Discrimination of native loop conformations in membrane proteins: Decoy library design and evaluation of effective energy scoring functions

Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 492-509

  Forrest, Lucy R ^a   Woolf, Thomas B ^b  

^a WELLCOME TRUST SANGER INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

B factor; Effective energy function; Implicit solvent; Loop prediction; Membrane protein; Protein structure prediction

Indexed keywords

ADENOSINE TRIPHOSPHATASE (CALCIUM); GLOBULAR PROTEIN; MEMBRANE PROTEIN; RHODOPSIN;

ACCURACY; ANALYTICAL CONTINUUM SOLVENT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE ANATOMY; COMPUTER PREDICTION; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; DECOY LIBRARY DESIGN; DIELECTRIC CONSTANT; DNA LIBRARY; EFFECTIVE ENERGY FUNCTION; ELECTRICITY; ENERGY; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIGAND BINDING; LIPID BILAYER; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MEMBRANE BINDING; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NONHUMAN; POISSON BOLTZMANN ENERGY FUNCTION; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; ROOT MEAN SQUARE DEVIATION; SCORING SYSTEM; SOLVATION; SOLVENT EFFECT;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; CALCIUM-TRANSPORTING ATPASES; CATTLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CRYSTALLOGRAPHY, X-RAY; DATABASES, PROTEIN; ELECTROSTATICS; MEMBRANE PROTEINS; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; RHODOPSIN; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 0041919601     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.10404     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Doyle DA, Cabral JM, Pfuetzner RA, Kuo A, Gulbis JM, Cohen SL, I Cahit BT, MacKinnon R. The structure of the potassium channel: Molecular basis of K-conduction and selectivity. Science 1998;280:69-77.
2. Dutzler R, Campbell EB, Cadene M, Chait BT, MacKinnon R. X-ray structure of a CIC chloride channel at 3.0 Å reveals the molecular basis of anion selectivity. Nature 2002;415:287-294.
3. Toyoshima C, Nakasako M, Nomura H, Ogawa H. Crystal structure of the calcium pump of sarcoplasmic reticulum at 2.6 Å resolution. Nature 2000;405:647-655.
4. Palczewski K, Kumasaka T, Hori T, Behnke CA, Motoshima H, Fox BA, Le Trong I, Teller DC, Okada T, Stenkamp RE, Yamamoto M, Miyano M. Crystal structure of rhodopsin: A G protein-coupled receptor. Science 2000;289:739-745.
5. Rost B, Sander C. Bridging the protein sequence-structure gap by structure predictions. Annu Rev Biophys Biomolec Struct 1996;25:113-136.
6. Sanchez R, Sali A. Comparative protein structure modeling in genomics. J Comput Phys 1999;151:388-401.
7. Baldwin JM. The probable arrangement of the helices in G protein-coupled receptors. EMBO J 1993;12:1693-1703.
8. Ballesteros JA, Shi L, Javitch JA. Structural mimicry in G protein-coupled receptors: Implications of the high-resolution structure of rhodopsin for structure-function analysis of rhodopsin-like receptors. Mol Pharmacol 2001;60:1-19.
9. Visiers I, Ballesteros JA, Weinstein H. Three-dimensional representations of G protein-coupled structures and mechanisms. Methods Enzymol 2002;343:329-371.
10. Higgins CF. ABC transporters: Physiology, structure and mechanism - an overview. Res Microbiol 2001;152:205-210.
11. Giorgetti A, Carloni P. Molecular modeling of ion channels: structural predictions. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2003;7:150-156.
12. Chothia C, Lesk AM. The relation between the divergence of sequence and structure in proteins. EMBO J 1986;5:823-826.
13. Xiang Z, Soto C, Honig B. Evaluating conformational free energies: the colony energy and its application to the problem of loop prediction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002;99:7432-7437.
14. van Vlijmen HWT, Karplus M. PDB-based protein loop prediction: Parameters for selection and methods for optimization. J Mol Biol 1997;267:975-1001.
