Literature DB >> 26574250

Examining the assumptions underlying continuum-solvent models.

Robert C Harris1, B Montgomery Pettitt1.   

Abstract

Continuum-solvent models (CSMs) have successfully predicted many quantities, including the solvation-free energies (ΔG) of small molecules, but they have not consistently succeeded at reproducing experimental binding free energies (ΔΔG), especially for protein-protein complexes. Several CSMs break ΔG into the free energy (ΔGvdw) of inserting an uncharged molecule into solution and the free energy (ΔGel) gained from charging. Some further divide ΔGvdw into the free energy (ΔGrep) of inserting a nearly hard cavity into solution and the free energy (ΔGatt) gained from turning on dispersive interactions between the solute and solvent. We show that for 9 protein-protein complexes neither ΔGrep nor ΔGvdw was linear in the solvent-accessible area A, as assumed in many CSMs, and the corresponding components of ΔΔG were not linear in changes in A. We show that linear response theory (LRT) yielded good estimates of ΔGatt and ΔΔGatt, but estimates of ΔΔGatt obtained from either the initial or final configurations of the solvent were not consistent with those from LRT. The LRT estimates of ΔGel differed by more than 100 kcal/mol from the explicit solvent model's (ESM's) predictions, and its estimates of the corresponding component (ΔΔGel) of ΔΔG differed by more than 10 kcal/mol. Finally, the Poisson-Boltzmann equation produced estimates of ΔGel that were correlated with those from the ESM, but its estimates of ΔΔGel were much less so. These findings may help explain why many CSMs have not been consistently successful at predicting ΔΔG for many complexes, including protein-protein complexes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26574250      PMCID: PMC5340276          DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00684

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput        ISSN: 1549-9618            Impact factor:   6.006


  49 in total

1.  The Protein Data Bank.

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

2.  Temperature and length scale dependence of hydrophobic effects and their possible implications for protein folding.

Authors:  D M Huang; D Chandler
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-07-18       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Electrostatics of nanosystems: application to microtubules and the ribosome.

Authors:  N A Baker; D Sept; S Joseph; M J Holst; J A McCammon
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2001-08-21       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Assessing implicit models for nonpolar mean solvation forces: the importance of dispersion and volume terms.

Authors:  Jason A Wagoner; Nathan A Baker
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-05-18       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  A blind challenge for computational solvation free energies: introduction and overview.

Authors:  J Peter Guthrie
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2009-04-09       Impact factor: 2.991

6.  Kunitz-type soybean trypsin inhibitor revisited: refined structure of its complex with porcine trypsin reveals an insight into the interaction between a homologous inhibitor from Erythrina caffra and tissue-type plasminogen activator.

Authors:  H K Song; S W Suh
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1998-01-16       Impact factor: 5.469

7.  Backbone additivity in the transfer model of protein solvation.

Authors:  Char Y Hu; Hironori Kokubo; Gillian C Lynch; D Wayne Bolen; B Montgomery Pettitt
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 6.725

8.  Solvation free energies of alanine peptides: the effect of flexibility.

Authors:  Hironori Kokubo; Robert C Harris; Dilipkumar Asthagiri; B Montgomery Pettitt
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2013-12-13       Impact factor: 2.991

9.  Optimization of the additive CHARMM all-atom protein force field targeting improved sampling of the backbone φ, ψ and side-chain χ(1) and χ(2) dihedral angles.

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

Review 10.  The SAMPL4 host-guest blind prediction challenge: an overview.

Authors:  Hari S Muddana; Andrew T Fenley; David L Mobley; Michael K Gilson
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 3.686

View more
  6 in total

1.  Computing conformational free energy differences in explicit solvent: An efficient thermodynamic cycle using an auxiliary potential and a free energy functional constructed from the end points.

Authors:  Robert C Harris; Nanjie Deng; Ronald M Levy; Ryosuke Ishizuka; Nobuyuki Matubayasi
Journal:  J Comput Chem       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 3.376

2.  Importance of Hydrophilic Hydration and Intramolecular Interactions in the Thermodynamics of Helix-Coil Transition and Helix-Helix Assembly in a Deca-Alanine Peptide.

Authors:  Dheeraj S Tomar; Valéry Weber; B Montgomery Pettitt; D Asthagiri
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 2.991

Review 3.  Reconciling the understanding of 'hydrophobicity' with physics-based models of proteins.

Authors:  Robert C Harris; B Montgomery Pettitt
Journal:  J Phys Condens Matter       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 2.333

4.  Theoretical analysis on thermodynamic stability of chignolin.

Authors:  Tomonari Sumi; Kenichiro Koga
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-03-26       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Optimization of Protein-Ligand Electrostatic Interactions Using an Alchemical Free-Energy Method.

Authors:  Alexander D Wade; David J Huggins
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 6.006

6.  Structure and spin state of nonheme FeIVO complexes depending on temperature: predictive insights from DFT calculations and experiments.

Authors:  Na Young Lee; Debasish Mandal; Seong Hee Bae; Mi Sook Seo; Yong-Min Lee; Sason Shaik; Kyung-Bin Cho; Wonwoo Nam
Journal:  Chem Sci       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 9.825

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.