A coarse-grained potential for fold recognition and molecular dynamics simulations of proteins

Proteins: Structure, Function and Bioinformatics

Volumn 76, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 822-836

  Májek, Peter ^a   Elber, Ron ^b  

^a Department of Computer Science and School of Operations Research and Information Engineering   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Empirical force field; Fold recognition; Generalized ensembles; Protein simulation; Reduced energy; Statistical potential

Indexed keywords

GLOBULAR PROTEIN; PROTEIN;

ARTICLE; HYDROGEN BOND; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN DATA BANK; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN SECONDARY STRUCTURE; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL MODEL; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHMS; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN FOLDING; PROTEINS;

EID: 68149165350     PISSN: 08873585     EISSN: 10970134     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prot.22388     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Dill KA. Theory for the folding and stability of globular proteins. Biochemistry 1985;24:1501-1509.
2. Tirion MM. Large amplitude elastic motions in proteins from a single- parameter, atomic analysis. Phys Rev Lett 1996;77:1905-1908.
3. Haliloglu T, Bahar I, Erman B. Gaussian dynamics of folded proteins. Phys Rev Lett 1997;79:3090.
4. Kolinski A, Skolnick J. Lattice models of protein folding, dynamics and thermodynamics. Austin, Texas: Landes Company and Chapman Hill; 1996.
5. Marrink SJ, Risselada HJ, Yefimov S, Tieleman DP, de Vries AH. The MARTINI force field: coarse grained model for biomolecular simulations. J Phys Chem B 2007;111:7812-7824. (Pubitemid 47169693)
6. Berman HM, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat TN, Weissig H, Shindyalov IN, Bourne PE. The protein data bank. Nucleic Acids Res 2000;28:235-242.
7. Miyazawa S, Jernigan RL. Estimation of effective interresidue contact energies from protein crystal structures: quasi-chemical approximation. Macromolecules 1985;18:534-552.
8. Goldstein RA, Lutheyschulten ZA, Wolynes PG. Protein tertiary structure recognition using optimized hamiltonians with local interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1992;89:9029-9033.
9. Luthy R, Bowie JU, Eisenberg D. Assesments of protein models with 3-dimensional profiles. Nature 1992;356:83-85.
10. Maiorov VN, Crippen GM. Contact potential that recognizes the correct folding of globular-proteins. J Mol Biol 1992;227:876-888.
11. Rizzo RC, Jorgensen WL. OPLS all-atom model for amines: resolution of the amine hydration problem. J Am Chem Soc 1999;121: 4827-4836.
12. Lagant P, Nolde D, Stote R, Vergoten G, Karplus M. Increasing normal modes analysis accuracy: the SPASIBA spectroscopic force field introduced into the CHARMM program. J Phys Chem A 2004;108: 4019-4029.
13. Wang JM, Kollman PA. Automatic parameterization of force field by systematic search and genetic algorithms. J Comput Chem 2001; 22:1219-1228.
14. Sippl MJ. Calculation of conformational ensembles from potentials of mena force: an approach to the knowledge-based prediction of local structures in globular proteins. J Mol Biol 1990;213:859-883.
15. Skolnick J, Jaroszewski L, Kolinski A, Godzik A. Derivation and testing of pair potentials for protein folding. When is the quasichemical approximation correct? Protein Sci 1997;6:676-688.
16. Betancourt MR, Thirumalai D. Pair potentials for protein folding: choice of reference states and sensitivity of predicted native states to variations in the interaction schemes. Protein Sci 1999;8:361-369. (Pubitemid 29072436)
17. Bryant SH, Lawrence CE. An empirical energy function for threading protein-sequence through the foldingmotif. Proteins 1993;16: 92-112.
18. Hinds DA, Levitt M. Exploring conformational space with a simple lattice model for protein-structure. J Mol Biol 1994;243:668-682. (Pubitemid 24341711)
19. Xia Y, Huang ES, Levitt M, Samudrala R. Ab initio construction of protein tertiary structures using a hierarchical approach. J Mol Biol 2000;300:171-185. (Pubitemid 30692578)
20. Buchete NV, Straub JE, Thirumalai D. Anisotropic coarse-grained statistical potentials improve the ability to identify nativelike protein structures. J Chem Phys 2003;118:7658-7671.
21. Lu M, Dousis AD, Ma J. OPUS-PSP: an orientation-dependent statistical all-atom potential derived from side-chain packing. J Mol Biol 2008;376:288-301.
