Chapter title |
AutoDock and AutoDockTools for Protein-Ligand Docking: Beta-Site Amyloid Precursor Protein Cleaving Enzyme 1(BACE1) as a Case Study
|
---|---|
Chapter number | 20 |
Book title |
Neuroproteomics
|
Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2017
|
DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-6952-4_20 |
Pubmed ID | |
Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-6950-0, 978-1-4939-6952-4, 978-1-4939-6950-0, 978-1-4939-6952-4
|
Authors |
Nehme El-Hachem, Benjamin Haibe-Kains, Athar Khalil, Firas H. Kobeissy, Georges Nemer |
Editors |
Firas H. Kobeissy, Stanley M. Stevens, Jr. |
Abstract |
Computational docking and scoring techniques have revolutionized structural bioinformatics by providing unprecedented insights on key aspects of ligand-receptor interaction. Docking is used for optimizing known drugs and for identifying novel binders by predicting their binding mode and affinity. AutoDock and AutoDockTools are free of charge techniques that have been extensively cited in the literature as essential tools in structure-based drug design. Moreover, these methods are fast enough to permit virtual screening of ligand libraries containing tens of thousands of compounds. However using Autodock requires some knowledge in programming which creates a limitation for biologists and makes them prone for commercial applications. Here, we selected a relevant target involved in the progression of Alzheimer disease and provided a fully reproducible docking protocol. This example will show how docking techniques would be an important asset to identify new BACE1 inhibitors. The following friendly user tutorial targets both undergraduate and graduate students, allowing them to understand docking as a computational tool for structure-based drug design. |
X Demographics
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 50% |
Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 188 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 26 | 14% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 9% |
Student > Master | 17 | 9% |
Researcher | 14 | 7% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 3% |
Other | 20 | 11% |
Unknown | 89 | 47% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 28 | 15% |
Chemistry | 20 | 11% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 7% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 4% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 3% |
Other | 18 | 10% |
Unknown | 97 | 52% |