» Articles » PMID: 24803863

Multiscale Free Energy Simulations: An Efficient Method for Connecting Classical MD Simulations to QM or QM/MM Free Energies Using Non-Boltzmann Bennett Reweighting Schemes

Overview
Specialties Biochemistry
Chemistry
Date 2014 May 8
PMID 24803863
Citations 62
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

THE RELIABILITY OF FREE ENERGY SIMULATIONS (FES) IS LIMITED BY TWO FACTORS: (a) the need for correct sampling and (b) the accuracy of the computational method employed. Classical methods (e.g., force fields) are typically used for FES and present a myriad of challenges, with parametrization being a principle one. On the other hand, parameter-free quantum mechanical (QM) methods tend to be too computationally expensive for adequate sampling. One widely used approach is a combination of methods, where the free energy difference between the two end states is computed by, e.g., molecular mechanics (MM), and the end states are corrected by more accurate methods, such as QM or hybrid QM/MM techniques. Here we report two new approaches that significantly improve the aforementioned scheme; with a focus on how to compute corrections between, e.g., the MM and the more accurate QM calculations. First, a molecular dynamics trajectory that properly samples relevant conformational degrees of freedom is generated. Next, potential energies of each trajectory frame are generated with a QM or QM/MM Hamiltonian. Free energy differences are then calculated based on the QM or QM/MM energies using either a non-Boltzmann Bennett approach (QM-NBB) or non-Boltzmann free energy perturbation (NB-FEP). Both approaches are applied to calculate relative and absolute solvation free energies in explicit and implicit solvent environments. Solvation free energy differences (relative and absolute) between ethane and methanol in explicit solvent are used as the initial test case for QM-NBB. Next, implicit solvent methods are employed in conjunction with both QM-NBB and NB-FEP to compute absolute solvation free energies for 21 compounds. These compounds range from small molecules such as ethane and methanol to fairly large, flexible solutes, such as triacetyl glycerol. Several technical aspects were investigated. Ultimately some best practices are suggested for improving methods that seek to connect MM to QM (or QM/MM) levels of theory in FES.

Citing Articles

CHARMM at 45: Enhancements in Accessibility, Functionality, and Speed.

Hwang W, Austin S, Blondel A, Boittier E, Boresch S, Buck M J Phys Chem B. 2024; 128(41):9976-10042.

PMID: 39303207 PMC: 11492285. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcb.4c04100.


Insights and Challenges in Correcting Force Field Based Solvation Free Energies Using a Neural Network Potential.

Karwounopoulos J, Wu Z, Tkaczyk S, Wang S, Baskerville A, Ranasinghe K J Phys Chem B. 2024; 128(28):6693-6703.

PMID: 38976601 PMC: 11264272. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcb.4c01417.


Software Infrastructure for Next-Generation QM/MM-ΔMLP Force Fields.

Giese T, Zeng J, Lerew L, McCarthy E, Tao Y, Ekesan S J Phys Chem B. 2024; 128(26):6257-6271.

PMID: 38905451 PMC: 11414325. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcb.4c01466.


Convergence criteria for single-step free-energy calculations: the relation between the Π bias measure and the sample variance.

Wang M, Mei Y, Ryde U Chem Sci. 2024; 15(23):8786-8799.

PMID: 38873060 PMC: 11168088. DOI: 10.1039/d4sc00140k.


Perspectives on Computational Enzyme Modeling: From Mechanisms to Design and Drug Development.

Nam K, Shao Y, Major D, Wolf-Watz M ACS Omega. 2024; 9(7):7393-7412.

PMID: 38405524 PMC: 10883025. DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.3c09084.


References
1.
Fox S, Pittock C, Tautermann C, Fox T, Christ C, Malcolm N . Free energies of binding from large-scale first-principles quantum mechanical calculations: application to ligand hydration energies. J Phys Chem B. 2013; 117(32):9478-85. DOI: 10.1021/jp404518r. View

2.
Lonsdale R, Hoyle S, Grey D, Ridder L, Mulholland A . Determinants of reactivity and selectivity in soluble epoxide hydrolase from quantum mechanics/molecular mechanics modeling. Biochemistry. 2012; 51(8):1774-86. PMC: 3290109. DOI: 10.1021/bi201722j. View

3.
Riccardi D, Schaefer P, Yang Y, Yu H, Ghosh N, Prat-Resina X . Development of effective quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) methods for complex biological processes. J Phys Chem B. 2006; 110(13):6458-69. DOI: 10.1021/jp056361o. View

4.
Li H, Yang W . Sampling enhancement for the quantum mechanical potential based molecular dynamics simulations: a general algorithm and its extension for free energy calculation on rugged energy surface. J Chem Phys. 2007; 126(11):114104. DOI: 10.1063/1.2710790. View

5.
Mobley D, Liu S, Cerutti D, Swope W, Rice J . Alchemical prediction of hydration free energies for SAMPL. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2011; 26(5):551-62. PMC: 3583515. DOI: 10.1007/s10822-011-9528-8. View