Blind test of physics-based prediction of protein structures

Biophysical Journal

Volumn 96, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 917-924

  Scott Shell, M ^a,c   Banu Ozkan, S ^b   Voelz, Vincent ^a,d   Wu, Guohong Albert ^a,e   Dill, Ken A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c University of California   (United States)

^d STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MEMBRANE PROTEIN; MONOMER; POLYMER; SYNTHETIC PEPTIDE; PEPTIDE FRAGMENT; PROTEIN;

ACCURACY; AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; BIOINFORMATICS; COMPUTER MODEL; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; SIMULATION; SOLVATION; TECHNIQUE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR GENETICS; PHYSICS; PROTEIN DATABASE; TIME;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATABASES, PROTEIN; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR SEQUENCE DATA; PEPTIDE FRAGMENTS; PHYSICS; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEINS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 61549140397     PISSN: 00063495     EISSN: 15420086     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2008.11.009     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Baker, D., and A. Sali. 2001. Protein structure prediction and structural genomics. Science. 294:93-96.
2. Moult, J. 2005. A decade of CASP: progress, bottlenecks and prognosis in protein structure prediction. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 15:285-289.
3. Pearlman, D. A., D. A. Case, J. W. Caldwell, W. S. Ross, T. E. Cheatham Iii, et al. 1995. AMBER, a package of computer programs for applying molecular mechanics, normal mode analysis, molecular dynamics and free energy calculations to simulate the structural and energetic properties of molecules. Comput. Phys. Commun. 91:1-41.
4. Brooks, B. R., R. E. Bruccoleri, B. D. Olafson, D. J. States, S. Swaminathan, et al. 1983. CHARMM: a program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations. J. Comput. Chem. 4:187-217.
5. Jorgensen, W. L., and J. Tirado-Rives. 1988. The OPLS potential functions for proteins. Energy minimizations for crystals of cyclic peptides and crambin. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 110:1657-1666.
6. Hermans, J., H. J. C. Berendsen, W. F. Van Gunsteren, and J. P. M. Postma. 1984. A consistent empirical potential for water-protein interactions. Biopolymers. 23:1513-1518.
7. Koehl, P., and M. Levitt. 1999. A brighter future for protein structure prediction. Nat. Struct. Biol. 6:108-111.
8. Fiser, A., M. Feig, C. L. Brooks Iii, and A. Sali. 2002. Evolution and physics in comparative protein structure modeling. Acc. Chem. Res. 35:413-121.
9. Gnanakaran, S., and A. E. Garcia. 2003. Validation of an all-atom protein force field: from dipeptides to larger peptides. J. Phys. Chem. B. 107:12555-12557.
10. Yoda, T., Y. Sugita, and Y. Okamoto. 2004. Comparisons of force fields for proteins by generalized-ensemble simulations. Chem. Phys. Lett. 386:460-467.
11. Felts, A. K., Y. Harano, E. Gallicchio, and R. M. Levy. 2004. Free energy surfaces of β-hairpin and α-helical peptides generated by replica exchange molecular dynamics with the AGBNP implicit solvent model. Proteins. 56:310-321.
12. Zhou, R., and B. J. Berne. 2002. Can a continuum solvent model reproduce the free energy landscape of a β-hairpin folding in water? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:12777-12782.
13. Duan, Y., and P. A. Kollman. 1998. Pathways to a protein folding intermediate observed in a 1-microsecond simulation in aqueous solution. Science. 282:740-744.
14. Vila, J. A., D. R. Ripoll, and H. A. Scheraga. 2003. Atomically detailed folding simulation of the B domain of staphylococcal protein A from random structures. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 100:14812-14816.
15. Jayachandran, G., V. Vishal, and V. S. Pande. 2006. Using massively parallel simulation and Markovian models to study protein folding: examining the dynamics of the villin headpiece. J. Chem. Phys. 124:164902.
16. Lei, H., C. Wu, H. Liu, and Y. Duan. 2007. Folding free-energy landscape of villin headpiece subdomain from molecular dynamics simulations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 104:4925-4930.
