Refinement of Homology-based Protein Structures by Molecular Dynamics Simulation Techniques

Overview

Journal Protein Sci

Specialty Biochemistry

Date 2003 Dec 24

PMID 14691236

Citations 71

Authors

Hao Fan

Alan E Mark

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The use of classical molecular dynamics simulations, performed in explicit water, for the refinement of structural models of proteins generated ab initio or based on homology has been investigated. The study involved a test set of 15 proteins that were previously used by Baker and coworkers to assess the efficiency of the ROSETTA method for ab initio protein structure prediction. For each protein, four models generated using the ROSETTA procedure were simulated for periods of between 5 and 400 nsec in explicit solvent, under identical conditions. In addition, the experimentally determined structure and the experimentally derived structure in which the side chains of all residues had been deleted and then regenerated using the WHATIF program were simulated and used as controls. A significant improvement in the deviation of the model structures from the experimentally determined structures was observed in several cases. In addition, it was found that in certain cases in which the experimental structure deviated rapidly from the initial structure in the simulations, indicating internal strain, the structures were more stable after regenerating the side-chain positions. Overall, the results indicate that molecular dynamics simulations on a tens to hundreds of nanoseconds time scale are useful for the refinement of homology or ab initio models of small to medium-size proteins.

Citing Articles

Comparison, Analysis, and Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Structures of a Viral Protein Modeled Using Various Computational Tools.

Mani H, Chang C, Hsu H, Yang C, Yen J, Liou J Bioengineering (Basel). 2023; 10(9).

PMID: 37760106 PMC: 10525864. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering10091004.

Solvent Accessibility Promotes Rotamer Errors during Protein Modeling with Major Side-Chain Prediction Programs.

Hameduh T, Mokry M, Miller A, Heger Z, Haddad Y J Chem Inf Model. 2023; 63(14):4405-4422.

PMID: 37410883 PMC: 10369486. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.3c00134.

Isolation and Characterization of the Growth Hormone (ag-GH) cDNA and Three-Dimensional Modeling of This Hormone in Comparison with the Human Hormone (hGH).

Lima E, Freire R, Suzuki M, Oliveira J, Yosidaki V, Peroni C Biomolecules. 2023; 13(1).

PMID: 36671542 PMC: 9855374. DOI: 10.3390/biom13010158.

Enhancement of Methane Catalysis Rates in OB3b.

Samanta D, Govil T, Saxena P, Gadhamshetty V, Krumholz L, Salem D Biomolecules. 2022; 12(4).

PMID: 35454149 PMC: 9024549. DOI: 10.3390/biom12040560.

Fermentation optimization of cellulase production from sugarcane bagasse by and molecular modeling study of cellulase.

Pramanik S, Mahmud S, Paul G, Jabin T, Naher K, Uddin M Curr Res Microb Sci. 2021; 2:100013.

PMID: 34841306 PMC: 8610336. DOI: 10.1016/j.crmicr.2020.100013.

References

Lee M, Baker D, Kollman P . 2.1 and 1.8 A average C(alpha) RMSD structure predictions on two small proteins, HP-36 and s15. J Am Chem Soc. 2001; 123(6):1040-6. DOI: 10.1021/ja003150i. View

Bycroft M, Hubbard T, Proctor M, Freund S, Murzin A . The solution structure of the S1 RNA binding domain: a member of an ancient nucleic acid-binding fold. Cell. 1997; 88(2):235-42. DOI: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81844-9. View

Dill K, Chan H . From Levinthal to pathways to funnels. Nat Struct Biol. 1997; 4(1):10-9. DOI: 10.1038/nsb0197-10. View

Liu J, Lynch P, Chien C, Montelione G, KRUG R, Berman H . Crystal structure of the unique RNA-binding domain of the influenza virus NS1 protein. Nat Struct Biol. 1997; 4(11):896-9. DOI: 10.1038/nsb1197-896. View

