Optimization of the GBMV2 implicit solvent force field for accurate simulation of protein conformational equilibria

Accurate treatment of solvent environment is critical for reliable simulations of protein conformational equilibria. Implicit treatment of solvation, such as using the generalized Born (GB) class of models arguably provides an optimal balance between computational efficiency and physical accuracy. Yet, GB models are frequently plagued by a tendency to generate overly compact structures. The physical origins of this drawback are relatively well understood, and the key to a balanced implicit solvent protein force field is careful optimization of physical parameters to achieve a sufficient level of cancellation of errors. The latter has been hampered by the difficulty of generating converged conformational ensembles of non‐trivial model proteins using the popular replica exchange sampling technique. Here, we leverage improved sampling efficiency of a newly developed multi‐scale enhanced sampling technique to re‐optimize the generalized‐Born with molecular volume (GBMV2) implicit solvent model with the CHARMM36 protein force field. Recursive optimization of key GBMV2 parameters (such as input radii) and protein torsion profiles (via the CMAP torsion cross terms) has led to a more balanced GBMV2 protein force field that recapitulates the structures and stabilities of both helical and β‐hairpin model peptides. Importantly, this force field appears to be free of the over‐compaction bias, and can generate structural ensembles of several intrinsically disordered proteins of various lengths that seem highly consistent with available experimental data. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Extending the treatment of backbone energetics in protein force fields: Limitations of gas‐phase quantum mechanics in reproducing protein conformational distributions in molecular dynamics simulations , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[2]  Charles L Brooks,et al.  Recent advances in implicit solvent-based methods for biomolecular simulations. , 2008, Current opinion in structural biology.

[3]  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.

[4]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Induction of peptide bond dipoles drives cooperative helix formation in the (AAQAA)3 peptide. , 2014, Biophysical journal.

[5]  Diwakar Shukla,et al.  To milliseconds and beyond: challenges in the simulation of protein folding. , 2013, Current opinion in structural biology.

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

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

[8]  Weihong Zhang,et al.  Accelerate Sampling in Atomistic Energy Landscapes Using Topology-Based Coarse-Grained Models. , 2014, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[9]  John Karanicolas,et al.  The origins of asymmetry in the folding transition states of protein L and protein G , 2002, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[10]  B. Honig,et al.  A rapid finite difference algorithm, utilizing successive over‐relaxation to solve the Poisson–Boltzmann equation , 1991 .

[11]  Peter E Wright,et al.  Solution Structure of the KIX Domain of CBP Bound to the Transactivation Domain of CREB: A Model for Activator:Coactivator Interactions , 1997, Cell.

[12]  Marie Skepö,et al.  Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Intrinsically Disordered Proteins: Force Field Evaluation and Comparison with Experiment. , 2015, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[13]  Jianhan Chen Effective Approximation of Molecular Volume Using Atom-Centered Dielectric Functions in Generalized Born Models. , 2010, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[14]  B. Roux,et al.  Implicit solvent models. , 1999, Biophysical chemistry.

[15]  Michael Feig,et al.  Balancing an accurate representation of the molecular surface in generalized born formalisms with integrator stability in molecular dynamics simulations , 2006, J. Comput. Chem..

[16]  Charles L. Brooks,et al.  New analytic approximation to the standard molecular volume definition and its application to generalized Born calculations , 2003, J. Comput. Chem..

[17]  Charles L. Brooks,et al.  Surveying implicit solvent models for estimating small molecule absolute hydration free energies , 2011, J. Comput. Chem..

[18]  Ray Luo,et al.  A Poisson–Boltzmann dynamics method with nonperiodic boundary condition , 2003 .

[19]  C. Simmerling,et al.  ff14SB: Improving the Accuracy of Protein Side Chain and Backbone Parameters from ff99SB. , 2015, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[20]  T. Head-Gordon,et al.  Optimizing Protein-Solvent Force Fields to Reproduce Intrinsic Conformational Preferences of Model Peptides. , 2011, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[21]  Jing Huang,et al.  CHARMM36 all‐atom additive protein force field: Validation based on comparison to NMR data , 2013, J. Comput. Chem..

[22]  Charles L Brooks,et al.  Critical importance of length-scale dependence in implicit modeling of hydrophobic interactions. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[23]  Y. Sugita,et al.  Replica-exchange molecular dynamics method for protein folding , 1999 .

[24]  R. Best Atomistic molecular simulations of protein folding. , 2012, Current opinion in structural biology.

[25]  B. Lee,et al.  The interpretation of protein structures: estimation of static accessibility. , 1971, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  D. Svergun,et al.  CRYSOL : a program to evaluate X-ray solution scattering of biological macromolecules from atomic coordinates , 1995 .

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

[28]  Michael Feig,et al.  MMTSB Tool Set: enhanced sampling and multiscale modeling methods for applications in structural biology. , 2004, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[29]  H. Schwalbe,et al.  Structure and dynamics of the homologous series of alanine peptides: a joint molecular dynamics/NMR study. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[30]  R. Best,et al.  Balanced Protein–Water Interactions Improve Properties of Disordered Proteins and Non-Specific Protein Association , 2014, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[31]  J A McCammon,et al.  Coupling hydrophobicity, dispersion, and electrostatics in continuum solvent models. , 2005, Physical review letters.

[32]  G. Ciccotti,et al.  Numerical Integration of the Cartesian Equations of Motion of a System with Constraints: Molecular Dynamics of n-Alkanes , 1977 .

[33]  Logan S. Ahlstrom,et al.  Hamiltonian Mapping Revisited: Calibrating Minimalist Models to Capture Molecular Recognition by Intrinsically Disordered Proteins , 2014, The journal of physical chemistry letters.

