Molecular Dynamics Simulations

Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1215)

Abstract

Molecular dynamics has evolved from a niche method mainly applicable to model systems into a cornerstone in molecular biology. It provides us with a powerful toolbox that enables us to follow and understand structure and dynamics with extreme detail—literally on scales where individual atoms can be tracked. However, with great power comes great responsibility: Simulations will not magically provide valid results, but it requires a skilled researcher. This chapter introduces you to this, and makes you aware of some potential pitfalls. We focus on the two basic and most used methods; optimizing a structure with energy minimization and simulating motion with molecular dynamics. The statistical mechanics theory is covered briefly as well as limitations, for instance the lack of quantum effects and short timescales. As a practical example, we show each step of a simulation of a small protein, including examples of hardware and software, how to obtain a starting structure, immersing it in water, and choosing good simulation parameters. You will learn how to analyze simulations in terms of structure, fluctuations, geometrical features, and how to create ray-traced movies for presentations. With modern GPU acceleration, a desktop can perform μs-scale simulations of small proteins in a day—only 15 years ago this took months on the largest supercomputer in the world. As a final exercise, we show you how to set up, perform, and interpret such a folding simulation.

Key words

Molecular dynamics Simulation Force field Protein Solvent Energy minimization Position restraints Equilibration Trajectory analysis Secondary structure 

References

  1. 1.
    Alder BJ, Wainwright TE (1957) Phase transition for a hard sphere system. J Chem Phys 27:1208–1209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rahman A, Stillinger FH (1971) Molecular dynamics study of liquid water. J Chem Phys 55:3336–3359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McCammon JA, Gelin BR, Karplus M (1977) Dynamics of folded proteins. Nature 267:585–590PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Allen MP, Tildesley DJ (1989) Computer simulation of liquids. Clarendon, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frenkel D, Smit B (2001) Understanding molecular simulation. Academic, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaminski GA, Friesner RA, Tirado-Rives J, Jorgensen WL (2001) Evaluation and reparametrization of the OPLS-AA force field for proteins via comparison with accurate quantum chemical calculations on peptides. J Phys Chem B 105:6474–6487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    MacKerell AD Jr et al (1998) All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics Studies of proteins. J Phys Chem B 102:3586–3616PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Oostenbrink C, Villa A, Mark AE, van Gunsteren WF (2004) A biomolecular force field based on the free enthalpy of hydration and solvation: the GROMOS force-field parameter sets 53A5 and 53A6. J Comput Chem 25:1656–1676PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang J, Cieplak P, Kollman PA (2000) How well does a restrained electrostatic potential (RESP) model perform in calculating conformational energies of organic and biological molecules? J Comput Chem 21:1049–1074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chandler D (1987) Introduction to modern statistical mechanics. Oxford University Press, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Essman U, Perera L, Berkowitz M, Darden T, Lee H, Pedersen LG (1995) A smooth particle mesh Ewald method. J Chem Phys 103:8577–8593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ryckaert JP, Ciccotti G, Berendsen HJC (1977) Numerical integration of the cartesian equations of motion of a system with constraints; molecular dynamics of n-alkanes. J Comp Phys 23:327–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hess B, Bekker H, Berendsen HJC, Fraaije JGEM (1998) LINCS: a linear constraint solver for molecular simulation. J Comput Chem 18:1463–1472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lindahl E, Hess B, van der Spoel D (2001) GROMACS 3.0: A package for molecular simulation and trajectory analysis. J Mol Model 7:306–317Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Case DA et al (2005) The Amber biomolecular simulation programs. J Comput Chem 26:1668–1688PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brooks BR et al (1983) CHARMM: a program for macromolecular energy, minmimization, and dynamics calculations. J Comput Chem 4:187–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Phillips JC et al (2005) Scalable molecular dynamics with NAMD. J Comput Chem 26:1781–1802PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    DeLano WL (2002) The PyMOL molecular graphics system. DeLano Scientific, San Carlos, CA, http://www.PyMOL.org Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ascenzi P et al (2003) The bovine basic pancreatic trypsin inhibitor (kunitz inhibitor): a milestone protein. Curr Protein Pept Sci 4:231–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wlodawer A et al (1987) Structure of form III crystals of bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor. J Mol Biol 198:469–480PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Frauenfelder H, Petsko GA, Tsernoglou D (1979) Temperature-dependent X-ray diffraction as a probe of protein structural dynamics. Nature 280:558–563PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jorgensen WL, Chandrasekhar J, Madura JD, Impey RW, Klein ML (1983) Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water. J Chem Phys 79:926–935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Berendsen HJC, Postma JPM, van Gunsteren WF (1981) Interaction models for water in relation to protein hydration. In: Pullman B (ed) Intermolecular forces. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Germany, pp 331–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bussi G, Donadio D, Parrinello M (2007) Canonical sampling through velocity-rescaling. J Chem Phys 126:014101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kabsch W, Sanders C (1983) Dictionary of protein secondary structure: pattern recognition of hydrogen-bonded and geometrical features. Biopolymers 22:2577–2637PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jorgensen WL, Madura JD (1985) Temperature and size dependence for monte carlo simulations of TIP4P water. Mol Phys 56:1381–1392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mahoney MW, Jorgensen WL (2000) A five-site model for liquid water and the reproduction of the density anomaly by rigid, nonpolarizable potential fuynctions. J Chem Phys 112:8910–8922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nosé S (1984) A molecular dynamics method for simulations in the canonical ensemble. Mol Phys 52:255–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Parrinello M, Rahman A (1981) Polymorphic transitions in single crystals: a new molecular dynamics method. J Appl Phys 52:7182–7190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ensign DL, Kasson P, Pande V (2007) Heterogeneity even at the speed limit of folding: large-scale molecular dynamics study of a fast-folding variant of the villin headpiece. J Mol Biol 374:806–816PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Voelz VA, Bowman GR, Beauchamp K, Pande VS (2010) Molecular simulation of ab initio protein folding for a millisecond folder NTL9 (1-39). J Am Chem Soc 132:1526–1528PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biochemistry and BiophysicsStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations