4
$\begingroup$

We can calculate the distance between residues in a PDB file regarding different parameters like closest atoms, alpha carbon, beta carbon, centroid and etc. Which one of these parameters are better to show physical interaction between residues in a PDB file?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Which kind of physical interaction are you looking for: an hydrogen bound, a covalent bond, a ionic bond...? $\endgroup$ – llrs Jun 21 '17 at 13:08
  • $\begingroup$ There is no different for me which kind of physical interaction. The least distance and the farthest no different just physical $\endgroup$ – Sara Jun 21 '17 at 15:55
  • $\begingroup$ The CASP experiment uses an 8 Angstrom distance between C-beta atoms (C-alpha for glycine) to determine residue-residue contacts. $\endgroup$ – jgreener Sep 10 '19 at 21:33
1
$\begingroup$

Use a distance cutoff of 12Å between Cᵦ atoms.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ If this is part of your previous answer, consider editing it, otherwise it would be nice to provide bit more explanation. $\endgroup$ – Kamil S Jaron Jun 22 '17 at 9:12
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Please could you clarify what types of interactions can happen at such distances, as I am currently unaware of interaction being possible at such a long distance? $\endgroup$ – Aalawlx Oct 11 '17 at 16:23
6
$\begingroup$

A popular (and I would say, respected and trusted) website is PDBsum https://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbsum (which also has a Wikipedia article about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDBsum)

They measure protein-protein (prot-prot) contacts as any Nitrogen, Carbon, or Oxygen element atoms (N, C, O) within 4.0 Angstroms (Å) when measuring the 3d euclidean distance.

If your atomic contacts are not close enough, the amino acids may not actually interact at all, even though they theoretically could. Since in PPIs you generally want to use reliable ground-truth information, it is better to use cautious parameters. Often, in PPIs, the answer to "does it interact?" is not "yes" or "no" but rather "yes" or "don't know / unknown".

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

You should read my paper, where I did a comprehensive parameter sweep across different thresholds and definitions and benchmarked the resulting empirical potentials on a decoy ranking challenge:

The relevant phrase from the abstract is "compared using 90 different definitions of residue-residue contact". However, it boils down (as always) to the question, "what do you want to do".

Cite me if you use my paper for your research.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Most papers give 5 or 6 angstrom distance for physical interactions. I don't know this distance is between which atoms exactly $\endgroup$ – Sara Jun 21 '17 at 15:59
  • $\begingroup$ People use what other people use, which is why I did a 'parameter sweep'. I've seen other work using a strict 'information maximization' criteria, which was nice. $\endgroup$ – Dan Jun 25 '17 at 21:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.