Skip to main content

Table 3 Ligand all-atom RMSD (Ã…) and the number of docking solutions (N) in the cluster from 100 Larmarckian genetic algorithm (LGA) docking runs of twenty-five protease-inhibitor complexes.

From: Improved prediction of HIV-1 protease-inhibitor binding energies by molecular dynamics simulations

PDB

No MD

0.01 ps

0.1 ps

1 ps

10 ps

code

N

RMSD (Ã…)

N

RMSD (Ã…)

N

RMSD (Ã…)

N

RMSD (Ã…)

N

RMSD (Ã…)

1gno

32

0.62

18

0.88

4

1.54

13

1.57

16

1.54

1hbv

4

2.15

8

1.18

6

1.30

6

2.05

9

3.18

1hef

8

1.46

6

1.24

4

1.13

12

2.14

9

2.23

1heg

15

2.16

7

0.88

4

0.94

6

1.31

5*

1.20

1hih

14

1.21

6

0.58

4

0.75

7

1.81

4

3.86

1hiv

12

1.27

8

1.04

4

1.06

5

1.29

7

2.75

1hps

10

1.03

5

1.35

1

0.95

5

1.53

2

2.84

1hpv

3

1.33

9

1.32

5

0.73

5

2.92

7

2.59

1hvi

13

1.53

6

0.93

4

0.95

2

2.94

5

3.54

1hvj

3

1.33

3

0.75

2

0.95

2

2.35

4

2.86

1hvk

8

1.44

4

1.34

7

1.12

9

0.97

2

3.26

1hvl

12

1.72

2

1.61

2

1.54

5

2.49

3

2.92

1hvr

18

0.98

9

0.70

6

0.68

8

1.01

8

2.37

1hvs

13

1.73

7

0.87

1

1.03

3

0.99

3

1.24

1hte

3

2.26

9

1.21

3

1.88

7

2.72

8*

3.23

1htf

13

1.11

8

1.03

6

0.93

13

2.11

10

2.9

1htg

8

1.96

9

0.97

8

1.03

6

0.96

12

2.86

1pro

18

0.76

15

0.78

7

0.77

9

0.63

9

0.87

1sbg

11

1.71

17

0.61

8

0.73

2

1.01

9

2.63

2upj

15

1.75

17

1.74

4

1.79

2

2.07

9

3.54

4phv

1

2.93

9

1.57

3

1.23

3

2.51

7

3.08

4hvp

3

1.97

11

0.98

2

1.37

5

1.91

7

2.16

5hvp

12

1.89

5

0.86

2

0.88

8

0.97

8*

1.01

8hvp

13

1.75

5

1.53

2

1.41

2

2.25

8

2.16

9hvp

6

2.66

6

1.48

2

1.54

2

2.51

8

2.12

Average

10.72

1.63

8.36

1.10

4.12

1.13

5.88

1.80

7.16

2.51

  1. Docking solutions with ligand all-atom RMSDs within 1.0 Ã… of each other were clustered together and ranked by the corresponding lowest energy representative. The lowest energy solution of the lowest ligand RMSD cluster was accepted as the calculated binding energy. The lowest ligand RMSD cluster was usually ranked as the first cluster; the clusters that were ranked as a second cluster are marked with (*). Average N values from docking results of all MD simulation time scales are lower than an average N value from protein-rigid docking, indicating that the ligands bind to the binding pocket of the MD simulated structures with higher specificity.