Jeon Y, Negishi T, Shirakawa M, Yamazaki T, Fujita N, Ishihama A . Solution structure of the activator contact domain of the RNA polymerase alpha subunit. Science. 1995; 270(5241):1495-7. DOI: 10.1126/science.270.5241.1495. View

Standley D, Eyrich V, An Y, Pincus D, Gunn J, Friesner R . Protein structure prediction using a combination of sequence-based alignment, constrained energy minimization, and structural alignment. Proteins. 2002; Suppl 5:133-9. DOI: 10.1002/prot.10005. View

Bycroft M, Grunert S, Murzin A, Proctor M, St Johnston D . NMR solution structure of a dsRNA binding domain from Drosophila staufen protein reveals homology to the N-terminal domain of ribosomal protein S5. EMBO J. 1995; 14(14):3563-71. PMC: 394424. DOI: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1995.tb07362.x. View

Vriend G . WHAT IF: a molecular modeling and drug design program. J Mol Graph. 1990; 8(1):52-6, 29. DOI: 10.1016/0263-7855(90)80070-v. View

Schonbrun J, Wedemeyer W, Baker D . Protein structure prediction in 2002. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2002; 12(3):348-54. DOI: 10.1016/s0959-440x(02)00336-6. View

10.

Baker D, Sali A . Protein structure prediction and structural genomics. Science. 2001; 294(5540):93-6. DOI: 10.1126/science.1065659. View

11.

Fogh R, Ottleben G, Ruterjans H, Schnarr M, Boelens R, Kaptein R . Solution structure of the LexA repressor DNA binding domain determined by 1H NMR spectroscopy. EMBO J. 1994; 13(17):3936-44. PMC: 395313. DOI: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1994.tb06709.x. View

12.

Sanchez R, Sali A . Large-scale protein structure modeling of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998; 95(23):13597-602. PMC: 24864. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.95.23.13597. View

13.

Sunnerhagen M, Nilges M, Otting G, Carey J . Solution structure of the DNA-binding domain and model for the complex of multifunctional hexameric arginine repressor with DNA. Nat Struct Biol. 1997; 4(10):819-26. DOI: 10.1038/nsb1097-819. View

14.

Eberstadt M, Huang B, Chen Z, Meadows R, Ng S, Zheng L . NMR structure and mutagenesis of the FADD (Mort1) death-effector domain. Nature. 1998; 392(6679):941-5. DOI: 10.1038/31972. View

15.

Guex N, Diemand A, Peitsch M . Protein modelling for all. Trends Biochem Sci. 1999; 24(9):364-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0968-0004(99)01427-9. View

16.

Groft C, Uljon S, Wang R, Werner M . Structural homology between the Rap30 DNA-binding domain and linker histone H5: implications for preinitiation complex assembly. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998; 95(16):9117-22. PMC: 21301. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.95.16.9117. View

17.

Sharma A, Hanai R, Mondragon A . Crystal structure of the amino-terminal fragment of vaccinia virus DNA topoisomerase I at 1.6 A resolution. Structure. 1994; 2(8):767-77. DOI: 10.1016/s0969-2126(94)00077-8. View

18.

Feenstra K, Hess B, Berendsen H . Improving efficiency of large time-scale molecular dynamics simulations of hydrogen-rich systems. J Comput Chem. 2022; 20(8):786-798. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-987X(199906)20:8<786::AID-JCC5>3.0.CO;2-B. View

19.

Viguera A, Blanco F, Serrano L . The order of secondary structure elements does not determine the structure of a protein but does affect its folding kinetics. J Mol Biol. 1995; 247(4):670-81. DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.1994.0171. View

20.

Musco G, Kharrat A, Stier G, Fraternali F, Gibson T, Nilges M . The solution structure of the first KH domain of FMR1, the protein responsible for the fragile X syndrome. Nat Struct Biol. 1997; 4(9):712-6. DOI: 10.1038/nsb0997-712. View