Yelena A Arnautova1, Ruben Abagyan2, Maxim Totrov1. 1. Molsoft L.L.C. , 11199 Sorrento Valley Road, S209, San Diego, California 92121, United States. 2. Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California San Diego , La Jolla, California 92093, United States.
Abstract
We present an extension of the all-atom internal-coordinate force field, ICMFF, that allows for simulation of heterogeneous systems including hexopyranose saccharides and glycan chains in addition to proteins. A library of standard glycan geometries containing α- and β-anomers of the most common hexapyranoses, i.e., d-galactose, d-glucose, d-mannose, d-xylose, l-fucose, N-acetylglucosamine, N-acetylgalactosamine, sialic, and glucuronic acids, is created based on the analysis of the saccharide structures reported in the Cambridge Structural Database. The new force field parameters include molecular electrostatic potential-derived partial atomic charges and the torsional parameters derived from quantum mechanical data for a collection of minimal molecular fragments and related molecules. The ϕ/ψ torsional parameters for different types of glycosidic linkages are developed using model compounds containing the key atoms in the full carbohydrates, i.e., glycosidic-linked tetrahydropyran-cyclohexane dimers. Target data for parameter optimization include two-dimensional energy surfaces corresponding to the ϕ/ψ glycosidic dihedral angles in the disaccharide analogues, as determined by quantum mechanical MP2/6-31G** single-point energies on HF/6-31G** optimized structures. To achieve better agreement with the observed geometries of glycosidic linkages, the bond angles at the O-linkage atoms are added to the internal variable set and the corresponding bond bending energy term is parametrized using quantum mechanical data. The resulting force field is validated on glycan chains of 1-12 residues from a set of high-resolution X-ray glycoprotein structures based on heavy atom root-mean-square deviations of the lowest-energy glycan conformations generated by the biased probability Monte Carlo (BPMC) molecular mechanics simulations from the native structures. The appropriate BPMC distributions for monosaccharide-monosaccharide and protein-glycan linkages are derived from the extensive analysis of conformational properties of glycoprotein structures reported in the Protein Data Bank. Use of the BPMC search leads to significant improvements in sampling efficiency for glycan simulations. Moreover, good agreement with the X-ray glycoprotein structures is achieved for all glycan chain lengths. Thus, average/median RMSDs are 0.81/0.68 Å for one-residue glycans and 1.32/1.47 Å for three-residue glycans. RMSD from the native structure for the lowest-energy conformation of the 12-residue glycan chain (PDB ID 3og2) is 1.53 Å. Additionally, results obtained for free short oligosaccharides using the new force field are in line with the available experimental data, i.e., the most populated conformations in solution are predicted to be the lowest energy ones. The newly developed parameters allow for the accurate modeling of linear and branched hexopyranose glycosides in heterogeneous systems.
We present an extension of the all-atom internal-coordinate force field, ICMFF, that allows for simulation of heterogeneous systems including hexopyranose saccharides and glycanchains in addition to proteins. A library of standard glycan geometries containing α- and β-anomers of the most common hexapyranoses, i.e., d-galactose, d-glucose, d-mannose, d-xylose, l-fucose, N-acetylglucosamine, N-acetylgalactosamine, sialic, and glucuronic acids, is created based on the analysis of the saccharide structures reported in the Cambridge Structural Database. The new force field parameters include molecular electrostatic potential-derived partial atomiccharges and the torsional parameters derived from quantum mechanical data for a collection of minimal molecular fragments and related molecules. The ϕ/ψ torsional parameters for different types of glycosidic linkages are developed using model compounds containing the key atoms in the full carbohydrates, i.e., glycosidic-linked tetrahydropyran-cyclohexane dimers. Target data for parameter optimization include two-dimensional energy surfaces corresponding to the ϕ/ψ glycosidic dihedral angles in the disaccharide analogues, as determined by quantum mechanical MP2/6-31G** single-point energies on HF/6-31G** optimized structures. To achieve better agreement with the observed geometries of glycosidic linkages, the bond angles at the O-linkage atoms are added to the internal variable set and the corresponding bond bending energy term is parametrized using quantum mechanical data. The resulting force field is validated on glycanchains of 1-12 residues from a set of high-resolution X-ray glycoprotein structures based on heavy atom root-mean-square deviations of the lowest-energy glycanconformations generated by the biased probability Monte Carlo (BPMC) molecular mechanics simulations from the native structures. The appropriate BPMC distributions for monosaccharide-monosaccharide and protein-glycan linkages are derived from the extensive analysis of conformational properties of glycoprotein structures reported in the Protein Data Bank. Use of the BPMC search leads to significant improvements in sampling efficiency for glycan simulations. Moreover, good agreement with the X-ray glycoprotein structures is achieved for all glycanchain lengths. Thus, average/median RMSDs are 0.81/0.68 Å for one-residue glycans and 1.32/1.47 Å for three-residue glycans. RMSD from the native structure for the lowest-energy conformation of the 12-residue glycanchain (PDB ID 3og2) is 1.53 Å. Additionally, results obtained for free short oligosaccharides using the new force field are in line with the available experimental data, i.e., the most populated conformations in solution are predicted to be the lowest energy ones. The newly developed parameters allow for the accurate modeling of linear and branched hexopyranose glycosides in heterogeneous systems.
Carbohydrates have been a topic of active theoretical and experimental
research for their important roles in biology and chemistry. Carbohydrates
are involved in numerous biological functions in humans, such as recognition
in axonal growth,[1] blood anticoagulation,[2] cell–cell recognition,[3] antibody–antigen interactions,[4,5] structure
factors in extracellular matrices,[6] and
post- or cotranslational modifications of polypeptides.[7] Correct glycosylation patterns are essential
for normal cell and organism function.[8,9] In plants,
carbohydrate polymers, cellulose and starch, provide structure and
energy storage.[10] Interest in carbohydrates
has also increased significantly in the past few years because of
their potential applications as biofuels.It is, therefore,
essential that the structural, dynamic, and thermodynamic
properties of carbohydrate molecules are accurately determined. Ideally,
a three-dimensional structure of a glycoprotein together with its
glycans would be resolved by experimental methods such as X-ray crystallography
or NMR spectroscopy. However, a brief survey of the glycoprotein structures
in the Protein Data Bank[11] (PDB) reveals
that the glycan moieties are virtually never preserved in their entirety
in crystal structures. Instead of the physiologically typical ∼9
sugar residues at N-glycosylation sites, only 1 to 2 monosaccharide
moieties are commonly seen (Figure 1). The
reasons for this are manifold: crystallographers often enzymatically
truncate larger glycans or completely eliminate glycosylation sites
via mutations to improve crystallization properties; even when they
are biochemically intact, large portions of glycan moieties are often
not traceable in the electron density maps due to disorder, heterogeneity,
or the presence of multiple conformers.
Figure 1
Distribution of numbers
of observed monosaccharide moieties at
the N-glycosylation sites in PDB X-ray structures. Data was generated
by querying PDB using the ICM program.
Distribution of numbers
of observed monosaccharide moieties at
the N-glycosylation sites in PDB X-ray structures. Data was generated
by querying PDB using the ICM program.Furthermore, analysis of glycoprotein structures in PDB shows
that
the reported conformations of the glycans frequently appear highly
strained. For example, simple statistics of the amidic torsion angle
in N-acetyl glucosamine, one of the most common glycosylating
moieties, shows that as many as 33% deviate at least 30° or more
from the expected planar trans configuration (Figure 2a), resulting in highly strained conformations. A similar
situation is observed for the geometry of the asparagine–glycanamide linkage (Figure 2b), and sugar rings
themselves are also often far from their optimal conformers: boat
conformations are often seen. It is not unusual to encounter incorrect
stereoisomers.
Figure 2
(a) Distribution of the amide angle of N-acetyl
glucosamine in PDB structures. Peaks at ±180° correspond
to the expected flat configuration. (b) Example of poor geometry: N-acetylglucosamine at N58 in PDB 1OW0; internal amide
bond has a torsion angle at 85°, and the amino acid/sugar amide
bond is twisted out of plane by 61°; electron density contouring
(brown mesh) reveals that experimental data does not seem to warrant
assignment of such a strained conformer.
(a) Distribution of the amide angle of N-acetyl
glucosamine in PDB structures. Peaks at ±180° correspond
to the expected flat configuration. (b) Example of poor geometry: N-acetylglucosamine at N58 in PDB 1OW0; internal amide
bond has a torsion angle at 85°, and the amino acid/sugaramide
bond is twisted out of plane by 61°; electron density contouring
(brown mesh) reveals that experimental data does not seem to warrant
assignment of such a strained conformer.These strained or otherwise incorrect conformations are very
likely
artifacts of the X-ray structure refinement procedure and/or software:
without well-validated residue library entries for sugar moieties,
researchers sometimes borrow geometries from older structures, themselves
erroneous; nonstandard force-field parameters are also frequently
improperly assigned. Structure quality control is routinely applied
to the polypeptide portions of the crystal structure, detecting excessive
deviations from the idealized covalent geometry and other problems
such as incorrect stereochemistry. Heteroatom groups, including sugars,
are much less scrutinized. Efforts to rerefine the small molecule
ligands are under way.[12] For glycans, similar
work maybe necessary to bring the quality of their reconstruction
to the level typical for that of the polypeptidic portions of the
X-ray structure.[13]Independently
of the experimental structure accuracy issues, for
many if not most systems, a single conformation may not provide an
adequate account of the behavior of glycans under physiologically
relevant conditions. More likely, the realistic picture should be
an ensemble of conformations where some parts of the glycan moiety
stay relatively static[14−16] due to stericconstraints and other stabilizing interactions,
whereas other parts will be mobile[14] and
transiently occupy multiple locations. Because experimental methods
of structure resolution alone appear to be insufficient to provide
such a static-dynamic picture, computer simulations may be a necessary
complementary approach to improve our understanding of structure and
function of glycans.Success of the computational modeling methods
is fundamentally
determined by two factors: the accuracy of the energy approximation
(force field) and the sampling power of the conformational search
method. A number of force fields and parameter sets have been proposed
for carbohydrates.[17−28] A comprehensive review of the existing carbohydrate force fields
was published recently.[29] A number of carbohydrate
force fields were developed for treating poly- and oligosaccharides
only and are not fully compatible with existing protein force fields.
