Advertisement

Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design

, Volume 26, Issue 5, pp 551–562 | Cite as

Alchemical prediction of hydration free energies for SAMPL

  • David L. Mobley
  • Shaui Liu
  • David S. Cerutti
  • William C. Swope
  • Julia E. Rice
Perspectives

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Hydration Alchemical Free energy Molecular dynamics 

Notes

Acknowledgments

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).

Supplementary material

10822_2011_9528_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (181 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 181 KB)
10822_2011_9528_MOESM2_ESM.gz (4 mb)
Supplementary material 2 (GZ 4089 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Mobley DL, Dumont É, Chodera JD, Dill K (2007) Comparison of charge models for fixed-charge force fields: small-molecule hydration free energies in explicit solvent. J Phys Chem B 111(9):2242–2254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nicholls A, Mobley DL, Guthrie JP, Chodera JD, Bayly CI, Cooper MD, Pande VS (2008) Predicting small-molecule solvation free energies: an informal blind test for computational chemistry. J Med Chem 51:769–779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mobley DL, Bayly CI, Cooper MD, Shirts MR, Dill KA (2009) Small molecule hydration free energies in explicit solvent: an extensive test of fixed-charge atomistic simulations. J Chem Theory Comput 5(2):350–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Klimovich P, Mobley DL (2010) Predicting hydration free energies using all-atom molecular dynamics simulations and multiple starting conformations. J Comput Aided Mol Design 24(4):307–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mobley DL, Dumont É, Chodera JD, Dill KA (2011) Comparison of charge models for fixed-charge force fields: small molecule hydration free energies in explicit solvent. J Phys Chem B 115:1329–1332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Villa A, Mark AE (2002) Calculation of the free energy of solvation for neutral analogs of amino acid side chains. J Comput Chem 23(5):548–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    MacCallum JL, Tieleman DP (2003) Calculation of the water-cyclohexane transfer free energies of neutral amino acid side-chain analogs using the OPLS all-atom force field. J Comput Chem 24:1930–1935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shirts MR, Pitera JW, Swope WC, Pande VS (2003) Extremely precise free energy calculations of amino acid side chain analogs: comparison of common molecular mechanics force fields for proteins. J Chem Phys 119(11):5740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Deng Y, Roux B (2004) Hydration of amino acid side chains: nonpolar and electrostatic contributions calculated from staged molecular dynamics free energy simulations with explicit water molecules. J Phys Chem B 108:16567–16576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shirts MR, Pande VS (2005) Solvation free energies of amino acid side chain analogs for common molecular mechanics water models. J Chem Phys 122:134508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hess B, van der Vegt NFA (2006) Hydration thermodynamic properties of amino acid analogues: a systematic comparison of biomolecular force fields and water models. J Phys Chem B 110:17616–17626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mobley DL, Bayly CI, Cooper MD, Dill KA, Dill KA (2009) Predictions of hydration free energies from all-atom molecular dynamics simulations. J Phys Chem B 113:4533–4537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shivakumar D, Deng Y, Roux B (2009) Computations of absolute solvation free energies of small molecules using explicit and implicit solvent model. J Chem Theory Comput 5(4):919–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shivakumar D, Williams J, Wu Y, Damm W, Shelley J, Sherman W (2010) Prediction of absolute solvation free energies using molecular dynamics free energy perturbation and the OPLS force field. J Chem Theory Comput 6:1509–1519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Knight JL, Brooks CL III (2011) Surveying implicit solvent models for estimating small molecule absolute hydration free energies. J Comput Chem 32:2909–2923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Deng Y, Roux B (2006) Calculation of standard binding free energies: aromatic molecules in the T4 lysozyme L99A mutant. J Chem Theory Comput 2:1255–1273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mobley DL, Graves AP, Chodera JD, McReynolds A, Shoichet BK, Dill KA (2007) Predicting absolute ligand binding free energies to a simple model site. J Mol Biol 371:1118–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Boyce SE, Mobley DL, Rocklin GJ, Graves AP, Dill KA, Shoichet BK (2009) Predicting ligand binding affinity with alchemical free energy methods in a polar model binding site. J Mol Biol 394:747–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gallicchio E, Lapelosa M, Levy RM (2010) Binding energy distribution analysis method (BEDAM) for estimation of Protein−Ligand binding affinities. J Chem Theory Comput 6:2961–2977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chodera JD, Mobley DL, Shirts MR, Dixon RW, Branson K, Pande VS (2011) Alchemical free energy methods for drug discovery: progress and challenges. Curr Opin Struct Biol 21:150–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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
