| Literature DB >> 32397128 |
Abstract
Boric acid, borate esters, and hydroxy derivatives are biologically active molecules. Thus, performing molecular dynamics simulations of these molecules is vital in terms of drug design, but it is difficult to find directly generated Amber parameters based on an ab initio method for these kinds of molecules in the literature. In this study, Amber parameters for such molecules containing boron were generated based on ab initio calculations using the paramfit program, which applies a combination of genetic and simplex algorithms, and the Visual Force Field Derivation Toolkit (VFFDT) program containing the Seminario method. The minimized structure, after obtaining novel parameters and the sander program, was compared with the experimental crystallographic structures, and it was observed that the root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) value between the experimental structure and minimized structure agreed reasonably well. In addition, the molecule was heated, and the molecular dynamics simulation was successfully obtained with the novel parameters.Entities:
Keywords: Amber; boron; force field; parameterization
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32397128 PMCID: PMC7249141 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25092196
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Electrostatic potential (ESP) charges (a.u.) and assigned atom types for molecules. (A,C,E) show ESP charges for diethoxyboronic acid, IVEKAW02, and TEAMBO04, respectively. (B,D,F) show assigned atom types in the same order.
Generated bond and angle Amber force-field parameters based on optimized diethoxyborinic acid using the VFFDT program containing the Seminario method.
|
|
|
|
| h1–ob | 546.139 | 0.970 |
| ob–B | 350.221 | 1.372 |
| ob–c3 | 219.866 | 1.435 |
|
|
|
|
| h1–ob–B | 50.184 | 110.55 |
| ob–B –ob | 104.357 | 120.00 |
| B –ob–c3 | 110.735 | 121.35 |
| ob–c3–c3 | 114.01 | 111.44 |
| ob–c3–h1 | 77.700 | 107.94 |
Generated dihedral Amber parameters. h1–ob–B–ob and ob–B–ob–c3 dihedrals were generated from ab initio calculation and paramfit program. For other dihedrals, General Amber Force Field (GAFF) wildcard parameters were used [2].
|
| Divider | Vn (kcal/mol) |
| n | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| h1–ob–B –ob | 1 | 2.350 | 0.000 | −1.000 | |
| h1–ob–B –ob | 1 | 1.654 | 0.000 | 2.000 | |
| ob–B –ob–c3 | 1 | 1.980 | 180.000 | −1.000 | |
| ob–B –ob–c3 | 1 | 1.472 | 180.000 | 2.000 | |
| B –ob–c3–c3 | 2 | 5.400 | 180.000 | 2.000 | same as GAFF X –c–os–X [ |
| B –ob–c3–h1 | 1 | 5.400 | 180.000 | 2.000 | same as GAFF X –c–os–X [ |
| ob–c3–c3–h1 | 1 | 0.300 | 180.000 | 2.000 | same as GAFF X –c–c–X [ |
Suggested improper dihedrals.
|
| Vn (kcal/mol) |
| n |
|---|---|---|---|
| ob–ob–B–ob | 40.5 | 180.0 | 2.0 |
Figure 2Comparison of ab initio and molecular mechanics calculations for ob–B–ob–c3 dihedral.
Figure 3Comparison of ab initio and molecular mechanics calculations for h1–ob–B–ob dihedral.
Root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) between crystallographic structure and minimized geometry. RMSD-AD is the RMSD of atomic displacement, RMSD-L is the RMSD of bond length, and RMSD-A is the RMSD of bond angle. The numbers in the parentheses represent the out-of-plane angles not included in RMSD-A.
| Molecule | RMSD-AD | RMSD-L | RMSD-A |
|---|---|---|---|
| IVEKAW02 | 0.206 | 0.0468 | 2.179 (1.442) |
| TEAMBO04 | 0.212 | 0.0765 | 5.976 (3.381) |
| Average | 0.209 | 0.06165 | 4.077 (2.411) |
Figure 4RMSD chart for IWEKAW02 molecular dynamics production (duration: 145 ns).
Figure 5RMSD chart for TEAMBO04 molecular dynamics production (duration: 145 ns).