Abstract
Monte-Carlo conformational searches with four kinds of force fields (AMBER94, MM3*, MMFFs, and OPLS-2005) were performed on glycylglycine (GlyGly), deprotonated glycylglycine (GlyGly−), glycylglycine chloride anion complex (GlyGly · Cl−), glycylglycine sodium cation complex (GlyGly · Na+) and glycylglycine dihydrate [GlyGly · (H2O)2]. Combined with Hartree-Fock (HF) and second-order Møller-Plesset (MP2) optimizations, conformations within an energy of 20 kJ mol−1 were predicted. After MP2 calculations, the geometries and relative energies of the predicted structures were the same regardless of the force field used. Therefore, the performance of different force fields reflects mainly the conformational search process. For GlyGly, there was practically no difference among the four force fields. Due to the complex hydrogen bonding network when involving water, the total number of resulting conformers for GlyGly · (H2O)2 increased drastically. Moreover, the MMFFs force field fared best in finding the global minimum compared to the remaining three force fields. In describing hydrogen bonded and inter-molecular complexes, we recommend application of the MMFFs and AMBER94 force fields. Furthermore, the MMFFs and OPLS-2005 force fields have a good description of electrostatic interactions. This work will contribute to helping the reader make an optimal choice of force field, taking into account the latter’s strengths and limitations.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Seybold PG, May M, Bagal UA (1987) J Chem Educ 64:575
Engelsen SB, Koca J, Braccini I, Hervé Du Penhoat C, Pérez S (1995) Carbohyd Res 276:1
Imberty A, Perez S (2000) Chem Rev 100:4567
Jockusch RA, Kroemer RT, Talbot FO, Snoek LC, Carcabal P, Simons JP, Havenith M, Bakker JM, Compagnon I, Meijer G, von Helden G (2004) J Am Chem Soc 126:5709
Carcabal P, Hünig I, Gamblin DP, Liu B, Jockusch RA, Kroemer RT, Snoek LC, Fairbanks AJ, Davis BG, Simons JP (2006) J Am Chem Soc 128:1976
Carcabal P, Jockusch RA, Hünig I, Snoek LC, Kroemer RT, Davis BG, Gamblin DP, Compagnon I, Oomens J, Simons JP (2005) J Am Chem Soc 127:11414
Li Y, Liu X, Chen D, Wei Z, Liu BJ (2013) Mol Model 19:3619
Carcabal P, Patsias T, Hünig I, Liu B, Kaposta C, Snoek LC, Gamblin DP, Davis BG, Simons JP (2006) Phys Chem Chem Phys 8:129
Chen D, Yao Y, Wei Z, Zhang S, Tu P, Liu B, Dong M (2013) Comput Theor Chem 1010:45
McCammon JA (1984) Protein dynamics. Rep Prog Phys 47:1
Hendrickson JB (1961) J Am Chem Soc 83:4537
Wertz DH, Allinger NL (1974) Tetrahedron 30:1579
Allinger NL (1977) J Am Chem Soc 89:8127
Allinger NL, Yuh YH, Lii JH (1989) J Am Chem Soc 111:8551
Cornell WD, Cieplak P, Bayly CI, Gould IR, Merz KM Jr, Ferguson DM, Spellmeyer DC, Fox T, Caldwell JW, Kollman PA (1995) J Am Chem Soc 117:5179
Jorgensen WL, Tirado-Rives J (1988) J Am Chem Soc 110:1657
Thomas AH (1996) J Comput Chem 17:490
Thomas AH (1999) J Comput Chem 20:730
Dang LX, Pettitt BM, Rossky PJ (1992) J Chem Phys 96:4046
Stortz CA, Johnson GP, French AD, Csonka GI (2009) Carbohydr Res 344:2217
Alexander D, Mackerell J (2004) J Comput Chem 25:1584
Hemmingsen L, Madsen DE, Esbensen AL, Olsen L, Engelsen SB (2004) Carbohydr Res 339:937
Paton RS, Goodman JM (2009) J Chem Inf Model 49:944
Kaminsky J, Jensen F (2007) J Chem Theory Comput 3:1774
Liu HN, Dasmahapatra A, Doerksen R (2011) J Chem Phys Lett 511:405
Beachy MD, Chasman D, Murphy RB, Halgren TA, Friesner RA (1997) J Am Chem Soc 119:5908
Fariborz M, Nigel GJR, Waynel CG, Rob L, Mark L, Craig C, George C, Thomas H, Still WC (1990) J Comput Chem 11:440
Frisch MJ, Trucks GW, Schlegel HB, Scuseria GE, Robb MA, Cheeseman JR, Montgomery Jr. JA, Vreven T, Kudin KN, Burant JC, Millam JM, Iyengar SS, Tomasi J, Barone V, Mennucci B, Cossi M, Scalmani G, Rega N, Petersson GA, Nakatsuji H, Hada M, Ehara M, Toyota K, Fukuda R, Hasegawa J, Ishida M, Nakajima T, Honda Y, Kitao O, Nakai H, Klene M, Li X, Knox JE, Hratchian HP, Cross JB, Bakken V, Adamo C, Jaramillo J, Gomperts R, Stratmann RE, Yazyev O, Austin AJ, Cammi R, Pomelli C, Ochterski J, Ayala PY, Morokuma K, Voth GA, Salvador P, Dannenberg JJ, Zakrzewski VG, Dapprich S, Daniels AD, Strain MC, Farkas O, Malick DK, Rabuck AD, Raghavachari K, Foresman JB, Ortiz JV, Cui Q, Baboul AG, Clifford S, Cioslowski J, Stefanov BB, Liu G, Liashenko A, Piskorz P, Komaromi I, Martin RL, Fox DJ, Keith T, Al-Laham MA, Peng CY, Nanayakkara A, Challacombe M, Gill PMW, Johnson BG, Chen W, Wong MW, Gonzalez C, Pople JA (2004) GAUSSIAN 03 (Revision C.02), Gaussian, Wallingford, CT
McDonald DQ, Still WC (1992) Tetrahedron Lett 33:7743
Halgren TA (1996) J Comput Chem 17:520
Jorgensen WL, Maxwell DS, Tirado-Rives J (1996) J Am Chem Soc 118:11225
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China Contract No. 21373077, NSFC-Henan Talent Training Fund Contract No. U1304310, and the Natural Science Foundation of Henan Educational Committee under Contract No. 12B430001.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dong, C., Yong-Zhi, L., Zhi-Chao, W. et al. Performance of four different force fields for simulations of dipeptide conformations: GlyGly, GlyGly−, GlyGly · Cl−, GlyGly · Na+ and GlyGly · (H2O)2 . J Mol Model 20, 2279 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00894-014-2279-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00894-014-2279-4