S.Liang et al. 5. Janin J, Seraphin B. Genome-wide studies of protein–protein inter- action. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2003;13:383–388. 6. Janin J, Henrick K, Moult J, Eyck LT, Sternberg MJE, Vajda S, Vakser I, Wodak SJ. CAPRI: a critical assessment of predicted inter- actions. Proteins 2003;52:2–9. 7. Mendez R, Leplae R, Maria LD, Wodak SJ. Assessment of blind pre- dictions of protein–protein interactions: current status of docking methods. Proteins 2003;52:51–67. 8. Brooijmans N, Kuntz ID. Molecular recognition and docking algo- rithms. Annu Rev Biophys Struct 2003;32:335–373. 9. Vajda S, Camacho CJ. Protein–protein docking: is the glass half-full or half-empty? Trends Biotech 2004;22:110–116. 10. Mendez R, Leplaea R, Lensink MF, Wodak SJ. Assessment of CAPRI predictions in rounds 3–5 shows progress in docking procedures. Proteins 2005;60:150–169. 11. Janin J. Assessing predictions of protein–protein interaction: the CAPRI experiment. Protein Sci 2005;14:278–283. 12. Gray JJ. High-resolution protein–protein docking. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2006;16:183–193. 13. Bonvin AM. Flexible protein–protein docking. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2006;16:194–200. 14. Brooks BR, Bruccoleri RE, Olafson BD, States DJ, Swaminathan S, Karplus M. CHARMM: a program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations. J Comput Chem 1983;4: 187–217. 15. Weiner SJ, Kollman P, Nguyen D, Case D. An all atom force field for simulations of proteins and nucleic acids. J Comput Chem 1986;7:230–252. 16. Jorgensen WL, Maxwell DS, Tirado-Rives J. Development and testing of the OPLS all-atom force field on conformational energetics and properties of organic liquids. J Am Chem Soc 1996;118:11225–11236. 17. Scott WRP, Hu¨nenberger PH, Tironi IG, Mark AE, Billeter SR, Fennen J, Torda AE, Huber T, Kru¨ger P, vanGunsteren WF. The GROMOS biomolecular simulation program package. J Phys Chem A 1999;103:3596–3607. 18. Taylor JS, Burnett RM. DARWIN: a program for docking flexible molecules. Proteins 2000;41:173–191. 19. Eyck LT, Mandell J, Roberts V, Pique M. Surveying molecular inter- actions with dot. Supercomputing ’95, IEEE Press 1995. 20. Ritchie D, Kemp G. Protein docking using spherical polar Fourier correlations. Proteins 2000;39:178–194. 21. Fitzjohn P, Bates P. Guided docking: first step to locate potential binding sites. Proteins 2003;52:28–32. 22. Komatsu K, Kurihara Y, Iwadate M, Takeda-Shitaka M, Umeyama H. Evaluation of the third solvent clusters fitting procedure for the prediction of protein–protein interactions based on the results at the CAPRI blind docking study. Proteins 2003;52:15–18. 23. Camacho C, Vajda S. Protein docking along smooth association pathways. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001;98:10636–10641. 24. Wodak S, Janin J. Computer analysis of protein–protein interaction. J Mol Biol 1978;123:323–342. 25. Cherfils J, Duquerroy S, Janin J. Protein–protein recognition ana- lyzed by docking simulation. Proteins 1991;11:271–280. 26. Li C, Ma X, Chen W, Wang C. A soft docking algorithm for pre- dicting the structure of antibody-antigen complexes. Proteins 2003; 52:47–50. 27. Fernandez-Recio J, Totrov M, Abagyan R. Soft protein–protein docking in internal coordinates. Protein Sci 2002;11:280–291. 28. Norel R, Petrey D, Wolfson H, Nussinov R. Examination of shape complementarity in docking of unbound proteins. Proteins 1999; 35:403–419. 29. Norel R, Sheinerman F, Petrey D, Honig B. Electrostatics contribu- tions to protein–protein interactions: fast energetic filters for dock- ing and their physical basis. Protein Sci 2001;10:2147–2161. 30. Vakser I. Evaluation of GRAMM low-resolution docking methodology on the hemagglutinin-antibody complex. Proteins 1997;29(Suppl 1): 226–230. 