22. Lu H, Skolnick J. A distance-dependent atomic knowledge-based potential for improved protein structure selection. Proteins 2001;44:223-232. (Pubitemid 32702231)
23. Hill TL. Statistical mechanics: principles and selected applications. New York: Dover; 1956.
24. Feng YP, Kloczkowski A, Jernigan RL. Four-body contact potentials derived from two protein datasets to discriminate native structures from decoys. Proteins 2007;68:57-66. (Pubitemid 46876534)
25. Buchete NV, Straub JE, Thirumalai D. Orientational potentials extracted from protein structures improve native fold recognition. Protein Sci 2004;13:862-874. (Pubitemid 38429210)
26. Ngan SC, Inouye MT, Samudrala R. A knowledge-based scoring function based on residue triplets for protein structure prediction. Protein Eng Des Sel 2006;19:187-193.
27. Kinnear BS, Jarrold MF, Hausmann UHE. All-atom generalizedensemble simulations of small proteins. J Mol Graph Mod 2004; 22:397-403.
28. Amir EAD, Kalisman N, Keasar C. Differentiable, multi-dimensional, knowledge-based energy terms for torsion angle probabilities and propensities. Proteins 2008;72:62-73. (Pubitemid 351809148)
29. Jagielska A, Wroblewska L, Skolnick J. Protein model refinement using an optimized physics-based all-atom force field. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008;105:8268-8273. (Pubitemid 351904745)
30. Honeycutt JD, Thirumalai D. The nature of folded states of globular proteins. Biopolymers 1992;32:695-709.
31. Brown S, Head-Gordon T. Intermediates and the folding of proteins L and G. Protein Sci 2004;13:958-970.
32. Yap E-H, Fawzi NL, Head-Gordon T. A coarse-grained alphacarbon protein model with anisotropic hydrogen-bonding. Proteins 2008;70:626-638. (Pubitemid 351161925)
33. Aaqvist J, Warshel A. Simulation of enzyme reactions using valence bond force fields and other hybrid quantum/classical approaches. Chem Rev 1993;93:2523-2544. (Pubitemid 23989466)
34. Maragakis P, Karplus M. Large amplitude conformational change in proteins explored with a plastic network model: adenylate kinase. J Mol Biol 2005;352:807-822. (Pubitemid 41267070)
35. Okazaki K-I, Koga N, Takada S, Onuchic JN, Wolynes PG. Multiple- basin energy landscapes for large-amplitude conformational motions of proteins: structure-based molecular dynamics simulations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006;103: 11844-11849. (Pubitemid 44215774)
36. Liwo A, Ołdziej S, Czaplewski C, Kozłowska U, Scheraga HA. Parametrization of backbone-electrostatic and multibody contributions to the UNRES force field for protein-structure prediction from ab initio energy surfaces of model systems. J Phys Chem B 2004;108: 9421-9438.
37. Liwo A, Wawak RJ, Scheraga HA, Pincus MR, Rackovsky S. Calculation of protein backbone geometry from {alpha}-carbon coordinates based on peptide-group dipole alignment. Protein Sci 1993;2:1697-1714. (Pubitemid 23294347)
38. Zhou H, Zhou Y. Distance-scaled, finite ideal-gas reference state improves structure-derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction. Protein Sci 2002;11:2714-2726. (Pubitemid 35191145)
39. Reith D, Pütz M, Müller-Plathe F. Deriving effective mesoscale potentials from atomistic simulations. J Comput Chem 2003;24: 1624-1636.
40. Sun Q, Ghosh J, Faller R. State-point dependence and transferability of potentials in systematic structural coarse-graining. In: Voth G, editor. Coarse-graining of Condensed Phase and Biomolecular Systems. Boca Raton FL: CRC Press; 2008. Chapter 6, pp 69-82.
41. Hansmann UHE, Okamoto Y, Eisenmenger F. Molecular dynamics, Langevin and hydrid Monte Carlo simulations in a multicanonical ensemble. Chem Phys Lett 1996;259:321-330.
42. Vallat BK, Pillardy J, Elber R. A template-finding algorithm and a comprehensive benchmark for homology modeling of proteins. Proteins 2008;72:910-928. (Pubitemid 352000869)
43. Meyerguz L, Grasso C, Kleinberg J, Elber R. Computational analysis of sequence selection mechanisms. Structure 2004;12:547-557. (Pubitemid 38447158)
44. Tusnady GE, Dosztanyi Z, Simon I. Transmembrane proteins in the Protein Data Bank: identification and classification. Bioinformatics 2004;20:2964-2972. (Pubitemid 39619188)
45. Jayasinghe S, Hristova K, White SH. MPtopo: a database of membrane protein topology. Protein Sci 2001;10:455-458. (Pubitemid 32225666)
46. Spirin S, Titov M, Karyagina A, Alexeevski A. NPIDB: a database of nucleic acids protein interactions. Bioinformatics 2007;23:3247-3248. (Pubitemid 350187530)
