The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

1 329 protocols using tools

1

Molecular Docking with AutoDock 4.0

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Molecular docking was undertaken with the help of AutoDock 4.0, Autogrid [33 (link)], and AutoDock Tools [34 ]. The standard AutoDock protocol was followed unless otherwise noted. Ligands were drawn and then processed with AutoDock Tools for charge and rotatable bonds assignment. 5-LO crystal structure chosen for docking is PDB ID: 3O8Y [34 ], which is a “stable-5-LOX.” To enable crystallization, several mutations are present in the noncatalytic domain and a small 3 residue sequence in the catalytic domain is replaced from KKK to ENL. The mutations maybe affect the structure, but “stable-5-LOX” catalytic activity was not affected [34 ]. The protein was prepared with AutoDock Tools. Water molecules were removed, polar hydrogens added, and charges assigned. The grid box used a default spacing of 0.375 with a bounding box of 60, 66, and 60 and a grid center of −2.24, 25.69, and −0.94, in both cases X, Y, and Z coordinates. As for the docking settings, 100 runs were completed per ligand and defaults were kept with exceptions for the following values: ga_pop_size 5000, ga_num_evals 100,000,000, ga_num_generations 500,000, and sw_max_its 5000. For analysis, AutoDock Tools (Schrödinger Release; Maestro, version 10.6) and LigPlot+ [35 (link)] were used. Results were clustered with a maximum of 2.00 Å RMSD, and the largest cluster with the lowest binding energy was chosen.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Protein-Ligand Docking Protocol with AutoDock

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For the docking studies, the proteins were rigid, whereas the ligands were flexible. The *.pdb, ∗.pdbqt, ∗.gpf and ∗.dpf files were created in AutoDock Tools. After the docking simulations, the protein-ligand interactions were evaluated using AutoDock Tools. The grid box was of 60 Å3 with a grid spacing of 0.375 Å3. For 4QPE the grid center was at X = −25.93, Y = 30.821, Z = −6.062. With this box, the residues H447, E334, S203, Y337 were included, whereas for 1Z0Q (alpha-helix) the grid center was X = 2.282, Y = 5.061, Z = −6.757; for 2BEG (beta-sheet) X = 2.937, Y = −4.619, Z = −1.241 and for 1Z0Q (RC) X = 9.387 Y = −4.642 Z = 1.805. The scoring sampling of docking study used the Lamarckian genetic algorithm as implemented in AutoDock Tools with an initial population of 100 individuals with 1 × 107 evaluations. The ligand-protein complexes were analyzed to find the lowest free (ΔG) values by means of the AutoDock Tools program to then describe the ligand-protein interactions.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

STAT3-4-OI Molecular Docking Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The crystal structure of STAT3 was obtained from the PDB database (http://www.pdb.org) and was then imported into Pymol software (version 2.4.0) for the removal of water molecules, co-crystallized ligands, and ions. Subsequently, hydrogens were added and gasteiger charges were computed by AutoDock Tools (version 1.5.6). The structures were saved as PDBQT format files after the AD4 type was assigned. 3D-structure of 4-OI was downloaded from PubChem database (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) and was converted into Mol2 format files by Open Babel GUI software (version 2.3.1) http://openbabel.org) [30 (link)]. Then the small molecule ligand file was imported into AutoDock Tools (version 1.5.6) and torsions were set automatically. The structures were then saved as PDBQT format files, too. Subsequently, PDBQT files of macromolecule receptors and corresponding small molecule ligands were imported into AutoDock Tools (version 1.5.6) for the construction of mating pockets. Further molecular docking simulation was conducted in AutoDock Tools (version 1.5.6) by using a Genetic algorithm. Autodock Vina (version 1.1.2) was used for docking the receptor protein with the small molecule ligands binding energy (DG in kcal/mol). Analysis and visualization were performed using PyMOL (version 2.4.0).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Molecular Docking of Antidiabetic Compounds

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Molecular docking study using AutoDock4 and Auto Dock Tools (version 1.5.6) was performed on compounds 11a–o and 6a–c to elucidate the patterns of their interactions in the active site of the human acid-alpha-glucosidase (PDB ID: 5NN8). Receptor was prepared by removing water molecules and computing Kollman charges with BIOVIA Discovery Studio visualizer and Auto Dock Tools. To validate the docking procedure, redocking process was performed with acarbose as standard ligand, and RMSD value of 1.57 was achieved. The redocked ligand identified similar binding pose to original co-crystalized position downloaded from RCSB database (5NN8). Acarbose was extracted from the PDB file using BIOVIA Discovery Studio visualizer and saved as a separate PDB file. A possible grid box was determined using Auto Dock Tools (version 1.5.6). Furthermore, genetic algorithm was selected as the searching parameter. This procedure was carried out for different potential grid coordinates. Finally, the best grid coordinates were determined by comparing RMSD values.
Afterwards, ligands 11 and 6 were prepared by adding Gasteiger Charges using Auto Dock Tools, and the docking procedure was conducted with 100 genetic algorithm runs using AutoDock4 and AutoGrid4. The interactions were visualized by PLIP online service62 (link) and PyMOL Molecular Graphics System, Version 2.5.2 Schrödinger, LLC.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Molecular Docking of Hub Receptors

