Using AutoDock 4 with ADT: A Tutorial

Similar documents
Using AutoDock With AutoDockTools: A Tutorial

Using AutoDock 4 with ADT: A Tutorial

BCB410 Protein-Ligand Docking Exercise Set Shirin Shahsavand December 11, 2011

Protein-Ligand Docking Methods

Ranking of HIV-protease inhibitors using AutoDock

Small Molecule & Protein Docking CHEM 430

What is Protein-Ligand Docking?

Protein-Ligand Docking Methods

Introduction to AutoDock and AutoDock Tools

Softwares for Molecular Docking. Lokesh P. Tripathi NCBS 17 December 2007

Computational modeling of G-Protein Coupled Receptors (GPCRs) has recently become

Using AutoDock 4 and Vina with AutoDockTools: A Tutorial

Docking. GBCB 5874: Problem Solving in GBCB

User Guide for LeDock

NIH Public Access Author Manuscript J Comput Chem. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 18.

OpenDiscovery: Automated Docking of Ligands to Proteins and Molecular Simulation

Kd = koff/kon = [R][L]/[RL]

Modeling the Enantioselective Enzymatic Reaction with Modified Genetic Docking Algorithm

Autodock tutorial VINA with UCSF Chimera

AutoDock-related material

Supplementary Information. g, 29 mmol) in absolute EtOH (25 cm 3 ) was treated with diethyl oxalate (3.86 g, 26.4

Protein-Ligand Docking Evaluations

Protein-Ligand Docking Using AutoDock 4 Shirin Shahsavand Professor Boris Steipe

Using AutoDock with AutoDockTools: A Tutorial

Homology modeling. Dinesh Gupta ICGEB, New Delhi 1/27/2010 5:59 PM

A genetic algorithm for the ligand-protein docking problem

María Jesús García-Godoy, Esteban López-Camacho, José García-Nieto, Antonio J. Nebro and José F. Aldana-Montes *

User Guide. AutoDock 2.4. Version 2.4. Garrett M. Morris, David S. Goodsell, & Ruth Huey. Arthur J. Olson

MOLECULAR RECOGNITION DOCKING ALGORITHMS. Natasja Brooijmans 1 and Irwin D. Kuntz 2

Structural Bioinformatics (C3210) Molecular Docking

ONETEP PB/SA: Application to G-Quadruplex DNA Stability. Danny Cole

CHAPTER-5 MOLECULAR DOCKING STUDIES

Computational statistics

Molecular Mechanics, Dynamics & Docking

Tutorial: Molecular docking

Molecular Simulation III

Towards Physics-based Models for ADME/Tox. Tyler Day

Chemical properties that affect binding of enzyme-inhibiting drugs to enzymes

Using AutoDock for Virtual Screening

AutoDock Version 4.2

Flexibility and Constraints in GOLD

11. IN SILICO DOCKING ANALYSIS

PROTEIN-PROTEIN DOCKING REFINEMENT USING RESTRAINT MOLECULAR DYNAMICS SIMULATIONS

DISCRETE TUTORIAL. Agustí Emperador. Institute for Research in Biomedicine, Barcelona APPLICATION OF DISCRETE TO FLEXIBLE PROTEIN-PROTEIN DOCKING:

5.1. Hardwares, Softwares and Web server used in Molecular modeling

Chemical properties that affect binding of enzyme-inhibiting drugs to enzymes

Conformational Searching using MacroModel and ConfGen. John Shelley Schrödinger Fellow

ICM-Chemist-Pro How-To Guide. Version 3.6-1h Last Updated 12/29/2009

Chapter 8: Introduction to Evolutionary Computation

Portal. User Guide Version 1.0. Contributors

Molecular docking-based test for affinities of two ligands toward vasopressin and oxytocin receptors

André Schleife Department of Materials Science and Engineering

Analyzing Molecular Conformations Using the Cambridge Structural Database. Jason Cole Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre

RNA evolution and Genotype to Phenotype maps

Catalytic Mechanism of the Glycyl Radical Enzyme 4-Hydroxyphenylacetate Decarboxylase from Continuum Electrostatic and QC/MM Calculations

Docking with Water in the Binding Site using GOLD

Laboratory Exercises. Molecular Docking of Enzyme Inhibitors* hs A COMPUTATIONAL TOOL FOR STRUCTURE-BASED DRUG DESIGN

Computational protein design

High Throughput In-Silico Screening Against Flexible Protein Receptors

Using Molecular Dynamics and Enhanced Sampling to Predict Binding Poses Beyond The Rigid Docking Approximation

Structural Bioinformatics (C3210) Molecular Mechanics

New techniques of molecular modelling and structural chemistry for the development of bioactive compounds

Protein Structure Prediction and Protein-Ligand Docking

Receptor Based Drug Design (1)

Electronic Supplementary Information: Protein-ligand docking using fitness learning-based. artificial bee colony with proximity stimuli

Lesson 4: Understanding Genetics

ACTA UNIVERSITATIS SAPIENTIAE AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENT, 7 (2015)