15. Lazaridis T, Karplus M. Effective energy functions for protein structure prediction. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2000;10:139-145.
16. Dominy BN, Brooks CL. Identifying native-like protein structures using physics-based potentials. J Comput Chem 2002;23:147-160.
17. Lazaridis T, Karplus M. Discrimination of the native from misfolded protein models with an energy function including implicit solvation. J Mol Biol 1999;288:477-487.
18. Wang YH, Zhang H, Scott RA. A new computational model for protein folding based on atomic solvation. Prot Sci 1995;4:1402-1411.
19. Hassan SA, Mehler EL. A critical analysis of continuum electrostatics: The screen coulomb potential-implicit solvent model and the study of the alanine dipeptide and discrimination of misfolded structures of proteins. Proteins 2002;47:45-61.
20. David L, Luo R, Gilson MK. Comparison of generalized Born and Poisson models: Energetics and dynamics of HIV protease. J Comput Chem 2000;21:295-309.
21. Edinger SR, Cortis C, Shenkin PS, Friesner RA. Solvation free energies of peptides: Comparison of approximate continuum solvation models with accurate solution of the Poisson-Boltzmann equation. J Phys Chem B 1997;101:1190-1197.
22. Feig M, Brooks CL. Evaluating CASP4 predictions with physical energy functions. Proteins 2002;49:232-245.
23. Mohanty D, Dominy BN, Kolinski A, Brooks CL, Skolnick J. Correlation between knowledge-based and detailed atomic potentials: Application to the unfolding of the GCN4 leucine zipper. Proteins 1999;35:447-452.
24. Berman HM, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat TN, Weissig H, Shindyalov IN, Bourne PE. The Protein Data Bank. Nucl Acids Res 2000;28:235-242.
25. Brooks BR, Bruccoleri RE, Olafson BD, States DJ, Swaminathan S, Karplus M. CHARMM: A program for macromolecular energy, minimisation, and dynamics calculations. J Comput Chem 1983;4:187-217.
26. Reiher WE, III. Theoretical studies of hydrogen bonding. PhD thesis, Dept of Chemistry, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA; 1985.
27. Neria E, Fischer S, Karplus M. Simulations of activation free energies in molecular systems. J Chem Phys 1996;105:1902-1921.
28. Im W, Roux B. Ions and counterions in a biological channel: A molecular dynamics simulation of OmpF porin from Escherichia coli in an explicit membrane with 1M KC1 aqueous salt solution. J Mol Biol 2002;319:1177-1197.
29. Brooks CL, Karplus M, Pettitt BM. Proteins: A theoretical perspective of dynamics, structure and thermodynamics. In: R. Prigogine, editor. Advances in chemical physics. Wiley: New York; 1988.
30. Wang YH, Zhang H, Li W, Scott RA. Discriminating compact nonnative structures from the native structure of globular proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1995;92:709-713.
31. Kelley LA, Gardner SP, Sutcliffe MJ. An automated approach for clustering an ensemble of NMR-derived protein structures into conformationally related subfamilies. Protein Eng 1996;9:1063-1065.
32. Samudrala R, Levitt M. Decoys 'R' Us: A database of incorrect conformations to improve protein structure prediction. Prot Sci 2000;9:1399-1401.
33. Wesson L, Eisenberg D. Atomic solvation parameters applied to molecular dynamics of proteins in solution. Prot Sci 1992;1:227-235.
34. Eisenberg D, McLachlan AD. Solvation energy in protein folding and binding. Nature 1986;319:199-203.
35. Das B, Meirovitch H. Optimization of solvation models for predicting the structure of surface loops in proteins. Proteins 2001;43:303-314.
36. Eisenberg D, Wesson L, Yamashita M. Interpretation of protein folding and binding with atomic solvation parameters. Chem Scrip 1989;29A:217-221.
37. Juffer AH, Eisenhaber F, Hubbard SJ, Walther D, Argos P. Comparison of atomic solvation parametric sets: Applicability and limitations in protein folding and binding. Prot Sci 1995;4:2499-2509.
38. Lazaridis T, Karplus M. Effective energy function for proteins in solution. Proteins 1999;35:133-152.
