Literature DB >> 33562962

Improved Sampling Strategies for Protein Model Refinement Based on Molecular Dynamics Simulation.

Lim Heo1, Collin F Arbour1, Giacomo Janson1, Michael Feig1.   

Abstract

Protein structures provide valuable information for understanding biological processes. Protein structures can be determined by experimental methods such as X-ray crystallography, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, or cryogenic electron microscopy. As an alternative, in silico methods can be used to predict protein structures. These methods utilize protein structure databases for structure prediction via template-based modeling or for training machine-learning models to generate predictions. Structure prediction for proteins distant from proteins with known structures often results in lower accuracy with respect to the true physiological structures. Physics-based protein model refinement methods can be applied to improve model accuracy in the predicted models. Refinement methods rely on conformational sampling around the predicted structures, and if structures closer to the native states are sampled, improvements in the model quality become possible. Molecular dynamics simulations have been especially successful for improving model qualities but although consistent refinement can be achieved, the improvements in model qualities are still moderate. To extend the refinement performance of a simulation-based protocol, we explored new schemes that focus on optimized use of biasing functions and the application of increased simulation temperatures. In addition, we tested the use of alternative initial models so that the simulations can explore the conformational space more broadly. Based on the insights of this analysis, we are proposing a new refinement protocol that significantly outperformed previous state-of-the-art molecular dynamics simulation-based protocols in the benchmark tests described here.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33562962      PMCID: PMC7946773          DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.0c01238

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


  60 in total

1.  LGA: A method for finding 3D similarities in protein structures.

Authors:  Adam Zemla
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2003-07-01       Impact factor: 16.971

2.  Modified replica exchange simulation methods for local structure refinement.

Authors:  Xiaolin Cheng; Guanglei Cui; Viktor Hornak; Carlos Simmerling
Journal:  J Phys Chem B       Date:  2005-04-28       Impact factor: 2.991

3.  Ligand-Binding-Site Structure Refinement Using Molecular Dynamics with Restraints Derived from Predicted Binding Site Templates.

Authors:  Hugo Guterres; Hui Sun Lee; Wonpil Im
Journal:  J Chem Theory Comput       Date:  2019-10-14       Impact factor: 6.006

4.  Improved protein structure prediction using potentials from deep learning.

Authors:  Andrew W Senior; Richard Evans; John Jumper; James Kirkpatrick; Laurent Sifre; Tim Green; Chongli Qin; Augustin Žídek; Alexander W R Nelson; Alex Bridgland; Hugo Penedones; Stig Petersen; Karen Simonyan; Steve Crossan; Pushmeet Kohli; David T Jones; David Silver; Koray Kavukcuoglu; Demis Hassabis
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-01-15       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints.

Authors:  A Sali; T L Blundell
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1993-12-05       Impact factor: 5.469

6.  Assessment of refinement of template-based models in CASP11.

Authors:  Vivek Modi; Roland L Dunbrack
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2016-06-15

Review 7.  Protein structure prediction: when is it useful?

Authors:  Yang Zhang
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2009-03-25       Impact factor: 6.809

8.  Physics-based protein structure refinement through multiple molecular dynamics trajectories and structure averaging.

Authors:  Vahid Mirjalili; Keenan Noyes; Michael Feig
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2013-08-19

9.  Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP)-Round XIII.

Authors:  Andriy Kryshtafovych; Torsten Schwede; Maya Topf; Krzysztof Fidelis; John Moult
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2019-10-23

10.  TM-align: a protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score.

Authors:  Yang Zhang; Jeffrey Skolnick
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2005-04-22       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  4 in total

1.  Physics-based protein structure refinement in the era of artificial intelligence.

Authors:  Lim Heo; Giacomo Janson; Michael Feig
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2021-06-29

2.  Can molecular dynamics simulations improve the structural accuracy and virtual screening performance of GPCR models?

Authors:  Jon Kapla; Ismael Rodríguez-Espigares; Flavio Ballante; Jana Selent; Jens Carlsson
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 4.475

3.  Fast and effective protein model refinement using deep graph neural networks.

Authors:  Xiaoyang Jing; Jinbo Xu
Journal:  Nat Comput Sci       Date:  2021-07-15

4.  Structural and functional characterization of NEMO cleavage by SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro.

Authors:  Mikhail A Hameedi; Erica T Prates; Michael R Garvin; Irimpan I Mathews; B Kirtley Amos; Omar Demerdash; Mark Bechthold; Mamta Iyer; Simin Rahighi; Daniel W Kneller; Andrey Kovalevsky; Stephan Irle; Van-Quan Vuong; Julie C Mitchell; Audrey Labbe; Stephanie Galanie; Soichi Wakatsuki; Daniel Jacobson
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-09-08       Impact factor: 17.694

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.