K Vanommeslaeghe1, A D MacKerell2. 1. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. 2. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. Electronic address: alex@outerbanks.umaryland.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Molecular Mechanics (MM) is the method of choice for computational studies of biomolecular systems owing to its modest computational cost, which makes it possible to routinely perform molecular dynamics (MD) simulations on chemical systems of biophysical and biomedical relevance. SCOPE OF REVIEW: As one of the main factors limiting the accuracy of MD results is the empirical force field used, the present paper offers a review of recent developments in the CHARMM additive force field, one of the most popular biomolecular force fields. Additionally, we present a detailed discussion of the CHARMM Drude polarizable force field, anticipating a growth in the importance and utilization of polarizable force fields in the near future. Throughout the discussion emphasis is placed on the force fields' parametrization philosophy and methodology. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS: Recent improvements in the CHARMM additive force field are mostly related to newly found weaknesses in the previous generation of additive force fields. Beyond the additive approximation is the newly available CHARMM Drude polarizable force field, which allows for MD simulations of up to 1μs on proteins, DNA, lipids and carbohydrates. GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE: Addressing the limitations ensures the reliability of the new CHARMM36 additive force field for the types of calculations that are presently coming into routine computational reach while the availability of the Drude polarizable force fields offers an inherently more accurate model of the underlying physical forces driving macromolecular structures and dynamics. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled "Recent developments of molecular dynamics".
BACKGROUND: Molecular Mechanics (MM) is the method of choice for computational studies of biomolecular systems owing to its modest computational cost, which makes it possible to routinely perform molecular dynamics (MD) simulations on chemical systems of biophysical and biomedical relevance. SCOPE OF REVIEW: As one of the main factors limiting the accuracy of MD results is the empirical force field used, the present paper offers a review of recent developments in the CHARMMadditive force field, one of the most popular biomolecular force fields. Additionally, we present a detailed discussion of the CHARMM Drude polarizable force field, anticipating a growth in the importance and utilization of polarizable force fields in the near future. Throughout the discussion emphasis is placed on the force fields' parametrization philosophy and methodology. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS: Recent improvements in the CHARMMadditive force field are mostly related to newly found weaknesses in the previous generation of additive force fields. Beyond the additive approximation is the newly available CHARMM Drude polarizable force field, which allows for MD simulations of up to 1μs on proteins, DNA, lipids and carbohydrates. GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE: Addressing the limitations ensures the reliability of the new CHARMM36 additive force field for the types of calculations that are presently coming into routine computational reach while the availability of the Drude polarizable force fields offers an inherently more accurate model of the underlying physical forces driving macromolecular structures and dynamics. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled "Recent developments of molecular dynamics".
Authors: H M Berman; J Westbrook; Z Feng; G Gilliland; T N Bhat; H Weissig; I N Shindyalov; P E Bourne Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2000-01-01 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Peter L Freddolino; Anton S Arkhipov; Steven B Larson; Alexander McPherson; Klaus Schulten Journal: Structure Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: Richard M Venable; Alexander J Sodt; Brent Rogaski; Huan Rui; Elizabeth Hatcher; Alexander D MacKerell; Richard W Pastor; Jeffery B Klauda Journal: Biophys J Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 4.033
Authors: Robert B Best; Xiao Zhu; Jihyun Shim; Pedro E M Lopes; Jeetain Mittal; Michael Feig; Alexander D Mackerell Journal: J Chem Theory Comput Date: 2012-07-18 Impact factor: 6.006
Authors: Andrew C Simmonett; Frank C Pickard; Yihan Shao; Thomas E Cheatham; Bernard R Brooks Journal: J Chem Phys Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Sara E Tweedy; Attabey Rodríguez Benítez; Alison R H Narayan; Paul M Zimmerman; Charles L Brooks; Troy Wymore Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 2.991