Testing the semi-explicit assembly model of aqueous solvation in the SAMPL4 challenge

Here, we test a method, called semi-explicit assembly (SEA), that computes the solvation free energies of molecules in water in the SAMPL4 blind test challenge. SEA was developed with the intention of being as accurate as explicit-solvent models, but much faster to compute. It is accurate because it uses pre-simulations of simple spheres in explicit solvent to obtain structural and thermodynamic quantities, and it is fast because it parses solute free energies into regionally additive quantities. SAMPL4 provided us the opportunity to make new tests of SEA. Our tests here lead us to the following conclusions: (1) The newest version, called Field-SEA, which gives improved predictions for highly charged ions, is shown here to perform as well as the earlier versions (dipolar and quadrupolar SEA) on this broad blind SAMPL4 test set. (2) We find that both the past and present SEA models give solvation free energies that are as accurate as TIP3P. (3) Using a new approach for force field parameter optimization, we developed improved hydroxyl parameters that ensure consistency with neat-solvent dielectric constants, and found that they led to improved solvation free energies for hydroxyl-containing compounds in SAMPL4. We also learned that these hydroxyl parameters are not just fixing solvent exposed oxygens in a general sense, and therefore do not improve predictions for carbonyl or carboxylic-acid groups. Other such functional groups will need their own independent optimizations for potential improvements. Overall, these tests in SAMPL4 indicate that SEA is an accurate, general and fast new approach to computing solvation free energies.

[1]  Ken A Dill,et al.  Physical Modeling of Aqueous Solvation , 2011, Journal of statistical physics.

[2]  Charles W. Kehoe,et al.  Modeling aqueous solvation with semi-explicit assembly , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  Charles W. Kehoe,et al.  Testing the semi-explicit assembly solvation model in the SAMPL3 community blind test , 2012, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[4]  Araz Jakalian,et al.  Fast, efficient generation of high‐quality atomic charges. AM1‐BCC model: I. Method , 2000 .

[5]  Ken A Dill,et al.  Simple liquid models with corrected dielectric constants. , 2012, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[6]  Hans W. Horn,et al.  Accounting for polarization cost when using fixed charge force fields. I. Method for computing energy. , 2010, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[7]  W. L. Jorgensen,et al.  Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water , 1983 .

[8]  Christopher I. Bayly,et al.  Fast, efficient generation of high‐quality atomic charges. AM1‐BCC model: II. Parameterization and validation , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

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

[10]  D. van der Spoel,et al.  GROMACS: A message-passing parallel molecular dynamics implementation , 1995 .

[11]  Carsten Kutzner,et al.  GROMACS 4:  Algorithms for Highly Efficient, Load-Balanced, and Scalable Molecular Simulation. , 2008, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[12]  J. Guthrie,et al.  A blind challenge for computational solvation free energies: introduction and overview. , 2009, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[13]  Hans W. Horn,et al.  Accounting for polarization cost when using fixed charge force fields. II. Method and application for computing effect of polarization cost on free energy of hydration. , 2010, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[14]  David L. Mobley,et al.  A Fixed-Charge Model for Alcohol Polarization in the Condensed Phase, and Its Role in Small Molecule Hydration , 2014, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[15]  Wim F Vranken,et al.  ACPYPE - AnteChamber PYthon Parser interfacE , 2012, BMC Research Notes.

[16]  Junmei Wang,et al.  Development and testing of a general amber force field , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[17]  J. Peter Guthrie,et al.  SAMPL4, a blind challenge for computational solvation free energies: the compounds considered , 2014, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[18]  David L Mobley,et al.  Predicting small-molecule solvation free energies: an informal blind test for computational chemistry. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[19]  Charles W. Kehoe,et al.  Oil/water transfer is partly driven by molecular shape, not just size. , 2010, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[20]  Anthony Nicholls,et al.  The SAMPL2 blind prediction challenge: introduction and overview , 2010, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[21]  Christopher J. Fennell,et al.  Field-SEA: A Model for Computing the Solvation Free Energies of Nonpolar, Polar, and Charged Solutes in Water , 2013, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[22]  P. Kollman,et al.  Automatic atom type and bond type perception in molecular mechanical calculations. , 2006, Journal of molecular graphics & modelling.

[23]  David L. Mobley,et al.  Blind prediction of solvation free energies from the SAMPL4 challenge , 2014, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[24]  A. Geoffrey Skillman,et al.  SAMPL3: blinded prediction of host–guest binding affinities, hydration free energies, and trypsin inhibitors , 2012, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.