Some biomolecular force fields, including AMBER, CHARMM, and GROMOS,
contain parameters for carbohydrates that are compatible with the
latest protein parameters, although fewer contain parameters for glycoproteins
or glycolipids. More recent force fields were created by expanding
a protein force field by additional atom types and corresponding parameters,
making them suitable for simulations of heterogeneous systems, such
as glycoproteins. Evaluation of the performance of several carbohydrate
force fields against QM[30,31] and experimental solution
data[32,33] showed that no single parameter set consistently
out performed the others. Insufficiently high accuracy of the existing
force fields is partially due to the fact that the functional form
or parameters (such as scaling factors for 1–4 van der Waals
and nonbonded interactions) that work well for the original systems
of interest (for example, proteins) appeared to be unsuitable for
modeling carbohydrates.[34] Thus, in a study
of the ω angle rotation (O5–C5–C6–O6, Figure 3) in
monosaccharides,[34] it was observed that
O6 may interact with either O4 (1–5 interaction)
or O5 (1–4 interaction), and the use of 1–4
scaling unbalanced these interactions, leading to an inability to
correctly predict rotamer populations.
Figure 3
Atom notation and torsional
definitions for the hexopyranose fragment.
Atom notation and torsional
definitions for the hexopyranose fragment.Inconsistencies in force field development put serious limitations
on the applicability of these force fields to many biological problems,
which, as in the case of glycans, involve modeling heterogeneous systems
including both carbohydrates and proteins and therefore require an
accurate force field applicable to different classes of molecules.
An effort to develop such consistent parametrizations has been made
in the recent versions of the GLYCAM06[18] and CHARMM[27] force fields. Although the
results obtained during the development and evaluation of these force
fields look promising, tests carried out for larger and more complex
systems may be necessary to evaluate their accuracy adequately.While recent parametrizations of the carbohydrate force fields
may offer improved accuracy, they rely on Cartesian (i.e., XYZ coordinate) representation. Given the large size of
conformational space and the complexity of the energy landscapes,
extensive sampling and global energy optimization using all-atom Cartesian
force fields becomes prohibitive for many biomolecular systems. One
way to reduce the conformational space is to use a rigid covalent
geometry approximation, i.e., torsional angle representation. The
advantage of this approach is not only in the smaller (∼10-fold)
dimensionality of the sampling space and faster energy evaluation
at each step but also in more efficient local minimization, which
has much larger radii of convergence than Cartesian space local minimizations.[35] The torsional modeling approach should be particularly
beneficial in simulations of glycans because, while they can be highly
flexible, their movements are almost exclusively around bonds in glycosidic
linkages, whereas pyranose rings often can be considered rigid.The torsional angle representation was originally introduced in
the ECEPP algorithm (empirical conformational energy program for peptides)[36] used for conformational energy computations
of peptides and proteins.[37−40] A new protein internal coordinate mechanics (ICM)
force field designed specifically for torsional angle representation
was reported recently.[41] It was developed
using high-level ab initio calculations combined with experimental
data for crystals of organic molecules. The main features of ICMFF
include more accurate description of hydrogen-bond interactions, improved
backbone covalent geometry and energetics achieved using novel backbone
torsional potentials, and inclusion of the bond angles at the Cα atoms into the internal variable set. Loop modeling
simulations carried out for 4–13 residue loops demonstrated
the high accuracy of the new ICM force field[41] and indicate that ICMFF represents a promising starting point for
development of an accurate and consistent force field for simulations
of glycoproteins and protein–carbohydratecomplexes.Computational studies of biomolecular systems are not possible
without a highly efficient conformation search method. We have previously
proposed and validated a method (biased probability Monte Carlo, BPMC[42]) to dramatically enhance efficiency of the Monte
Carlo (MC) optimization procedure in peptide simulations by preferentially
sampling the regions of conformational space that are known to be
low-energy or well-populated. By performing MC random steps predominantly
into these regions, BPMC avoids wasting computational cycles on sampling
parts of the conformational space that are irrelevant in biological
structures due to their exceedingly high energy. We demonstrated that
much faster convergence of peptide folding simulations is achieved
when BPMC rather than flatly distributed random steps are used.[42] The approach was subsequently used in side chain
optimization for homology modeling[43,44] and small
protein folding.[45,46] Both the analysis of the experimental
structures of glycoproteins[47] and quantum
mechanics (QM) calculations[48] for glycosidic
linkages show that the ϕ/ψ combinations observed for different
types of linkages correspond to small sets (1–3) of well-defined
low-energy regions. These conformational preferences of glycosidic
linkages make them perfect candidates for applying the BPMC method.The main goal of this work is the development of a carbohydrate
force field that is consistent with the existing ICM force field for
proteins, thereby enabling the simulation of heterogeneous systems.
Therefore, we use the same functional form and parametrization procedure
as ICMFF.[41] As a first step, we obtained,
from the analysis of the experimental data from the Cambridge Structural
Database (CSD), standard geometries for both α- and β-anomers
of the nine most common hexopyranose monosaccharides (Table 1) and computed corresponding atomic partial charges.
Torsional parameters were derived using QM calculations for small
molecule model compounds corresponding to fragments of the hexopyranosemonosaccharides and to disaccharide linkages. Next, biased probability
zones were defined for different disaccharides using glycoprotein
experimental data available from PDB. The validation step at the end
of the parameter development process consisted of BPMCconformational
search carried out for (a) short oligosaccharides in solution and
(b) 1–12-residue glycanchains from a set of high-resolution
X-ray glycoprotein structures. This step ensured that the parameters
are transferable from the model compounds to the glycanchains and
are compatible with the rest of the force field.
Table 1
Monosaccharides Considered in This
Work and the Corresponding MRF
Computational Details
Form
of the Potential
ICMFF is an
internal coordinate force field, i.e., its intramolecular energy is
a function of torsional degrees of freedom (with certain exceptions,
see below). It employs the standard residue geometry.[49] A detailed description of the ICM force field for proteins
and its parametrization was published recently.[50]The total energy of a molecule in ICMFF, Eintra, consists of nonbonded (van der Waals
plus electrostatics), Eintranbe, torsional, Etor, and angle bending, Ebb, termsThe nonbonded term of the force field
is calculated as a sum of
the Buckingham potential and the Coulomb contributionwhere r is the distance between atoms i and j separated by at least three bonds; A, B, and C are
van der Waals parameters; q and q are point
charges (in e.u.) localized on atoms. The summation runs over all
pairs of atoms i < j. k14 and k14el are scale factors for 1–4
van der Waals and electrostatic interactions, respectively. The dielectricconstant ε = 2 was used. In simulations of glycoproteins, distance-dependent
dielectricconstant ε = 2r was used to account for solvent screening of electrostatic
interactions.The following combination rules for the van der
Waals parameters A, B and C were appliedThe van der Waals and
electrostatic interactions described by eq 1 are included for 1–4 or higher-order atom
pairs. The 1–4 interactions are treated in a special way by
introducing k14 and k14el scaling
factors. k14el = 1 and k14 =
2 were chosen based on our studies[41] of
the terminally blocked alanine where nonscaled 1–4 repulsion
resulted in an excessively high energy barrier at θ ∼
0°.Hydrogen-bonding interaction is represented by a combination
of
electrostatic and van der Waals terms (eq 1)
with a separate set of parameters for heavy atom–hydrogen pairs.[41]The glycan residues considered in this
work contain atom types
that are already present in ICMFF; therefore, no derivation of additional
parameters was necessary. Hexopyranoseoxygen is the only exception,
but we assumed that van der Waals parameters of hydroxyloxygencan
be used to describe this atom type. Transferability of the van der
Waals parameters to hexopyranoses was assessed by carrying out local
energy minimizations for crystal structures of eight monosaccharides
retrieved from CSD (see Results and Discussion).
Atomic Partial Charges
To obtain
a set of atomiccharges for hexose residues that is consistent with
the existing ICM force field, we followed the methodology described
in ref (41), i.e.,
partial atomiccharges, q (eq 2), were fitted[41] to reproduce the molecular electrostatic potential, calculated with
the Hartree–Fock wave function and the 6-31G* basis set using
the GAMESS program.[43]A small set
of low-energy conformations differing in orientation of hexose side
chains was generated for each standard hexose geometry. Electrostatic
potentials were computed for all conformations from the set. Multiple-conformation
fitting was carried out using the restrained electrostatic potential
(resp) method[44]a implemented in the AMBER 6.0 program.[44]b Resulting partial atomiccharges for the 18 hexose residues
are reported in Table S1, Supporting Information. The resp method was also employed to obtain a
single set of charges using several conformations for model molecules
used for deriving torsional parameters (see below).
Torsional Potential
The torsional
energy term for all dihedral angles’ θ’s is computed
as followswhere θ
is a torsional angle varying
from 0 to 180°, kθ are the torsional parameters,
and N ≤ 3.
QM and
MM ϕ/ψ Maps for C–O–C
Monosaccharide–Monosaccharide Linkages
To derive torsional
energy profile for the relative rotation of two hexopyranose units
connected via O-linkage, entire QM ϕ/ψ maps were calculated
for four model molecules (Figure 4), representing
all possible enantiomers of the two chiral centers involved in the
linkage.
Figure 4
Model molecules used for deriving ϕ/ψ torsional parameters
for O-linkage: (1) equatorial–equatorial (eq–eq), (2)
axial–equatorial (ax–eq), (3) axial–axial (ax–ax),
and (4) equatorial–axial (eq–ax) linkages.
Model molecules used for deriving ϕ/ψ torsional parameters
for O-linkage: (1) equatorial–equatorial (eq–eq), (2)
axial–equatorial (ax–eq), (3) axial–axial (ax–ax),
and (4) equatorial–axial (eq–ax) linkages.All quantum mechanical calculations were carried
out using the
GAMESS software.[50] The QM ϕ/ψ
maps were computed in two steps. First, all conformations generated
in two-dimensional ϕ/ψ space on a 15° grid were geometry-optimized
at the Hartree–Fock level with the 6-31G** basis set and with
the ϕ and ψ angles constrained. Next, single-point energy
calculations were carried out for each of the optimized geometries
using the more accurate MP2 method with the 6-31G** basis set and
the polarizable continuum model (PCM) implemented in GAMESS. The PCM
model was used to take into account the solvation free energy for
consistency with our nonbonded energy calculations carried out with
the effective dielectricconstant ε = 2. Heptane was used as
a solvent. The MP2/6-31G**//HF/6-31G** methods were used to generate
target data to maintain consistency with the current ICMFF parametrization.The resulting ϕ/ψ energy maps were compared to the
corresponding maps obtained with the ICM force field. The MM energy
maps were computed using standard ICM geometries and minimizing the
energy of each conformation with the ϕ/ψ torsion angles
constrained at the designated values.
