Abstract
A method for modeling segments of proteins that connect regions with defined secondary structure is illustrated with a study of long segments (8–13 amino acids) that include parts of defined secondary structure motifs. Loop structure calculation can be considered a particular case of this more challenging problem. The new algorithm first finds conformations representative of the segment structure tethered to the protein at one terminus only, and subsequently drives the free end of the segment towards its attachment point using a reversed harmonic constrained simulated annealing scheme. An adjustable force constant drives the free terminal towards the attachment point, using the Monte Carlo (MC) technique of scaled collective variables (SCV). Each segment is initially placed in an extended conformation with the N-terminus covalently bound to the protein, and MC simulated annealing is carried out to find the preferred conformations of the segment. The resulting families of conformations prepare the segment for attachment of the C-terminus. In the second stage a hierarchical protocol drives the segment’s C-terminus towards its final position in the protein. The free C-terminus is attached to a dummy residue, identical to the target residue where the segment will be connected. Successive MC simulations are carried out using the SCV method with increasingly larger values of the harmonic force constant that slowly stabilize the free energy surface to ensure the correct orientation of the segment region with the rest of the system. The performance of the method was evaluated for eight segments in the a-subunit of the G protein transducin for which a high-resolution X-ray crystal structure (2.0 Å) is available. The calculation was performed using the all-atom representation and the CHARMM force field with the electrostatic effects of the solvent described implicitly by the new SCP general continuum model. The segments that are most exposed to solvent are found to be represented best with this method.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Dobson, C. M., A. Sali, and M. Karplus. Protein Folding: A perspective from Theory and Experiment. Angewandte Chem. Int. Ed. 37:868–893 (1998).
Sali, A., E. Shakhnovich, and M. Karplus. How does a Protein Fold? Nature 369:248–251 (1994).
Zhou, Y., and M. Karplus. Folding Thermodynamics of a Model Three-Helix-Bundle Protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sei. USA 94:14429–14432 (1997).
Lazaridis, T., and M. Karplus. New View of Protein Folding Reconciled with the Old Through Multiple Unfolding Simulations. Science 278:1928–1931 (1997).
Mohanty, D., R. Elber, D. Thirumalai, D. Beglov, and B. Roux. Kinetics of Peptide Folding: Computer Simulations of DYPFDV and Peptide Variants in Water. J. Mol. Biol. 272:423–442 (1997).
Schaefer, M., C. Bartels, and M. Karplus. Solution Conformations and Thermodynamics of Structured peptides: Molecular Dynamics Simulation with an Implicit Solvation Model. J. Mol. Biol. 284:835–848 (1998).
Hassan, S. A., F. Guarnieri, and E. L. Mehler. A new approach for folding peptides: conformational memories with a new implicit solvent model. Biophys. J. 78:A1978 (2000).
Hassan, S. A., F. Guarnieri, and E. Mehler. A Screened Coulomb Potential Based Implicit Solvent Model: Parametrization and Prediction of Structures of Small Peptides. Biophys. J. 76:A198 (1999).
Hassan, S.A., and E. L. Mehler. A General Screening Coulomb Potential based Implicit Solvent Model: Calculation of Secondary Structure of Small Peptides. Int. J. Quant. Chem. 83:193 (2001).
Godzik, A., A. Kolinski, and J. Skolnick. Lattice Representation of Globular Proteins: How Good are They? J. Comp. Chem. 14:1194–1202 (1993).
Sikorski, A., A. Kolinski, and J. Skolnick. Computer Simulations of De Novo Designed Helical Proteins. Biophysical J. 75:92–105 (1998).
Lu, Y., and J. S. Valentine. Engineering Metal-binding Sites in Proteins. Curr. Opin. Struct Biol 7:495–500 (1997).
Wu, S. J., and D. H. Dean. Functional Significance of Loops in the Receptor Binding Domain of Bacilus Thuringiensis CryIIIA δ-endotoxin. J. Mol. Biol. 255:628–640 (1996).
Jones, S., P. van Heyningen, H. M. Berman, and J. M. Thornton. Protein-DNA Interactions: A Structural Analysis. J. Mol. Biol. 287:877–896 (1999).
Perona, J. J., and C. S. Craik. Structural Basis of Substrate Specificity. Protein Sei. 4:337–360 (1995).
Meirovitch, H., and T. F. Hendrickson. Backbone Entropy of Loops as a Measure of Their Flexibility: Application to a Ras Protein Simulated by Molecular Dynamics. PROTEINS: Structure, Function, and Genetics 29:127–140 (1997).
Getzoff, E. D., H. M. Geysen, S. J. Rodda, H. Alexander, J. A. Tainer, and R. A. Lerner. Mechanisms of Antibody Binding to a Protein. Science 235:1191–1196 (1987).
