Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
01/
02/
There are 2 types of docking;
1. Rigid docking
2. Flexible docking
Molecular docking encompasses a range of methods to study the interaction between a ligand and a target protein. Understanding these methods can help in designing novel compounds and optimizing their binding affinity.
In molecular docking, several methods can be employed to predict the binding mode and affinity of a ligand with a target protein. Some of these methods include the Monte Carlo approach, Metropolis criterion, fragment-based method, distance geometry, matching approach, ligand fit approach, point complementarity approach, blind docking, and inverse docking.
International Research Journal of Pure & Applied Chemistry
03/
05/
1. Protein structure organization
2. Search method and scoring
3. Modeling a flexible protein receptor
4. Studying interaction between molecules
5. Identifying inhibitor molecules
Docking is a valuable tool in drug design to understand the effects of ligand-protein interactions and optimize the design of new compounds.
Docking plays a crucial role in drug design by studying the interaction between a small molecule ligand and an enzyme protein. This binding communication between the ligand and protein can result in the activation or inhibition of the enzyme. Additionally, if the protein is a receptor, ligand binding can lead to agonist or antagonist effects. Docking is primarily used in the field of drug design, where it can be applied to small organic molecules commonly found in drugs.
04/
Step 1: Protein preparation involves...
Step 2: Active site prediction is done...
Step 3: Ligand preparation includes...
Step 4: The final step is...
the Docking process involves the following steps:
Hit identification: Utilize the flexible docking methods mentioned earlier to identify potential ligands that have a high binding affinity to the target protein.
Lead optimization: Once potential ligands have been identified, apply various optimization techniques to enhance their potency, selectivity, and drug-like properties.
Bioremediation: Explore the application of the optimized ligands in bioremediation processes for environmental cleanup.
The interdependence between sampling and scoring function affect the docking capacity in predict possible poses or binding affinities for novel compounds. Thus, an evaluation of a docking protocol is normally essential (when experimental data is available) to determine its
analytical capability. Docking measurement can be performing using different strategy
Assessing the accuracy of molecular docking
Evaluating the performance of a docking method on newly generated data
Comparing the performance of different docking methods
A measure of the ability of a docking method to distinguish true ligands from decoys
remain significant challenge. Scoring function is
a fundamental component worth being further
improved upon in docking. Successful application
examples show that computational approaches
have the power to screen hits from a huge
database and design novel small molecules.
However, the realistic interactions between small
molecules and receptors are still relied on
experimental technology. Accurate as well
as low computational cost scoring functions
may bring docking application to a new stage.
New algorithm from industry and academia
are quickly incorporated into the high end
packages. It continues to extend role in exciting
new techniques such as computational
enzymology, genomics and proteomics search
engines.
Molecular docking provides an array of valuable
tools for drug design and analysis. Simple
visualization of molecules and easy access to
structural databases has become essential
components on the desktop of the medicinal
chemist. Commercial software program continue
to expand upon core user interface. The
probable docking method is done after
systematically screening of the target, ligand and
docking technique presentation. The ligand
flexibility though is almost determined and does
not generate much difficulty however protein
suppleness needs to be enhanced. Water
molecules should be incorporated to think the
hydrogen bonding with non-aqueous residue. It is
apparent from docking prose that it has attain a
good amount of adulthood and in this short
review, we have focused on types, approaches,
applications of molecular docking in concise but
secretarial for flexibility and thriving scoring
15. McMartin C, Bohacek RS, et al. QXP:
Powerful, Rapid Computer Algorithms for
Structure-based Drug Design. J Comput
Aid. Mol. Des. 1997;11:333-344.15.
16. Schnecke V, Kuhn LA, et al. Virtual
Screening with Solvation and
Ligandinduced Complementarity,
Perspect. Drug Discov. 2000;20:171-
190.16.
17. Jain AN, et al. Surflex: Fully
Automatic Flexible Molecular Docking
Using a Molecular Similarity-Based
Search Engine. J Med Chem. 2003;46:
499-511.17.