Protein-Ligand Docking

Local Search & Optimization

Pose and affinity prediction by ICM in D3R GC3. Max Totrov Molsoft

Enhancing Specificity in the Janus Kinases: A Study on the Thienopyridine. JAK2 Selective Mechanism Combined Molecular Dynamics Simulation

Tutorial. Getting started. Sample to Insight. March 31, 2016

Metaheuristics and Local Search

Dihedral Angles. Homayoun Valafar. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, USC 02/03/10 CSCE 769

Ligand Scout Tutorials

MM-GBSA for Calculating Binding Affinity A rank-ordering study for the lead optimization of Fxa and COX-2 inhibitors

Today s lecture. Molecular Mechanics and docking. Lecture 22. Introduction to Bioinformatics Docking - ZDOCK. Protein-protein docking

Metaheuristics and Local Search. Discrete optimization problems. Solution approaches

Genetic Algorithms. Donald Richards Penn State University

Generating Small Molecule Conformations from Structural Data

Dr. Sander B. Nabuurs. Computational Drug Discovery group Center for Molecular and Biomolecular Informatics Radboud University Medical Centre

Introduction to Structure Preparation and Visualization

International Journal of Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences. International Journal of Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences

Bioengineering 215. An Introduction to Molecular Dynamics for Biomolecules

Ignasi Belda, PhD CEO. HPC Advisory Council Spain Conference 2015

Ultra High Throughput Screening using THINK on the Internet

Molecular Modeling -- Lecture 15 Surfaces and electrostatics

Protein Docking by Exploiting Multi-dimensional Energy Funnels

LOCAL SEARCH. Today. Reading AIMA Chapter , Goals Local search algorithms. Introduce adversarial search 1/31/14

All-atom Molecular Mechanics. Trent E. Balius AMS 535 / CHE /27/2010

Other Cells. Hormones. Viruses. Toxins. Cell. Bacteria

Alchemical free energy calculations in OpenMM

Local Search & Optimization

Overview & Applications. T. Lezon Hands-on Workshop in Computational Biophysics Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center 04 June, 2015

A Motion Planning Approach to Flexible Ligand Binding

Exercise 2: Solvating the Structure Before you continue, follow these steps: Setting up Periodic Boundary Conditions

Ensemble Docking with GOLD

PDBe TUTORIAL. PDBePISA (Protein Interfaces, Surfaces and Assemblies)

Chapter 1. Topic: Overview of basic principles

BIOINF527: STRUCTURAL BIOINFORMATICS LAB SESSION

Transcription:

Using AutoDock 4 with ADT: A Tutorial Ruth Huey Sargis Dallakyan Alex Perryman David S. Goodsell (Garrett Morris) 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 1

What is Docking? Predicting the best ways two molecules will interact. (1) (2) (3) 9/2/08 Start with the 3D structures of the two molecules. (Limit to the best binding site.) Determine the best binding modes. Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 2

Key aspects of docking Scoring Functions What are they? Search Methods How do they work? Which search method should I use? Dimensionality What is it? Why is it important? 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 3

AutoDock 4 Scoring Function Terms Physics-based approach with terms from molecular mechanics methods ΔG binding = ΔG vdw + ΔG elec + ΔG hbond + ΔG desolv + ΔG tors ΔG vdw = ΔG vdw 12-6 Lennard-Jones potential ΔG elec with distance-dependent dielectric ΔG hbond 12-10 H-bonding potential with directionality ΔG desolv Charge-dependent variant of volume-based atomic solvation parameters ΔG tors Number of rotatable bonds http://autodock.scripps.edu/science/equations http://autodock.scripps.edu/science/autodock-4-desolvation-free-energy/ 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 4

Empirical Free Energy Force Field A V = W ij vdw 12 r B ij +W 6 hbond E(t) C ij 12 i, j ij r ij r D ij +W q i q j 10 elec i, j ij r ij i, j ε(r ij )r +W S V + S V sol i j j i ij i, j ( ) e ( r ij 2 / 2σ 2 ) Calibrated with 188 complexes from LPDB, K i s from PDB-Bind Standard error (in Kcal/mol): 2.52 (AutoDock4) 2.63 (AutoDock 3) 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 5

Improved H-bond Directionality Hydrogen affinity AutoGrid 3 Oxygen affinity Guanine Cytosine AutoGrid 4 Guanine Cytosine Huey, Goodsell, Morris, and Olson (2004) Letts. Drug Des. & Disc., 1: 178-183 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 6

Why Use Grid Maps? Saves time: Pre-computing the interactions on a grid is typically 100 times faster than pairwise methods O(N 2 ) calculation becomes O(N) AutoDock needs one map for each atom type in the ligand(s) and moving parts of receptor (if there are any) Drawback: The receptor is conformationally rigid (although vdw softened ) Limits the search space 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 7

