Structure-guided forcefield optimization

Accurate modeling of biomolecular systems requires accurate forcefields. Widely used molecular mechanics (MM) forcefields obtain parameters from experimental data and quantum chemistry calculations on small molecules but do not have a clear way to take advantage of the information in high‐resolution macromolecular structures. In contrast, knowledge‐based methods largely ignore the physical chemistry of interatomic interactions, and instead derive parameters almost exclusively from macromolecular structures. This can involve considerable double counting of the same physical interactions. Here, we describe a method for forcefield improvement that combines the strengths of the two approaches. We use this method to improve the Rosetta all‐atom forcefield, in which the total energy is expressed as the sum of terms representing different physical interactions as in MM forcefields and the parameters are tuned to reproduce the properties of macromolecular structures. To resolve inaccuracies resulting from possible double counting of interactions, we compare distribution functions from low‐energy modeled structures to those from crystal structures. The structural and physical bases of the deviations between the modeled and reference structures are identified and used to guide forcefield improvements. We describe improvements resolving double counting between backbone hydrogen bond interactions and Lennard‐Jones interactions in helices; between sidechain‐backbone hydrogen bonds and the backbone torsion potential; and between the sidechain torsion potential and Lennard‐Jones interactions. Discrepancies between computed and observed distributions are also used to guide the incorporation of an explicit Cα‐hydrogen bond in β sheets. The method can be used generally to integrate different sources of information for forcefield improvement. Proteins 2011; © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  W. Kabsch,et al.  Dictionary of protein secondary structure: Pattern recognition of hydrogen‐bonded and geometrical features , 1983, Biopolymers.

[2]  U. Singh,et al.  A NEW FORCE FIELD FOR MOLECULAR MECHANICAL SIMULATION OF NUCLEIC ACIDS AND PROTEINS , 1984 .

[3]  E. Baker,et al.  Hydrogen bonding in globular proteins. , 1984, Progress in biophysics and molecular biology.

[4]  P. Kollman,et al.  An all atom force field for simulations of proteins and nucleic acids , 1986, Journal of computational chemistry.

[5]  M H Saier,et al.  A new subfamily of bacterial ABC‐type transport systems catalyzing export of drugs and carbohydrates , 1992, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[6]  K. Dill,et al.  Hydrogen bonding in globular proteins. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[7]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  Conformational analysis of the backbone-dependent rotamer preferences of protein sidechains , 1994, Nature Structural Biology.

[8]  E. Milner-White,et al.  Coulombic interactions between partially charged main-chain atoms not hydrogen-bonded to each other influence the conformations of alpha-helices and antiparallel beta-sheet. A new method for analysing the forces between hydrogen bonding groups in proteins includes all the Coulombic interactions. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  E. Milner-White,et al.  Coulombic attractions between partially charged main-chain atoms stabilise the right-handed twist found in most beta-strands. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[11]  M. A. Wouters,et al.  An analysis of side chain interactions and pair correlations within antiparallel β‐sheets: The differences between backbone hydrogen‐bonded and non‐hydrogen‐bonded residue pairs , 1995, Proteins.

[12]  W. L. Jorgensen,et al.  Development and Testing of the OPLS All-Atom Force Field on Conformational Energetics and Properties of Organic Liquids , 1996 .

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

[14]  K. Dill,et al.  An iterative method for extracting energy-like quantities from protein structures. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[16]  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.

[17]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Development and current status of the CHARMM force field for nucleic acids , 2000, Biopolymers.

[18]  Roland L. Dunbrack Rotamer libraries in the 21st century. , 2002, Current opinion in structural biology.

[19]  Paul M. G. Curmi,et al.  Twist and shear in β-sheets and β-ribbons , 2002 .

[20]  Paul M G Curmi,et al.  Twist and shear in beta-sheets and beta-ribbons. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[22]  D. Baker,et al.  An orientation-dependent hydrogen bonding potential improves prediction of specificity and structure for proteins and protein-protein complexes. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

[23]  Viktor Hornak,et al.  Using PC clusters to evaluate the transferability of molecular mechanics force fields for proteins , 2003, J. Comput. Chem..

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

[25]  D. Baker,et al.  Modeling structurally variable regions in homologous proteins with rosetta , 2004, Proteins.

[26]  D. Baker,et al.  Close agreement between the orientation dependence of hydrogen bonds observed in protein structures and quantum mechanical calculations. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  David Baker,et al.  Protein Structure Prediction Using Rosetta , 2004, Numerical Computer Methods, Part D.

[28]  Johannes Söding,et al.  The HHpred interactive server for protein homology detection and structure prediction , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[29]  Themis Lazaridis,et al.  The contribution of C alpha-H...O hydrogen bonds to membrane protein stability depends on the position of the amide. , 2005, Biochemistry.

[30]  Guoli Wang,et al.  PISCES: recent improvements to a PDB sequence culling server , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[31]  O. Schueler‐Furman,et al.  Progress in Modeling of Protein Structures and Interactions , 2005, Science.

[32]  David Baker,et al.  Protein-protein docking with backbone flexibility. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[33]  B. Rost,et al.  Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction—Round VIII , 2009, Proteins.

[34]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  proteins STRUCTURE O FUNCTION O BIOINFORMATICS Improved prediction of protein side-chain conformations with SCWRL4 , 2022 .

[35]  Lauren Wickstrom,et al.  Evaluating the performance of the ff99SB force field based on NMR scalar coupling data. , 2009, Biophysical journal.

[36]  Oliver F. Lange,et al.  Structure prediction for CASP8 with all‐atom refinement using Rosetta , 2009, Proteins.

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

[38]  Joseph A. Bank,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Figs. S1 to S10 Table S1 References Movies S1 to S3 Atomic-level Characterization of the Structural Dynamics of Proteins , 2022 .

[39]  D. Baker,et al.  Alternate states of proteins revealed by detailed energy landscape mapping. , 2011, Journal of molecular biology.