Published online 4 July 2006
© 2006 The Author(s)
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk/) which permits unrestricted non-commerical use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Article |
Information-driven protein–DNA docking using HADDOCK: it is a matter of flexibility
NMR Spectroscopy Research Group, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research, Faculty of Sciences, Utrecht University The Netherlands 1 Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Oregon State University Corvallis, USA
*To whom correspondence may be addressed. Tel: +31 30 2533859; Fax: +31 30 2537623; Email: a.m.j.j.bonvin{at}chem.uu.nl
Received April 27, 2006. Revised May 16, 2006. Accepted May 18, 2006.
Intrinsic flexibility of DNA has hampered the development of efficient protein–DNA docking methods. In this study we extend HADDOCK (High Ambiguity Driven DOCKing) [C. Dominguez, R. Boelens and A. M. J. J. Bonvin (2003) J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125, 1731–1737] to explicitly deal with DNA flexibility. HADDOCK uses non-structural experimental data to drive the docking during a rigid-body energy minimization, and semi-flexible and water refinement stages. The latter allow for flexibility of all DNA nucleotides and the residues of the protein at the predicted interface. We evaluated our approach on the monomeric repressor–DNA complexes formed by bacteriophage 434 Cro, the Escherichia coli Lac headpiece and bacteriophage P22 Arc. Starting from unbound proteins and canonical B-DNA we correctly predict the correct spatial disposition of the complexes and the specific conformation of the DNA in the published complexes. This information is subsequently used to generate a library of pre-bent and twisted DNA structures that served as input for a second docking round. The resulting top ranking solutions exhibit high similarity to the published complexes in terms of root mean square deviations, intermolecular contacts and DNA conformation. Our two-stage docking method is thus able to successfully predict protein–DNA complexes from unbound constituents using non-structural experimental data to drive the docking.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. van Dijk and A. M. J. J. Bonvin A protein-DNA docking benchmark Nucleic Acids Res., June 26, 2008; (2008) gkn386v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Gamsjaeger, M. K. Swanton, F. J. Kobus, E. Lehtomaki, J. A. Lowry, A. H. Kwan, J. M. Matthews, and J. P. Mackay Structural and Biophysical Analysis of the DNA Binding Properties of Myelin Transcription Factor 1 J. Biol. Chem., February 22, 2008; 283(8): 5158 - 5167. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Boudet, V. Duval, H. Van Melckebeke, M. Blackledge, A. Amoroso, B. Joris, and J.-P. Simorre Conformational and thermodynamic changes of the repressor/DNA operator complex upon monomerization shed new light on regulation mechanisms of bacterial resistance against {beta}-lactam antibiotics Nucleic Acids Res., July 26, 2007; 35(13): 4384 - 4395. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Tjong and H.-X. Zhou DISPLAR: an accurate method for predicting DNA-binding sites on protein surfaces Nucleic Acids Res., March 12, 2007; 35(5): 1465 - 1477. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. W. Siggers and B. Honig Structure-based prediction of C2H2 zinc-finger binding specificity: sensitivity to docking geometry Nucleic Acids Res., February 28, 2007; 35(4): 1085 - 1097. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. D. J. van Dijk and A. M. J. J. Bonvin Solvated docking: introducing water into the modelling of biomolecular complexes Bioinformatics, October 1, 2006; 22(19): 2340 - 2347. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|