Bockaert, J., and J. P. Pin. Molecular tinkering of G protein-coupled receptors: an evolutionary success. Embo J 18:1723–1729 (1999).
Visiers, I., J. A. Ballesteros, and H. Weinstein. Computational methods for the construction and analysis of three dimensional representations of GPCR structures and mechanisms, in Methods Enzymol (I. Iyengar and J. Hildebrandt, eds.). Academic Press, New York (2001).
Go, N., and H. A. Scheraga. Ring Closure and Local Conformational Deformations of Chain Molecules. Macromolecules 3:178–187 (1970).
Bruccoleri, R. E., and M. Karplus. Prediction of the Folding of Short Polypeptide Segments by Uniform Conformaional Sampling. Biopolymers 26:137–168 (1987).
Wedemeyer, W. J., and H. A. Scheraga. Exact Analytical Loop Closure in Proteins Using Polynomial Equations. J. Comp. Chem. 20:819–844 (1999).
Fiser, A., R. Kinh Gian Do, and A. Sali. Modeling of Loops in Protein Structures. Protein Science 9:1753–1773 (2000).
Li, W., Z. Liu, and L. Lai. Protein Loops on Structurally Similar Scaffolds: Database and Conformational Analysis. Biopolymers 49:481–495 (1999).
Chotia, C, A. M. Lesk, M. Levitt, A. G. Amit, R. A. Mariuzza, S. E. V. Phillips, and R. J. Poljak. The Predicted Structure of Immunoglobulin d1.3 and its Comparison with the Crystal Structure. Science 233:755–758 (1986).
van Vlijmen, H. W. T., and M. Karplus. PDB-based Protein Loop Prediction: Prameters for Selection and Methods for Optimization. J. Mol. Biol. 267:975–1001 (1997).
Higo, J., V. Collura, and J. Gamier. Development of an Extended Simulated Annealing Method: Application to the Modeling of Complementary Determining Regions of Immunoglobulins. Biopolymers 32:33–43 (1992).
Carlacci, L., and S. W. Englander. Loop Problem in Proteins: Developments on Monte Carlo Simulated Annealing Approach. J. Comp. Chem. 17:1002–1012 (1996).
Baysal, C, and H. Meirovitch. Efficiency of Simulated Annealing for Peptides with Increasing Geometrical Restrictions. J. Comp. Chem. 20:1659–1670 (1999).
Nakajima, N., J. Higo, A. Kidera, and e. al. Free Energy Landscapes of Ppetides by Enhanced Conformational Sampling. J. Mol. Biol. 296:197–216 (2000).
Kidera, A. Enhanced Conformational Sampling in Monte Carlo Simulations of Proteins: Application to a Constrained Peptide. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sei. USA 92:9886–9889 (1995). 3
Still, W. C., A. Tempczyk, R. C. Hawley, and T. Hendrickson. Semianalytical Treatment of Solvation for Molecular Mechanics and Dynamics. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 112:6127–6129 (1990).
Hassan, S. A., F. Guarnieri, and E. L. Mehler. A General Treatment of Solent Effects Based on Screened Coulomb potentials. J. Phys. Chem. 104:6478 (2000).
Vasmatzis, L., R. Brower, and C. Delisi. Biopolymers 34:1669–1680 (1994).
Zheng, Q., R. Rosenfeld, C. Delisi, and D. J. Kyle. Protein Sei. 3:493–506 (1994).
Rapp, C. S., and R. A. Friesner. Prediction of Loop Geometries Using a Generalized Born Model of Soilvation Effects. PROTEINS: Structure, Function, and Genetics 35:173–183 (1999).
Hassan, S. A., F. Guarnieri, and E. L. Mehler. Characterization of Hydrogen Bonding in a Continuum Solbent Model. J. Phys. Chem. 104:6490 (2000).
Ma, B., and R. Nussinov. Explicit and Implicit Water Simulations of a β-Hairpin Peptide. PROTEINS: Structure, Function, and Genetics 37:73–87 (1999).
Martin, A., M. MacArthur, and J. Thornton. Assesment of Comparative Modeling in CASP2. Proteins Suppl. 1:14–28 (1997).
Rufino, S. D., L. E. Donate, C. L. H. J., and T. L. Blundell. Predicting the Conformational Class of Short and Medium Size Loops Connecting Regular Secondary Structures: Application to Comparative Modeling. J. Mol. Biol. 267:352–367 (1997).
Brooks, B. R., R. E. Bruccoleri, B. D. Olafson, D. J. States, S. Swaminathan, and M. Karplus. CHARMM: A Program for Macromolecular Energy, Minimization, and Dynamics Calculations. J. Comp. Chem. 4:187–217 (1983).