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Crystal structures of screened hub macromolecule receptors were obtained from PDB database (http://www.pdb.org) (Berman et al., 2002 (link)) and were then imported into Pymol software (version 2.4.0) for removal of water molecules, co-crystallized ligands and ions. Subsequently, hydrogens were added and gasteiger charges were computed by AutoDockTools (version 1.5.6). The structures were saved as PDBQT format files after AD4 type was assigned. 3D-structures of corresponding ingredients were downloaded from pubchem database (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) and were converted into Mol2 format files by Open Babel GUI software (version 2.3.1 http://openbabel.org) (O'Boyle et al., 2011 (link)). Then the small molecule ligand files were imported into AutoDock Tools (version 1.5.6) and torsions were set automatically. The structures were then saved as PDBQT format files, too. Subsequently, PDBQT files of macromolecule receptors and corresponding small molecule ligands were imported into AutoDockTools (version 1.5.6) for construction of mating pockets. Further molecular docking simulation was conducted in AutoDockTools (version 1.5.6) by using Genetic algorithm. Conformations with the lowest docking binding free energy were selected as the most possible docking modes and visualized using PyMOL (version 2.4.0).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Automated Molecular Docking in AutoDockTools

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A Grid Box was manually defined in AutoDockTools to perform docking in the enzyme active site. A config.txt files was prepared indicating the receptor and ligand file names, the Grid Box coordinates and size, the energy range (4 kcal/mol) and exhaustiveness of the docking (set to 8). AutoDock Vina docking was started from the AutoDockTools built-in GUI interface. Each docking was run five times. The docking poses (in pdbqt format) and scores were visualized in AutoDockTools, and were exported for further analyses in Discovery Studio Visualizer.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Computational Modeling of Kinase Inhibitors

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Computational modeling31 (link)–33 (link) studies were completed using AutoDock Vina33 (link), AutoDock Tools, and Discovery Studio 3.5. Using AutoDock Tools, kinase crystal structures were prepared as follows: 1) All hydrogens were added as ‘Polar Only’ 2) A grid box for the ATP binding site was created. Compounds to be computationally modeled were assigned appropriate rotatable bonds using AutoDock Tools. To computationally model the compounds, AutoDock Vina was employed. AutoDock Vina provides docking scores in terms of ΔG values. After the modeling study, kinase inhibitors docked in FLT3 were visualized and analyzed with Discovery Studio 3.5.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Molecular Docking of Herbal Compounds

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Molecular docking was conducted to validate whether CGMs were capable of binding targets. Two-dimensional structures of the top 10 core compounds (top 10 degrees in the herb-compound-target network) were downloaded from TCMSP and PubChem databases. Structures were charged and displayed rotatable keys using AutoDock Tools. The protein crystal structures corresponding to the core target genes (top 10 degrees in the PPI network) were downloaded from the Protein Data Bank (PDB) (Burley et al., 2017 (link)). The screening conditions were set as follows: 1) the protein structure was obtained using X-ray diffraction; 2) the protein crystal resolution was <3 Å; 3) the species was Homo sapiens. Water and other hetero molecules of proteins were removed using AutoDock Tools, and hydrogen atoms and charge operations of proteins were added. The 3D Grid box for molecular docking simulation was also obtained using AutoDock Tools and displayed using AutoDock Vina (Trott & Olson, 2010 (link)). Pymol software was used to visualize docking results.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Molecular Docking of α-Glucosidase Inhibitor

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The 3D structure of α-glucosidase with PDB ID: 5NN8 (EC: 3.2.1.20, resolution: 2.45 Å) was downloaded from the Brookhaven protein database (https://www.rcsb.org/structure/5NN8). Docking studies were performed using AutoDock Tools (version1.5.6). The 3D structure of the selected compound was generated and energy minimized using hyperchem software and then converted to pdbqt coordinate via AutoDock Tools. Before docking, the water molecules and the inhibitor were removed from the protein. Then, using AutoDock Tools, polar hydrogen atoms were added, and Kollman charges were assigned. The active site is defined by the ligand of the protein crystal structure. The dimensions of the active site box were set at 60 × 60 × 60 Å with flexible ligand dockings approach. The docked system was carried out by 50 runs of the AUTODOCK search by the Lamarckian genetic algorithm (LGA). The best position of 5e was selected for analyzing the interactions against α-glucosidase. The results were visualized using Discovery Studio 2016 Client [22 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Molecular Docking of Compound 1 with F1-ATPase

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Compound 1 was docked into F1 from Bos taurus (PBD entry 1BMF [63 (link)]) and Saccharomyces cerevisiae (PDB entry 2WPD [68 (link)]) using AutoDock Tools [90 (link)] and AutoDock Vina [69 (link)] as per the user manuals. Briefly, the energy-minimised 3-dimensional coordinates of compound 1 were generated with ChemBio 3D (Perkin Elmer) and converted to PDBQT format with AutoDockTools. All non-protein atoms (e.g., waters, nucleotides and metals) were removed from the F1 PDB coordinates and hydrogens were added with AutoDockTools. Initially compound 1 was docked into the entire F1 complex using a grid-box of dimensions 126 x 126 x 126 Å containing the entire complex and an exhaustiveness of 48 to account for the large search area. Compound 1 was next docked into the ATP-binding sites of each α- and β-subunit using a grid-box of dimensions 17 x 15 x 23 Å covering the binding site. Positions of docked compound 1 were evaluated using Pymol (Schrodinger).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!