Derivation
of Parameters of the Torsional
Potentials
Our derivation of the torsional potential energy
terms relied on fitting the molecular mechanical (MM) energy profiles
for rotation around a specific bond against the corresponding QM profiles.
The torsional potential energy terms were obtained by fitting a cosine
series (eq 4) to the difference between the
QM and MM profiles (the latter consisting of nonbonded and electrostatic
terms), i.e., by minimizing the following target functionwith respect to
the kθ coefficients of the Fourier
expansion (eq 4). The summation runs over all N points of
the ϕ/ψ map taken into consideration. ΔEMM and ΔEQM are the relative MM
and QM energies, respectively, for a given point i; w are empirical weights.
The weights were computed according to the formulawhere c and c1 are empirical parameters introduced to provide
additional
de-emphasis of high-energy regions. The value of c was chosen so as to give higher weights to those of the fitting
points located at or near the energy minima.Because this fitting
method does not always produce acceptable results for ϕ/ψ
maps,[41] in this study it was combined with
an alternative empirical approach described in detail in the Results and Discussion. It was designed to reproduce
main features of the QM ϕ/ψ map (such as shape and relative
stability of the low-energy regions) while focusing on the low-energy
regions of the QM energy surface that are also the most populated
areas of the ϕ/ψ map obtained from the analysis of the
experimental glycoprotein structures.To obtain a complete set
of torsional parameters, including both
the ϕ/ψ backbone and side chain torsional potentials,
a number of model molecules (Table S2, Supporting
Information) containing the same types of torsional angles
as those present in the glycan side chains, such as hydroxyl groups,
were used. The four atoms (defining each type of torsional angle)
with their covalently bound neighbors replaced by hydrogen atoms defined
the molecules selected for the calculations. More complex model molecules
were used in cases where nontrivial influence of distant atoms was
expected, i.e., for ϕ/ψ. Thus, the torsional terms were
parametrized to reproduce the properties of the simplest molecules
possible and then applied to larger and more complex ones.The
QM and MM profiles of the model molecules were calculated adiabatically,
i.e. by constraining the appropriate torsions for each of the torsional
angles on a 10° grid while minimizing the energy with respect
to all other degrees of freedom. All of the ab initio calculations were carried out at the MP2[51,52] level of theory with a 6-31G** basis set implemented in the GAMESS
program.[53,54] The corresponding MM torsional profiles
were computed using the ICM program. The molecular geometries (bond
lengths and bond angles) were optimized by QM calculations, and the
lowest-energy QM conformations were used for calculating the MM torsional
profiles. Some functional groups, such as methyl group, can have higher
symmetry than the geometries obtained from QM calculations on fixed
rotamers of these groups; hence, the corresponding bond lengths and
bond angles of these groups were averaged to conform to the highest
symmetry possible for a particular group.
Flexibility
of C–O–C Linkage
Analysis of CSD X-ray data
for oligosaccharides showed that the
C1–O–C angle in glycan–glycan O-linkage
exhibits significant variation depending on values of ϕ and
ψ angles (Figure 5). Therefore, following
the methodology used in development of ICMFF for proteins, we introduced
flexibility of the C1OC bond angle into our model. The
angle bending term, Ebb, empolyed to account
for conformation-dependent changes in ∠C1OC is computed
as followswhere k is the angle bending force constant
(in kcal/rad2)
and θ0 is a reference
∠C1OC in degrees.
Figure 5
Distribution of C1–O–C
valence angles
(in degrees) in CSD saccharide structures with R <
10%.
Distribution of C1–O–C
valence angles
(in degrees) in CSD saccharide structures with R <
10%.Parameters of the harmonic potential
(eq 7) describing angle bending were derived
using the QM ϕ/ψ
maps for the model molecules from Figure 4.The force constant and reference angle of the angle bending term
(eq 7) were obtained by minimizing RMSD between
the QM and MM values of ∠C1OC (θ) for a set
of conformations, i.e.,where θQM are the QM values of
∠C1OC taken from the conformations of the model
molecules generated to compute QM ϕ/ψ energy maps. N is a number of structures. θMM angles were
calculated by minimizing MM energy of a given model molecule while
keeping the ϕ and ψ angles fixed at the same values as
those in the corresponding QM conformations.Parameter optimization
was carried out via a systematic search
on the k0/θ0 grid. Grid
points were obtained by scanning the 200–1000 kcal/rad2 range for k0 and 110–130°
range for θ0 with step of 50 kcal/rad2 and 1° for the force constant and the reference angle, respectively.
The final ∠C1OC bending parameters, k0 (in kcal/rad2) and θ0, are
800.0 and 121°, respectively. Resulting potential enabled us
to reproduce accurately (RMSD < 2°) QM values of ∠C1OC (corresponding to low-energy conformations) in the model
molecules.
Solvation Model
Simulations of glycoproteins
were carried out with the solvation free energy, ΔGsolv, of each structure estimated by using a solvent-accessible
surface area (SA) modelwhere A represents the solvent-accessible
SAs of various atom types
calculated as described in ref (55) and σ is the solvation
parameter for each type.Solvation parameters employed in the
current work were optimized[41] using conformational
ensembles for 58 loops of nine residues and subsequently tested in
simulation of protein loops of different lengths. The ICM energy function
supplemented by the solvation energy term with these parameters was
shown[41] to discriminate near-native loop
conformations from a large set of decoy structures.
Standard Monosaccharide Geometry
The following most
common hexopyranose residues (Table 1) were
considered in the work: d-galactose, d-glucose, d-mannose, d-xylose, l-fucose, d-GlcNac
(N-acetylglucosamine), d-GalNac
(N-acetylgalactosamine), and sialic (NANA) and glucuronic
acids. Standard geometries were obtained for the glycans with the
energetically more favorable 4C1 conformation
of the pyran ring and for both the α- and β-anomers.To derive representative orthogonal coordinates for each hexopyranose
residue, we followed the methodology described in detail in refs (56 and 57). Thus, a Cambride Structural
Database (CSD)[58] search was carried out
to find crystal structures containing the hexopyranose fragments listed
in Table 1. The 2011 release of CSD and the
graphical search program QUEST were used for search and data retrieval.
We applied the same search criteria as those described by Allen and
Fortier[56] except that the lower R factor of 10% was adopted because a large amount of accurate
experimental data has been added to CSD over the past 20 years. Each
hexopyranoseconformation was described by the 11 torsion angles (descriptors,
see Figure 3): six intra-annular torsional
angles and up to five torsional angles defining axial or equatorial
disposition of ring substituents with respect to the ring (for example,
C5–O5–C1–O1). Geometries of all hexopyranose
fragments retrieved from CSD were clustered using these descriptors,
and the average values of each descriptor were computed for each cluster.
The set of 11 average τ values for each cluster defines a cluster
centroid. Deviations of τ angles of each structure of a cluster
from the corresponding centroid values were calculated, and the most
representative fragment (MRF) was defined for each cluster as the
fragment of the data set that is closest to the cluster centroid.[57] Table 1 lists the CSD
reference codes of the crystal structures containing MRF for each
of the 18 monosaccharides.
Biased Probability Monte
Carlo Procedure
Having an efficient search method along with
an accurate force
field represent two crucial parts of the prediction of any structure.
The Monte Carlo method implemented in the ICM program employs the
so-called biased probability zones to cover the conformational space
of a protein more efficiently. The idea of the BPMC method is to sample
with larger probability those regions of the conformational space
that are known to be highly populated.Local probability distributions
of a small number of correlated variables can be deduced from the
statistical analysis of the available experimental data or evaluated
based on their energy. Thus, all ϕ and ψ angles of a glycanchain are divided into (Nresidues –
1) pairs, and a random Monte Carlo move is made by selecting a residues
and a change of both angles by some values. In the current implementation
of the BPMC procedure, we describe the probability distribution by
a set of Gaussian distributions. The random move consists of the following
steps: (1) randomly select an internal variable, (2) identify all
high-probability zones associated with the variable, (3) select one
zone according to the probability P, and (4) make
a normally distributed step in the vicinity of kth
zone, i.e., the displacement from the center of the zone by a random
vector having components distributed with the probability density
ρLocal conformational
preferences of glycosidic linkages between
monosaccharides and with a protein side chain are represented by multidimentional
ellipsoidal zones in subspaces of associated internal variables (ϕ/ψ/ω).
To evaluate the positions, sizes, and probabilities of preferred zones
in ϕ/ψ/ω subspaces, we carried out statistical analysis
for a representative set of known glycoprotein structures solved by
X-ray diffraction at 2.5 Å or better resolution. The resulting
maps were divided into regions based on visual inspection and, therefore,
are somewhat arbitrary. However, two regions were considered to be
independent if they were separated by at least 20°. Extremely
accurate definition of the probability zones is not critical because
we use the continuous distribution rather than fixed rotamers. Each
region corresponds to a preferred zone, which was approximated by
an ellipse with the centerand probability n/N, where i is a variable
contributing to
the zone, p is an index of a point, n is a number of points in the region, and N is a
total number of points.It should be emphasized that the low-populated
areas, which are
not explicitly represented by any zone, may be still accessed by the
BPMC procedure from the neighboring zones because of the tails of
the Gaussian probability distributions of the random step.The
BPMC global optimization method employed in this work consists
of the following steps repeated iteratively: (1) random conformational
change, (2) local energy minimization of the ICMFF[41] energy function using analytical derivatives, (3) evaluation
of additional energy terms weakly dependent on the local conformational
changes (solvation), and (4) acceptance decision based on the total
energy using the Metropolis criterion.[59] Temperature parameter for the Metropolis criterion in MC was set
to 600 K. Up to 300 + 20n (where n is the number of glycan residues) steps of local gradient minimization
were allowed after each random step. A simple empiric rule was used
to determine the total length of the BPMC simulation: the simulation
was terminated after (50 000 + 40 000n3) energy evaluations. We evaluated convergence to the
global minimum by performing five independent runs of the full protocol
in parallel. Whenever no further progress was detected in the current
run, a different conformation was chosen from the ensemble of already
generated conformations to start a new trajectory. Lack of progress
was determined using a visit count mechanism.[46]We used the BPMC method to locate the global minimum of the
energy
function, which consists of the ICMFF energy supplemented by the SA-based
solvation energy term (eq 9). To account for
solvent screening of electrostatic interactions, a simple distance-dependent
dielectricconstant model, ε = ε0r with initial dielectricconstant ε0 = 2, was used.
