Rapid prediction of solvation free energy. 3. Application to the SAMPL2 challenge
- 189 Downloads
The SAMPL2 hydration free energy blind prediction challenge consisted of a data set of 41 molecules divided into three subsets: explanatory, obscure and investigatory, where experimental hydration free energies were given for the explanatory, withheld for the obscure, and not known for the investigatory molecules. We employed two solvation models for this challenge, a linear interaction energy (LIE) model based on explicit-water molecular dynamics simulations, and the first-shell hydration (FiSH) continuum model previously calibrated to mimic LIE data. On the 23 compounds from the obscure (blind) dataset, the prospectively submitted LIE and FiSH models provided predictions highly correlated with experimental hydration free energy data, with mean-unsigned-errors of 1.69 and 1.71 kcal/mol, respectively. We investigated several parameters that may affect the performance of these models, namely, the solute flexibility for the LIE explicit-solvent model, the solute partial charging method, and the incorporation of the difference in intramolecular energy between gas and solution phases for both models. We extended this analysis to the various chemical classes that can be formed within the SAMPL2 dataset. Our results strengthen previous findings on the excellent accuracy and transferability of the LIE explicit-solvent approach to predict transfer free energies across a wide spectrum of functional classes. Further, the current results on the SAMPL2 test dataset provide additional support for the FiSH continuum model as a fast yet accurate alternative to the LIE explicit-solvent model. Overall, both the LIE explicit-solvent model and the FiSH continuum solvation model show considerable improvement on the SAMPL2 data set over our previous continuum electrostatics-dispersion solvation model used in the SAMPL1 blind challenge.
KeywordsHydration Continuum solvation LIE Continuum van der Waals First hydration shell Prospective study
This is National Research Council of Canada publication number 00000.
- 5.Mancera RL (2007) Molecular modeling of hydration in drug design. Curr Opin Drug Discov Dev 10(3):275Google Scholar
- 10.Marten B, Kim K, Cortis C, Friesner RA, Murphy RB, Ringnalda MN, Sitkoff D, Honig B (1996) New model for calculation of solvation free energies: correction of self-consistent reaction field continuum dielectric theory for short-range hydrogen-bonding effects. J Phys Chem 100(28):11775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Reddi MR, Erion MD (2001) Free energy calculations in rational drug design. Kluwer/Plenum Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 17.Chen J, Brooks Iii CL, Khandogin J (2008) Recent advances in implicit solvent-based methods for biomolecular simulations. Curr Opin Struct Biol 18(2):140Google Scholar
- 33.Sulea T, Corbeil CR, Purisima EO (2010) Rapid prediction of solvation free energy. 1. An extensive test of linear interation Energy (LIE) for continuum model development. J Chem Theory Comput (in press)Google Scholar
- 34.Corbeil CR, Sulea T, Purisima EO (2010) Rapid Prediction of Solvation Free Energy. 2. The First-Shell Hydration (FiSH) Continuum Model. J Chem Theory Comput (in press)Google Scholar
- 35.Geballe MT, Skillman AG, Nicholls A, Guthrie JP, Taylor PJ (2010) The SAMPL2 blind prediction challenge: introduction and overview. J Comput Aided Mol Des. doi: 10.1007/s10822-010-9350-8
- 39.(2005) QuACPAC. 1.1.1. Sante Fe, NM: OpenEye Scientific Software, IncGoogle Scholar
- 41.Case DA, Darden TA, Cheatham TE III, CLS WangJ, Duke RE, Luo R, Merz KM, Pearlman DA, Crowley M, Walker RC, Zhang W, Wang B, Hayik S, Roitberg A, Seabra G, Wong KF, Paesani F, Wu X, Brozell S, Tsui V, Gohlke H, Yang L, Tan C, Mongan J, Hornak V, Cui G, Beroza P, Mathews DH, Schafmeister C, Ross WS, Kollman PA (2006) AMBER. 9. University of California, San Francisco, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar