Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 27, 2025

Incorporating Target Protein Structure Flexibility and Dynamics in Computational Drug Discovery Using Ensemble-Based Docking Analysis
Published on: June 20, 2025
Attracting Cavities 2.0: Improving the Flexibility and Robustness for Small-Molecule Docking
Ute F Röhrig1, Mathilde Goullieux1, Marine Bugnon1
1Molecular Modeling Group, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Abstract:
Molecular docking is a computational approach for predicting the most probable position of a ligand in the binding site of a target macromolecule. Our docking algorithm Attracting Cavities (AC) has been shown to compare favorably to other widely used docking algorithms [Zoete, V.; et al. J. Comput. Chem. 2016, 37, 437]. Here we describe several improvements of AC, making the sampling more robust and providing more flexibility for either fast or high-accuracy docking. We benchmark the performance of AC 2.0 using the 285 complexes of the PDBbind Core set, version 2016. For redocking from randomized ligand conformations, AC 2.0 reaches a success rate of 73.3%, compared to 63.9% for GOLD and 58.0% for AutoDock Vina. Due to its force-field-based scoring function and its thorough sampling procedure, AC 2.0 also performs well for blind docking on the entire receptor surface. The accuracy of its scoring function allows for the detection of problematic experimental structures in the benchmark set. For cross-docking, the AC 2.0 success rate is about 30% lower than for redocking (42.5%), similar to GOLD (42.8%) and better than AutoDock Vina (33.1%), and it can be improved by an informed choice of flexible protein residues. For selected targets with a high success rate in cross-docking, AC 2.0 also achieves good enrichment factors in virtual screening.
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
10:33Development of Inhibitors of Protein-protein Interactions through REPLACE: Application to the Design and Development Non-ATP Competitive CDK Inhibitors
Published on: October 26, 2015
Related Concept Videos
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...
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...
Predicting Molecular Geometry
Induced-fit Model
Enzymes exhibit substrate specificity, meaning that they can only bind to certain substrates. This is mainly determined by the shape and chemical...
Noncovalent Attractions in Biomolecules
Four types of noncovalent interactions are hydrogen bonds, van der Waals forces, ionic bonds, and hydrophobic interactions.
Hydrogen bonding results from the electrostatic attraction of a hydrogen atom covalently bonded to a strong-electronegative atom like oxygen,...
Ligand Binding and Linkage