Experimental Data Used for Deriving BP Zones
To derive BP zones for different combinations of glycan residues,
ϕ/ψ/ω torsional angles of glycans in glycoprotein
crystal structures were collected from PDB using the glycosciences.de Web site[60] (data collected in December
2012). We considered only structures solved by X-ray diffraction at
2.5 Å or better resolution. All of the obtained data pertaining
to glycan–glycan linkages were grouped into four sets corresponding
to four possible stereoisomers formed by the two glycans (Figure 4). For protein–glycan linkages, we selected
structures containing at least one protein–glycan linkage of
the following type: α/β-*-Ser, α/β-*-Thr,
or α/β-*-Asn, where * stands for any saccharide from Table 1.The following definitions of the torsional
angles (Figure 4) were adopted for analysis
of the glycan–glycan and protein–glycan linkage conformationsIt should
be mentioned that the quality of the glycan portions
of glycoprotein structures is often much lower than that of its protein
part. For many crystal structures in PDB, glycan units do not fit
the corresponding electron density maps well or the electron density
is absent for the glycan parts of the glycoprotein structure. It is
also quite common for pyran rings of some glycan residues to deviate
significantly from the two enantiomericchair forms (4C1 and 1C4). All of these types of problems
occur even in high-resolution X-ray structures deposited in PDB.The large amount of the experimental data available for glycoproteins
precludes detailed inspection of all glycan residues. To eliminate
erroneous information, we compared ϕ/ψ/ω angular
distributions describing protein–glycan and intraglycan linkages
with the corresponding QM energy maps. Structures corresponding to
the high-energy regions were subjected to visual inspection. Linkages
involving monosaccharides with conformations of the pyran ring other
than 4C1 and/or unrealistically large (>125°)
C1–O–C angles were excluded.A wide
range of values of the ψN angle in the
Asn–glycan linkage can be found in X-ray structures, with some
of them close to 90°. Because amide torsion is well-known to
possess a high (∼20 kcal/mol) rotation barrier, only linkages
with ψN = 180 ± 20° were analyzed.Finally, to study the influence of glycosylation on conformational
preferences of the Asn, Thr, and Ser side chains, we analyzed distributions
of χ1 and χ1/χ2 angles of nonglycosylated Thr/Ser and Asn, respectively. The analyzed
data set consisted of ∼33 000 protein crystal structures
solved by X-ray diffraction at resolution below 2 Å and containing
nonglycosylated Asn, Ser, and Thr. Because glycosylation takes place
mostly on the protein surface, only the residues with nonzero solvent-accessible
surface area were considered.
Evaluation
of ICMFF for Oligosaccharides
and Glycoproteins
Although glycans are highly flexible systems,
it was shown that their structures display a high degree of variation,
within well-defined limits, with the overall topology of the molecule
being relatively conserved.[61] An extensive
reorganization of solvent and inter-residue hydrogen bonds is required
for significant conformational changes to occur. Flexibility is reduced
even further when an oligosaccharide is considered in the context
of glycoprotein. These considerations provided a basis for using molecular
mechanics (BPMC) simulations for evaluation of the new force field.
Two types of tests were carried out to assess the new force field:
one for free oligosaccharides in solution and another one for glycoproteins
containing glycanchains of different length.Results of the
conformational search for free oligosaccharides were compared with
the available NMR data and results of MD simulations. Oligosaccharidesconsidered in this work contain from 2 to 5 residues and are listed
in Tables S3 and S4, Supporting Information.X-ray structures of 15 glycoproteins containing glycanchains
with
lengths ranging from 1 to 12 residues and that are covalently bound
to a protein were also used in this work (Table 2). All structures were solved at high resolution (2 Å or better)
and contain most of the glycan residues from Table 1.
Table 2
Structure Prediction Results for Glycan
Chains of Different Length Obtained Using ICMFF
simpleb
neighbors
and waterc
side-chains
sampling (SC)a,d
chain length
PDB ID
residue
no.
predicted RMSD (Å)
best RMSD sampled (Å)
predicted RMSD (Å)
best RMSD sampled
(Å)
predicted RMSD (Å)
best RMSD sampled (Å)
1
1kcc
N92
1.04
0.01
0.73
0.64
5.38
0.74
1kcc
N161
0.47
0.44
1.49
1.48
4.47
0.60
1a7s
N114
0.68
0.25
0.67
0.17
1gpe
N392
0.86
0.60
0.89
0.53
1.13
0.64
1gpe
N165
0.91
0.86
0.44
0.37
0.92
0.60
2q9o
N39b
0.30
0.24
0.64
0.26
2q9o
N396b
1.99
0.70
0.68
0.24
2.92
0.71
2q9o
N39a
0.37
0.35
0.87
0.41
2q9o
N244a
1.56
0.31
0.67
0.20
6.14
1.32
2q9o
N396a
0.33
0.18
0.33
0.28
3og2
N709
2.07
0.28
0.66
0.49
2.19
0.26
3pxl
N333
0.24
0.23
0.59
0.13
3pfz
N431
0.35
0.33
0.32
0.23
3clu
N104
0.65
0.30
0.82
0.77
3clu
N182
0.25
0.22
0.72
0.60
1k7c
N104
0.22
0.11
0.63
0.43
0.73
0.46
1myr
N21
1.36
0.27
0.72
0.33
0.77
0.41
1myr
N482
0.39
0.30
0.25
0.25
5.10
0.26
1myr
N244
0.73
0.36
0.72
0.34
5.95
0.52
1myr
N90
0.71
0.20
0.65
0.10
5.99
0.87
3m5q
S336
0.30
0.30
1.01
0.11
0.28
0.25
1bxo
S3
1.40
0.42
1.03
0.38
1.00
0.39
1bxo
T7
0.86
0.12
0.84
0.12
1.91
0.07
1rmg
S380
1.91
0.10
1.26
0.14
1rmg
S418
0.39
0.15
0.28
0.10
0.87
0.14
2
3m5q
N131
0.58
0.14
1.08
0.15
1a7s
N145
0.99
0.93
0.79
0.40
3.13
0.62
2q9o
N216
0.88
0.75
0.93
0.51
2q9o
N289
0.52
0.31
0.50
0.50
2q9o
N376
0.79
0.46
1.17
0.97
2q9o
N216
0.82
0.52
1.08
0.79
3og2
N434
1.55
0.64
0.98
0.34
1.62
0.53
1gpe
N357
1.00
0.64
0.99
0.68
3pxl
N436
0.71
0.68
1.12
0.80
1myr
N218
1.23
0.62
1.26
0.66
5.58
0.46
3
2q9o
N88
1.49
0.37
0.66
0.41
4.57
0.46
2q9o
N289
0.43
0.39
0.69
0.43
1.05
0.47
3pxl
N217
1.47
0.48
1.23
1.10
0.93
0.55
2ciw
N93
0.84
0.49
1.11
0.45
1rmg
N299
2.36
2.20
2.40
2.11
2.57
2.01
4
3pfz
N267
1.57
0.92
0.81
0.55
1.29
1.13
5
1gpe
N93
0.95
0.62
0.99
0.65
0.97
0.55
2q9o
N201
7.56
2.88
7.91
1.28
5.93
2.73
1gai
N171
1.24
0.87
1.67
0.71
1ioo
N28
3.54
2.32
3.56
1.35
4.97
3.17
6
1k7c
N182
5.14
2.77
0.40
0.31
0.77
0.77
7
3og2
N267
1.25
0.76
0.92
0.52
1.43
1.04
3pxl
N54
5.90
0.48
2.41
0.54
9.91
8.04
4dz8
N297
3.92
1.21
1.43
0.86
4.67
0.93
8
3gly
N395
11.70
1.66
2.65
0.54
5.45
2.87
9
1gai
N395
4.20
2.75
1.53
0.60
4.78
4.29
10
4fqc
N105
6.14
1.74
12.96
3.78
12
3og2
N930
1.53
1.35
2.54
1.77
Torsional angles of the protein
side chains in contact with the glycan were allowed to vary during
the simulations.
The simulation
system consisted
of the glycoprotein only, i.e., glycan chain and the protein chain
to which it is bound.
The
simulation system included the
glycan and protein chains plus water molecules and all other protein
chains (crystallographic neighbors) in direct contact with the glycan.
The simulations system was
the same
as in footnote c except for water molecules.
Torsional angles of the protein
side chains in contact with the glycan were allowed to vary during
the simulations.The simulation
system consisted
of the glycoprotein only, i.e., glycanchain and the protein chain
to which it is bound.The
simulation system included the
glycan and protein chains plus water molecules and all other protein
chains (crystallographic neighbors) in direct contact with the glycan.The simulations system was
the same
as in footnote c except for water molecules.If a given glycanchain of a protein in its native
conformation
does not have any direct interactions with any other glycanchains
from the same protein, then the conformation of this chain was optimized
while keeping the rest of the glycoprotein structure fixed. If two
or more glycanchains are in direct contact in the experimental structure,
then the internal degrees of freedom of all of them were allowed to
vary during the conformational search.Due to the inherent flexibility
of glycans, accurate prediction
of their conformations requires not only their interactions with the
proteins they are attached to but also those with the neighboring
protein chains to be taken into account. Moreover, many glycoproteins
display water-mediated protein–glycan interactions. Omitting
those water molecules in the simulations may lead to incorrect prediction
of glycanconformations. Therefore, some simulations described in
this work (Results and Discussion) were carried
out by considering all protein chains within a 5 Å distance from
a given glycanchain and all water molecules that are within a 5 Å
distance of the glycanchain and are in contact with both the glycanchain and a protein.Since the goal of this work is to evaluate
the new glycoprotein
force field, use of the experimental information about protein crystal
packing and the number and positions of water molecules is appropriate.
In contrast, fully ab initio prediction of glycanconformations is
a much more challenging task, and it will be a subject of future research.The standard protonation state at pH 7.0 was assigned to all titratable
groups (histidine and tyrosine residues were considered to be uncharged).
