Literature DB >> 18311962

Microsecond molecular dynamics simulation shows effect of slow loop dynamics on backbone amide order parameters of proteins.

Paul Maragakis1, Kresten Lindorff-Larsen, Michael P Eastwood, Ron O Dror, John L Klepeis, Isaiah T Arkin, Morten Ø Jensen, Huafeng Xu, Nikola Trbovic, Richard A Friesner, Arthur G Palmer, David E Shaw.   

Abstract

A molecular-level understanding of the function of a protein requires knowledge of both its structural and dynamic properties. NMR spectroscopy allows the measurement of generalized order parameters that provide an atomistic description of picosecond and nanosecond fluctuations in protein structure. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulation provides a complementary approach to the study of protein dynamics on similar time scales. Comparisons between NMR spectroscopy and MD simulations can be used to interpret experimental results and to improve the quality of simulation-related force fields and integration methods. However, apparent systematic discrepancies between order parameters extracted from simulations and experiments are common, particularly for elements of noncanonical secondary structure. In this paper, results from a 1.2 micros explicit solvent MD simulation of the protein ubiquitin are compared with previously determined backbone order parameters derived from NMR relaxation experiments [Tjandra, N.; Feller, S. E.; Pastor, R. W.; Bax, A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 12562-12566]. The simulation reveals fluctuations in three loop regions that occur on time scales comparable to or longer than that of the overall rotational diffusion of ubiquitin and whose effects would not be apparent in experimentally derived order parameters. A coupled analysis of internal and overall motion yields simulated order parameters substantially closer to the experimentally determined values than is the case for a conventional analysis of internal motion alone. Improved agreement between simulation and experiment also is encouraging from the viewpoint of assessing the accuracy of long MD simulations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18311962      PMCID: PMC2805408          DOI: 10.1021/jp077018h

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Phys Chem B        ISSN: 1520-5207            Impact factor:   2.991


  14 in total

1.  NMR characterization of the dynamics of biomacromolecules.

Authors:  Arthur G Palmer
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 60.622

2.  Determination of protein structures consistent with NMR order parameters.

Authors:  Robert B Best; Michele Vendruscolo
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2004-07-07       Impact factor: 15.419

3.  NMR Relaxation and Internal Dynamics of Ubiquitin from a 0.2 μs MD Simulation.

Authors:  Aart J Nederveen; Alexandre M J J Bonvin
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 6.006

4.  Simultaneous determination of protein structure and dynamics.

Authors:  Kresten Lindorff-Larsen; Robert B Best; Mark A Depristo; Christopher M Dobson; Michele Vendruscolo
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-01-13       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Molecular dynamics and protein function.

Authors:  M Karplus; J Kuriyan
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-05-03       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Importance of the CMAP correction to the CHARMM22 protein force field: dynamics of hen lysozyme.

Authors:  Matthias Buck; Sabine Bouguet-Bonnet; Richard W Pastor; Alexander D MacKerell
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2005-12-16       Impact factor: 4.033

Review 7.  New tools provide new insights in NMR studies of protein dynamics.

Authors:  Anthony Mittermaier; Lewis E Kay
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-04-14       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Comparison of multiple Amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters.

Authors:  Viktor Hornak; Robert Abel; Asim Okur; Bentley Strockbine; Adrian Roitberg; Carlos Simmerling
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2006-11-15

9.  Exploring multiple timescale motions in protein GB3 using accelerated molecular dynamics and NMR spectroscopy.

Authors:  Phineus R L Markwick; Guillaume Bouvignies; Martin Blackledge
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2007-03-22       Impact factor: 15.419

10.  Quantitative molecular ensemble interpretation of NMR dipolar couplings without restraints.

Authors:  Scott A Showalter; Rafael Brüschweiler
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2007-03-17       Impact factor: 15.419

View more
  72 in total

1.  Determining protein dynamics from ¹⁵N relaxation data by using DYNAMICS.

Authors:  David Fushman
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2012

2.  Scrutinizing molecular mechanics force fields on the submicrosecond timescale with NMR data.

Authors:  Oliver F Lange; David van der Spoel; Bert L de Groot
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 4.033

3.  The folding transition-state ensemble of a four-helix bundle protein: helix propensity as a determinant and macromolecular crowding as a probe.

Authors:  Harianto Tjong; Huan-Xiang Zhou
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 4.033

Review 4.  Structural dynamics of bio-macromolecules by NMR: the slowly relaxing local structure approach.

Authors:  Eva Meirovitch; Yury E Shapiro; Antonino Polimeno; Jack H Freed
Journal:  Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 9.795

Review 5.  Protein Allostery and Conformational Dynamics.

Authors:  Jingjing Guo; Huan-Xiang Zhou
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2016-02-15       Impact factor: 60.622

6.  Integrating molecular dynamics simulations with chemical probing experiments using SHAPE-FIT.

Authors:  Serdal Kirmizialtin; Scott P Hennelly; Alexander Schug; Jose N Onuchic; Karissa Y Sanbonmatsu
Journal:  Methods Enzymol       Date:  2015-02-07       Impact factor: 1.600

7.  Medicinal chemistry for 2020.

Authors:  Seetharama D Satyanarayanajois; Ronald A Hill
Journal:  Future Med Chem       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.808

8.  Quantifying multiscale noise sources in single-molecule time series.

Authors:  Christopher P Calderon; Nolan C Harris; Ching-Hwa Kiang; Dennis D Cox
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2009-01-08       Impact factor: 2.991

9.  Flexible backbone sampling methods to model and design protein alternative conformations.

Authors:  Noah Ollikainen; Colin A Smith; James S Fraser; Tanja Kortemme
Journal:  Methods Enzymol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.600

10.  Optimized molecular dynamics force fields applied to the helix-coil transition of polypeptides.

Authors:  Robert B Best; Gerhard Hummer
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2009-07-02       Impact factor: 2.991

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.