Often analogues are considered sufficient Clearly that was not the case in our investigation. Given the appropriate infrastructure, large libraries can be screened in silico in a cost efficient manner, overcoming a problem with in vitro screening of having to preselect library compounds and thus to restrict commercially available chemical space. However, it is well known that docking performance decreases with increasing KIN1408 molecular size and number of rotational bonds. Therefore, the complexity of the compounds in the in silico library was limited. As a consequence, the HTS hits 7 and 8 were rejected as they violated the upper limit of number of heavy atoms and ring systems. Even if the HTS library had been used for virtual screening, could not have been discovered. Both compounds ranked poorly when docking this library against IspE and more promising compounds like would still have been favoured for biochemical testing. It remains unclear which binding mode adopts when binding and therefore why docking failed. In contrast, we speculated that binding of requires a conformational change of the receptor. When this receptor conformation was used for docking, a more sensible binding mode was obtained but ranking was still poor. This points to a limitations of molecular docking: While progress has been made in considering receptor flexibility in practice, it is still often neglected when screening large databases due to speed issues, scoring problems and difficulties in predicting relevant protein conformations. As a result, ligands that require a conformational change of the receptor in order to bind will not be retrieved. Furthermore, fragment hits are often weaker ligands than the larger HTS hits. This was also the case here. While the HTS hits showed affinities in the low micromolar range, the virtual screening hits were less potent with IC50 values in the high micromolar to low millimolar range. However, the ligand MEDChem Express Sepantronium bromide efficiencies of the virtual screening hits were comparable or higher than those of the HTS hits. Assuming that the ligand efficiency stays approximately constant during optimisation, despite their weaker potencies the virtual screening hits are therefore at least as good starting points for a hit-to-lead program as are the HTS hits. A benefit of the virtual screening hits was that they came immediately with a hypothesis about which binding mode they might adopt. This allowed rational selection of analogues to probe the binding mode and derive SAR. In contrast, for one of the HTS hits a binding m