Literature DB >> 11591346

Free-energy calculations highlight differences in accuracy between X-ray and NMR structures and add value to protein structure prediction.

M R Lee1, P A Kollman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While X-ray crystallography structures of proteins are considerably more reliable than those from NMR spectroscopy, it has been difficult to assess the inherent accuracy of NMR structures, particularly the side chains.
RESULTS: For 15 small single-domain proteins, we used a molecular mechanics-/dynamics-based free-energy approach to investigate native, decoy, and fully extended alpha conformations. Decoys were all less energetically favorable than native conformations in nine of the ten X-ray structures and in none of the five NMR structures, but short 150 ps molecular dynamics simulations on the experimental structures caused them to have the lowest predicted free energy in all 15 proteins. In addition, a strong correlation exists (r(2) = 0.86) between the predicted free energy of unfolding, from native to fully extended conformations, and the number of residues.
CONCLUSIONS: This work suggests that the approximate treatment of solvent used in solving NMR structures can lead NMR model conformations to be less reliable than crystal structures. This conclusion was reached because of the considerably higher calculated free energies and the extent of structural deviation during aqueous dynamics simulations of NMR models compared to those determined by X-ray crystallography. Also, the strong correlation found between protein length and predicted free energy of unfolding in this work suggests, for the first time, that a free-energy function can allow for identification of the native state based on calculations on an extended state and in the absence of an experimental structure.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11591346     DOI: 10.1016/s0969-2126(01)00660-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Structure        ISSN: 0969-2126            Impact factor:   5.006


  12 in total

1.  Distributions in protein conformation space: implications for structure prediction and entropy.

Authors:  David C Sullivan; Irwin D Kuntz
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Smoothing protein energy landscapes by integrating folding models with structure prediction.

Authors:  Ari Pritchard-Bell; M Scott Shell
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 4.033

3.  Assessment of Semiempirical Quantum Mechanical Methods for the Evaluation of Protein Structures.

Authors:  Andrew M Wollacott; Kenneth M Merz
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 6.006

4.  Partial unfolding and refolding for structure refinement: A unified approach of geometric simulations and molecular dynamics.

Authors:  Avishek Kumar; Paul Campitelli; M F Thorpe; S Banu Ozkan
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2015-11-17

5.  Discrimination of Native-like States of Membrane Proteins with Implicit Membrane-based Scoring Functions.

Authors:  Bercem Dutagaci; Kitiyaporn Wittayanarakul; Takaharu Mori; Michael Feig
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2017-05-11       Impact factor: 6.006

6.  Structure and dynamics of zymogen human blood coagulation factor X.

Authors:  Divi Venkateswarlu; Lalith Perera; Tom Darden; Lee G Pedersen
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 4.033

7.  X-ray vs. NMR structures as templates for computational protein design.

Authors:  Michael Schneider; Xiaoran Fu; Amy E Keating
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2009-10

8.  Importance of dispersion and electron correlation in ab initio protein folding.

Authors:  Xiao He; Laszlo Fusti-Molnar; Guanglei Cui; Kenneth M Merz
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2009-04-16       Impact factor: 2.991

9.  Application of MM/PBSA colony free energy to loop decoy discrimination: toward correlation between energy and root mean square deviation.

Authors:  Federico Fogolari; Silvio C E Tosatto
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 6.725

10.  Protein-DNA binding specificity predictions with structural models.

Authors:  Alexandre V Morozov; James J Havranek; David Baker; Eric D Siggia
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2005-10-24       Impact factor: 16.971

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.