Discrimination of the native from misfolded protein models with an energy function including implicit solvation. |
| |
Authors: | T Lazaridis M Karplus |
| |
Affiliation: | Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Harvard University, 12 Oxford St, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA. |
| |
Abstract: | An essential requirement for theoretical protein structure prediction is an energy function that can discriminate the native from non-native protein conformations. To date most of the energy functions used for this purpose have been extracted from a statistical analysis of the protein structure database, without explicit reference to the physical interactions responsible for protein stability. The use of the statistical functions has been supported by the widespread belief that they are superior for such discrimination to physics-based energy functions. An effective energy function which combined the CHARMM vacuum potential with a Gaussian model for the solvation free energy is tested for its ability to discriminate the native structure of a protein from misfolded conformations; the results are compared with those obtained with the vacuum CHARMM potential. The test is performed on several sets of misfolded structures prepared by others, including sets of about 650 good decoys for six proteins, as well as on misfolded structures of chymotrypsin inhibitor 2. The vacuum CHARMM potential is successful in most cases when energy minimized conformations are considered, but fails when applied to structures relaxed by molecular dynamics. With the effective energy function the native state is always more stable than grossly misfolded conformations both in energy minimized and molecular dynamics-relaxed structures. The present results suggest that molecular mechanics (physics-based) energy functions, complemented by a simple model for the solvation free energy, should be tested for use in the inverse folding problem, and supports their use in studies of the effective energy surface of proteins in solution. Moreover, the study suggests that the belief in the superiority of statistical functions for these purposes may be ill founded. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|