Only the δ tautomer of histidine was used.Accuracy of
the glycan modeling results was assessed using the
heavy-atom root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) computed after superimposing
the body (i.e., all of the residues except those of the glycanchains)
of the protein.The BPMC method was applied to a system containing
a glycoprotein
with the glycanchain of interest, neighboring protein chains, and
water molecules. The starting system was obtained by optimizing the
native structure by conversion to the standard ICM covalent geometry
(which included rebuilding of all hydrogens) by carrying out a systematic
search for torsional angles defining positions of polar hydrogens
and by setting all glycan ϕ, ψ, and ω angles to
180°.
Results and Discussion
Statistical Analysis of Local Conformational
Preferences of Glycans
Glycan–Glycan
Linkages
All C–O–Cglycan–glycan linkages
retrieved from
PDB were divided into four groups corresponding to the model molecules
shown in Figure 4. The ϕ/ψ distribution
for the most common C1–O–C linkage type,
namely, eq–eq, is shown in Figure 6a
(left). It corresponds roughly to the three minima of the eq–eq
energy map (Figure 6a, middle), with the lowest-energy
minimum (ϕ ∼ −80°; ψ ∼ 120°)
being the most populated one. Conformations of the eq–eq model
molecule corresponding to the three energy minima are shown in Figure 7. Table S5 shows the
breakdown of eq–eq ϕ/ψ distribution according to
the different linkage types. ϕ/ψ angles for the majority
of linkages have values in the lowest-energy region (minimum I, Figure 6a) with insignificant (<0.05) contributions from
minima II and III. The β-d-GlcpNAc-(1–4)-α-d-GlcpNAc, β-d-GlcpNAc-(1–3)-β-d-Gal, and β-d-Man-(1–3)-β-d-Man linkages are the only exceptions with β-d-GlcpNAc-(1–4)-α-d-GlcpNAc displaying two populated regions (minima I and III),
β-d-GlcpNAc-(1–3)-β-d-Gal has
one well-defined cluster around −80/–130°, and
β-d-Manp-(1–3)-β-d-Manp has no
well-defined minimum, with ϕ/ψ values scattered in ϕ
< 0, ψ < 0 region.
Figure 6
Conformational preferences of different
C–O–C disaccharide
linkages: (a–d) eq–eq, ax–eq, ax–ax, and
eq–ax C–O–C disaccharide linkages, respectively.
(Left) Distribution of ϕ/ψ angles in high-resolution PDB
structures of glycoproteins with each type of linkage (6319 linkages
from 1810 structures for eq–eq, 2303 linkages from 920 structures
for ax–eq, 434 linkages from 200 structures for ax–ax,
and 239 linkages from 101 structures for eq–ax). (Middle, right)
QM and total ICMFF energy surfaces, respectively, for model molecules 1–4 (Figure 4).
The color code from purple to red of the energy maps corresponds to
the 0–8 kcal/mol range. Contours are drawn with 1 kcal/mol
step.
Figure 7
Conformations of the eq–eq model molecule
corresponding
to the three minima on the ϕ/ψ energy map (Figure 6a).
Conformational preferences of different
C–O–Cdisaccharide
linkages: (a–d) eq–eq, ax–eq, ax–ax, and
eq–ax C–O–Cdisaccharide linkages, respectively.
(Left) Distribution of ϕ/ψ angles in high-resolution PDB
structures of glycoproteins with each type of linkage (6319 linkages
from 1810 structures for eq–eq, 2303 linkages from 920 structures
for ax–eq, 434 linkages from 200 structures for ax–ax,
and 239 linkages from 101 structures for eq–ax). (Middle, right)
QM and total ICMFF energy surfaces, respectively, for model molecules 1–4 (Figure 4).
The color code from purple to red of the energy maps corresponds to
the 0–8 kcal/mol range. Contours are drawn with 1 kcal/mol
step.Conformations of the eq–eq model molecule
corresponding
to the three minima on the ϕ/ψ energy map (Figure 6a).The second most common (2303 hits) linkage type is ax–eq.
Distribution of ϕ/ψ values for this linkage (Figure 6b, column 1) is in line with the corresponding QM
energy map (Figure 6b, middle), i.e., points
in Figure 6a are localized in the vicinity
of two minima of the energy map. The populations of the two regions
are very different, with the ϕ/ψ angles for the majority
of linkages in the vicinity of minimum I (Table
S6). ϕ/ψ angles of α-d-Manp-(1–3)-β-d-Manp, α-d-Manp-(1–3)-α-d-Manp, α-d-Galp-(1–3)-β-d-Galp,
α-d-GalpNAc-(1–3)-β-d-Galp, and
α-d-Glcp-(1–3)-α-d-Manp populate
exclusively minimum II (Table S6).There is a significantly smaller amount of experimental data for
the ax–ax (Figure 6c, left) and eq–ax
(Figure 6d, left) linkages (434 and 239 hits,
respectively). The corresponding QM energy maps (middle of Figure 6c,d) display only one minimum that is in agreement
with the observed ϕ/ψ distributions. Description of the
corresponding probability zones is reported in Tables S7 and S8.Analysis of the glycoproteins containing
1–6 linkages shows
that the majority (87%) of them involve α-glycans (Table S9). As can be seen from Figure 8, the α-(1–6) linkage adopts two significantly
populated conformations with ϕ ∼ 70° and ψ
∼ 180° that differ only in the value of ω (180°
and 60°). The β-(1–6) linkage has two almost equally
populated states at ϕ ∼ −100°, ψ ∼
−165°, and ω = 10° and 160°.
Figure 8
Distribution
of (a) ϕ, (b) ψ, and (c) ω torsional
angles in PDB structures of glycoproteins with 1–6 disaccharide
linkages. ψ histogram is offset into the 0 to 360° range
rather than −180 to 180° to better show the major peak
at 180°.
Distribution
of (a) ϕ, (b) ψ, and (c) ω torsional
angles in PDB structures of glycoproteins with 1–6 disaccharide
linkages. ψ histogram is offset into the 0 to 360° range
rather than −180 to 180° to better show the major peak
at 180°.ϕ/ψ values
and their standard deviations reported in Tables
S5–S9 were used to define biased
probability zones for glycoproteins.
Protein–Glycan
Linkages
N-Linkage
Search carried out for α-glycansconnected
to Asn residues of glycoproteins yielded 301 linkages from 204 crystal
structures. Distribution of the ϕN/ψN angles for α-*-Asn (where * is exclusively α-d-GlcNAc) is shown in Figure 9a. As seen from
Figure 9a, both ϕN and ψN angles can assume a wide range of values with no preferred
conformations. If we consider only highly accurate experimental structures
(selected according to the presence of electron density at the locations
of all ring atoms of the first glycan monosaccharide), then the majority
of the remaining points will be located in the ϕN > 0°, ψN < 150° region without
a well-defined
preferred conformation. Small amount of the available experimental
data coupled with the wide dispersion of the ϕN/ψN values did not allow us to define BP zones for α-*-Asn
linkage.
Figure 9
Distribution of ϕ/ψ torsional angles in PDB structures
of proteins with N-linkages: (a) α-d-GlcNAc-ASN and
(b–d) β-d-GlcNAc-ASN.
Distribution of ϕ/ψ torsional angles in PDB structures
of proteins with N-linkages: (a) α-d-GlcNAc-ASN and
(b–d) β-d-GlcNAc-ASN.More data is available for β-*-Asn linkages (7030 linkages
from 1887 structures), including 7025 β-d-GlcpNAc-(1–4)-Asn,
2 β-d-Man-(1–4)-Asn, 2 β-d-Glc-(1–4)-Asn,
and 1 β-d-GalNAc-(1–4)-Asn linkages. As can
be seen from Figure 9b, the β-*-Asn linkage
adopts only one significantly populated conformation at ϕN = −97.9 ± 20.8° and ψN =
176.3 ± 15.6°, which is in line with the results reported
by Petrescu et al.[62] According to Figure 9d, ψN, which corresponds to the
rotation about the amide double bond, can assume values close to ±90°.
If these energetically unfavorable conformations are excluded from
the analysis, i.e., only the points with ψN = 180
± 20° are considered, then two unequally populated clusters
remain: one at ϕN ∼ −100°, ψN ∼ 180° and much smaller one at ϕN ∼ 60°, ψN ∼ 180°. Description
of the BP zones corresponding to these two clusters is given in Table S10.To study whether the presence
of glycans affects conformational
preferences of asparagine, we also analyzed distribution of χ1 and χ2 angles of Asn with bound glycans
(Figure S2) and compared it with the side
chain torsional angles of nonglycosylated Asn (data not shown). The
side chains of glycosylated Asncan exist in three rotameric states
with χ1 = −60, +60, or 180° and χ2 ≈ 0° (χ2 is defined relative
to Oδ). Occupancies of the three χ1 rotamers are 47, 33, and 20% for χ1 = 180, −60,
and +60°, respectively. The range of χ2 values
(∼±45°) is significantly wider than that of χ1 (±10°). In comparison, side chains of nonglycosylated
asparagines fall into the same three conformations, but populations
of the three states are different from those of glycosylated Asn.
Thus, χ1 = −60° is by far the most populated
conformation (60%) with χ1 = 180 and 60° observed
in only 27 and 13% of asparagine residues, respectively. The χ1 distribution widths for both glycosylated and nonglycosylated
asparagins are roughly the same (±11°). It should be mentioned
that the χ1 angular distributions obtained for glycosylated
and nonglycosylated asparagines are in very good agreement with the
results reported by Petrescu et al.,[62] who
used much smaller data set for their analysis.Differences in
conformational preferences found for glycosylated
and nonglycosylated asparagine mean that the BP zones for Asn that
are currently used in ICM should be supplemented by the χ1/χ2 zones for glycosylated Asn.
O-Glycan–Protein
Linkage
O-Linkages are much
less numerous than N-linkages. Search in PDB yielded the total of
260 linkages, with 158 of them for α-glycansconnected to Ser
and 88 for α-glycans bound to Thr. There is not enough experimental
data (14 linkages only) to carry out conformational analysis for β-glycansconnected to either Ser or Thr.α-d-Mannose is
the most common monosaccharide found in O-linkages with protein (245
out of 260 analyzed linkages). Distributions of ϕO/ψO angles for glycan–Ser and glycan–Thr
are shown in Figure 10. Both distributions
display a single well-defined cluster of conformations. Parameters
of the corresponding BP zones are given in Table
S10.
Figure 10
Distribution of ϕ/ψ torsional angles in PDB
structures
of glycoproteins with O-linkages: (a) α-*-Ser and (b) α-*-Thr
structures.
