Alchemical prediction of hydration free energies for SAMPL
Hydration free energy calculations have become important tests of force fields. Alchemical free energy calculations based on molecular dynamics simulations provide a rigorous way to calculate these free energies for a particular force field, given sufficient sampling. Here, we report results of alchemical hydration free energy calculations for the set of small molecules comprising the 2011 Statistical Assessment of Modeling of Proteins and Ligands challenge. Our calculations are largely based on the Generalized Amber Force Field with several different charge models, and we achieved RMS errors in the 1.4–2.2 kcal/mol range depending on charge model, marginally higher than what we typically observed in previous studies (Mobley et al. in J Phys Chem B 111(9):2242–2254, 2007, J Chem Theory Comput 5(2):350–358, 2009, J Phys Chem B 115:1329–1332, 2011; Nicholls et al. in J Med Chem 51:769–779, 2008; Klimovich and Mobley in J Comput Aided Mol Design 24(4):307–316, 2010). The test set consists of ethane, biphenyl, and a dibenzyl dioxin, as well as a series of chlorinated derivatives of each. We found that, for this set, using high-quality partial charges from MP2/cc-PVTZ SCRF RESP fits provided marginally improved agreement with experiment over using AM1-BCC partial charges as we have more typically done, in keeping with our recent findings (Mobley et al. in J Phys Chem B 115:1329–1332, 2011). Switching to OPLS Lennard–Jones parameters with AM1-BCC charges also improves agreement with experiment. We also find a number of chemical trends within each molecular series which we can explain, but there are also some surprises, including some that are captured by the calculations and some that are not.
KeywordsHydration Alchemical Free energy Molecular dynamics
DLM and SL acknowledge the Louisiana Board of Regents Research Competitiveness and Research Enhancement Subprograms as well as the Louisiana Optical Network Initiative (supported by the Louisiana Board of Regents Post-Katrina Support Fund Initiative grant LEQSF(2007-12)- ENH-PKSFI-PRS-01), and the National Science Foundation under NSF EPSCoR Cooperative Agreement No. EPS-1003897 with additional support from the Louisiana Board of Regents. DSC acknowledges the help of David A. Case (Rutgers) in developing the solvent reaction field QM calculations, and the support of NIH grants RR12255 and RR05969 (to Dr. Case).
- 21.Li J, Zhu T, Hawkins GD, Winget P, Liotard DA, Truhlar DG (1999, June) Extension of the platform of applicability of SM5.42R universal solvation modelGoogle Scholar
- 25.Wang J, Wang W, Kollman P, Case DA (2006) Automatic atom type and bond type perception in molecular mechanical calculations. J Mol Graph Model 25:247–260Google Scholar
- 29.Dixon R (2011, March) OEAntechamber: assign and generate AMBER atom types and structural parameters. http://SimTk.org—OEAntechamber: assign and generate AMBER atom types and structural parameters
- 35.Frisch MJ, Trucks GW, Schlegel HB, Scuseria GE, Robb MA, Cheeseman JR, Montgomery JA Jr, Vreven T, Kuden KN, Burant JC, Milliam 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, Gomberts R, Stratmann RE, Yazyev O, Austin AJ, Cammi R, Pomelli C, Ochterski JW, 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, 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 B, Chen W, Wong MW, Gonzalez C, Pople JA (2004, September) Gaussian03, c.02 edn. Gaussian, Inc., WallingfordGoogle Scholar
- 37.Mennucci B, Cancès E, Tomasi J (1997) Evaluation of solvent effects in isotropic and anisotropic dielectrics and in ionic solutions with a unified integral equation method: theoretical bases, computational implementation, and numerical applications. J Phys Chem B 101:10506–10517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Kehoe C (2011, July) Personal communication. Discussion of computed hydration free energies via Skype and e-mailGoogle Scholar
- 43.Kehoe CW, Fennell CJ, Dill KA (2011) Testing the semi-explicit assembly solvation model in the SAMPL3 community blind test. J Comput Aided Mol Design. doi: 10.1007/s10822-011-9536-8
- 44.Geballe M (2011, August) Overview of SAMPL hydration challenge. In: SAMPL 2011, StanfordGoogle Scholar
- 46.Guthrie JP (2011, August) Overview of experimental data for hydration. In: SAMPL 2011, StanfordGoogle Scholar