Abstract
A structure‐based comparison of the ligand‐binding domains of 35 nuclear receptors from five different subfamilies is presented. Their ligand and coactivator binding sites are characterized using knowledge‐based contact preference fields for hydrophobic and hydrophilic interactions implemented in the MOE modeling environment. Additionally, for polar knowledge‐based field points the preference for negative or positive electrostatic interactions is estimated using the Poisson‐Boltzmann equation. These molecular‐interaction fields are used to cluster the nuclear receptor family based on similarities of their binding sites. By analyzing the similarities and differences of hydrophobic and polar fields in binding pockets of related receptors it is possible to identify conserved interactions in ligand and coactivator binding pockets, which support e.g. design of specific ligands during lead optimization or virtual screening as docking filter. Examples of remarkable similarities between ligand binding sites of members from phylogenetically different nuclear receptor families (RXR, RAR, HNF4, NR5) and differences between closely related subtypes (LXR, RAR, TR) are discussed in more detail. Significant similarities and differences of coactivator binding sites are shown for NR3Cs, LXRs and PPARs. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Biopolymers 91: 884–894, 2009.
This article was originally published online as an accepted preprint. The “Published Online” date corresponds to the preprint version. You can request a copy of the preprint by emailing the Biopolymers editorial office at [email protected]