Distribution of ϕ/ψ torsional angles in PDB
structures
of glycoproteins with O-linkages: (a) α-*-Ser and (b) α-*-Thr
structures.χ1 values
for glycosylated Ser and Thr belong
to three main conformations, i.e., 180°/–60°/60°
with relative populations of 37, 43, 15% and 7, 53, 40%, respectively
(Figure S3). Comparison of the χ1 values for glycosylated and nonglycosylated Ser and Thr demonstrates
that glycosylation changes conformational preferences of both Ser
and Thr. Thus, χ1 = 60° is the most populated
rotameric state for nonglycosylated residues (∼55% for Thr
and Ser), in contrast with χ1 = −60°
for the glycosylated ones. Populations for nonglycosylated Ser and
Thr are 18, 26, 56% and 5, 40, 55%, respectively.
ω Angle in CH2OH Exocyclic
Groups
Three stable staggered conformations are possible
for the exocyclicCH2OH group: gauche–trans (gt),
trans–gauche (tg), and gauche–gauche (gg), referring
to the configuration of the O6–C6–C5–O5 and the
O6–C6–C5–C4 torsion angles, respectively (Figure 11). Experimental studies have shown[63] that in glycopyranosides the ω torsional angles (O6–C6–C5–O5)
display a preference for the gauche conformation, in disagreement
with predictions based on gas-phase QM calculations. The ω angle
in galactopyranosides displays a high proportion of the anti orientation. It is recognized that the gauche effect in carbohydrates
is a solvent-dependent phenomenon.[34] Kirschner
and Woods[34] demonstrated that the experimental
rotamer distributions about the ω angle can be reproduced only
if explicit water is included in simulations. The main role of water
appears to be to disrupt the hydrogen bonding within the carbohydrate,
allowing the rotamer populations to be determined by internal electronic
and steric repulsions between oxygen atoms.[34] These findings indicate that QM calculations used in this work for
parametrizing torsional potentials cannot be applied to obtaining
torsional parameters of the ω angle. As an alternative, we adopted
an approach based on rotamer populations for the ω angle derived
from the experimental NMR J coupling constants.[63] Thibaudeau et all.[63] presented data for rotameric populations of ω angle in saccharide
hydroxymethyl groups. Their results also showed that the anomeric
and C4 configurations affect the distribution of ω rotamers.
Thus, α-anomers with equatorial C4 configuration are characterized
by the 45/45/10% distribution of gg/gt/tg, respectively. β-anomers,
on the other hand, have higher population of gt rotamers (60%), with
tg still representing ∼10% of the population. The anomericconfiguration has no noticeable effect on ω rotameric populations
of saccharides with axial C4 configuration. Seventy percent of the
observed rotamers for these saccharides were gt, with 30% being tg
rotamers. Virtually no gg rotamer was observed. We used these experimental
populations to compute relative stabilities of gg, gt, and tt conformations
for the two model molecules (Figure 11) representing
glycopyranoside and galactopyranoside fragments. We found that a three-term
torsional potential (eq 4) is not sufficient
for reproducing the observed conformations of glycans with either
an axial or equatorial C4 configuration. An additional cosine term
shifted by −60° was introduced to avoid overstabilizing
the ggconformation. Parameters of the torsional potential were adjusted
manually to achieve relative stabilities of gg, gt, and tgconformations
observed from the experiment, i.e., 0.0/0.0/1.93 kcal/mol and 0.0/0.19/1.79
kcal/mol for gg/gt/tgconformations for molecules 1 and 2 (Figure 11), respectively. The resulting torsional parameters
are given in Table S11, Supporting Information.
Figure 11
Model molecules used for parametrization of ω torsional potential
in (a) glucopyranoside and (b) galactopyranoside fragments.
Model molecules used for parametrization of ω torsional potential
in (a) glucopyranoside and (b) galactopyranoside fragments.
Evaluation
of Nonbonded Parameters
Although the ICMFF nonbonded parameters
used in this work have already
been evaluated in ref (41), we considered eight crystal structures of monosaccharides from
the Cambridge Database (Table S12) to make
sure that those parameters are indeed transferable to saccharides
and glycoproteins. Each of the eight experimental structures was energy-minimized
using the GRYSTALG program (see ref (41) for details). Partial atomiccharges derived
in this work for hexose residues were used. Results of the crystal
computations, including changes in unit cell parameters after energy
minimization with ICMFF, are reported in Table S12, Supporting Information. To assess the energetic aspect of
the force field’s performance, a literature search of experimental
enthalpies of sublimation was carried out for the monosaccharides
from Table S12. α-d-Glucose
is the only molecule for which sublimation enthalpy is available (column
7 of Table S12). As seen from Table S12, energy minimizations with ICMFF led
to small (less than 5%) changes in unit cell parameters, whereas the
lattice energy obtained for α-d-glucose (−40
kcal/mol) is between the two experimental values (33.2 and 46.5 kcal/mol)
available for this molecule. These results indicate that nonbonded
parameters in ICMFF are accurate enough to reproduce crystal structures
of most common monosaccharides. Although the two experimental values
of sublimation enthalpy reported in literature differ by ∼13
kcal/mol, the fact that the computed lattice energy of the α-d-glucosecrystal is close to both of them suggests that ICMFF
describes energetic aspect of intermolecular interaction reasonably
well.
Parameterization of the ϕ/ψ
Torsional Potential
C–O–C
Glycan–Glycan
Linkage
The accuracy of the force field energy function with
respect to ϕ/ψ angles is of extraordinary importance in
glycans and glycoproteins because relatively small ϕ/ψ
angular deviations can result in large movements as they propagate
along the glycanchain. As in the case of the protein backbone, we
paid special attention to the parameters and choice of the functional
form for glycan ϕ/ψ torsional potentials. The same empirical
approach that was used for parametrization of protein backbone torsional
potential[41] was applied to glycans. It
was designed to reproduce main features of the QM ϕ/ψ
map (such as shape and relative stability of the low-energy regions)
while focusing on the low-energy regions that are also the most populated
areas of the ϕ/ψ map obtained from the analysis of the
experimental glycoprotein structures from PDB.QM computation
of energy as a function of all torsional degrees of freedom is unfeasible
even for the simplest disaccharides; therefore, we used simplified
model molecules shown in Figure 4 to produce
ϕ/ψ energy maps for glycan–glycan linkages. These
molecules lack hydroxyl group and, therefore, their energy maps may
somewhat differ from the ϕ/ψ maps of real disaccharides.
To verify whether the energy maps from Figure 6 (middle) are sufficiently similar to those of disacchirides, we
compared them with the distributions of experimental values of ϕ/ψ
angles from the data collected for the same four types of glycan–glycan
linkages PDB (Figure 6, left). In general,
the most populated, according to the statistics from PDB, areas of
the ϕ/ψ maps agree well with the low-energy regions of
the corresponding QM maps. It should be mentioned that the distributions
in Figure 6 display a large number of outliers,
which can be attributed to the low quality of the glycan segments
of some experimental structures. Therefore, we considered the QM energy
maps as our target data.First, we calculated ϕ/ψ
energy maps for the nonbonded
terms (van der Waals and electrostatics) of the ICMFF force field
energy function using the model molecules shown in Figure 4 and then compared them to the corresponding QM
energy maps.
Molecule 1 (eq–eq)
The experimental ϕ/ψ
distribution for this linkage type displays three populated regions,
which correspond roughly to the three energy minima of the QM map
(Figure 6a, middle). The deepest energy minimum
(and the largest cluster) is at ϕ ∼ −60°
and ψ ∼ 120°. Other, much smaller, minima are located
at ϕ = −60°, ψ = −30° and ϕ
= 45°, ψ = 150° with energies of 2.5 and 2.3 kcal/mol,
respectively. There is no well-defined cluster around ϕ = −60°,
ψ = −30° (Figure 6a, left).
These three minima are also present on the nonbonded energy map; however,
all of them are more extended along the ϕ axis. Three-term torsional
potentials, fitted by optimizing target function in eqs 5 and 6, for both ϕ and ψ
angles were found to be necessary to correct the nonbonded energy
map. The resulting MM map shown in Figure 6a (right) agrees well with the QM map except for the region around
ϕ = −60°, ψ = −30°. Thus, the
ϕ = 45°, ψ = 150° minimum is 2.5 kcal/mol higher
than the one at ϕ ∼ −60°, ψ ∼
120°, which is close to the QM value of 2.3 kcal/mol. The depth
of the third minimum (ϕ = −60°, ψ = −30°)
of the QM map is reproduced well on the MM map (2.5 kcal/mol); on
the other hand, it is position is shifted to ϕ = −90°,
ψ = −75°. Since there is no well-defined cluster
of experimental conformations in the vicinity of this minimum, we
did not attempt to improve further the agreement with the QM map.
Molecule 2 (ax–eq)
The experimental ϕ/ψ
distribution (Figure 6b, left) for molecule
2 has one densely populated region around ϕ = 60°, ψ
= 90° corresponding to the lowest minimum of the QM energy map.
A significantly smaller number of points are also present in the other
regions of the map, in particular, around ϕ ∼ 70°,
ψ ∼ 50°. This region coincides with the second minimum
(2.9 kcal/mol higher than the first one) of the QM map. Both of these
minima appear to be significantly wider on the nonbonded energy map
as compared to the QM one, but the positions of the two minima along
the ψ axis are very similar. Therefore, a ϕ-only torsional
potential was fitted as above and used to compensate the differences
between the QM and nonbonded energy maps. The resulting MM map agrees
well with the QM one (right and middle of Figure 6b), especially around the main minimum at ϕ = 60°,
ψ = 90°. The second minimum of the MM map is ∼1.5
kcal/mol higher than the corresponding QM minimum (4.6 vs 2.9 kcal/mol).
Considering the low probability of conformations corresponding to
this minimum, the obtained energy difference is acceptable.
Molecule
3 (ax–ax)
The QM energy map computed
for molecule 1 (Figure 6c, middle) displays
a single minimum centered at ϕ ∼ 75°, ψ ∼
90°, which is in agreement with the experimental ϕ/ψ
distribution (Figure 6c, left). The corresponding
nonbonded energy map also has a single minimum, but it is broader
along the ϕ axis, extending all the way to ϕ = 180°.
Its lowest point is also shifted along the ψ axis (ψ ∼
165°). To bring the MM energy map close to the QM one, it was
found to be sufficient to add a three-term ϕ torsional potential
to the nonbonded energy. Parameters of the potential were optimized
by minimizing the target function from eq 5.
