| Literature DB >> 27054161 |
F Vitalini1, F Noé2, B G Keller1.
Abstract
We present extensive all-atom Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulation data of the twenty encoded amino acids in explicit water, simulated with different force fields. The termini of the amino acids have been capped to ensure that the dynamics of the Φ and ψ torsion angles are analogues to the dynamics within a peptide chain. We use representatives of each of the four major force field families: AMBER ff-99SBILDN [1], AMBER ff-03 [2], OPLS-AA/L [3], CHARMM27 [4] and GROMOS43a1 [5], [6]. Our data represents a library and test bed for method development for MD simulations and for force fields development. Part of the data set has been previously used for comparison of the dynamic properties of force fields (Vitalini et al., 2015) [7] and for the construction of peptide basis functions for the variational approach to molecular kinetics [8].Entities:
Keywords: Amino acid; Force field; Molecular dynamics
Year: 2016 PMID: 27054161 PMCID: PMC4802541 DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2016.02.086
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Data Brief ISSN: 2352-3409
Simulation parameters per amino acid and force field: number of water molecules, size of simulation box, number of independent runs and total simulation time.
| Amino Acid | ff_AMBER ff99SB -ILDN | ff_AMBER ff03 | ff_CHARMM27 | ff_OPLS AA/L | ff_GROMOS43a1 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # H2O | box-size | sim. time | # H2O | box-size | sim. time | # H2O | box-size | sim. time | # H2O | box-size | sim. time | # H2O | box-size | sim. time | |
| Ac-A-NHMe | 651 | (2.7 nm)3 | 20×200 ns | 646 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs | 680 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs | 684 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs | 531 | (2.5 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs |
| Ac-C-NHMe | 717 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 717 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 717 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 717 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 610 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac- | 763 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 763 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 751 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 763 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 648 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-E-NHMe | 796 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 796 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 796 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 796 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 749 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-F-NHMe | 903 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 903 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 911 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 903 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 854 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-G-NHMe | 795 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 20×200 ns | 643 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 3×1 μs | 628 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 644 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 534 | (2.5 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-H-NHMe | 848 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 848 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 854 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 848 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 785 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-I-NHMe | 766 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 20×200 ns | 751 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs | 751 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 751 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 636 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-K-NHMe | 924 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 924 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 924 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 924 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 876 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac- | 796 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 20×200 ns | 726 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs | 739 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 726 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 622 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-M-NHMe | 782 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 782 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 782 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 782 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 664 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-N-NHMe | 722 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 722 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 727 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 722 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 679 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-P-NHMe | 860 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 20×200 ns | 704 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs | 723 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 704 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 610 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-Q-NHMe | 881 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 881 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 881 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 881 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 824 | (2.9 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-R-NHMe | 1026 | (3.2 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 1026 | (3.2 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 1026 | (3.2 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 1026 | (3.2 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 997 | (3.1 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-S-NHMe | 691 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 691 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 706 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 691 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 614 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-T-NHMe | 748 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 748 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 724 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 748 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 626 | (2.7 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-V-NHMe | 676 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 20×200 ns | 672 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs | 672 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs | 672 | (2.8 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs | 577 | (2.6 nm) 3 | 4×1 μs |
| Ac-W-NHMe | 930 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 930 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 916 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 930 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 869 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
| Ac-Y-NHMe | 99- | (3.1 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 990 | (3.1 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 990 | (3.1 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 990 | (3.1 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs | 925 | (3.0 nm) 3 | 2×1 μs |
Fig. 1Ramachandran plots of all terminally capped amino acids simulated with AMBER ff99SB-ILDN force field. Represented is the logarithm of the {Φ-ψ}-pairs counts on a 1°-grid.
Fig. 2Ramachandran plots of all terminally capped amino acids simulated with AMBER ff03 force field. Represented is the logarithm of the {Φ-ψ}-pairs counts on a 1°-grid.
Fig. 3Ramachandran plots of all terminally capped amino acids simulated with CHARMM27 force field. Represented is the logarithm of the {Φ-ψ}-pairs counts on a 1°-grid.
Fig. 4Ramachandran plots of all terminally capped amino acids simulated with OPLS-AA/L force field. Represented is the logarithm of the {Φ-ψ}-pairs counts on a 1°-grid.
Fig. 5Ramachandran plots of all terminally capped amino acids simulated with GROMOS43a1 force field. Represented is the logarithm of the {Φ-ψ}-pairs counts on a 1°-grid.
| Subject area | |
| More specific subject area | |
| Type of data | |
| How data was acquired | Classical all-atom MD simulation in explicit solvent |
| Data format | GROMACS |
| Experimental factors | NVT ensemble at 300 K |
| Experimental features | GROMACS 4.5.5 |
| Data source location | Freie Universität Berlin Germany |
| Data accessibility | Data within this article |