Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Electrostatic complementarity between proteins and ligands. 1. Charge disposition, dielectric and interface effects

P L Chau1, P M Dean

  • 1Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, U.K.

Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design
|October 1, 1994
PubMed
Summary

This study quantitatively analyzed electrostatic complementarity in ligand-receptor interactions using Brookhaven Protein Data Bank data. Results show complementarity is absent between adjacent atoms, with minimal difference between total and interfacial surfaces.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Relational bodies.

Journal of law and medicine·2014
Same author

The pyridylthioacetmorpholides and pyridylacetic acids.

Journal of the American Chemical Society·2010
Same author

Chemical genomics: a challenge for de novo drug design.

Molecular biotechnology·2007
Same author

The impact of epilepsy surgery on quality of life in children.

Neurology·2006
Same author

Analysis methods for identifying coordinated movements during ligand unbinding.

Journal of computer-aided molecular design·2003
Same author

Reality hits postdocs earlier in France.

Nature·2001

Area of Science:

  • Biochemistry
  • Structural Biology
  • Computational Chemistry

Background:

  • Electrostatic interactions are crucial for ligand-receptor binding.
  • Previous understanding of electrostatic complementarity is largely qualitative.
  • Rigorous quantitative analysis is needed.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To quantitatively assess electrostatic complementarity between ligands and receptors.
  • To investigate the role of adjacent atoms and surface regions in complementarity.
  • To evaluate the impact of dielectric models on complementarity calculations.

Main Methods:

  • Utilized 34 high-quality datasets from the Brookhaven Protein Data Bank.
  • Calculated electrostatic complementarity based on surface potentials.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Compared complementarity across total ligand surface, interfacial regions, and adjacent atoms.
  • Assessed the effect of homogeneous versus distance-dependent dielectric models.

    • Main Results:

    • Electrostatic complementarity is absent between adjacent or neighboring ligand and receptor atoms.
    • Little difference observed between complementarity on the total ligand surface and the interfacial region.
    • Distance-dependent dielectrics slightly reduce complementarity but do not alter its overall pattern.

    Conclusions:

    • The study provides a rigorous, quantitative assessment of electrostatic complementarity.
    • Findings challenge the notion of significant electrostatic complementarity at the atomic level between interacting partners.
    • The choice of dielectric model has a minor impact on the observed complementarity patterns.