OPUS-PSP: an orientation-dependent statistical all-atom potential derived from side-chain packing.

Here we report an orientation-dependent statistical all-atom potential derived from side-chain packing, named OPUS-PSP. It features a basis set of 19 rigid-body blocks extracted from the chemical structures of all 20 amino acid residues. The potential is generated from the orientation-specific packing statistics of pairs of those blocks in a non-redundant structural database. The purpose of such an approach is to capture the essential elements of orientation dependence in molecular packing interactions. Tests of OPUS-PSP on commonly used decoy sets demonstrate that it significantly outperforms most of the existing knowledge-based potentials in terms of both its ability to recognize native structures and consistency in achieving high Z-scores across decoy sets. As OPUS-PSP excludes interactions among main-chain atoms, its success highlights the crucial importance of side-chain packing in forming native protein structures. Moreover, OPUS-PSP does not explicitly include solvation terms, and thus the potential should perform well when the solvation effect is difficult to determine, such as in membrane proteins. Overall, OPUS-PSP is a generally applicable potential for protein structure modeling, especially for handling side-chain conformations, one of the most difficult steps in high-accuracy protein structure prediction and refinement.

[1]  J Moult,et al.  Comparison of database potentials and molecular mechanics force fields. , 1997, Current opinion in structural biology.

[2]  Yong Duan,et al.  Comparison between Generalized-Born and Poisson–Boltzmann methods in physics-based scoring functions for protein structure prediction , 2005, Journal of molecular modeling.

[3]  Arnab Mukherjee,et al.  Orientation-dependent potential of mean force for protein folding. , 2005, The Journal of chemical physics.

[4]  Teresa Head-Gordon,et al.  Hydrophobic potential of mean force as a solvation function for protein structure prediction. , 2007, Structure.

[5]  R Samudrala,et al.  Decoys ‘R’ Us: A database of incorrect conformations to improve protein structure prediction , 2000, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[6]  G. Klebe,et al.  Statistical potentials and scoring functions applied to protein-ligand binding. , 2001, Current opinion in structural biology.

[7]  M J Sippl,et al.  Knowledge-based potentials for proteins. , 1995, Current opinion in structural biology.

[8]  A. Godzik,et al.  Derivation and testing of pair potentials for protein folding. When is the quasichemical approximation correct? , 1997, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[9]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  What is a desirable statistical energy functions for proteins and how can it be obtained? , 2007, Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics.

[10]  A. Sali,et al.  Comparative protein structure modeling by iterative alignment, model building and model assessment. , 2003, Nucleic Acids Research.

[11]  Xiaolong Wang,et al.  Novel knowledge-based mean force potential at the profile level , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[12]  Christodoulos A. Floudas,et al.  A novel high resolution CαCα distance dependent force field based on a high quality decoy set , 2006 .

[13]  D Thirumalai,et al.  Development of novel statistical potentials for protein fold recognition. , 2004, Current opinion in structural biology.

[14]  J. Straub,et al.  Orientational potentials extracted from protein structures improve native fold recognition , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[15]  James E Fitzgerald,et al.  Reduced Cβ statistical potentials can outperform all‐atom potentials in decoy identification , 2007, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[16]  Richard Bonneau,et al.  An improved protein decoy set for testing energy functions for protein structure prediction , 2003, Proteins.

[17]  Robert L Jernigan,et al.  How effective for fold recognition is a potential of mean force that includes relative orientations between contacting residues in proteins? , 2005, The Journal of chemical physics.

[18]  David E. Kim,et al.  Free modeling with Rosetta in CASP6 , 2005, Proteins.

[19]  David Baker,et al.  Analysis of anisotropic side-chain packing in proteins and application to high-resolution structure prediction. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[20]  Jie Liang,et al.  Empirical potential function for simplified protein models: Combining contact and local sequence–structure descriptors , 2006, Proteins.

[21]  Jianpeng Ma,et al.  OPUS‐Ca: A knowledge‐based potential function requiring only Cα positions , 2007, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[22]  Ram Samudrala,et al.  A Combined Approach for Ab Initio Construction of Low Resolution Protein Tertiary Structures from Sequence , 1999, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[23]  A. Sali,et al.  Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[24]  D. Baker,et al.  Design of a Novel Globular Protein Fold with Atomic-Level Accuracy , 2003, Science.

[25]  R. Jernigan,et al.  Structure-derived potentials and protein simulations. , 1996, Current opinion in structural biology.

[26]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  An accurate, residue‐level, pair potential of mean force for folding and binding based on the distance‐scaled, ideal‐gas reference state , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[27]  Guoli Wang,et al.  PISCES: a protein sequence culling server , 2003, Bioinform..

[28]  Eugene I Shakhnovich,et al.  Lessons from the design of a novel atomic potential for protein folding , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[29]  C Kooperberg,et al.  Assembly of protein tertiary structures from fragments with similar local sequences using simulated annealing and Bayesian scoring functions. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[30]  D Gilis,et al.  Protein Decoy Sets for Evaluating Energy Functions , 2004, Journal of biomolecular structure & dynamics.

[31]  M. Levitt,et al.  Energy functions that discriminate X-ray and near native folds from well-constructed decoys. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[32]  B. McConkey,et al.  Discrimination of native protein structures using atom–atom contact scoring , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  Rama Ranganathan,et al.  Knowledge-based potential functions in protein design. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[34]  Hongyi Zhou,et al.  Distance‐scaled, finite ideal‐gas reference state improves structure‐derived potentials of mean force for structure selection and stability prediction , 2002, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[35]  R Samudrala,et al.  Ab initio construction of protein tertiary structures using a hierarchical approach. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[36]  R. Elber,et al.  Distance‐dependent, pair potential for protein folding: Results from linear optimization , 2000, Proteins.

[37]  D Gilis,et al.  A new generation of statistical potentials for proteins. , 2006, Biophysical journal.

[38]  Andrej Sali,et al.  Minimalist representations and the importance of nearest neighbor effects in protein folding simulations. , 2006, Journal of molecular biology.

[39]  M. Karplus,et al.  Effective energy functions for protein structure prediction. , 2000, Current opinion in structural biology.

[40]  R. Jernigan,et al.  Residue-residue potentials with a favorable contact pair term and an unfavorable high packing density term, for simulation and threading. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[41]  Rama Ranganathan,et al.  Knowledge-based potentials in protein design. , 2006, Current opinion in structural biology.

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

[43]  D. Baker,et al.  Improved recognition of native‐like protein structures using a combination of sequence‐dependent and sequence‐independent features of proteins , 1999, Proteins.

[44]  J. Skolnick.  In quest of an empirical potential for protein structure prediction. , 2006, Current opinion in structural biology.

[45]  M. Levitt,et al.  A novel approach to decoy set generation: designing a physical energy function having local minima with native structure characteristics. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.