Evaluating the conformational space of the active site of D2 dopamine receptor. Scope and limitations of the standard docking methods
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 21, 2025

Incorporating Target Protein Structure Flexibility and Dynamics in Computational Drug Discovery Using Ensemble-Based Docking Analysis
Published on: June 20, 2025
Rodrigo D Tosso1, M Natalia C Zarycz1, Ayelén Schiel1
1Facultad de Química, Bioquímica y Farmacia, Universidad Nacional de San Luis, Instituto Multidisciplinario de Investigaciones Biológicas, San Luis, Argentina.
Abstract:
We report here for the first time the potential energy surfaces (PES) of phenyletilamine (PEA) and meta-tyramine (m-OH-PEA) at the D2 dopamine receptor (D2DR) binding site. PESs not only allow us to observe all the critical points of the surface (minimums, maximums, and transition states), but also to note the ease or difficulty that each local minima have for their conformational inter-conversions and therefore know the conformational flexibility that these ligands have in their active sites. Taking advantage of possessing this valuable information, we analyze how accurate a standard docking study is in these cases. Our results indicate that although we have to be careful in how to carry out this type of study and to consider performing some extra-simulations, docking calculations can be satisfactory. In order to analyze in detail the different molecular interactions that are stabilizing the different ligand-receptor (L-R) complexes, we carried out quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM) computations and NMR shielding calculations. Although some of these techniques are a bit tedious and require more computational time, our results demonstrate the importance of performing computational simulations using different types of combined techniques (docking/MD/hybrid QM-MM/QTAIM and NMR shielding calculations) in order to obtain more accurate results. Our results allow us to understand in details the molecular interactions stabilizing and destabilizing the different L-R complexes reported here. Thus, the different activities observed for dopamine (DA), m-OH-PEA, and PEA can be clearly explained at molecular level.
More Related Videos
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
10:29Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship, Activity Prediction, and Molecular Dynamics of Non-nucleotide Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors
Published on: May 9, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Conserved Binding Sites
Binding sites are often located in large pockets, and if their location on a protein’s surface is unknown, it can be predicted using various approaches. The energetic method computationally...
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: Determination Methods
Indirect methods involve isolating the bound drug from its free form in biological samples such as blood, serum, or plasma. These techniques aim to measure the percentage of drugs bound to proteins. Equilibrium dialysis is a commonly used method where the free drug concentration at equilibrium is measured by separating the bound...
Ligand Binding and Linkage
The Two-State Receptor Model
The binding affinity of a drug determines its interaction with...
Structure-Activity Relationships and Drug Design
SAR studies the intricate relationship between a drug's chemical structure and biological activity. It focuses on understanding how modifications to a drug's structure can influence...