39. Schaefer M, Bartels C, Karplus M. Solution conformations and thermodynamics of structured peptides: Molecular dynamics simulation with an implicit solvation model. J Mol Biol 1998;284:835-848.
40. Schaefer M, Karplus M. A comprehensive analytical treatment of continuum electrostatics. J Phys Chem 1996;100:1578-1599.
41. Schaefer M, Bartels C, LeClerc F, Karplus M. Effective atom volumes for implicit solvent models: Comparison between voronoi volumes and minimum fluctuation volumes. J Comp Chem 2001; 22:1857-1879.
42. Nina M, Beglov D, Roux B. Atomic radii for continuum electrostatics calculations based on molecular dynamics free energy simulations. J Phys Chem 1997;101:5239-5248.
43. Huang ES, Subbiah S, Tsai J, Levitt M. Using a hydrophobic contact potential to evaluate native and near-native folds generated by molecular dynamics simulations. J Mol Biol 1996;257:716-725.
44. Park BH, Huang ES, Levitt M. Factors affecting the ability of energy functions to discriminate correct from incorrect folds. J Mol Biol 1997;266:831-846.
45. Petrey D, Honig B. Free energy determinants of tertiary structure and the evaluation of protein models. Protein Sci 2000;9:2181-2191.
46. Tramontano A, Leplae R, Morea V. Analysis and assessment of comparative modeling predictions in CASP4. Proteins 2001;Suppl 5:22-38.
47. Smith KC, Honig B. Evaluation of the conformational free energies of loops in proteins. Proteins 1994;18:119-132.
48. Bashford D, Case DA. Generalized born models of macromolecular solvation effects. Annu Rev Phys Chem 2000;51:129-152.
49. Fiser A, Feig M, Brooks CL, Sali A. Evolution and physics in comparative protein structure modeling. Acc Chem Res 2002;35:413-421.
50. Tappura K. Influence of rotational energy barriers to the conformational search of protein loops in molecular dynamics and ranking the conformations. Proteins 2001;44:167-179.
51. Wohlfahrt G, Hangoc V, Schomburg D. Positioning of anchor groups in protein loop prediction: The importance of solvent accessibility and secondary structure elements. Proteins 2002;47:370-378.
52. Fiser A, Do RKG, Sali A. Modeling of loops in protein structures. Protein Sci 2000;9:1753-1773.
53. Rapp CS, Friesner RA. Prediction of loop geometries using a generalized born model of solvation effects. Proteins 1999;35:173-183.
54. Wagner F, Simonson T. Implicit solvent models: Combining an analytical formulation of continuum electrostatics with simple models of the hydrophobic effect. J Comput Chem 1999;20:322-335.
55. Gatchell DW, Dennis S, Vajda S. Discrimination of near-native protein structures from misfolded models by empirical free energy functions. Proteins 2000;41:518-534.
56. Janardhan A, Vajda S. Selecting near-native conformations in homology modeling: The role of molecular mechanics and solvation terms. Protein Sci 1998;7:1772-1780.
57. Spassov VZ, Yan K, Szalma S. Introducing an implicit membrane in generalized Born/solvent accessibility continuum solvent models. J Phys Chem B 2002;106:8726-8738.
58. Grossfield A, Sachs J, Woolf TB. Dipole lattice membrane model for protein calculations. Proteins 2002;41:211-223.
59. Srinivasan J, Trevathan MW, Beroza P, Case DA. Application of a pairwise generalized Born model to proteins and nucleic acids: Inclusion of salt effects. Theor Chem Acc 1999;101:426-434.
60. Hawkins GD, Cramer CJ, Truhlar DG. Pairwise solute descreening of solute charges from a dielectric medium. Chem Phys Lett 1995;246:122-129.
61. Qiu D, Shenkin PS, Hollinger FP, Still WC. The GB/SA continuum model for solvation: A fast analytical method for the calculation of approximate Born radii. J Phys Chem A 1997;101:3005-3014.
62. Dominy BN, Brooks CL. Development of a generalized Born model parametrization for proteins and nucleic acids. J Phys Chem B 1999;103:3765-3773.
63. Ghosh A, Rapp CS, Friesner RA. Generalized Born model based on a surface integral formulation. J Phys Chem B 1998;102:10983-10990.