Skip Navigation


Bioinformatics Advance Access originally published online on March 7, 2006
Bioinformatics 2006 22(11):1335-1342; doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btl079
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (Print PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
22/11/1335    most recent
btl079v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Burgoyne, N. J.
Right arrow Articles by Jackson, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Burgoyne, N. J.
Right arrow Articles by Jackson, R. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Predicting protein interaction sites: binding hot-spots in protein–protein and protein–ligand interfaces

Nicholas J. Burgoyne and Richard M. Jackson *

Institute of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds Leeds LS2 9JT, UK

*To whom correspondence should be addressed.

Motivation: Protein assemblies are currently poorly represented in structural databases and their structural elucidation is a key goal in biology. Here we analyse clefts in protein surfaces, likely to correspond to binding ‘hot-spots’, and rank them according to sequence conservation and simple measures of physical properties including hydrophobicity, desolvation, electrostatic and van der Waals potentials, to predict which are involved in binding in the native complex.

Results: The resulting differences between predicting binding-sites at protein–protein and protein–ligand interfaces are striking. There is a high level of prediction accuracy (≤93%) for protein–ligand interactions, based on the following attributes: van der Waals potential, electrostatic potential, desolvation and surface conservation. Generally, the prediction accuracy for protein–protein interactions is lower, with the exception of enzymes. Our results show that the ease of cleft desolvation is strongly predictive of interfaces and strongly maintained across all classes of protein-binding interface.

Contact: r.m.jackson{at}leeds.ac.uk

Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Received on January 20, 2006; revised on February 14, 2006; accepted on February 28, 2006

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
H.-X. Zhou and S. Qin
Interaction-site prediction for protein complexes: a critical assessment
Bioinformatics, September 1, 2007; 23(17): 2203 - 2209.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.