18. Huang N, Shoichet BK, Irwin JJ, et al.
Benchmarking sets for molecular docking.
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 2006;
49(23):6789–801.
19. Ballante F, Marshall GR, et al. An
automated strategy for binding-pose
selection and docking assessment in
structure-based drug design. Journal of
Chemical Information and Modeling. 2016;
56.
1. Lengauer T, Rarey M. et al. Computational
methods for biomolecular docking. Current
Opinion in Structural Biology. 1986;6(3):
402–406.
2. Kitchen DB, Decornez H, Furr JR, Bajorath
J. et al. Docking and scoring in virtual
screening for drug discovery: Methods and
applications. 2004;3(11)
3. Kuntz ID, Blaney JM, Oatley SJ, Langridge
R, Ferrin TE, et al. A geometric approach
to macromolecule-ligand interactions.1982;
161:269-288.
4. Des Jarlais RL, Sheridan RP, Seibel GL,
Dixon JS, Kuntz ID, Venkataraghavan R.
et al. Using shape complementarity as an
initial screen in designing ligands for a
receptor binding site of known three
dimensional structure. J. Med. Chem.
1988;31:722-9
5. Rarey M, Kramer B, Lengauer T,
Klebe G, et al. A fast flexible docking
method using an incremental
construction algorithm. J Mol Biol. 1996;
261:470-89.
6. Jones G, Willett P, Glen RC, Leach AR,
Taylor R, et al. Development and validation
of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking.
J Mol Biol. 1997;267:727-48.
20. Bursulaya BD, Totrov M, Abagyan R,
Brooks CL, et al. Comparative study of
several algorithms for flexible ligand
docking. Journal of Computer
Aided Molecular Design. 2003;17(11):755–
63.
21. Ballante Flavio, et al. Protein-Ligand
Docking in Drug Design: Performance
Assessment and Binding-Pose Selection.
Methods in Molecular Biology. 2018;
1824:67–88.
22. Available:https://novadatasolutions.co.uk/h
it-identification
23. Irwin JJ, et al. "Community benchmarks for
virtual screening". Journal of Computer
Aided Molecular Design. 2018;22(3–4):
193–9.
24. Hartshorn MJ, Verdonk ML,
Chessari G, Brewerton SC, Mooij WT,
Mortenson PN, Murray CW. et al. Diverse,
high-quality test set for the validation of
protein-ligand docking performance.
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 2007:
50(4):726–41.
25. Hauser AS, Windshügel B, et al. A
benchmark data set for assessment of
peptide docking performance. Journal of
Chemical Information and Modeling. 2015;
56(1):188–200.
7. Abagyan R, Totrov M, Kuznetsov D, et al.
ICM - A new method for protein modelling
and design. Applications to docking and
structure prediction from the distorted
native conformation. J Comput Chem
1994;15:488-506.
8. Available:https://images.app.goo.gl/6ZfCp
UQX5nSPw4b58.
9. Ayaz Mahmood Dar, Shafia Mir, et al.
Molecular Docking: Approaches, Types,
Applications and Basic Challenges J Anal
Bioanal Tech. 2017;8:2.
10. Gaba Monika, Gaba Punam, Singh
Sarbjot, Gupta GD. Int. J. Drug Dev. &
Res. 2010;2(2):219-231.
11. Avinash R, Veerabhadra Rao A, et al. A
review on molecular docking, Novel tool in
drug design and analysis, Journal of
Harmonized Research in Pharmacy. 2013;
2(4):215-218.
12. Available:https://link.springer.com/protocol/
10.1007/978-1-59745-177-219
13. Mukesh B, Rakesh K. Molecular docking: a
review, International journal of ayurveda &
pharmacy. 2011;2(6):1746-1750.
14. Kitchen D, De cornez H, Furr J,
Bajorath J, et al. Docking and scoring invirtual screening for drug discovery:
methods and applications. International
Journal of Pharma and Bioscience. 2004;
3(11):95-97.