Literature DB >> 24463371

Assessing the accuracy of physical models used in protein-folding simulations: quantitative evidence from long molecular dynamics simulations.

Stefano Piana1, John L Klepeis2, David E Shaw3.   

Abstract

Advances in computer hardware, software and algorithms have now made it possible to run atomistically detailed, physics-based molecular dynamics simulations of sufficient length to observe multiple instances of protein folding and unfolding within a single equilibrium trajectory. Although such studies have already begun to provide new insights into the process of protein folding, realizing the full potential of this approach will depend not only on simulation speed, but on the accuracy of the physical models ('force fields') on which such simulations are based. While experimental data are not available for comparison with all of the salient characteristics observable in long protein-folding simulations, we examine here the extent to which current force fields reproduce (and fail to reproduce) certain relevant properties for which such comparisons are possible.
Copyright © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24463371     DOI: 10.1016/j.sbi.2013.12.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol        ISSN: 0959-440X            Impact factor:   6.809


  109 in total

1.  Improved validation of IDP ensembles by one-bond Cα-Hα scalar couplings.

Authors:  Vytautas Gapsys; Raghavendran L Narayanan; ShengQi Xiang; Bert L de Groot; Markus Zweckstetter
Journal:  J Biomol NMR       Date:  2015-10-03       Impact factor: 2.835

2.  Characterizing a partially ordered miniprotein through folding molecular dynamics simulations: Comparison with the experimental data.

Authors:  Athanasios S Baltzis; Nicholas M Glykos
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2015-12-16       Impact factor: 6.725

Review 3.  Constraint methods that accelerate free-energy simulations of biomolecules.

Authors:  Alberto Perez; Justin L MacCallum; Evangelos A Coutsias; Ken A Dill
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 3.488

Review 4.  Protein folding transition path times from single molecule FRET.

Authors:  Hoi Sung Chung; William A Eaton
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2017-11-05       Impact factor: 6.809

5.  Diffusive Dynamics of Contact Formation in Disordered Polypeptides.

Authors:  Gül H Zerze; Jeetain Mittal; Robert B Best
Journal:  Phys Rev Lett       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 9.161

6.  Conformational Rigidity and Protein Dynamics at Distinct Timescales Regulate PTP1B Activity and Allostery.

Authors:  Meng S Choy; Yang Li; Luciana E S F Machado; Micha B A Kunze; Christopher R Connors; Xingyu Wei; Kresten Lindorff-Larsen; Rebecca Page; Wolfgang Peti
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 17.970

7.  Linking time-series of single-molecule experiments with molecular dynamics simulations by machine learning.

Authors:  Yasuhiro Matsunaga; Yuji Sugita
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 8.140

Review 8.  New tricks for old dogs: improving the accuracy of biomolecular force fields by pair-specific corrections to non-bonded interactions.

Authors:  Jejoong Yoo; Aleksei Aksimentiev
Journal:  Phys Chem Chem Phys       Date:  2018-03-28       Impact factor: 3.676

9.  Escaping Atom Types in Force Fields Using Direct Chemical Perception.

Authors:  David L Mobley; Caitlin C Bannan; Andrea Rizzi; Christopher I Bayly; John D Chodera; Victoria T Lim; Nathan M Lim; Kyle A Beauchamp; David R Slochower; Michael R Shirts; Michael K Gilson; Peter K Eastman
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 6.006

10.  Free-Energy Landscape of the Amino-Terminal Fragment of Huntingtin in Aqueous Solution.

Authors:  Vincent Binette; Sébastien Côté; Normand Mousseau
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2016-03-08       Impact factor: 4.033

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.