Analytical electrostatics for biomolecules: beyond the generalized Born approximation.

The modeling and simulation of macromolecules in solution often benefits from fast analytical approximations for the electrostatic interactions. In our previous work [G. Sigalov et al., J. Chem. Phys. 122, 094511 (2005)], we proposed a method based on an approximate analytical solution of the linearized Poisson-Boltzmann equation for a sphere. In the current work, we extend the method to biomolecules of arbitrary shape and provide computationally efficient algorithms for estimation of the parameters of the model. This approach, which we tentatively call ALPB here, is tested against the standard numerical Poisson-Boltzmann (NPB) treatment on a set of 579 representative proteins, nucleic acids, and small peptides. The tests are performed across a wide range of solvent/solute dielectrics and at biologically relevant salt concentrations. Over the range of the solvent and solute parameters tested, the systematic deviation (from the NPB reference) of solvation energies computed by ALPB is 0.5-3.5 kcal/mol, which is 5-50 times smaller than that of the conventional generalized Born approximation widely used in this context. At the same time, ALPB is equally computationally efficient. The new model is incorporated into the AMBER molecular modeling package and tested on small proteins.

[1]  J. Apostolakis,et al.  Continuum Electrostatic Energies of Macromolecules in Aqueous Solutions , 1997 .

[2]  W. C. Still,et al.  The GB/SA Continuum Model for Solvation. A Fast Analytical Method for the Calculation of Approximate Born Radii , 1997 .

[3]  C. Cramer,et al.  Implicit Solvation Models: Equilibria, Structure, Spectra, and Dynamics. , 1999, Chemical reviews.

[4]  R. Levy,et al.  Free energy surfaces of β‐hairpin and α‐helical peptides generated by replica exchange molecular dynamics with the AGBNP implicit solvent model , 2004 .

[5]  Granino A. Korn,et al.  Mathematical handbook for scientists and engineers. Definitions, theorems, and formulas for reference and review , 1968 .

[6]  Gregory D. Hawkins,et al.  Pairwise solute descreening of solute charges from a dielectric medium , 1995 .

[7]  Charles L. Brooks,et al.  Performance comparison of generalized born and Poisson methods in the calculation of electrostatic solvation energies for protein structures , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[8]  P Beroza,et al.  Calculations of proton-binding thermodynamics in proteins. , 1998, Methods in enzymology.

[9]  Ray Luo,et al.  Accelerated Poisson–Boltzmann calculations for static and dynamic systems , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[10]  Yong Duan,et al.  Distinguish protein decoys by Using a scoring function based on a new AMBER force field, short molecular dynamics simulations, and the generalized born solvent model , 2004, Proteins.

[11]  A. Roitberg,et al.  All-atom structure prediction and folding simulations of a stable protein. , 2002, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[12]  Nathan A. Baker,et al.  Improving implicit solvent simulations: a Poisson-centric view. , 2005, Current opinion in structural biology.

[13]  D. Case,et al.  Modification of the Generalized Born Model Suitable for Macromolecules , 2000 .

[14]  R. Friesner,et al.  Generalized Born Model Based on a Surface Integral Formulation , 1998 .

[15]  David A. Case,et al.  Effective Born radii in the generalized Born approximation: The importance of being perfect , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[16]  Peter Scheffel,et al.  Incorporating variable dielectric environments into the generalized Born model. , 2005, The Journal of chemical physics.

[17]  Ting Wang,et al.  Implicit solvent models for flexible protein–protein docking by molecular dynamics simulation , 2002, Proteins.

[18]  Pascal Bonnet,et al.  Scoring binding affinity of multiple ligands using implicit solvent and a single molecular dynamics trajectory: application to influenza neuraminidase. , 2005, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[19]  G. Temple.  Static and Dynamic Electricity , 1940, Nature.

[20]  Richard A. Friesner,et al.  Solvation Free Energies of Peptides: Comparison of Approximate Continuum Solvation Models with Accurate Solution of the Poisson−Boltzmann Equation , 1997 .

[21]  D. Beveridge,et al.  A MODIFICATION OF THE GENERALIZED BORN THEORY FOR IMPROVED ESTIMATES OF SOLVATION ENERGIES AND PK SHIFTS , 1998 .

[22]  M. Karplus,et al.  A Comprehensive Analytical Treatment of Continuum Electrostatics , 1996 .

[23]  D. Case,et al.  Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Nucleic Acids with a Generalized Born Solvation Model , 2000 .

[24]  H. Nymeyer,et al.  Simulation of the folding equilibrium of α-helical peptides: A comparison of the generalized Born approximation with explicit solvent , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  Converging free energy estimates: MM‐PB(GB)SA studies on the protein–protein complex Ras–Raf , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[26]  Alexander D. MacKerell.  Empirical force fields for biological macromolecules: Overview and issues , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[27]  C. Brooks,et al.  Recent advances in the development and application of implicit solvent models in biomolecule simulations. , 2004, Current opinion in structural biology.

[28]  C. Brooks,et al.  Novel generalized Born methods , 2002 .

[29]  Barry Honig,et al.  Calculating the electrostatic properties of RNA provides new insights into molecular interactions and function , 1999, Nature Structural Biology.

[30]  D. J. Price,et al.  Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[31]  M K Gilson,et al.  Theory of electrostatic interactions in macromolecules. , 1995, Current opinion in structural biology.

[32]  W. C. Still,et al.  Semianalytical treatment of solvation for molecular mechanics and dynamics , 1990 .

[33]  D. Case,et al.  Generalized born models of macromolecular solvation effects. , 2000, Annual review of physical chemistry.

[34]  B. Dominy,et al.  Development of a generalized Born model parameterization for proteins and nucleic acids , 1999 .

[35]  Ray Luo,et al.  Comparison of generalized born and poisson models: Energetics and dynamics of HIV protease , 2000 .

[36]  D. Case,et al.  Exploring protein native states and large‐scale conformational changes with a modified generalized born model , 2004, Proteins.

[37]  T. Simonson,et al.  Protein molecular dynamics with the generalized born/ACE solvent model , 2001, Proteins.

[38]  宁北芳,et al.  疟原虫var基因转换速率变化导致抗原变异[英]／Paul H, Robert P, Christodoulou Z, et al//Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A , 2005 .

[39]  Matthew P Jacobson,et al.  Virtual Ligand Screening against Escherichia coli Dihydrofolate Reductase: Improving Docking Enrichment Using Physics-Based Methods , 2005, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[40]  Ronald M. Levy,et al.  AGBNP: An analytic implicit solvent model suitable for molecular dynamics simulations and high‐resolution modeling , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[41]  Velin Z. Spassov,et al.  Introducing an Implicit Membrane in Generalized Born/Solvent Accessibility Continuum Solvent Models , 2002 .

[42]  J. Kirkwood,et al.  Theory of Solutions of Molecules Containing Widely Separated Charges with Special Application to Zwitterions , 1934 .

[43]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  The Amber biomolecular simulation programs , 2005, J. Comput. Chem..

[44]  P. Kollman,et al.  Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. , 2000, Accounts of chemical research.

[45]  Gregory D. Hawkins,et al.  Parametrized Models of Aqueous Free Energies of Solvation Based on Pairwise Descreening of Solute Atomic Charges from a Dielectric Medium , 1996 .

[46]  P. Beroza,et al.  Application of a pairwise generalized Born model to proteins and nucleic acids: inclusion of salt effects , 1999 .

[47]  B. Honig,et al.  Classical electrostatics in biology and chemistry. , 1995, Science.