Literature DB >> 8535247

Are proteins ideal mixtures of amino acids? Analysis of energy parameter sets.

A Godzik1, A Koliński, J Skolnick.   

Abstract

Various existing derivations of the effective potentials of mean force for the two-body interactions between amino acid side chains in proteins are reviewed and compared to each other. The differences between different parameter sets can be traced to the reference state used to define the zero of energy. Depending on the reference state, the transfer free energy or other pseudo-one-body contributions can be present to various extents in two-body parameter sets. It is, however, possible to compare various derivations directly by concentrating on the "excess" energy-a term that describes the difference between a real protein and an ideal solution of amino acids. Furthermore, the number of protein structures available for analysis allows one to check the consistency of the derivation and the errors by comparing parameters derived from various subsets of the whole database. It is shown that pair interaction preferences are very consistent throughout the database. Independently derived parameter sets have correlation coefficients on the order of 0.8, with the mean difference between equivalent entries of 0.1 kT. Also, the low-quality (low resolution, little or no refinement) structures show similar regularities. There are, however, large differences between interaction parameters derived on the basis of crystallographic structures and structures obtained by the NMR refinement. The origin of the latter difference is not yet understood.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8535247      PMCID: PMC2142984          DOI: 10.1002/pro.5560041016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Protein Sci        ISSN: 0961-8368            Impact factor:   6.725


  28 in total

1.  The frequency of ion-pair substructures in proteins is quantitatively related to electrostatic potential: a statistical model for nonbonded interactions.

Authors:  S H Bryant; C E Lawrence
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  1991

2.  Identification of native protein folds amongst a large number of incorrect models. The calculation of low energy conformations from potentials of mean force.

Authors:  M Hendlich; P Lackner; S Weitckus; H Floeckner; R Froschauer; K Gottsbacher; G Casari; M J Sippl
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1990-11-05       Impact factor: 5.469

3.  A computer model to dynamically simulate protein folding: studies with crambin.

Authors:  C Wilson; S Doniach
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  1989

4.  SIRIUS. An automated method for the analysis of the preferred packing arrangements between protein groups.

Authors:  J Singh; J M Thornton
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1990-02-05       Impact factor: 5.469

5.  Definition of general topological equivalence in protein structures. A procedure involving comparison of properties and relationships through simulated annealing and dynamic programming.

Authors:  A Sali; T L Blundell
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1990-03-20       Impact factor: 5.469

6.  Identification of protein folds: matching hydrophobicity patterns of sequence sets with solvent accessibility patterns of known structures.

Authors:  J U Bowie; N D Clarke; C O Pabo; R T Sauer
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  1990

7.  Novel method for the rapid evaluation of packing in protein structures.

Authors:  L M Gregoret; F E Cohen
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1990-02-20       Impact factor: 5.469

8.  Identification of predictive sequence motifs limited by protein structure data base size.

Authors:  M J Rooman; S J Wodak
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1988-09-01       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  Ion-pairs in proteins.

Authors:  D J Barlow; J M Thornton
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1983-08-25       Impact factor: 5.469

10.  Residue contacts in protein structures and implications for protein folding.

Authors:  S V Narayana; P Argos
Journal:  Int J Pept Protein Res       Date:  1984-07
View more
  38 in total

1.  Environment-dependent residue contact energies for proteins.

Authors:  C Zhang; S H Kim
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-03-14       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Analysis of knowledge-based protein-ligand potentials using a self-consistent method.

Authors:  J Shimada; A V Ishchenko; E I Shakhnovich
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 6.725

3.  Meanfield approach to the thermodynamics of protein-solvent systems with application to p53.

Authors:  A R Völkel; J Noolandi
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 4.033

4.  Can correct protein models be identified?

Authors:  Björn Wallner; Arne Elofsson
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 6.725

5.  Correlation between sequence hydrophobicity and surface-exposure pattern of database proteins.

Authors:  Susanne Moelbert; Eldon Emberly; Chao Tang
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2004-02-06       Impact factor: 6.725

6.  An accurate, residue-level, pair potential of mean force for folding and binding based on the distance-scaled, ideal-gas reference state.

Authors:  Chi Zhang; Song Liu; Hongyi Zhou; Yaoqi Zhou
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 6.725

7.  Design of an optimal Chebyshev-expanded discrimination function for globular proteins.

Authors:  Boris Fain; Yu Xia; Michael Levitt
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 6.725

8.  The dependence of all-atom statistical potentials on structural training database.

Authors:  Chi Zhang; Song Liu; Hongyi Zhou; Yaoqi Zhou
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.033

9.  Database-derived potentials dependent on protein size for in silico folding and design.

Authors:  Yves Dehouck; Dimitri Gilis; Marianne Rooman
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.033

10.  Orientational potentials extracted from protein structures improve native fold recognition.

Authors:  Nicolae-Viorel Buchete; John E Straub; Devarajan Thirumalai
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 6.725

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.