17. Lei, H., and Y. Duan. 2007. Two-stage folding of HP-35 from ab initio simulations. J. Mol. Biol. 370:196-206.
18. Simmerling, C., B. Strockbine, and A. E. Roitberg. 2002. All-atom structure prediction and folding simulations of a stable protein. J. Am. Chem.Soc. 124:11258-11259.
19. Pitera, J. W., and W. Swope. 2003. Understanding folding and design: replica-exchange simulations of "Trp-cage" fly miniproteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 100:7587-7592.
20. Chowdhury, S., M. C. Lee, G. Xiong, and Y. Duan. 2003. Ab initio folding simulation of the Trp-cage mini-protein approaches NMR resolution. J. Mol. Biol. 327:711-717.
21. Lei, H., and Y. Duan. 2007. Ab initio folding of albumin binding domain from all-atom molecular dynamics simulation. J. Phys. Chem. B. 111:5458-5463.
22. Kollman, P. A., R. Dixon, W. Cornell, T. Fox, C. Chipot, et al. 1997. The development/application of a "minimalist" organic/biochemical molecular mechanic force field using a combination of ab initio calculations and experimental data. In Computer Simulation of Biomolecular Systems, Vol. 3, A. Wilkinson, P. Weiner, and W. F. van Gunsteren, editors. Elsevier.
23. Onufriev, A., D. Bashford, and D. A. Case. 2000. Modification of the generalized Born model suitable for macromolecules. J. Phys. Chem. B. 104:3712-3720.
24. Ozkan, S. B., G. H. A. Wu, J. D. Chodera, and K. A. Dill. 2007. Protein folding by zipping and assembly. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 104:11987-11992.
25. Simon, I., G. Némethy, and H. A. Scheraga. 1978. Conformational energy calculations of the effects of sequence variations on the conformations of two tetrapeptides. Macromolecules. 11:797-804.
26. Liwo, A., P. Arlukowicz, C. Czaplewski, S. Oldziej, J. Pillardy, et al. 2002. A method for optimizing potential-energy functions by a hierarchical design of the potential-energy landscape: application to the UNRES force field. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 99:1937-1942.
27. Liwo, A., M. Khalili, and H. A. Scheraga. 2005. Ab initio simulations of protein-folding pathways by molecular dynamics with the united-residue model ofpolypeptide chains. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 102:2362-2367.
28. Shell, M. S., R. Ritterson, and K. A. Dill. 2008. A test on peptide stability of AMBER force fields with implicit solvation. J. Phys. Chem. B. 112:6878-6886.
29. Sugita, Y., and Y. Okamoto. 1999. Replica-exchange molecular dynamics method for protein folding. Chem. Phys. Lett. 314:141-151.
30. Fiebig, K. M., and K. A. Dill. 1993. Protein core assembly processes. J. Chem. Phys. 98:3475-3487.
31. Weikl, T. R., and K. A. Dill. 2003. Folding kinetics of two-state proteins: effect of circularization, permutation, and crosslinks. J. Mol. Biol. 332:953-963.
32. Weikl, T. R., and K. A. Dill. 2003. Folding rates and low-entropy-loss routes of two-state proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 329:585-598.
33. Voelz, V. A., and K. A. Dill. 2006. Exploring zipping and assembly as a protein folding principle. Proteins. 66:877-888.
34. Hockenmaier, J., A. K. Joshi, and K. A. Dill. 2006. Routes are trees: the parsing perspective on protein folding. Proteins. 66:1-15.
35. Dill, K. A., A. Lucas, J. Hockenmaier, L. Huang, D. Chiang, etal. 2007. Computational linguistics: a new tool for exploring biopolymer structures and statistical mechanics. Polymer (Guildf.). 48:4289-4300.
36. Ho, B. K., and K. A. Dill. 2006. Folding very short peptides using molecular dynamics. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2:e27.
37. Feig, M., A. Onufriev, M. S. Lee, W. Im, D. A. Case, et al. 2004. Performance comparison of generalized Born and Poisson methods in the calculation of electrostatic solvation energies for protein structures. J. Comput. Chem. 25:265-284.
38. Tan, C., L. Yang, and R. Luo. 2006. How well does Poisson-Boltzmann implicit solvent agree with explicit solvent? A quantitative analysis. J. Phys. Chem. B. 110:18680-18687.
39. Kabsch, W., and C. Sander. 1983. Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers. 22:2577-2637.