Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 18, 2026

Incorporating Target Protein Structure Flexibility and Dynamics in Computational Drug Discovery Using Ensemble-Based Docking Analysis
Published on: June 20, 2025
Toward the fast blind docking of a peptide to a target protein by using a four-body statistical pseudo-potential
Takuyo Aita1, Koichi Nishigaki, Yuzuru Husimi
1Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Saitama University, 255 Shimo-okubo, Saitama 338-8570, Japan. taita@mail.saitama-u.ac.jp
Abstract:
In vitro molecular evolution creates a lot of peptide aptamers that bind to each target protein. In many cases, their binding sites on a protein surface are not known. Then, predicting the binding sites through computation within a reasonable time is desirable. With this aim, we have developed a novel system of fast and robust blind docking of a peptide to a fixed protein structure at low computational costs. Our algorithm is based on the following scheme. Representing each of the amino acid residues by a single point corresponding to its side-chain center, the structure of a target protein and that of a ligand peptide are coarse-grained. The peptide, which is described as a flexible bead model, is movable along the grid-points which are set surrounding the protein. An arbitrary state of the protein-peptide complex is subjected to Delaunay tessellation. Then, the fitness of a peptide-coordination to the protein is measured by a four-body statistical pseudo-potential. Through 1000 trials of a simple hill-climbing optimization, the best 15 peptide-coordinations with the 1st-15th highest fitness values are selected as candidates for the putative coordination. Retrieving the available 28 protein-peptide complexes from the Protein Databank, we carried out the blind docking test for each system. The best 15 peptide-coordinations fell into several clusters by the cluster analysis based on their spatial distribution. We found that, in most cases, the largest cluster or second largest cluster correspond to nearly correct binding sites, and that the mean (+/- standard deviation) of GTGD over all the 28 cases is 4.8 A(+/-3.8 A), where GTGD represents the distance from the putative binding site to the correct binding site.
More Related Videos
14:34A Bilingual Computational Workflow for Identifying Potential PLK1 Inhibitors in American Sign Language and English
Published on: April 3, 2026
05:08Application of I TASSER, trRosetta, UCSF Chimera, HADDOCK server, and HEX loria for De Novo and In Silico Design of Proteins
Published on: July 8, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Protein-protein Interfaces
Directing Proteins to the Rough Endoplasmic Reticulum
Ligand Binding Sites
Protein-ligand interactions are quite specific; even though numerous potential ligands surround a cellular protein at any given time, only a particular ligand can bind to that protein. Moreover, a ligand binds only to a dedicated area on the surface of the protein, known as the...
Protein-Drug Binding: Mechanism and Kinetics
Various forces drive these interactions, including hydrogen bonds, hydrophobic interactions, ionic bonds, electrostatic interactions, and van der Waals forces. These bonds enable drugs to bind to specific sites on proteins,...
Tail-anchoring of Proteins in the ER Membrane