Identification of hot regions in hub protein–protein interactions by clustering and PPRA optimization

Abstract

Background Protein–protein interactions (PPIs) are the core of protein function, which provide an effective means to understand the function at cell level. Identification of PPIs is the crucial foundation of predicting drug-target interactions. Although traditional biological experiments of identifying PPIs are becoming available, these experiments remain to be extremely time-consuming and expensive. Therefore, various computational models have been introduced to identify PPIs. In protein-protein interaction network (PPIN), Hub protein, as a highly connected node, can coordinate PPIs and play biological functions. Detecting hot regions on Hub protein interaction interfaces is an issue worthy of discussing. Methods Two clustering methods, LCSD and RCNOIK are used to detect the hot regions on Hub protein interaction interfaces in this paper. In order to improve the efficiency of K-means clustering algorithm, the best k value is selected by calculating the distance square sum and the average silhouette coefficients. Then, the optimization of residue coordination number strategy is used to calculate the average coordination number. In addition, the pair potentials and relative ASA (PPRA) strategy is also used to optimize the predicted results. Results DataHub dataset and PartyHub dataset were used to train two clustering models respectively. Experiments show that LCSD and RCNOIK have the same coverage with Hub protein datasets, and RCNOIK is slightly higher than LCSD in Precision. The predicted hot regions are closer to the standard hot regions. Conclusions This paper optimizes two clustering methods based on PPRA strategy. Compared our methods for hot regions prediction against the well-known approaches, our improved methods have the higher reliability and are effective for predicting hot regions on Hub protein interaction interfaces.

Molecular Interactions of the Copper Chaperone Atx1 of Paracoccidioides brasiliensis with Fungal Proteins Suggest a Crosstalk between Iron and Copper Homeostasis

“…These are residues within the protein–protein interface that contribute to a reduced free binding energy and consequently, a stable conformation of the complex [ 48 ]. Generally, hotspots are gathered in regions of the interface ( Figure 4 B) [ 49 ], and residues neighboring them can also establish hydrogen bonds to decrease the free energy of the complex and assist in building the most stable conformation ( Figure 4 ). Despite the evidence of interaction between Atx1 and Cyb5, to date, this is the first time these interactions have been described in P. brasiliensis .…”