[Dock-fans] Failed Docking even after relaxing params

Trent E. Balius tbalius at aol.com
Mon Nov 3 08:50:32 PST 2014

 Hi Amr,

To add to Sudipto's suggestions, you might also consider increasing the following parameters: 

pruning_clustering_cutoff                                    25
pruning_conformer_score_cutoff                               25.0


pruning_clustering_cutoff                                    100
pruning_conformer_score_cutoff                               100.0

This will increase sampling but might slow down your calculations.


Since you are docking to meny sites you may need to increase pruning_clustering_cutoff even more. 
See the manual:

Typically, if you want to dock to multiple sites we would suggest that you perform multiple docking runs for each site.  

DOCK is not well suited to docking to multiple sites in the same run.  

I hope that this helps,


Trent E. Balius, PhD
Postdoc, Shoichet Lab, 
Dept. Pharm. Chem., UCSF
Phone: 415-514-4289
URL: http://docking.org/~tbalius



-----Original Message-----
From: #AMR ALI MOKHTAR ALHOSSARY# <AMRA0001 at e.ntu.edu.sg>
To: Sudipto Mukherjee <sudmukh at yahoo.com>; dock-fans <dock-fans at docking.org>
Sent: Mon, Nov 3, 2014 7:28 am
Subject: Re: [Dock-fans] Failed Docking even after relaxing params

Hi sudipto,
Thank you for your reply.
Yes, there is a reason for that. I am comparing the performance of Dock to the performance of another tool that I am developing within the same search space without any sort of preference (i.e. even if it end up docking in another pocket within the same search space), for the whole test set.
I will try re-dock without the bump filter and feed you back.

From: Sudipto Mukherjee [mailto:sudmukh at yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 11:20 PM
To: #AMR ALI MOKHTAR ALHOSSARY#; dock-fans at docking.org
Subject: Re: [Dock-fans] Failed Docking even after relaxing params


Hi Amr,


Try redocking those four complexes without the bump filter. From the verbose dock output, it looks like a lot of your partially grown conformers were pruned by the bump filter. 


We typically use < 100 spheres in the binding site. Is there a reason why you are using so many spheres? Despite starting with so many spheres and consequently a very large number of cliques during anchor orienting, the flexible docking calculation stage starts with only 23,10 and 9 anchor orients for each anchor after clustering. 


Sudipto Mukherjee, PhD

Dept. of Chemistry, Temple University

1901 N 13th St, Philadelphia, PA 19122


On Monday, November 3, 2014 5:26 AM, #AMR ALI MOKHTAR ALHOSSARY# <AMRA0001 at e.ntu.edu.sg> wrote:



While docking PDBbind 2014 core collection, four of the receptor-ligand complexes failed to find a suitable conformation, using the same parameter value of the application tutorial.


Even after relaxing the parameters: min_anchor_size to 6, max_orientations to 50000, pruning_max_orients to 1000, pruning_clustering_cutoff to 25; four complexes fail to find any suitable conformations. They are namely 3PWW, 1NVQ, 2PQ9, 2YGE.


May I have any recommendations?

I am attaching the output of one of them for your reference.





Best Regards, 


Amr Ali AL-HOSSARY |   Ph.D. Student | International PhD program in Computational Biology and Bioinformatics |School of Computer Engineering |   Nanyang Technological University | Singapore (GMT+8)|  Email:  aalhossary at pmail.ntu.edu.sg|  Mobile: +65-94572816




Dock-fans mailing list
Dock-fans at docking.org

Dock-fans mailing list
Dock-fans at docking.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.docking.org/pipermail/dock-fans/attachments/20141103/b85d3e7f/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 5258 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.docking.org/pipermail/dock-fans/attachments/20141103/b85d3e7f/attachment-0001.png 

More information about the Dock-fans mailing list