The MM energy map calculated with the optimized parameters is shown
in Figure 6c, right. The width, along the ϕ
axis, of the minimum is now very similar for the QM and MM maps, i.e.,
the QM and MM energies for ϕ = 60°/90° (ψ =
−135°) are 0.8/1.4 and 0.3/1.0 kcal/mol, respectively.
Molecule 4 (eq–ax)
The QM map computed for this
molecule has two minima (Figure 6d). The lowest-energy
minimum is much broader and located at ϕ = −60°,
ψ = −135°. The second minimum at ϕ = 45°,
ψ = −105° is ∼2.5 kcal/mol higher and separated
from the first one by relatively high energy barrier (∼6 kcal/mol).
At the same time, the experimental ϕ/ψ distribution for
disaccharides occupies mainly one region around ϕ ∼ −80°,
ψ ∼ −100° with only few points located in
the vicinity of ϕ ∼ 60°, ψ ∼ −100°
(Figure 6d, left). The MM ϕ/ψ nonbonded
energy map also has two minima, but they are much broader and more
similar in energy. There is also virtually no barrier between these
two minima. Fitting using the Fourier expansion from eq 4 carried out for ϕ torsional potential alone yielded
parameters that reproduce well the general shape of the two minima,
their energy difference (2.9 kcal/mol for the MM map), and the energy
barrier between them (6.4 kcal/mol for the MM map).The resulting
ϕ/ψ torsional parameters are listed in Table S11 and were used for predicting conformations of glycanchains in glycoproteins (see discussion below).
Side Chain Torsional Potentials
Table S2, Supporting Information, contains
the list of small molecules used for parametrization of the torsional
energy terms for glycan side chains. Ab initio and ICMFF energies
of different conformations are in excellent agreement, i.e., the average
difference between them is less than 0.3 kcal/mol. The two largest
deviations between the QM and MM energies were obtained for the gauche+
conformation of propylene glycol (0.80 kcal/mol) and for the gauche–
conformation of N-(1-methylethyl)-ethanamide (0.86
kcal/mol). As indicated by the results in Tables
S2, accuracy of the model is high enough to reproduce well
the details of the QM results.The torsional parameters for
glycan side chains are given in Table S11.
Structure Prediction for Nine-Residue Glycan
Chain (PDB ID 1gai)
To investigate the efficiency of the BPMC procedure as
a global optimization method for glycoproteins, we chose a nine-residue
glycanchain from the crystal structure of glucoamylase-471 (PDB ID 1gai) solved at 1.7 Å
resolution. The chain is composed of 2 β-GlcNAc and 7 α/β-Man
residues connected via different types of linkages (1–2, 1–3,
1–4, and 1–6). Global energy optimization was carried
out for the system including chain A of 1gai plus 17 water molecules forming a layer
between the protein and glycan (Figure 12).
Positions of the water molecules were taken as those in the experimental
structure and were kept fixed. All glycan dihedral angles, C–O–C
bond angles, and rotational degrees of freedom of the water molecules
were used as variables in local energy minimization, whereas internal
coordinates of the protein chain were fixed.
Figure 12
Overlay of the experimental
(magenta), the lowest-energy BPMC (green),
and the lowest-energy no BPMC (yellow) conformations of the nine-residue
glycan chain of PDB 1gai.
Overlay of the experimental
(magenta), the lowest-energy BPMC (green),
and the lowest-energy no BPMC (yellow) conformations of the nine-residue
glycanchain of PDB 1gai.The BPMC simulation started from
a conformation in which all variable
torsional angles were set to 180°. The preferred angular zones
used to modify the probability distribution of a random step are those
listed in Tables S5–S9. An unbiased
(evenly distributed) random step was applied to angles not included
in the preferred variable zones. Up to 150 low-energy conformations
with a pairwise ϕ−ψ RMSD deviation greater than
30° were accumulated in a so-called conformational stack.[42] The maximum number of energy evaluations in
every local minimization was set to 480 (300 + 20 × number of
residues). The simulation temperature was set to 600 K.To compare
the efficiency of the BPMC procedure with the unbiased
MC minimization procedure,[64] we performed
five simulations of each type starting from different random conformations.
Each simulation was limited to ∼12 800 Monte Carlo steps
(72 900 000 energy evaluations).Figure 13 shows the progression of the best
energy achieved with the time of simulation for both evenly distributed
random steps and the biased ones. All BPMC simulations converged to
low-energy conformations much faster than the unbiased runs. Thus,
after 30 000 000 energy evaluations, lowest energies
from the five BPMC runs were all below −845 kcal/mol (Figure 13a), whereas only three out of five unbiased runs
reached such a low energy (Figure 13b).
Figure 13
Progression
of the lowest energy achieved with the time of simulation
for PDB 1gai using (a) BPMC steps and ϕ, ψ, ω, and side chain
torsional angles as search variables, (b) evenly distributed MC steps
and ϕ, ψ, ω, and side chain torsional angles as
search variables, and (c) BPMC steps with only ϕ, ψ, and
ω angles as search variables.
Progression
of the lowest energy achieved with the time of simulation
for PDB 1gai using (a) BPMC steps and ϕ, ψ, ω, and side chain
torsional angles as search variables, (b) evenly distributed MC steps
and ϕ, ψ, ω, and side chain torsional angles as
search variables, and (c) BPMC steps with only ϕ, ψ, and
ω angles as search variables.Although the lowest energies yielded by the two sets of runs
are
similar, i.e., −850 kcal/mol, they correspond to slightly different
conformations. The lowest-energy conformations have RMSD from the
native structure of 1.53 and 1.31 Å for the BPMC and unbiased
runs, respectively. The superposition of the lowest-energy conformations
produced by these two types of simulations and the experimental structure
of 1gai is shown
in Figure 12. As seen from Figure 12, the two structures located as lowest-energy minima
by the BPMC and unbiased runs differ in the orientation of the Man497
residue.It should be mentioned that the most native-like conformation
found
by both search methods had RMSD of only 0.6 Å but a higher energy.Because ϕ, ψ, and ω (in 1–6 linkages)
torsional angles in glycans define the overall conformation of a glycanchain, it is possible that efficient coverage of the conformational
space in MC simulations could be achieved through random steps for
ϕ, ψ, and ω angles only, with the rest of the variables
optimized during local energy minimizations. To verify this assumption,
we carried out five BPMC runs with only ϕ, ψ, and ω
torsional angles as MC variables. Results of these simulations (Figure 13c) show that use of only ϕ, ψ, and
ω angles leads to dramatically worse results both in terms of
lowest energy found and simulation convergence. For example, the lowest
energy reached in these simulations never fell below −845 kcal/mol,
in contrast with the lowest energy of ∼−850 kcal/mol
reached in the two sets of runs discussed above. This result underscores
the role of hydroxyl groups in defining glycanconformation. Interestingly,
even though subjecting hydroxyl rotations to MC steps significantly
increases the search space, it leads to faster convergence of the
simulations.
Free Oligosaccharides
in Solution
The simulation protocol described in the Computational
Details and previous sections was applied to locate low-energy
conformations of several small oligosaccharides (Tables S3 and S4, Supporting Information) in solution. One-hundred
fifty structures generated by each of the five independent runs were
combined, structures with energies more than 7 kcal/mol above lowest-energy
conformation were removed, and the remaining conformations were grouped
into clusters using a pairwise ϕ/ψ RMSD deviation of less
than 30°. Each cluster is characterized by the energy of its
most stable member and average ϕ/ψ values. Tables S3 and S4 contain information available
from NMR, X-ray, and MD studies for the selected oligosaccharides
as well as results obtained in this work.Sattelle and Almond[65] applied aqueous MD simulations to study conformational
equilibria of mannosylcores, sialyl Lewis (sLe) antennae, and constituent
subsequences (Figure S1, Supporting Information) and compared their results with corresponding NMR and X-ray data.
Results of the simulations carried out using our new force field along
with those of Sattelle and Almond and the experimental data are given
in Table S3. Conformations predicted in
this work are listed according to their energies (from lowest to highest).
Results in Table S3 show that lowest-energy
clusters of conformations are in good agreement with the most populated
NMR and MD generated linkage conformations as well as with X-ray data.
Thus, differences between ϕ/ψ angles of the experimental
and predicted conformations are less than 20° and can be attributed
to the static nature of MC simulations used in this work.A
number of di- and trisaccharides have been used[66−70] to study conformational flexibility of oligosaccharides
with a combination
of NMR experiments and MD simulations. It is well-accepted that a
synconformation, in which the H′1–C′1–O–C and C′1–O–C–H linkage angles are close to 0° (i.e., ϕ
and ψ torsional angles according to the NMR definition), is
the most stable conformation in solution. However, recent experiments
demonstrated that anti conformations at the ϕ or/and ψ
torsional angles, although much less populated, are present to a considerable
degree. The presence of such conformations is important because it
indicates flexibility of oligosaccharide molecules in solution. After
reviewing literature on experimental studies of small oligisaccharide,
we selected two disaccharides, β-d-Glcp-(1→4)-α-d-Glcp-OMe[66] and β-d-Galp-(1→3)-β-d-Glcp-OMe,[71] and three trisaccharides, α-d-Glcp-(1→2)-β-d-Glcp-(1→3)-α-d-Glcp-OMe,[68] α-d-Glcp-(1→3)-[β-d-Glcp-(1→4)]-α-d-Glcp-OMe,[68] and β-d-Glcp-(1→2)-β-d-Glcp-(1→3)-α-d-Glcp-OMe,[69,70] as model molecules for assessing accuracy of our newly developed
force field. Results of the conformational search carried out for
each of the molecules are reported in Table S4, Supporting Information.For both disaccharides in Table S4,
our method finds all three conformations reported in the corresponding
experimental works. Relative energies, ΔE’s,
indicate that anti conformations are significantly less stable than
synconformation for both disaccharides, which is in agreement with
the population values, p, derived from the experimental
data.Clusters of conformations similar to those obtained using
a combination
of NMR and MD methods for trisaccharides from Table S4 were also found by our method. Average ϕ/ψ
values are reasonably close to the ones reported in the literature.
