Literature DB >> 21495739

Computation of methodology-independent single-ion solvation properties from molecular simulations. IV. Optimized Lennard-Jones interaction parameter sets for the alkali and halide ions in water.

Maria M Reif1, Philippe H Hünenberger.   

Abstract

The raw single-ion solvation free energies computed from atomistic (explicit-solvent) simulations are extremely sensitive to the boundary conditions and treatment of electrostatic interactions used during these simulations. However, as shown recently [M. A. Kastenholz and P. H. Hünenberger, J. Chem. Phys. 124, 224501 (2006); M. M. Reif and P. H. Hünenberger, J. Chem. Phys. 134, 144103 (2010)], the application of appropriate correction terms permits to obtain methodology-independent results. The corrected values are then exclusively characteristic of the underlying molecular model including in particular the ion-solvent van der Waals interaction parameters, determining the effective ion size and the magnitude of its dispersion interactions. In the present study, the comparison of calculated (corrected) hydration free energies with experimental data (along with the consideration of ionic polarizabilities) is used to calibrate new sets of ion-solvent van der Waals (Lennard-Jones) interaction parameters for the alkali (Li(+), Na(+), K(+), Rb(+), Cs(+)) and halide (F(-), Cl(-), Br(-), I(-)) ions along with either the SPC or the SPC/E water models. The experimental dataset is defined by conventional single-ion hydration free energies [Tissandier et al., J. Phys. Chem. A 102, 7787 (1998); Fawcett, J. Phys. Chem. B 103, 11181] along with three plausible choices for the (experimentally elusive) value of the absolute (intrinsic) hydration free energy of the proton, namely, ΔG(hyd)(⊖)[H(+)] = -1100, -1075 or -1050 kJ mol(-1), resulting in three sets L, M, and H for the SPC water model and three sets L(E), M(E), and H(E) for the SPC/E water model (alternative sets can easily be interpolated to intermediate ΔG(hyd)(⊖)[H(+)] values). The residual sensitivity of the calculated (corrected) hydration free energies on the volume-pressure boundary conditions and on the effective ionic radius entering into the calculation of the correction terms is also evaluated and found to be very limited. Ultimately, it is expected that comparison with other experimental ionic properties (e.g., derivative single-ion solvation properties, as well as data concerning ionic crystals, melts, solutions at finite concentrations, or nonaqueous solutions) will permit to validate one specific set and thus, the associated ΔG(hyd)(⊖)[H(+)] value (atomistic consistency assumption). Preliminary results (first-peak positions in the ion-water radial distribution functions, partial molar volumes of ionic salts in water, and structural properties of ionic crystals) support a value of ΔG(hyd)(⊖)[H(+)] close to -1100 kJ·mol(-1).

Entities:  

Year:  2011        PMID: 21495739     DOI: 10.1063/1.3567022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Phys        ISSN: 0021-9606            Impact factor:   3.488


  18 in total

1.  Pairwise-additive force fields for selected aqueous monovalent ions from adaptive force matching.

Authors:  Jicun Li; Feng Wang
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2015-11-21       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Calculating the binding free energies of charged species based on explicit-solvent simulations employing lattice-sum methods: an accurate correction scheme for electrostatic finite-size effects.

Authors:  Gabriel J Rocklin; David L Mobley; Ken A Dill; Philippe H Hünenberger
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2013-11-14       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  Definition and testing of the GROMOS force-field versions 54A7 and 54B7.

Authors:  Nathan Schmid; Andreas P Eichenberger; Alexandra Choutko; Sereina Riniker; Moritz Winger; Alan E Mark; Wilfred F van Gunsteren
Journal:  Eur Biophys J       Date:  2011-04-30       Impact factor: 1.733

4.  Solvation structure of the halides from x-ray absorption spectroscopy.

Authors:  Matthew Antalek; Elisabetta Pace; Britt Hedman; Keith O Hodgson; Giovanni Chillemi; Maurizio Benfatto; Ritimukta Sarangi; Patrick Frank
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 3.488

5.  Computational evidence support the hypothesis of neuroglobin also acting as an electron transfer species.

Authors:  Licia Paltrinieri; Giulia Di Rocco; Gianantonio Battistuzzi; Marco Borsari; Marco Sola; Antonio Ranieri; Laura Zanetti-Polzi; Isabella Daidone; Carlo Augusto Bortolotti
Journal:  J Biol Inorg Chem       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 3.358

6.  Charge hydration asymmetry: the basic principle and how to use it to test and improve water models.

Authors:  Abhishek Mukhopadhyay; Andrew T Fenley; Igor S Tolokh; Alexey V Onufriev
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2012-08-07       Impact factor: 2.991

7.  Parameterization of Monovalent Ions for the OPC3, OPC, TIP3P-FB, and TIP4P-FB Water Models.

Authors:  Arkajyoti Sengupta; Zhen Li; Lin Frank Song; Pengfei Li; Kenneth M Merz
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 4.956

8.  Testing of the GROMOS Force-Field Parameter Set 54A8: Structural Properties of Electrolyte Solutions, Lipid Bilayers, and Proteins.

Authors:  Maria M Reif; Moritz Winger; Chris Oostenbrink
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2013-01-02       Impact factor: 6.006

9.  Investigation of ion binding in chlorite dismutases by means of molecular dynamics simulations.

Authors:  Axel Sündermann; Maria M Reif; Stefan Hofbauer; Christian Obinger; Chris Oostenbrink
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 3.162

10.  Toward the correction of effective electrostatic forces in explicit-solvent molecular dynamics simulations: restraints on solvent-generated electrostatic potential and solvent polarization.

Authors:  Maria M Reif; Chris Oostenbrink
Journal:  Theor Chem Acc       Date:  2015-01-10       Impact factor: 1.702

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.