MacKerell, A. D. J., D. Bashford, M. Bellott, R. J. Dunbrack, J. Evanseck, M. Field, S. Fischer, J. Gao, H. Guo, S. Ha, and e. al. All-atom Empirical Potential for Molecular Modeling and Dynamics Studies of Proteins. J. Phys. Chem. B 102:3586–3616 (1998).
Hansmann, U. H. E., and Y. Okamoto. New Monte Carlo Algorithms for Protein Folding. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 9:177–183 (1999).
Noguti, T., and N. Go. Efficient Monte Carlo Method for Simulation of Fluctuating Conformations of Native Proteins. Biopolymers 24:527–546 (1985).
Guarnieri, F., and H. Weinstein. Conformational Memories and the Exploration of Biologically Relevant Peptide Conformations: An Illustration for the Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118:5580–5589 (1996).
Kirkpatrick, S., C. Gelatt, D., Jr., and M. P. Vecchi. Optimization by Simulated Annealing. Science 220:671–680 (1983).
Pellegrini, M., N. Gronbech-Jensen, and S. Doniach. Simulations of the Thermodynamic Properties of Short Polyalanine Peptide Using Potentials of Mean Force. Physica A 239:244–254 (1997).
Kinoshita, M., Y. Okamoto, and F. Hirata. First-principle Determination of Peptide Peptide Conformations in Solvents: Combination of Monte Carlo Simulated Annealing and RISM Theory. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 120:1855–1863 (1998).
Okamoto, Y., M. Masuya, M. Nabeshima, and T. Nakazawa. β-sheet Formation in BPTI(16–36) by Monte Carlo Simulated Annealing. Chem. Phys. Lett. 299:17–24 (1999).
Guarnieri, F., and M. Mezei. Simulated Annealing of Chemical Potential: A General Procedure for Locating Bound Waters. Application to the Study of the Differential Hydration Propensities of the Major and Minor Grooves of DNA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118:8493–8494 (1996).
Mehler, E. L., and E. Eichele. Electrostatic Effects in Water-Accessible Regions of Proteins. Biochemistry 23:3887–3891 (1984).
Gabb, H. A., C. Prevost, G. Bertucat, C. H. Robert, and R. Lavery. Collective-Variable Monte Carlo Simulation of DNA. J. Comp. Chem. 18:2001–2011 (1997).
Hurley, J. B. J. Bioenerg. Biomem. 24:219–226 (1992).
Pfister, C., and e. al. Cell. Sig. 5:235–241 (1993).
Lodish, H., A. Berk, S. L. Zipursky, P. Matsudaira, D. Baltimore, and J. E. Darnell. Molecular Cell Biology, New York (2000).
Stryer, L. Biochemistry. Freeman, New York (1995).
Lambright, D. G., J. Sondek, A. Bohm, N. P. Skiba, H. E. Hamm, and P. B. Sigler. The 2.0 A Crystal Structure of a Heterotrimeric G Protein. Nature 379:311–319 (1996).
Lambright, D. G., J. P. Noel, H. E. Hamm, and P. B. Siegler. Nature 369:621–628 (1994).
Sondek, J., A. Böhm, D. G. Lambright, H. E. Hamm, and P. B. Siegler. Nature 379:369–374 (1996).
Sullivan, K. A., and e. al. Nature 330: 778–760 (1987).
Simonds, W. F., P. K. Goldsmith, J. Codina, C. G. Unson, and A. M. Spiegel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sei. USA 86:7809–7813 (1989).
Noel, J. P., H. E. Hamm, and P. B. Siegler. Nature 366:654–663 (1993).
Guarnieri, F., and S. R. Wilson. Conformational Memories and a Simulated Annealing Program that Learns: Application to LTB4. J. Comp. Chem. 16:648–653 (1995).
Böttcher, C. J. F. Theory of Dielectric Polarization. Elseiver, Amsterdam (1993)
Jackson, J. D. Classical Electrodynamics. Wiley (1975).
Born, M. Volumen und Hydrationswärme der Ionen. Z. Phys. 1:45–48 (1920).
Hoijtink, G. J., E. de Boer, P. H. van der Meer, and W. P. Weijland. Reduction Potentials of Various Aromatic Hydrocarbons and their Univalent Anions. Rec. Trav. Chim. 75:487–503 (1956).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hassan, S.A., Mehler, E.L., Weinstein, H. (2002). Structure Calculation of Protein Segments Connecting Domains with Defined Secondary Structure: A Simulated Annealing Monte Carlo Combined with Biased Scaled Collective Variables Technique. In: Schlick, T., Gan, H.H. (eds) Computational Methods for Macromolecules: Challenges and Applications. Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering, vol 24. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-56080-4_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-56080-4_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43756-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-56080-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive