Computational study of protein secondary structure elements: Ramachandran plots revisited.

Potential energy surface (PES) were built for nineteen amino acids using density functional theory (PW91 and DFT M062X/6-311**). Examining the energy as a function of the φ/ψ dihedral angles in the allowed regions of the Ramachandran plot, amino acid groups that share common patterns on their PES plots and global minima were identified. These patterns show partial correlation with their structural and pharmacophoric features. Differences between these computational results and the experimentally noted permitted conformations of each amino acid are rationalized on the basis of attractive intra- and inter-molecular non-covalent interactions. The present data are focused on the intrinsic properties of an amino acid - an element which to our knowledge is typically ignored, as larger models are always used for the sake of similarity to real biological polypeptides.

[1]  Donald G. Truhlar,et al.  The M06 suite of density functionals for main group thermochemistry, thermochemical kinetics, noncovalent interactions, excited states, and transition elements: two new functionals and systematic testing of four M06 functionals and 12 other functionals , 2008 .

[2]  B. Kuhlman,et al.  Using quantum mechanics to improve estimates of amino acid side chain rotamer energies , 2007, Proteins.

[3]  Chris Sander,et al.  Objectively judging the quality of a protein structure from a Ramachandran plot , 1997, Comput. Appl. Biosci..

[4]  D. Baker,et al.  Prediction of local structure in proteins using a library of sequence-structure motifs. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[5]  E. Kabat,et al.  An attempt to evaluate the influence of neighboring amino acids (n-1) and (n+1) on the backbone conformation of amino acid (n) in proteins. Use in predicting the three-dimensional structure of the polypeptide backbone of other proteins. , 1973, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  Oliviero Carugo,et al.  Half a century of Ramachandran plots. , 2013, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[7]  Xiao Zhu,et al.  Intrinsic Energy Landscapes of Amino Acid Side-Chains , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[8]  J. Hirst,et al.  Protein secondary structure prediction with dihedral angles , 2005, Proteins.

[9]  D. Truhlar,et al.  The M06 suite of density functionals for main group thermochemistry, thermochemical kinetics, noncovalent interactions, excited states, and transition elements: two new functionals and systematic testing of four M06-class functionals and 12 other functionals , 2008 .

[10]  Jun Wang,et al.  Comparison of protein secondary structures based on backbone dihedral angles. , 2008, Journal of theoretical biology.

[11]  R. Silaghi-Dumitrescu,et al.  Performance comparison of computational methods for modeling alpha-helical structures , 2012, Journal of Molecular Modeling.

[12]  G. N. Ramachandran,et al.  Stereochemical criteria for polypeptide and protein chain conformations. II. Allowed conformations for a pair of peptide units. , 1965, Biophysical journal.

[13]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Neighbor-Dependent Ramachandran Probability Distributions of Amino Acids Developed from a Hierarchical Dirichlet Process Model , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[14]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins. , 1998, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[15]  V. Hornak,et al.  Comparison of multiple Amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters , 2006, Proteins.

[16]  Jing Zhao,et al.  Protein secondary structure prediction using dynamic programming. , 2005, Acta biochimica et biophysica Sinica.

[17]  Michael B. Hall,et al.  A reexamination of the propensities of amino acids towards a particular secondary structure: classification of amino acids based on their chemical structure , 2008, Journal of molecular modeling.

[18]  Yujia Xu,et al.  Ramachandran revisited. DFT energy surfaces of diastereomeric trialanine peptides in the gas phase and aqueous solution. , 2009, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[19]  P. Kollman,et al.  A Second Generation Force Field for the Simulation of Proteins, Nucleic Acids, and Organic Molecules , 1995 .

[20]  T. A. Jones,et al.  Databases in protein crystallography. , 1998, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[21]  P. Karplus,et al.  A fresh look at the Ramachandran plot and the occurrence of standard structures in proteins , 2010, Biomolecular concepts.

[22]  Ian W. Davis,et al.  Structure validation by Cα geometry: ϕ,ψ and Cβ deviation , 2003, Proteins.

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

[24]  G J Kleywegt,et al.  Phi/psi-chology: Ramachandran revisited. , 1996, Structure.

[25]  Bosco K. Ho,et al.  Revisiting the Ramachandran plot: Hard‐sphere repulsion, electrostatics, and H‐bonding in the α‐helix , 2003, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[26]  Xu Shuo,et al.  Protein secondary structure prediction based on SVM , 2010 .

[27]  G. N. Ramachandran,et al.  Stereochemistry of polypeptide chain configurations. , 1963, Journal of molecular biology.

[28]  Shuji Tomoda,et al.  Solvent effects on the φ–ψ potential surfaces of glycine and alanine dipeptides studied by PCM and I-PCM methods , 2002 .

[29]  Rajkumar Bondugula,et al.  Can computationally designed protein sequences improve secondary structure prediction? , 2011, Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS.