Developments in the US-SOMO bead modeling suite: new features in the direct residue-to-bead method, improved grid routines, and influence of accessible surface area screening.

The US-SOMO suite provides a flexible interface for accurately computing solution parameters from 3D structures of biomacromolecules through bead-modeling approaches. We present an extended analysis of the influence of accessible surface area screening, overlap reduction routines, and approximations for non-coded residues and missing atoms on the computed parameters for models built by the residue-to-bead direct correspondence and the cubic grid methods. Importantly, by taking the theoretical hydration into account at the atomic level, the performance of the grid-type models becomes comparable or exceeds that of the corresponding hydrated residue-to-bead models.

[1]  J. García de la Torre,et al.  Intrinsic viscosity and rotational diffusion of bead models for rigid macromolecules and bioparticles , 1998, European Biophysics Journal.

[2]  C. Ruggiero,et al.  BEAMS (BEAds Modelling System): a set of computer programs for the generation, the visualization and the computation of the hydrodynamic and conformational properties of bead models of proteins , 1997, European Biophysics Journal.

[3]  David J. Scott,et al.  UltraScan - A Comprehensive Data Analysis Software Package for Analytical Ultracentrifugation Experiments , 2005 .

[4]  G Vriend,et al.  WHAT IF: a molecular modeling and drug design program. , 1990, Journal of molecular graphics.

[5]  J. García de la Torre,et al.  Calculation of hydrodynamic properties of globular proteins from their atomic-level structure. , 2000, Biophysical journal.

[6]  J. Sumner,et al.  THE MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF CRYSTALLINE CATALASE. , 1938, Science.

[7]  D. McRorie,et al.  Self-Associating Systems in the Analytical Ultracentrifuge , 2004 .

[8]  O. Byron,et al.  Construction of hydrodynamic bead models from high-resolution X-ray crystallographic or nuclear magnetic resonance data. , 1997, Biophysical journal.

[9]  Olwyn Byron,et al.  SOMO (SOlution MOdeler) differences between X-Ray- and NMR-derived bead models suggest a role for side chain flexibility in protein hydrodynamics. , 2005, Structure.

[10]  P. Ferranti,et al.  Identification of N‐linked glycoproteins in human milk by hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry , 2008, Proteomics.

[11]  J. García de la Torre,et al.  Hydrodynamic properties of rigid particles: comparison of different modeling and computational procedures. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[12]  José García de la Torre,et al.  SIMUFLEX: Algorithms and Tools for Simulation of the Conformation and Dynamics of Flexible Molecules and Nanoparticles in Dilute Solution. , 2009, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[13]  J. T. Yang,et al.  Physicochemical characterization of citrate synthase and its subunits. , 1970, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[14]  K. Gekko,et al.  Compressibility of globular proteins in water at 25.degree.C , 1979 .

[15]  J. G. Torre,et al.  Effects from bead size and hydrodynamic interactions on the translational and rotational coefficients of macromolecular bead models , 1983 .

[16]  J. García de la Torre,et al.  Hydrodynamic properties of complex, rigid, biological macromolecules: theory and applications , 1981, Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics.

[17]  F. Castellino,et al.  Examination of the dissociation of multichain proteins in guanidine hydrochloride by membrane osmometry. , 1968, Biochemistry.

[18]  O. Byron Hydrodynamic bead modeling of biological macromolecules. , 2000, Methods in enzymology.

[19]  H. Durchschlag,et al.  Calculation of hydrodynamic parameters of proteins from crystallographic data using multibody approaches , 1997 .