Setting up the AutoGrid Box Center: center of ligand; center of macromolecule; a picked atom; or typed-in x-, y- and z-coordinates. Grid point spacing: default is 0.375Å (from 0.2Å to 1.0Å: : ). Number of grid points in each dimension: from 2 2 2 to 126 126 126 Make sure all the flexible parts of the macromolecule are inside the grid Make sure that the entire binding site is inside the grid 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 8

Two Kinds of Search Systematic Exhaustive Deterministic Outcome is dependent on granularity of sampling Feasible only for low- dimensional problems e.g. DOT (6D) Stochastic Random Outcome varies Must repeat the search or perform more steps to improve chances of success Feasible for larger problems e.g. AutoDock 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 9

AutoDock Search Methods Global search algorithms: Simulated Annealing (Goodsell et al. 1990) Genetic Algorithm (Morris et al. 1998) Local search algorithm: Solis & Wets (Morris et al. 1998) Hybrid global-local search algorithm: Lamarckian GA (Morris et al. 1998) 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 10

How Simulated Annealing Works Ligand starts at a random (or user-specified) position/orientation/conformation ( state( state ) Constant-temperature annealing cycle: Ligand s s state undergoes a random change. Compare the energy of the new position with that of the last position; if it is: lower,, the move is accepted ; higher,, the move is accepted if e (-ΔE/kT) > 0 ; otherwise the current move is rejected. the Metropolis criterion Cycle ends when we exceed either the number of accepted or rejected moves. Annealing temperature is reduced, 0.85 < g < 1 T i = g T i-1 Repeat. Stops at the maximum number of cycles. 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 11

How a Genetic Algorithm Works Start with a random population (50-300) Genes correspond to state variables Perform genetic operations Crossover 1-point crossover, ABCD + abcd Abcd + abcd 2-point crossover, ABCD + abcd AbCD + abcd uniform crossover, ABCD + abcd AbCd + abcd arithmetic crossover, ABCD + abcd [α ABCD + (1- α) abcd cd] ] + [(1- α) ABCD + α abcd cd] ] where: 0 < α < 1 Mutation add or subtract a random amount from randomly selected genes, A A Compute the fitness of individuals (energy evaluation) Proportional Selection & Elitism If total energy evaluations or maximum generations reached, stop 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 12

How a Lamarckian GA works Lamarckian: phenotypic adaptations of an individual to its environment can be mapped to its genotype & inherited by its offspring. Typical GA evolves the Genotype (state variables)--the Phenotype (atomic coordinates) is used to evaluate the fitness of each individual Lamarkian GA allows local optimization of the Phenotype, which is then applied to the Genotype Solis and Wets local search advantage that it does not require gradient information in order to proceed Rik Belew (UCSD) & William Hart (Sandia). 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 13

Important Search Parameters Simulated Annealing Initial temperature (K) rt0 61600 Temperature reduction factor (K -1 cycle) rtrf 0.95 Termination criteria: accepted moves accs 25000 rejected moves rejs 25000 annealing cycles cycles 50 Genetic Algorithm & Lamarckian GA Population size ga_pop_size 300 Crossover rate ga_crossover_rate 0.8 Mutation rate ga_mutation_rate 0.02 Solis & Wets local search (LGA only) sw_max_its 300 Termination criteria: ga_num_evals 250000 # short ga_num_evals 2500000 # medium ga_num_evals 25000000 # long ga_num_generations 27000 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 14

Dimensionality of Molecular Docking Degrees of Freedom (DOF) Position / Translation (3) x,y,z Orientation / Quaternion (3) qx, qy, qz, qw (normalized in 4D) Rotatable Bonds / Torsions (n)( τ 1, τ 2, τ n Dimensionality, D = 3 + 3 + n 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 15

Sampling Hyperspace Say we are hunting in D-dimensional hyperspace We want to evaluate each of the D dimensions N times. The number of evals needed, n,, is: n = N D N = n 1/D For example, if n = 10 6 and D=6, N = (10 6 ) 1/6 = 10 evaluations per dimension D=20, N = (10 6 ) 1/20 = ~2 evaluations per dimension Clearly, the more dimensions, the tougher it gets. 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 16

Practical Considerations What range of problems is feasible? Depends on the search method: LGA > GA >> SA >> LS SA : can output trajectories, D < about 8 torsions. LGA : D < about 8-16 torsions. When is AutoDock not suitable? Modeled structure of poor quality; Too many torsions (32 max); Target protein too flexible. 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 17

Using AutoDock: Step-by-Step Prepare the Following Input Files Ligand PDBQT file Rigid Macromolecule PDBQT file Flexible Macromolecule PDBQT file ( Flexres( Flexres ) AutoGrid Parameter File (GPF) Run AutoGrid 4 Run AutoDock 4 GPF depends on atom types in: Ligand PDBQT file Optional flexible residue PDBQT files) AutoDock Parameter File (DPF) Macromolecule PDBQT + GPF Grid Maps, GLG Grid Maps + Ligand PDBQT + [Flexres[ PDBQT +] DPF DLG (dockings & clustering) Run ADT to Analyze DLG 9/2/08 Using AutoDock 4 with ADT 18