[Dock-fans] TZD Tautomers
nancy5villa at gmail.com
Sun Jan 16 10:19:37 PST 2011
What experimental evidence are you referring to?
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 1:01 AM, John Irwin <jir322 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I find the experimental evidence for specific binding unconvincing.
> On Jan 13, 2011, at 17:49, Nancy <nancy5villa at gmail.com> wrote:
> Considering that others have stated that tautomeric form can be one of the
> most important factors when preparing ligands docking, could you clarify
> what you mean by "tautomeric form is the least of your worries"?
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 7:56 PM, John Irwin < <jir322 at gmail.com>
> jir322 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Single point IC50, no dose response, no IC50 curve, no test for
>> aggregation. Tautomeric form is the least of your worries.
>> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Nancy < <nancy5villa at gmail.com>
>> nancy5villa at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> I happened to find a published article where molecular docking
>>> simulations of TZDs against a novel protein is detailed:
>>> "Structure-based design of a thiazolidinedione which targets the
>>> mitochondrial protein mitoNEET" Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2010 Feb
>>> In this paper, the authors, using MarvinSketch v3.5.4, determined that
>>> the TZDs would exist predominantly in the enol form at pH 7.4, as opposed to
>>> the diketone form (see attached figure). It appears that the article's
>>> tautomer prediction was based only on the pH prior to docking, and had
>>> nothing to do with ligand-protein interactions.
>>> Does anyone know if the diketone or enol, or perhaps a different
>>> tautomer, would be predominant at pH 7.4?
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>> Dock-fans mailing list
>>> <Dock-fans at mailman.docking.org>Dock-fans at mailman.docking.org
> Dock-fans mailing list
> Dock-fans at mailman.docking.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Dock-fans