Cargando…

Evaluating Molecular Mechanical Potentials for Helical Peptides and Proteins

Multiple variants of the AMBER all-atom force field were quantitatively evaluated with respect to their ability to accurately characterize helix-coil equilibria in explicit solvent simulations. Using a global distributed computing network, absolute conformational convergence was achieved for large e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thompson, Erik J., DePaul, Allison J., Patel, Sarav S., Sorin, Eric J.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2850926/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20418937
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010056
_version_ 1782179823679963136
author Thompson, Erik J.
DePaul, Allison J.
Patel, Sarav S.
Sorin, Eric J.
author_facet Thompson, Erik J.
DePaul, Allison J.
Patel, Sarav S.
Sorin, Eric J.
author_sort Thompson, Erik J.
collection PubMed
description Multiple variants of the AMBER all-atom force field were quantitatively evaluated with respect to their ability to accurately characterize helix-coil equilibria in explicit solvent simulations. Using a global distributed computing network, absolute conformational convergence was achieved for large ensembles of the capped A(21) and F(s) helical peptides. Further assessment of these AMBER variants was conducted via simulations of a flexible 164-residue five-helix-bundle protein, apolipophorin-III, on the 100 ns timescale. Of the contemporary potentials that had not been assessed previously, the AMBER-99SB force field showed significant helix-destabilizing tendencies, with beta bridge formation occurring in helical peptides, and unfolding of apolipophorin-III occurring on the tens of nanoseconds timescale. The AMBER-03 force field, while showing adequate helical propensities for both peptides and stabilizing apolipophorin-III, (i) predicts an unexpected decrease in helicity with ALA→ARG(+) substitution, (ii) lacks experimentally observed 3(10) helical content, and (iii) deviates strongly from average apolipophorin-III NMR structural properties. As is observed for AMBER-99SB, AMBER-03 significantly overweighs the contribution of extended and polyproline backbone configurations to the conformational equilibrium. In contrast, the AMBER-99φ force field, which was previously shown to best reproduce experimental measurements of the helix-coil transition in model helical peptides, adequately stabilizes apolipophorin-III and yields both an average gyration radius and polar solvent exposed surface area that are in excellent agreement with the NMR ensemble.
format Text
id pubmed-2850926
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28509262010-04-23 Evaluating Molecular Mechanical Potentials for Helical Peptides and Proteins Thompson, Erik J. DePaul, Allison J. Patel, Sarav S. Sorin, Eric J. PLoS One Research Article Multiple variants of the AMBER all-atom force field were quantitatively evaluated with respect to their ability to accurately characterize helix-coil equilibria in explicit solvent simulations. Using a global distributed computing network, absolute conformational convergence was achieved for large ensembles of the capped A(21) and F(s) helical peptides. Further assessment of these AMBER variants was conducted via simulations of a flexible 164-residue five-helix-bundle protein, apolipophorin-III, on the 100 ns timescale. Of the contemporary potentials that had not been assessed previously, the AMBER-99SB force field showed significant helix-destabilizing tendencies, with beta bridge formation occurring in helical peptides, and unfolding of apolipophorin-III occurring on the tens of nanoseconds timescale. The AMBER-03 force field, while showing adequate helical propensities for both peptides and stabilizing apolipophorin-III, (i) predicts an unexpected decrease in helicity with ALA→ARG(+) substitution, (ii) lacks experimentally observed 3(10) helical content, and (iii) deviates strongly from average apolipophorin-III NMR structural properties. As is observed for AMBER-99SB, AMBER-03 significantly overweighs the contribution of extended and polyproline backbone configurations to the conformational equilibrium. In contrast, the AMBER-99φ force field, which was previously shown to best reproduce experimental measurements of the helix-coil transition in model helical peptides, adequately stabilizes apolipophorin-III and yields both an average gyration radius and polar solvent exposed surface area that are in excellent agreement with the NMR ensemble. Public Library of Science 2010-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC2850926/ /pubmed/20418937 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010056 Text en Thompson et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Thompson, Erik J.
DePaul, Allison J.
Patel, Sarav S.
Sorin, Eric J.
Evaluating Molecular Mechanical Potentials for Helical Peptides and Proteins
title Evaluating Molecular Mechanical Potentials for Helical Peptides and Proteins
title_full Evaluating Molecular Mechanical Potentials for Helical Peptides and Proteins
title_fullStr Evaluating Molecular Mechanical Potentials for Helical Peptides and Proteins
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating Molecular Mechanical Potentials for Helical Peptides and Proteins
title_short Evaluating Molecular Mechanical Potentials for Helical Peptides and Proteins
title_sort evaluating molecular mechanical potentials for helical peptides and proteins
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2850926/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20418937
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010056
work_keys_str_mv AT thompsonerikj evaluatingmolecularmechanicalpotentialsforhelicalpeptidesandproteins
AT depaulallisonj evaluatingmolecularmechanicalpotentialsforhelicalpeptidesandproteins
AT patelsaravs evaluatingmolecularmechanicalpotentialsforhelicalpeptidesandproteins
AT sorinericj evaluatingmolecularmechanicalpotentialsforhelicalpeptidesandproteins