252 PROTEINS 31. Gabb HA, Jackson RM, Sternberg MJE. Modelling protein docking using shape complementarity, electrostatics and biochemical infor- mation. J Mol Biol 1997;272:106–120. 32. Jackson R, Gabb H, Sternberg ME. Rapid refinement of protein interfaces incorporating solvation: application to the docking prob- lem. J Mol Biol 1998;276:265–285. 33. Morris GM, Goodsell DS, Halliday RS, Huey R, Hart WE, Belew RK, Olson AJ. Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algo- rithm and and empirical binding free energy function. J Comp Chem 1998;19:1639–1662. 34. Duncan B, Olson A. Applications of evolutionary programming for the prediction of protein–protein interactions. Evolutionary pro- gramming V. Proceedings of the 5th annual conference on evolu- tionary programming. Boston, MA: MIT Press; 1996. 35. Gardiner E, Willett P, Artymiuk P. Protein docking using a genetic algorithm. Proteins 1997;44:44–56. 36. Heifetz A, Eisenstein M. Effect of local shape modifications of mo- lecular surfaces on rigid-body protein–protein docking. Protein Eng 2003;16:179–185. 37. Ben-Zeev E, Eisenstein M. Weighted geometric docking: Incorporat- ing external information in the rotation-translation scan. Proteins 2003;52:24–27. 38. Palma P, Krippahl L, Wampler J, Moura J. Bigger: a new (soft) docking algorithm for predicting protein interactions. Proteins 2000;39:372–384. 39. Lorber D, Udo M, Shoichet B. Protein–protein docking with multi- ple residue conformations and residue substitutions. Protein Sci 2002;11:1393–1408. 40. Chen R, Li L, Weng Z. ZDOCK: an initial-stage protein-docking algorithm. Proteins 2003;52:80–87. 41. Gray J, Moughan S, Wang C, Schueler-Furman O, Kuhlman B, Rohl C, Baker D. Protein–protein docking with simultaneous optimization of rigid body displacement and side chain conformations. J Mol Biol 2003;331:281–299. 42. Zhang C, Vasmatzis G, Cornette J, DeLisi C. Determination of atomic desolvation energies from the structures of crystallized pro- teins. J Mol Biol 1997;267:707–726. 43. Robert C, Janin J. A soft, mean field potential derived from crystal contacts for predicting protein–protein interactions. J Mol Biol 1998;283:1037–1047. 44. Moont G, Gabb H, Sternberg M. Use of pair potentials across pro- tein interfaces in screening predicted docked complexes. Proteins 1999;35:364–373. 45. Ponstingl H, Henrick K, Thornton J. Discriminating between homodimeric and monomeric proteins in the crystalline state. Pro- teins. 2000;41:47–57. 46. Glaser F, Sternberg DM, Vakser I, Ben-Tal N. Residue frequencies and pairing preferences at protein–protein interfaces. Proteins 2001;43:89–102. 47. Lu H, Lu L, Skolnick J. Development of unified statistical potentials describing protein–protein interactions. Biophys. J 2003;84:1895– 1901. 48. Murphy J, Gatchell D, Prasad J, Vajda S. Combination of scoring functions improves discrimination in protein–protein docking. Pro- teins 2003;53:840–854. 49. Liu S, Zhang C, Zhou H, Zhou Y. A physical reference state unifies the structure-derived potential of mean force for protein folding and binding. Proteins 2004;56:93–101. 50. Schueler-Furman O, Wang C, Baker D. Progress in protein–protein docking: Atomic resolution predictions in the CAPRI experiment using RosettaDock with an improved treatment of side-chain flexi- bility. Proteins 2005;60:187–194. 51. Wiehe K, Pierce B, Mintseris J, Tong WW, Anderson R, Chen R, Weng Z. ZDOCK and RDOCK performance in CAPRI rounds 3, 4, and 5. Proteins 2005;60:207–213. 52. Inbar Y, Schneidman-Duhovny D, Halperin I, Oron A, Nussinov R, Wolfson HJ. Approaching the CAPRI challenge with an efficient geometry-based docking. Proteins 2005;60:217–223. DOI 10.1002/prot