47. Narang P, Bhushan K, Bose S, Jayaram B. A computational pathway for bracketing native-like structures for small alpha helical globular proteins. Phys Chem Chem Phys 2005;7:2364-2375. (Pubitemid 40855584)
48. Jayaram B, Bhushan K, Shenoy SR, Narang P, Bose S, Agrawal P, Sahu D, Pandey V. Bhageerath: an energy based web enabled computer software suite for limiting the search space of tertiary structures of small globular proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 2006;34:6195-6204. (Pubitemid 44942740)
49. Elber R, Roitberg A, Simmerling C, Goldstein R, Li H, Verkhivker G, Keasar C, Zhang J, Ulitsky A. MOIL: a program for simulations of macromolecules. Comput Phys Commun 1995;91:159-189.
50. Liwo A, Wawak RJ, Scheraga HA, Pincus MR, Rackovsky S. Prediction of protein conformation on the basis of a search for compact structures: test on avian pancreatic polypeptide. Protein Sci 1993;2: 1715-1731. (Pubitemid 23294348)
51. Zhang Y, Skolnick J. Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality. Proteins 2004;57:702-710. (Pubitemid 39626992)
52. Eyal E, Yang L-W, Bahar I. Anisotropic network model: systematic evaluation and a new web interface. Bioinformatics 2006;22:2619-2627. (Pubitemid 44642600)
53. Pettersen EF, Goddard TD, Huang CC, Couch GS, Greenblatt DM, Meng EC, Ferrin TE. UCSF chimera-a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J Comput Chem 2004;25:1605-1612.
54. Minary P, Levitt M. Probing protein fold space with a simplified model. J Mol Biol 2008;375:920-933. (Pubitemid 350309392)
55. Summa CM, Levitt M. Near-native structure refinement using in vacuo energy minimization. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2007;104: 3177-3182. (Pubitemid 46364133)
56. Samudrala R, Levitt M. Decoys 'R' Us: a database of incorrect conformations to improve protein structure prediction. Protein Sci 2000;9:1399-1401.
57. Lin MS, Fawzi NL, Head-Gordon T. Hydrophobic potential of mean force as a solvation function for protein structure prediction. Structure 2007;15:727-740. (Pubitemid 46874085)
58. Shen M-Y, Sali A. Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures. Protein Sci 2006;15:2507-2524. (Pubitemid 44771688)
59. McConkey BJ, Sobolev V, Edelman M. Discrimination of native protein structures using atom-atom contact scoring. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003;100:3215-3220. (Pubitemid 36356563)
60. Miyazawa S, Jernigan RL. How effective for fold recognition is a potential of mean force that includes relative orientations between contacting residues in proteins? J Chem Phys 2005;122:024901.
61. Zhang C, Liu S, Zhou H, Zhou Y. An accurate, residue-level, pair potential of mean force for folding and binding based on the distance- scaled, ideal-gas reference state. Protein Sci 2004;13:400-411. (Pubitemid 38124961)
62. Lee M, Yang R, Duan Y. Comparison between Generalized-Born and Poisson-Boltzmann methods in physics-based scoring functions for protein structure prediction. J Mol Model 2005;12:101-110. (Pubitemid 41829663)
63. Dehouck Y, Gilis D, Rooman M. A new generation of statistical potentials for proteins. Biophys J 2006;90:4010-4017. (Pubitemid 43846117)
64. Dong Q, Wang X, Lin L. Novel knowledge-based mean force potential at the profile level. BMC Bioinformatics 2006;7:324. (Pubitemid 44219139)
65. Tobi D, Elber R. Distance-dependent, pair potential for protein folding: results from linear optimization. Proteins 2000;41:40-46. (Pubitemid 30666911)
66. Zhang J, Chen R, Liang J. Empirical potential function for simplified protein models: combining contact and local sequencestructure descriptors. Proteins 2006;63:949-960. (Pubitemid 43765146)
67. Simons KT, Ruczinski I, Kooperberg C, Fox BA, Bystroff C, Baker D. Improved recognition of native-like protein structures using a combination of sequence-dependent and sequence-independent features of proteins. Proteins 1999;34:82-95. (Pubitemid 29019533)
68. Miyazawa S, Jernigan RL. Residue-residue potentials with a favorable contact pair term and an unfavorable high packing density term, for simulation and threading. J Mol Biol 1996;256:623-644. (Pubitemid 26107211)
69. Tobi D, Shafran G, Linial N, Elber R. On the design and analysis of protein folding potentials. Proteins 2000;40:71-85. (Pubitemid 30368583)
70. Michele V, Eytan D. Pairwise contact potentials are unsuitable for protein folding. J Chem Phys 1998;109:11101-11108.
71. Buchete NV, Straub JE, Thirumalai D. Development of novel statistical potentials for protein fold recognition. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2004;14:225-232. (Pubitemid 38490789)