2010
DOI: 10.1021/ci1000218
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

pharmACOphore: Multiple Flexible Ligand Alignment Based on Ant Colony Optimization

Abstract: The flexible superimposition of biologically active ligands is a crucial step in ligand-based drug design. Here we present pharmACOphore, a new approach for pairwise as well as multiple flexible alignment of ligands based on ant colony optimization (ACO; Dorigo M. Stützle T. Dorigo M. Stützle T. Ant Colony OptimizationMIT PressCambridge, MA, USA2004). An empirical scoring function is used, which describes ligand similarity by minimizing the distance of pharmacophoric features. The scoring function was para… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The best docking poses were selected by conformational clustering analysis and the binding score. The refined AFB5 structure and the TIR1 structure (after 3D-protonated with MOE 49 ) were taken for docking of IAA and picloram as ligands using PLANTS with the ChemPLP scoring function and the Lennard Jones potential for intra ligand energy calculations 50 . For each ligand and protein, 30 docking poses were calculated from which the most favored (lowest docking scores) were compared (Supplementary Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The best docking poses were selected by conformational clustering analysis and the binding score. The refined AFB5 structure and the TIR1 structure (after 3D-protonated with MOE 49 ) were taken for docking of IAA and picloram as ligands using PLANTS with the ChemPLP scoring function and the Lennard Jones potential for intra ligand energy calculations 50 . For each ligand and protein, 30 docking poses were calculated from which the most favored (lowest docking scores) were compared (Supplementary Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This docking software uses Ant Colony Optimization, a state-ofthe-art global optimization algorithm to find minima of a scoring function representing favorable complex structures 62 . ChemPLP scoring function was employed to score protein-ligand interactions as well as intra-ligand clash terms.…”
Section: Plantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This finding is in line with the plasticity of the receptor mentioned above. To allow this adaptation for ligands without available X-ray structures for complexes of A 2A R, such as with SYN and PQA, multiple possible ligand poses were predicted using a docking [11] as well as a pharmacophore approach, [12] based on the existing crystal structures of ZMA, XAC, and CAF with A 2A R (PDB IDs: 4EIY, 3REY, and 3RFM, respectively). These were visually inspected, which led to a total of three poses for PQA (Figure 3).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%