Efficient generation of low-energy folded states of a model protein

Journal of Chemical Physics

Volumn 118, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 1533-1540

  Gordon, Heather L ^a   Kwan, Wai Kei ^a   Gong, Chunhang ^a   Larrass, Stefan ^a   Rothstein, Stuart M ^a  

^a BROCK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONFORMATIONS; ELECTRON ENERGY LEVELS; GEOMETRY; ITERATIVE METHODS; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; MONTE CARLO METHODS; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; SIMULATED ANNEALING;

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; DISTANCE GEOMETRY METHOD; K-MEANS CLUSTERING; LOW ENERGY FOLDED STATES; PROTEIN STRUCTURE;

PROTEINS;

EID: 0037439966     PISSN: 00219606     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.1530579     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. C. J. Tsai, S. Kumar, B. Ma, and R. Nussinov, Protein Sci. 8, 1181 (1999).
2. U. H. E. Hansmann and Y. Okamoto, Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 9, 177 (1999).
3. Y.-H. Lee and B. J. Berne, J. Phys. Chem. 104, 86 (2000).
4. H. Kaya and H. S. Chan, Proteins 40, 637 (2000).
5. S. Rader and D. A. Agard, Protein Sci. 6, 1375 (1997).
6. D. M. Ferguson and D. G. Garrett, Adv. Chem. Phys. 105, 311 (1999).
7. H. Xu and B. J. Berne, J. Chem. Phys. 112, 2701 (2000).
8. J. M. Blaney, G. M. Crippen, A. Dearin, J. S. Dixon, and D. C. Spellmeyer, Tech. Report, QCPE 590, Indiana University, Bloomington (1995).
9. J. D. Honeycutt and D. Thirumalai, Biopolymers 32, 695 (1992).
10. P. Amara and J. E. Staub, J. Phys. Chem. 99, 14840 (1995).
11. D. T. Z. Guo and J. D. Honeycutt, J. Chem. Phys. 97, 525 (1992).
12. H. Nymeyer, A. E. García, and J. N. Onuchic, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 95, 5921 (1998).
13. R. S. Berry, N. Elmaci, J. P. Rose, and B. Vekhter, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 94, 952 (1997).
14. M. A. Miller and D. J. Wales, J. Chem. Phys. 111, 6610 (1999).
15. J. D. Honeycutt and D. Thirumalai, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 87, 3526 (1990).
16. J.-E. Shea, J. N. Onuchic, and C. L. Brooks III, J. Chem. Phys. 113, 7663 (2000).
17. S. Kirkpatrick, J. C. D. Gelatt, and M. P. Vecchi, Science 220, 671 (1983).
18. M. Nilges, G. M. Clore, and A. M. Gronenborn, FEBS Lett. 229, 317 (1988).
19. A. T. Brunger and M. Karplus, Acta Crystallogr., Sect. A: Found. Crystallogr. 45, 50 (1989).
20. H. Kawai, T. Kikuchi, and Y. Okamoto, Protein Eng. 3, 85 (1989).
21. S. R. Wilson and W. L. Cui, Biopolymers 29, 225 (1990).
22. S. Geman and D. Geman, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 6, 721 (1984).
23. N. Elmaci and R. S. Berry, J. Chem. Phys. 110, 10606 (1999).
24. M. J. Norusis, Tech. Report, SPSS Inc., Chicago (1994).
25. This particular conformation is consistent with the second lowest energy conformation depicted in Berry et al. (Ref. 13). The relative energy ordering of their global minimum and second lowest energy conformation has interchanged, presumably due to somewhat different values used for the force constants in the BLN potential than that used here and in Lee and Berne (Ref. 3).
26. J. M. Blaney and J. S. Dixon, Distance Geometry in Molecular Modeling, Reviews in Computational Chemistry Vol. 5 (VCH, New York, 1993), Chap. 6.
27. G. M. Crippen and T. F. Havel, Distance Geometry and Molecular Conformation (Wiley, New York, 1988).
28. G. M. Crippen, Distance Geometry and Conformational Calculations (Research Studies, New York, 1981).