Although no experimental populations are available for two out of
three trisaccharides from Table S4, high
relative energies of anti conformations predicted by our force field
are in line with the experimental evidence that these conformations
are significantly less populated. ΔE values
reported for the last trisaccharide in Table S4 correlate well with the experimental populations observed for this
molecule in solution.Comparison of the results obtained in
this work with the NMR/MD
and X-ray data shows that the new force field is accurate enough to
reproduce oligosaccharideconformations observed in experiment while
predicting the most populated of them as those with the lowest energy.
Structure Prediction for Glycan Chains of
Different Length
Accuracy of the new ICM force field for
glycoproteins was also evaluated based on RMSD of the lowest-energy
conformations generated using ICM from the corresponding PDB structures.
The BPMCconformational search was carried out for glycanchains with
lengths ranging from 1 to 12 glycan residues (Table 2). Due to the inherent flexibility of glycans, their conformations
can be influenced by the presence of crystal neighbors and water molecules.
Therefore, two types of BPMC runs were carried out for each glycanchain: (a) one for a simple system containing just the glycan and
a protein chain it is bound to (“simple” columns in
Table 2) and (b) another one for a system (“neighbors
and water” in Table 2) that also contains
crystallographic neighbors (protein chains) and water molecules within
a 5 Å radius of the glycanchain. Only the water molecules located
on the interface between a protein and the glycan were taken into
account. It should be mentioned that the “simple” runs
were not carried out for the longest glycans, 4fqc (10 residues) and 3og2 (12 residues), because
they have extensive contacts with the neighboring protein chains and,
therefore, their observed conformations cannot be reproduced without
taking the neighboring proteins into account.Results from Table 2 show that, in general, there is a correlation between
the accuracy of the glycan structure prediction (RMSD) and the length
of glycanchain. Thus, RMSDs for the majority of the lowest-energy
one-residue glycanchains obtained from the “simple”
runs are below 1 Å (average and median RMSDs are 0.81 and 0.68
Å, respectively), whereas the average/median RMSD for the two-
and three-residue chains are 0.91/0.85 and 1.32/1.47 Å, respectively.
It is difficult to draw any general conclusions about the accuracy
of the predictions for the longer glycanchains because of the small
number of structures considered, which, in turn, related to the much
smaller number of high-resolution experimental structures available
for glycoproteins containing long glycanchains.As indicated
by the similar values of the lowest-energy RMSDs and
best RMSDs sampled, the new force field coupled with the BPMC search
located near-native conformations as the lowest energy minima of the
potential for the majority of the one-residue glycanchains.The list of the one-residue glycanchains in Table 2 includes five O-linked glycans. The amount of experimental
data available for the O-glycosidic linkages is lower than that for
N-linkages, supposedly due to their increased flexibility. The number
of O-linkages in our test set is too small to make any meaningful
comparison between the accuracy of predictions for N- and O-linked
glycans.More than half of the one-residue glycans are in contact
with neighboring
protein chains and water molecules. Taking the crystallographic neighbors
into account led to lower RMSD values for all of the glycoproteins
with crystallographic neighbors except 1kcc (N92, lowest-energy RMSD of 1.49 Å), 1k7c (N104, lowest-energy
RMSD of 0.63 Å), and 3m5q (S336, lowest-energy RMSD of 1.01 Å). For 1kcc, both the new lowest-energy
RMSD and the best sampled RMSD were much higher than the ones obtained
without crystallographic neighbors, suggesting that conformations
of the surrounding protein side chains or positions of the water molecules
may not be determined accurately enough, leading to an unfavorable
glycan–protein interaction in the experimental structure.Protein–carbohydrate recognition is generally established
through networks of hydrogen bonds and complementary contact between
nonpolar surfaces.[72−74] While polar side chain groups and main chain amides
are used for hydrogen bonding, nonpolar surfaces of carbohydrates
often display stacking with aromatic residues. 3c1u (N104) represents
the latter case with a β-GlcNAc residue packed against the aromatic
ring of Y97 (Figure 14). The ICMFF lowest-energy
conformation is in excellent agreement with the experimental structure,
indicating that the new force field describes accurately both polar
and nonpolar interatomic interactions.
Figure 14
CH-pi stacking in PDB 3c1u. The experimental
BNag conformation is shown in cyan.
CH-pi stacking in PDB 3c1u. The experimental
BNag conformation is shown in cyan.The experimental conformations of the two- and three-residue
glycans
are reproduced well by the new force field (as indicated by RMSD in
Table 2). As in the case of the shortest glycanchains, taking crystallogtaphic neighbors into account leads to lower
RMSD.BPMC simulations carried out for 4–10-residue glycans
yielded
mixed results. Thus, very good agreement with the experimental structure
(RMSD < 1.57 Å) was obtained for 3pfz (four residues), 1gpe (five residues), 1gai (five residues),
and 3og2 (seven
residues) from “simple” BPMC runs. The RMSD was even
lower when neighboring protein chains and water molecules were considered.
Results obtained for the nine-residue glycanchain of 1gai have been discussed
in detail in the previous section. They show that ICMFF can reproduce
accurately the native structure as the lowest-energy conformation
(RMSD of 1.24 Å) if all crystallographic neighbors are taken
into account.The lowest-energy conformation found for the longest
(12 residues, 3og2) glycanchain considered
in this work is in very good agreement with the corresponding experimental
structure (RMSD of 1.77 Å). Such a low RMSD values obtained for
the longest glycanchain can be explained by the good accuracy of
the force field used and the relatively restricted space between protein
chains available for the glycan (Figure 15).
Figure 15
Overlay
of the experimental (magenta) and the lowest-energy (green)
conformations of the 12-residue glycan chain in PDB 3og2. Heavy-atom RMSD
between the two structures is 1.76 Å.
Overlay
of the experimental (magenta) and the lowest-energy (green)
conformations of the 12-residue glycanchain in PDB 3og2. Heavy-atom RMSD
between the two structures is 1.76 Å.Additionally, we carried out simulations where, in addition
to
the glycan itself, torsional angles of the protein side chains with
the heavy atoms within a 5 Å distance from the glycan heavy atoms
(including χ angles of the amino acid directly connected to
a given glycanchain) were allowed to vary (“SC” in
Table 2). Crystallographic neighbors were included
in these simulations, but without any water molecules. These simulations
represent a more stringent and more realistic test for a force field.
The side chain flexibility also allows possible atomicclashes to
be relieved that may be caused by uncertainties in the experimental
side chain conformations that, otherwise, would render the observed
glycanconformations energetically unfavorable. For the majority of
glycanchains from Table 2, side chain flexibility
does not lead to lower accuracy of the predictions, which indicates
that the new glycan force field is well-matched with its protein counterpart.
Thus, conformational search with flexible side chains carried out
for 12-residue glycanchain in 3og2 yielded a lowest-energy structure with
RMSD of only 2.5 Å from the native conformation, which is close
to the RMSD obtained as a results of the “neighbor and water”
search (1.77 Å).According to Table 2, there are a number
of cases where RMSD values for the “SC” simulations
are quite high. For some of them, such as one-residue glycanchains
in 1kcc (N92,
N161), 2q9o (N396b),
and 3og2 (N709),
seven-residue chain in 3pxl (N54), and nine-residue chain in 1gai (N395), the observed
glycanconformations are defined by interactions with both the protein
and the water molecules located at the glycan–protein interface
as indicated by higher RMSD values for the “simple”
search and low values for the “neighbors and water”
simulations.It should be mentioned that high RMSD values for
the lowest-energy
conformations of a given protein obtained as a results of both “simple”
and “neighbor and water” simulations may also be a sign
of problems with the experimental structure (e.g., close atomiccontacts).
Some of the close contacts can be eliminated by using flexible side
chains, as is the case for the three-residue glycan in 3pxl (N217) (Table 2). For other structures, such as the five-residue
glycanchains in 2q9o (N201) and 1ioo (N28) and 10-residue chain in 4fqc (N105), high RMSD’s for all three
types of runs may indicate both suboptimal side chain orientations
and positions of water molecules.Although a number of papers
describing parametrization and evaluation
of force fields for carbohydrates and glycoproteins have been published,
it is not easy to compare performance of ICMFF to that of other force
fields. Some of the evaluations were based on comparison with QM data
for small model systems[31] that have limited
similarity with the actual biological systems of interest. While certain
other studies were carried out using molecular dynamics simulations
for large systems (e.g., glycanchains in proteins) and their results
are often in reasonable agreement with some experimental data (such
as NMR J coupling and NOE values), it is hard to
predict how those methods would behave when applied to real-life problems,
for example, drug design. To our knowledge, the benchmark set of glycan
structures that we have compiled and used to evaluate ICMFF represents
the first systematic test for the ability of a glycan force field
and simulation method to reproduce experimentally observed three-dimensional
glycan structures on glycoproteins.
Conclusions
This work describes the derivation of a parameter set for an internal
coordinate all-atom force field that accurately models carbohydrates
and glycoproteins. QM calculations were employed to compute properties
such as partial atomiccharges, torsional parameters, and valence
angle deformation force constants. Special attention was paid to torsional
parameters because they can have a pronounced effect on the predicted
structure of glycans. Thus, QM energy maps were computed for a set
of model molecules representing possible glycan–glycan linkages.
Standard geometries for the most common monosaccharides were taken
from experimental X-ray and neutron diffraction data. A biased probability
Monte Carlo search method was adapted for predicting conformations
of glycanchains in glycoproteins. First, statistical analysis of
the experimental data available for glycans enabled us to determine
the high-probability zones for torsional angles of most of the common
types of glycan–glycan linkages. Second, these zones were used
in conjunction with the BPMC method to predict conformations of glycanchains containing 1–12 residues. Comparison of the performance
of a nonbiased Monte Carlo-with-minimization algorithm and BPMC indicates
that the latter method is significantly more efficient in locating
lowest-energy conformations. As indicated by low RMSDs obtained for
the majority of the test glycoproteins, from the shortest to the longest
glycanchains, the new ICMFF glycoprotein force field provides accurate
description of these complex systems.Results of our simulations
also highlight the importance of solvent–solute
interactions in defining native conformations of glycans and suggest
that implicit solvent models may not always be adequate for modeling
water-mediated protein–glycan interactions. Determining how
to address this problem within the framework of MM simulations is
a topic of our ongoing research.
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: Olgun Guvench; Sairam S Mallajosyula; E Prabhu Raman; Elizabeth Hatcher; Kenno Vanommeslaeghe; Theresa J Foster; Francis W Jamison; Alexander D Mackerell Journal: J Chem Theory Comput Date: 2011-10-11 Impact factor: 6.006