Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Ligand Binding Sites

Ligand Binding Sites

Proteins are dynamic macromolecules that carry out a wide variety of essential processes; however, the activities of most proteins depend on their interactions with other molecules or ions, known as ligands.
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...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

T cell decision-making decodes the dynamic antigenic landscape.

Frontiers in immunology·2026

Same author

Subclonal immune evasion in non-small cell lung cancer.

Cancer cell·2026

Same author

The T-cell receptor repertoire of wild mice.

Discovery immunology·2026

Same author

Tumour-intrinsic features shape T cell differentiation through precursor to symptomatic multiple myeloma.

Nature communications·2026

Same author

Intestinal macrophages modulate synucleinopathy along the gut-brain axis.

Nature·2026

Same author

Transforaminal Versus Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Radiographic, Perioperative, and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons·2025

Same journal

TLR7/8 agonist 3M-052 formulated in micelles induces local type I IFN response and antiviral immunity in zebrafish larvae.

Frontiers in immunology·2026

Same journal

HLA-DRB1*15:01 drives sex- and age-dependent microglial immune phenotypes and neuroimmune signaling.

Frontiers in immunology·2026

Same journal

Gut microbiota transfer from autoimmune dry eye mice imprints stereotypic B cell receptor repertoires in the lacrimal gland and induces disease.

Frontiers in immunology·2026

Same journal

Exosomal microRNAs in colorectal cancer communication networks: implications for metastasis, therapy resistance, and precision medicine.

Frontiers in immunology·2026

Same journal

TMEM160 promotes hepatocellular carcinoma cell proliferation, invasion, and immune evasion by regulating the VEGFA/PI3K/AKT signaling axis.

Frontiers in immunology·2026

Same journal

Nurr1 deficiency orchestrates a coupled liver-gut pathological axis revealed by multi-omics and deep-learning histopathology.

Frontiers in immunology·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 1, 2025

Application of I TASSER, trRosetta, UCSF Chimera, HADDOCK server, and HEX loria for De Novo and In Silico Design of Proteins

Application 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

Information-Driven Docking for TCR-pMHC Complex Prediction.

Thomas Peacock^1,2, Benny Chain¹

¹Division of Infection and Immunity, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Frontiers in Immunology

|June 28, 2021

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Computational modeling accurately predicts T cell receptor (TCR) and peptide-MHC (pMHC) interactions. HADDOCK demonstrated superior performance among four docking platforms, aiding TCR-based therapeutics and vaccine design.

Keywords:

ClusPro HADDOCK LightDock T cell receptor ZDOCK complementarity determining region loops computational modelling docking

More Related Videos

Measuring TCR-pMHC Binding In Situ using a FRET-based Microscopy Assay

Measuring TCR-pMHC Binding In Situ using a FRET-based Microscopy Assay

Published on: October 30, 2015

Using X-ray Crystallography, Biophysics, and Functional Assays to Determine the Mechanisms Governing T-cell Receptor Recognition of Cancer Antigens

Using X-ray Crystallography, Biophysics, and Functional Assays to Determine the Mechanisms Governing T-cell Receptor Recognition of Cancer Antigens

Published on: February 6, 2017

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 1, 2025

Application of I TASSER, trRosetta, UCSF Chimera, HADDOCK server, and HEX loria for De Novo and In Silico Design of Proteins

Application 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

Measuring TCR-pMHC Binding In Situ using a FRET-based Microscopy Assay

Measuring TCR-pMHC Binding In Situ using a FRET-based Microscopy Assay

Published on: October 30, 2015

Using X-ray Crystallography, Biophysics, and Functional Assays to Determine the Mechanisms Governing T-cell Receptor Recognition of Cancer Antigens

Using X-ray Crystallography, Biophysics, and Functional Assays to Determine the Mechanisms Governing T-cell Receptor Recognition of Cancer Antigens

Published on: February 6, 2017

Area of Science:

Immunology
Computational Biology
Structural Biology

Background:

T cell receptor (TCR) recognition of peptide-MHC (pMHC) complexes is central to adaptive immunity.
Understanding TCR-pMHC interactions is vital for developing TCR-based therapeutics and vaccines.
High TCR diversity and cross-reactivity challenge traditional structural determination methods.

Purpose of the Study:

To evaluate and compare the accuracy of four general-purpose docking platforms (ClusPro, LightDock, ZDOCK, HADDOCK) for TCR-pMHC complex modeling.
To assess the impact of varying binding interface information on model accuracy.
To provide guidance on optimal docking strategies for TCR-pMHC modeling.

Main Methods:

Utilized an expanded benchmark set of 44 TCR-pMHC docking cases.
Tested four distinct computational docking platforms: ClusPro, LightDock, ZDOCK, and HADDOCK.
Assessed platform performance based on the accuracy of predicted TCR-pMHC complex structures.

Main Results:

HADDOCK generally outperformed ClusPro, LightDock, and ZDOCK in accurately modeling TCR-pMHC complexes.
The study identified specific strengths and weaknesses of each platform regarding interface information utilization.
Performance varied across platforms depending on the docking strategy employed.

Conclusions:

Computational modeling, particularly with HADDOCK, offers an efficient alternative to experimental methods for TCR-pMHC structure determination.
The findings provide valuable insights for selecting appropriate docking tools and strategies in immunoinformatics research.
The benchmark dataset is publicly available to facilitate future research in TCR-pMHC complex modeling.