[34]  Charles L Brooks,et al.  Linking folding with aggregation in Alzheimer's β-amyloid peptides , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[36]  Charles L Brooks,et al.  Implicit modeling of nonpolar solvation for simulating protein folding and conformational transitions. , 2008, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[37]  Wei Xu,et al.  Mutual synergistic folding in recruitment of CBP/p300 by p160 nuclear receptor coactivators , 2002, Nature.

[38]  M. Karplus,et al.  CHARMM: A program for macromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations , 1983 .

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

[40]  R. Dror,et al.  How Fast-Folding Proteins Fold , 2011, Science.

[41]  Charles L Brooks,et al.  Folding intermediate in the villin headpiece domain arises from disruption of a N-terminal hydrogen-bonded network. , 2007, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[42]  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..

[43]  Weihong Zhang,et al.  Replica exchange with guided annealing for accelerated sampling of disordered protein conformations , 2014, J. Comput. Chem..

[44]  Wookyung Yu,et al.  Benchmarking all-atom simulations using hydrogen exchange , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[45]  K. Lindorff-Larsen,et al.  How robust are protein folding simulations with respect to force field parameterization? , 2011, Biophysical journal.

[46]  Huan-Xiang Zhou,et al.  Poisson-Boltzmann Calculations: van der Waals or Molecular Surface? , 2013, Communications in computational physics.

[47]  K. Lindorff-Larsen,et al.  Structure and dynamics of an unfolded protein examined by molecular dynamics simulation. , 2012, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[48]  Weihong Zhang,et al.  Residual Structures, Conformational Fluctuations, and Electrostatic Interactions in the Synergistic Folding of Two Intrinsically Disordered Proteins , 2012, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[49]  Emilio Gallicchio,et al.  On the nonpolar hydration free energy of proteins: surface area and continuum solvent models for the solute-solvent interaction energy. , 2003, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[50]  R. Dror,et al.  Improved side-chain torsion potentials for the Amber ff99SB protein force field , 2010, Proteins.

[51]  Y. Sugita,et al.  Multidimensional replica-exchange method for free-energy calculations , 2000, cond-mat/0009120.

[52]  Michael R. Shirts,et al.  Extremely precise free energy calculations of amino acid side chain analogs: Comparison of common molecular mechanics force fields for proteins , 2003 .

[53]  Carlos Simmerling,et al.  Improved Generalized Born Solvent Model Parameters for Protein Simulations. , 2013, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[54]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Improved treatment of the protein backbone in empirical force fields. , 2004, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[55]  Ann-Beth Nørholm,et al.  Temperature‐dependent structural changes in intrinsically disordered proteins: Formation of α‒helices or loss of polyproline II? , 2010, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[56]  R. Fesinmeyer,et al.  Enhanced hairpin stability through loop design: the case of the protein G B1 domain hairpin. , 2004, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[57]  B. L. de Groot,et al.  Structural Ensembles of Intrinsically Disordered Proteins Depend Strongly on Force Field: A Comparison to Experiment. , 2015, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[58]  Debabani Ganguly,et al.  Atomistic details of the disordered states of KID and pKID. Implications in coupled binding and folding. , 2009, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[59]  Charles L Brooks,et al.  Exploring atomistic details of pH-dependent peptide folding , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[60]  Jianhan Chen,et al.  Modulation of the Disordered Conformational Ensembles of the p53 Transactivation Domain by Cancer-Associated Mutations , 2015, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[61]  E. Stellwagen,et al.  Distribution of Helicity within the Model Peptide Acetyl(AAQAA)3amide , 1994 .

[62]  B. L. de Groot,et al.  Phosphorylation drives a dynamic switch in serine/arginine-rich proteins. , 2013, Structure.

[63]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Optimization of the additive CHARMM all-atom protein force field targeting improved sampling of the backbone φ, ψ and side-chain χ(1) and χ(2) dihedral angles. , 2012, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[64]  C. Brooks,et al.  Balancing solvation and intramolecular interactions: toward a consistent generalized Born force field. , 2006, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[65]  H. Horstmann,et al.  NSP1: A yeast nuclear envelope protein localized at the nuclear pores exerts its essential function by its carboxy-terminal domain , 1990, Cell.

[66]  He Huang,et al.  Folding Simulations for Proteins with Diverse Topologies Are Accessible in Days with a Physics-Based Force Field and Implicit Solvent , 2014, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

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

[68]  A. Barducci,et al.  Accuracy of current all-atom force-fields in modeling protein disordered states. , 2015, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[69]  P E Wright,et al.  Conformational preferences in the Ser133‐phosphorylated and non‐phosphorylated forms of the kinase inducible transactivation domain of CREB , 1998, FEBS letters.

[70]  Shan Zhao,et al.  Variational approach for nonpolar solvation analysis. , 2012, The Journal of chemical physics.

[71]  J Andrew McCammon,et al.  Limitations of atom-centered dielectric functions in implicit solvent models. , 2005, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[72]  Duncan Poole,et al.  Routine Microsecond Molecular Dynamics Simulations with AMBER on GPUs. 1. Generalized Born , 2012, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[73]  Jianpeng Ma,et al.  CHARMM: The biomolecular simulation program , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[74]  G. Hummer,et al.  Are current molecular dynamics force fields too helical? , 2008, Biophysical journal.

[75]  Kuo-Hao Lee,et al.  Multiscale enhanced sampling of intrinsically disordered protein conformations , 2016, J. Comput. Chem..

[76]  Andreas Vitalis,et al.  ABSINTH: A new continuum solvation model for simulations of polypeptides in aqueous solutions , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..