...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of chemical theory and computation: JCTC >Comparison of the Efficiency of the LIE and MM/GBSA Methods to Calculate Ligand-Binding Energies
【24h】

Comparison of the Efficiency of the LIE and MM/GBSA Methods to Calculate Ligand-Binding Energies

机译:LIE和MM / GBSA方法计算配体结合能的效率比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

We have evaluated the efficiency of two popular end-point methods to calculate ligand-binding free energies, LIE (linear interaction energy) and MM/GBSA (molecular mechanics with generalized Born surface-area solvation), i.e. the computational effort needed to obtain estimates of a similar precision. As a test case, we use the binding of seven biotin analogues to avidin. The energy terms used by MM/GBSA and LIE exhibit a similar correlation time (~5 ps), and the equilibration time seems also to be similar, although it varies much between the various ligands. The results show that the LIE method is more effective than MM/GBSA, by a factor of 2-7 for a truncated spherical system with a radius of 26 A and by a factor of 1.0-2.4 for the full avidin tetramer (radius 47 A). The reason for this is the cost for the MM/GBSA entropy calculations, which more than compensates for the extra simulation of the free ligand in LIE. On the other hand, LIE requires that the protein is neutralized, whereas MM/GBSA has no such requirements. Our results indicate that both the truncation and neutralization of the proteins may slow the convergence and emphasize small differences in the calculations, e.g., differences between the four subunits in avidin. Moreover, LIE cannot take advantage of the fact that avidin is a tetramer. For this test case, LIE gives poor results with the standard parametrization, but after optimizing the scaling factor of the van der Waals terms, reasonable binding affinities can be obtained, although MM/GBSA still gives a significantly better predictive index and correlation to the experimental affinities.
机译:我们评估了两种流行的端点方法来计算配体结合自由能的效率(LIE(线性相互作用能)和MM / GBSA(具有广义Born表面积溶剂化的分子力学))的效率,即获得估计所需的计算量具有相似的精度。作为测试案例,我们使用了七个生物素类似物与抗生物素蛋白的结合。 MM / GBSA和LIE使用的能量项显示出相似的相关时间(〜5 ps),并且平衡时间似乎也相似,尽管在各种配体之间差异很大。结果表明,对于半径为26 A的截头球形系统,LIE方法比MM / GBSA更有效,系数为2-7,对于完整的抗生物素四聚体(半径为47 A,半径为1.0-2.4) )。这样做的原因是MM / GBSA熵计算的成本,它远远超过LIE中游离配体的额外模拟。另一方面,LIE要求蛋白质被中和,而MM / GBSA没有这种要求。我们的结果表明,蛋白质的截短和中和都可能减慢收敛,并强调计算中的细微差异,例如,抗生物素蛋白四个亚基之间的差异。而且,LIE不能利用抗生物素蛋白是四聚体的事实。对于此测试用例,LIE的标准参数化效果不佳,但是在优化范德华项的比例因子后,可以获得合理的结合亲和力,尽管MM / GBSA仍然提供了更好的预测指标并与实验相关亲和力。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号