Abstract
Ribonuclease enzymes (RNases) play key roles in the maturation and metabolism of all RNA molecules. Computational simulations of the processes involved can help to elucidate the underlying enzymatic mechanism and is often employed in a synergistic approach together with biochemical experiments. Theoretical calculations require atomistic details regarding the starting geometries of the molecules involved, which, in the absence of crystallographic data, can only be achieved from computational docking studies. Fortunately, docking algorithms have improved tremendously in recent years, so that reliable structures of enzyme–ligand complexes can now be successfully obtained from computation. However, most docking programs are not particularly optimized for nucleotide docking. In order to assist our studies on the cleavage of RNA by the two most important ribonuclease enzymes, RNase A and RNase H, we evaluated four docking tools—MOE2009, Glide 5.5, QXP-Flo+0802, and Autodock 4.0—for their ability to simulate complexes between these enzymes and RNA oligomers. To validate our results, we analyzed the docking results with respect to the known key interactions between the protein and the nucleotide. In addition, we compared the predicted complexes with X-ray structures of the mutated enzyme as well as with structures obtained from previous calculations. In this manner, we were able to prepare the desired reaction state complex so that it could be used as the starting structure for further DFT/B3LYP QM/MM reaction mechanism studies.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Raines RT (1998) Chem Rev 98:1045–1065
Wu HJ, Lima WF, Crooke ST (2001) J Biol Chem 276:23547–23553
Hughes SH, Arnold E, Hostomska Z (1998) In: Crouch RJ, Toulme JJ (eds) Ribonuclease H. Inserm, Paris, pp 195–224
Schatz O, Cromme FV, Gruningerleitch F, Legrice SFJ (1989) Febs Lett 257:311–314
Tanese N, Goff SP (1988) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:1777–1781
Kroemer RT, Vulpetti A, McDonald JJ, Rohrer DC, Trosset JY, Giordanetto F, Cotesta S, McMartin C, Kihlen M, Stouten PFW (2004) J Chem Inf Comput Sci 44:871–881
Alisaraie L, Haller LA, Fels G (2006) J Chem Inf Model 46:1174–1187
Li YZ, Shen J, Sun XG, Li WH, Liu GX, Tang Y (2010) J Chem Inf Model 50:1134–1146
Sandor M, Kiss R, Keseru GM (2010) J Chem Inf Model 50:1165–1172
van Dijk ADJ, de Vries SJ, Dominguez C, Chen H, Zhou HX, Bonvin A (2005) Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf 60:232–238
van Dijk M, Bonvin A (2008) Nucleic Acids Res 36:e88
van Dijk M, van Dijk ADJ, Hsu V, Boelens R, Bonvin A (2006) Nucleic Acids Res 34:3317–3325
Issur M, Despins S, Bougie I, Bisaillon M (2009) Nucleic Acids Res 37:3714–3722
Kamphuis MB, Bonvin A, Monti MC, Lemonnier M, Munoz-Gomez A, van den Heuvel RHH, Diaz-Orejas R, Boelens R (2006) J Mol Biol 357:115–126
Suydam IT, Levandoski SD, Strobel SA (2010) Biochemistry 49:3723–3732
Hostomska Z, Matthews D, Hostomsky Z (1993) J Acq Im Def Syn Hum Ret 6:673–673
Schrödinger LLC (2009) Macromodel v.9.7, Glide v.5.5, Maestro v.9.0, LigPrep v.2.3. Schrödinger LLC, New York
McMartin C, Bohacek RS (1997) J Comput Aided Mol Des 11:333–344
Morris GM, Goodsell DS, Huey R, Lindstrom W, Hart WE, Kurowski S, Halliday S, Belew R, Olson AJ (2007) Autodock 4.0. http://autodock.scripps.edu/
Fedoroff OY, Salazar M, Reid BR (1993) J Mol Biol 233:509–523
Katayanagi K, Okumura M, Morikawa K (1993) Proteins Struct Funct Genet 17:337–346
Nowotny M, Gaidamakov SA, Ghirlando R, Cerritelli SM, Crouch RJ, Yang W (2007) Mol Cell 28:513–513
Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics (2010) RCSB protein data bank. Rutgers/SDSC, Piscataway/La Jolla
Valiev M, Bylaska EJ, Govind N, Kowalski K, Straatsma TP, van Dam HJJ, Wang D, Nieplocha J, Apra E, Windus TL, de Jong WA (2010) Comput Phys Commun 181:1477–1489
Boerema DJ, Tereshko VA, Kent SBH (2008) Biopolymers 90:278–286
Zegers I, Maes D, Daothi MH, Poortmans F, Palmer R, Wyns L (1994) Protein Sci 3:2322–2339
Wladkowski BD, Krauss M, Stevens WJ (1995) J Am Chem Soc 117:10537–10545
Elsässer B, Valiev M, Weare JH (2009) J Am Chem Soc 131:3869–3871
Mueller GA, Pari K, DeRose EF, Kirby TW, London RE (2004) Biochemistry 43:9332–9342
Onufriev A, Case DA, Bashford D (2002) J Comput Chem 23:1297–1304
Eisenschitz R, London F (1930) Z Phys A Hadrons Nuclei 60:491–527
Morris GM, Goodsell DS, Halliday RS, Huey R, Hart WE, Belew RK, Olson AJ (1998) J Comput Chem 19:1639–1662
Andrew CR, Martin Craig TP (2009) ProFit v.3.1. http://www.bioinf.org.uk/software/profit/
McLachlan AD (1982) Acta Crystallogr A 38:871–873
Sobolev V, Sorokine A, Prilusky J, Abola EE, Edelman M (1999) Bioinformatics 15:327–332
Pauling L (1960) The nature of the chemical bond. Cornell University Press, Ithaca
Record MT, Lohman TM, Dehaseth P (1976) J Mol Biol 107:145–158
Nowotny M, Gaidamakov SA, Crouch RJ, Yang W (2005) Cell 121:1005–1016
Elsässer B, Fels G (2010) Phys Chem Chem Phys 12:11081–11088
Acknowledgments
The QM/MM optimization of the generated complexes was performed using EMSL, a national scientific user facility sponsored by the Department of Energy’s Office of Biological and Environmental Research and located at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Elsässer, B., Fels, G. Nucleotide docking: prediction of reactant state complexes for ribonuclease enzymes. J Mol Model 17, 1953–1962 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00894-010-0900-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00894-010-0900-8