developed by different groups. Additionally, AlphaFold2 engines recalled the physiological dimers with significantly higher accuracy than the non-physiological set, lending support to the reliability of our benchmark dataset annotations. Optimizing the combined power of interface scoring functions and evaluating it on challenging benchmark datasets appears to be a promising strategy., (© 2023 Wiley-VCH GmbH.)

Numerous biological processes in a cell are carried out by protein complexes. To understand the molecular mechanisms of such processes, it is crucial to know the quaternary structures of the complexes. Although the structures of protein complexes have been determined by biophysical experiments at a rapid pace, there are still many important complex structures that are yet to be determined. To supplement experimental structure determination of complexes, many computational protein docking methods have been developed; however, most of these docking methods are designed only for docking with two chains. Here, we introduce a novel method, RL-MLZerD, which builds multiple protein complexes using reinforcement learning (RL). In RL-MLZerD a multi-chain assembly process is considered as a series of episodes of selecting and integrating pre-computed pairwise docking models in a RL framework. RL is effective in correctly selecting plausible pairwise models that fit well with other subunits in a complex. When tested on a benchmark dataset of protein complexes with three to five chains, RL-MLZerD showed better modeling performance than other existing multiple docking methods under different evaluation criteria, except against AlphaFold-Multimer in unbound docking. Also, it emerged that the docking order of multi-chain complexes can be naturally predicted by examining preferred paths of episodes in the RL computation., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Aderinwale, Christoffer and Kihara.)

Last year saw a breakthrough in protein structure prediction, where the AlphaFold2 method showed a substantial improvement in the modeling accuracy. Following the software release of AlphaFold2, predicted structures by AlphaFold2 for proteins in 21 species were made publicly available via the AlphaFold Database. Here, to facilitate structural analysis and application of AlphaFold2 models, we provide the infrastructure, 3D-AF-Surfer, which allows real-time structure-based search for the AlphaFold2 models. In 3D-AF-Surfer, structures are represented with 3D Zernike descriptors (3DZD), which is a rotationally invariant, mathematical representation of 3D shapes. We developed a neural network that takes 3DZDs of proteins as input and retrieves proteins of the same fold more accurately than direct comparison of 3DZDs. Using 3D-AF-Surfer, we report structure classifications of AlphaFold2 models and discuss the correlation between confidence levels of AlphaFold2 models and intrinsic disordered regions., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Proteins are essential to nearly all cellular mechanism and the effectors of the cells activities. As such, they often interact through their surface with other proteins or other cellular ligands such as ions or organic molecules. The evolution generates plenty of different proteins, with unique abilities, but also proteins with related functions hence similar 3D surface properties (shape, physico-chemical properties, …). The protein surfaces are therefore of primary importance for their activity. In the present work, we assess the ability of different methods to detect such similarities based on the geometry of the protein surfaces (described as 3D meshes), using either their shape only, or their shape and the electrostatic potential (a biologically relevant property of proteins surface). Five different groups participated in this contest using the shape-only dataset, and one group extended its pre-existing method to handle the electrostatic potential. Our comparative study reveals both the ability of the methods to detect related proteins and their difficulties to distinguish between highly related proteins. Our study allows also to analyze the putative influence of electrostatic information in addition to the one of protein shapes alone. Finally, the discussion permits to expose the results with respect to ones obtained in the previous contests for the extended method. The source codes of each presented method have been made available online., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

We present the results for CAPRI Round 50, the fourth joint CASP-CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round comprised a total of twelve targets, including six dimers, three trimers, and three higher-order oligomers. Four of these were easy targets, for which good structural templates were available either for the full assembly, or for the main interfaces (of the higher-order oligomers). Eight were difficult targets for which only distantly related templates were found for the individual subunits. Twenty-five CAPRI groups including eight automatic servers submitted ~1250 models per target. Twenty groups including six servers participated in the CAPRI scoring challenge submitted ~190 models per target. The accuracy of the predicted models was evaluated using the classical CAPRI criteria. The prediction performance was measured by a weighted scoring scheme that takes into account the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group as part of their five top-ranking models. Compared to the previous CASP-CAPRI challenge, top performing groups submitted such models for a larger fraction (70-75%) of the targets in this Round, but fewer of these models were of high accuracy. Scorer groups achieved stronger performance with more groups submitting correct models for 70-80% of the targets or achieving high accuracy predictions. Servers performed less well in general, except for the MDOCKPP and LZERD servers, who performed on par with human groups. In addition to these results, major advances in methodology are discussed, providing an informative overview of where the prediction of protein assemblies currently stands., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Protein complexes are involved in many important processes in living cells. To understand the mechanisms of these processes, it is necessary to solve the 3D structures of the protein complexes. When protein complex structures have not yet been determined by experiment, protein-protein docking tools can be used to computationally model the structures of these complexes. Here, we present a webserver which provides access to LZerD and Multi-LZerD protein docking tools. The protocol provided by the server have performed consistently among the top in the CAPRI blind evaluation. LZerD docks pairs of structures, while Multi-LZerD can dock three or more structures simultaneously. LZerD uses a soft protein surface representation with 3D Zernike descriptors and explores the binding pose space using geometric hashing. Multi-LZerD performs multi-chain docking by combining pairwise solutions by LZerD. Both methods output full-atom docked models of the input proteins. Users can also input distance constraints between interacting or non-interacting residues as well as residues that locate at the interface or far from the interface. The webserver is equipped with a user-friendly panel that visualizes the distribution and structures of binding poses of top scoring models. The LZerD webserver is available at https://lzerd.kiharalab.org., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Nucleic Acids Research.)

Computational protein-protein docking is one of the most intensively studied topics in structural bioinformatics. The field has made substantial progress through over three decades of development. The development began with methods for rigid-body docking of two proteins, which have now been extended in different directions to cover the various macromolecular interactions observed in a cell. Here, we overview the recent developments of the variations of docking methods, including multiple protein docking, peptide-protein docking, and disordered protein docking methods., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

We report the performance of the protein docking prediction pipeline of our group and the results for Critical Assessment of Prediction of Interactions (CAPRI) rounds 38-46. The pipeline integrates programs developed in our group as well as other existing scoring functions. The core of the pipeline is the LZerD protein-protein docking algorithm. If templates of the target complex are not found in PDB, the first step of our docking prediction pipeline is to run LZerD for a query protein pair. Meanwhile, in the case of human group prediction, we survey the literature to find information that can guide the modeling, such as protein-protein interface information. In addition to any literature information and binding residue prediction, generated docking decoys were selected by a rank aggregation of statistical scoring functions. The top 10 decoys were relaxed by a short molecular dynamics simulation before submission to remove atom clashes and improve side-chain conformations. In these CAPRI rounds, our group, particularly the LZerD server, showed robust performance. On the other hand, there are failed cases where some other groups were successful. To understand weaknesses of our pipeline, we analyzed sources of errors for failed targets. Since we noted that structure refinement is a step that needs improvement, we newly performed a comparative study of several refinement approaches. Finally, we show several examples that illustrate successful and unsuccessful cases by our group., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

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., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)