Learning probabilistic models of hydrogen bond stability from molecular dynamics simulation trajectories

BMC Bioinformatics

Volumn 12, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2011, Pages

  Chikalov, Igor ^a   Yao, Peggy ^b   Moshkov, Mikhail ^a   Latombe, Jean Claude ^c  

^a KING ABDULLAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Saudi Arabia)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c Stanford University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INDUCTIVE LEARNING METHODS; INTRINSIC STRENGTH; LOCAL ENVIRONMENTS; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS SIMULATIONS; OUTPUT VARIABLES; PROBABILISTIC MODELS; PROTEIN STRUCTURES; TREE CONSTRUCTION; REGRESSION TREES;

FORESTRY; HYDROGEN BONDS; LEARNING SYSTEMS; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PROTEINS; STABILITY; TRAJECTORIES; BIOINFORMATICS;

COMPUTER SIMULATION;

PROTEIN;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; HYDROGEN BOND; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PROTEIN SECONDARY STRUCTURE; PROTEIN STABILITY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ALGORITHMS; HYDROGEN BONDING; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS SIMULATION; PROTEIN STABILITY; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, SECONDARY; PROTEINS;

EID: 79951538322     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-S1-S34     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Baker EN. Hydrogen bonding in biological macromolecules. International Tables for Crystallography 2006, F:546-552. Chapter 22.2.
2. Fersht AR, Serrano L. Principles in protein stability derived from protein engineering experiments. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol 1993, 3:75-83.
3. Schell D, Tsai J, Scholtz JM, Pace CN. Hydrogen bonding increases packing density in the protein interior. Proteins 2006, 63:278-282. 10.1002/prot.20826, 16353166.
4. Bikadi Z, Demko L, Hazai E. Functional and structural characterization of a protein based on analysis of its hydrogen bonding network by hydrogen bonding plot. Arch Biochem Biophys 2007, 461:225-234. 10.1016/j.abb.2007.02.020, 17391641.
5. Dahiyat BI, Gordon DB, Mayo SL. Automated design of the surface positions of protein helices. Protein Science 1997, 6:1333-1337. 10.1002/pro.5560060622, 2143725, 9194194.
6. Levitt M. Molecular dynamics of hydrogen bonds in bovine pancreatic trypsin unhibitor protein. Nature 1981, 294:379-380. 10.1038/294379a0, 7312035.
7. Thorpe MF, Lei M, Rader AJ, Jacobs DJ, Kuhn LA. Protein flexibility and dynamics using constraint theory. J. Mol. Graph. Model 2001, 19:60-69. 10.1016/S1093-3263(00)00122-4, 11381531.
8. McDonald IK, Thornton JM. Satisfying hydrogen bonding potential in proteins. J. Mol. Biol 1994, 238:777-793. 10.1006/jmbi.1994.1334, 8182748.
9. Breiman L, Friedman JH, Ilshen RA, Stone CJ. Classification and regression trees. 1984, CRC Press.
10. Joo H, Qu X, Swanson R, McCallum CM, Tsai J. Modeling the dependency of residue packing upon backbone conformation using molecular dynamics simulation. Comput. Biol. Chem 2010,
11. Haspel N, Ricklin D, Geisbrecht B, Lambris JD, Lydia EK. Electrostatic contributions drive the interaction between staphylococcus aureus protein Efb-C and its complement target C3d. Protein Sci 2008, 17:1894-1906. 10.1110/ps.036624.108, 2578803, 18687868.
12. Levitt M, Hirshberg M, Sharon R, Daggett V. Potential Energy Function and Parameters for simulations of the Molecular Dynamics of Proteins and Nucleic Acids in Solution. Computer Physics Communications 1995, 91:215-231.
13. Srinivasan J, Trevathan M, Beroza P, Case D. Application of a pairwise generalized Born model to proteins and nucleic acids: inclusion of salt effects. Theor. Chem. Acc 1999, 101:426-434.
14. Jeffrey GA, Saenger W. Hydrogen bonding in biological structures. Springer-Verlag 1991, Germany.
15. Tuv E, Borisov A, Torkokola K. Best subset feature selection for massive mixed-type problems. IDEAL 2006, 4224:1048-1056.
16. Friedman JH. Greedy Function Approximation: A Gradient Boosting Machine. Annals of Statistics 2000, 29:1189-1232.