  22. 22.
    Guthrie JP (2009) A blind challenge for computational solvation free energies: introduction and overview. J Phys Chem B 113(14):4501–4507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Geballe MT, Skillman AG, Nicholls A, Guthrie JP, Taylor PJ (2010) The SAMPL2 blind prediction challenge: introduction and overview. J Comput Aided Mol Design 24:259–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wang J, Wolf R, Caldwell J, Kollman P, Case D (2004) Development and testing of a general amber force field. J Comput Chem 25(9):1157–1174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 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
  26. 26.
    Jakalian A, Bush B, Jack D, Bayly CI (2000) Fast, efficient generation of high-quality atomic charges. AM1-BCC model: I. Method. J Comput Chem 21(2):132–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jakalian A, Jack D, Bayly CI (2002) Fast, efficient generation of high-quality atomic charges. AM1-BCC model: II. Parameterization and validation. J Comput Chem 23(16):1623–1641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bayly CI, Cieplak P, Cornell WD, Kollman P (1993) A well-behaved electrostatic potential based method using charge restraints for deriving atomic charges: the RESP model. J Phys Chem 97(40):10269–10280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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
  30. 30.
    Jorgensen WL, Maxwell DS, Tirado-Rives J (1996) Development and testing of the OPLS all-atom force field on conformational energetics and properties of organic liquids. J Am Chem Soc 118:11225–11236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shirts MR, Chodera JD (2008) Statistically optimal analysis of samples from multiple equilibrium states. J Chem Phys 129:124105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2978177 See code at: http://simtk.org/home/pymbar Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jorgensen WL, Chandrasekhar J, Madura JD, Impey RW, Klein ML (1983) Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water. J Chem Phys 79(2):926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shirts MR, Mobley DL, Chodera JD, Pande VS (2007) Accurate and efficient corrections for missing dispersion interactions in molecular simulations. J Phys Chem B 111:13052–13063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hess B, Bekker H, Berendsen HJC, Fraaije JGEM (1997) LINCS: A linear constraint solver for molecular simulations. J Comput Chem 18:1463–1472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 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
  36. 36.
    Cancès E, Mennucci B, Tomasi J (1997) A new integral equation formalism for the polarizable continuum model: theoretical background and applications to isotropic and anisotropic dielectrics. J Chem Phys 107(8):3032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 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
  38. 38.
    Horn HW, Swope WC, Pitera JW, Madura JD, Dick TJ, Hura GL, Head-Gordon T (2004) Development of an improved four-site water model for biomolecular simulations: TIP4P-Ew. J Chem Phys 120(20):9665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Karamertzanis PG, Raiteri P, Galindo A (2010) The use of anisotropic potentials in modeling water and free energies of hydration. J Chem Theory Comput 6:1590–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kemp DD, Gordon MS (2008) An interpretation of the enhancement of the water dipole moment due to the presence of other water molecules. J Phys Chem A 112:4885–4894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wang J, Tingjun H (2011) Application of molecular dynamics simulations in molecular property prediction I: density and heat of vaporization. J Chem Theory Comput 7:2151–2165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kehoe C (2011, July) Personal communication. Discussion of computed hydration free energies via Skype and e-mailGoogle Scholar
  43. 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. 44.
    Geballe M (2011, August) Overview of SAMPL hydration challenge. In: SAMPL 2011, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Case DA, Cheatham TE, Darden T, Gohlke H, Luo R, Merz KM, Onufriev A, Simmerling C, Wang B, Woods RJ (2005) The amber biomolecular simulation programs. J Comput Chem 26:1668–1688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Guthrie JP (2011, August) Overview of experimental data for hydration. In: SAMPL 2011, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Cerutti DS, Baker NA, McCammon JA (2007) Solvent reaction field potential inside an uncharged globular protein: a bridge between implicit and explicit solvent models?. J Chem Phys 127(15):155101CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • David L. Mobley
    • 1
  • Shaui Liu
    • 1
  • David S. Cerutti
    • 2
  • William C. Swope
    • 3
  • Julia E. Rice
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryUniversity of New OrleansNew OrleansUSA
  2. 2.Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, BioMaPS InstituteRutgers, The State University of New JerseyPiscatawayUSA
  3. 3.IBM Almaden Research CenterSan JoseUSA

Personalised recommendations