IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0121114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Molecular Dynamics Force Fields in the Essential Subspace

Author

Listed:
  • Fernando Martín-García
  • Elena Papaleo
  • Paulino Gomez-Puertas
  • Wouter Boomsma
  • Kresten Lindorff-Larsen

Abstract

The continued development and utility of molecular dynamics simulations requires improvements in both the physical models used (force fields) and in our ability to sample the Boltzmann distribution of these models. Recent developments in both areas have made available multi-microsecond simulations of two proteins, ubiquitin and Protein G, using a number of different force fields. Although these force fields mostly share a common mathematical form, they differ in their parameters and in the philosophy by which these were derived, and previous analyses showed varying levels of agreement with experimental NMR data. To complement the comparison to experiments, we have performed a structural analysis of and comparison between these simulations, thereby providing insight into the relationship between force-field parameterization, the resulting ensemble of conformations and the agreement with experiments. In particular, our results show that, at a coarse level, many of the motional properties are preserved across several, though not all, force fields. At a finer level of detail, however, there are distinct differences in both the structure and dynamics of the two proteins, which can, together with comparison with experimental data, help to select force fields for simulations of proteins. A noteworthy observation is that force fields that have been reparameterized and improved to provide a more accurate energetic description of the balance between helical and coil structures are difficult to distinguish from their “unbalanced” counterparts in these simulations. This observation implies that simulations of stable, folded proteins, even those reaching 10 microseconds in length, may provide relatively little information that can be used to modify torsion parameters to achieve an accurate balance between different secondary structural elements.

Suggested Citation

  • Fernando Martín-García & Elena Papaleo & Paulino Gomez-Puertas & Wouter Boomsma & Kresten Lindorff-Larsen, 2015. "Comparing Molecular Dynamics Force Fields in the Essential Subspace," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0121114
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0121114
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0121114&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0121114?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jan H Peters & Bert L de Groot, 2012. "Ubiquitin Dynamics in Complexes Reveal Molecular Recognition Mechanisms Beyond Induced Fit and Conformational Selection," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-10, October.
    2. Kresten Lindorff-Larsen & Jesper Ferkinghoff-Borg, 2009. "Similarity Measures for Protein Ensembles," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(1), pages 1-13, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sean L Seyler & Avishek Kumar & M F Thorpe & Oliver Beckstein, 2015. "Path Similarity Analysis: A Method for Quantifying Macromolecular Pathways," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-37, October.
    2. Matteo Tiberti & Elena Papaleo & Tone Bengtsen & Wouter Boomsma & Kresten Lindorff-Larsen, 2015. "ENCORE: Software for Quantitative Ensemble Comparison," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, October.
    3. Akio Kitao, 2022. "Principal Component Analysis and Related Methods for Investigating the Dynamics of Biological Macromolecules," J, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Wouter Boomsma & Jesper Ferkinghoff-Borg & Kresten Lindorff-Larsen, 2014. "Combining Experiments and Simulations Using the Maximum Entropy Principle," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-9, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0121114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.