ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
My Activity
CONTENT TYPES

Figure 1Loading Img

Routine Access to Millisecond Time Scale Events with Accelerated Molecular Dynamics

View Author Information
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, Urey Hall, La Jolla, California 92093-0365, United States
San Diego Supercomputer Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093-0505, United States
§ Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, United States
Cite this: J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2012, 8, 9, 2997–3002
Publication Date (Web):July 27, 2012
https://doi.org/10.1021/ct300284c
Copyright © 2012 American Chemical Society
  • Open Access

Article Views

11916

Altmetric

-

Citations

394
LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS
PDF (2 MB)
Supporting Info (4)»

Abstract

In this work, we critically assess the ability of the all-atom enhanced sampling method accelerated molecular dynamics (aMD) to investigate conformational changes in proteins that typically occur on the millisecond time scale. We combine aMD with the inherent power of graphics processor units (GPUs) and apply the implementation to the bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor (BPTI). A 500 ns aMD simulation is compared to a previous millisecond unbiased brute force MD simulation carried out on BPTI, showing that the same conformational space is sampled by both approaches. To our knowledge, this represents the first implementation of aMD on GPUs and also the longest aMD simulation of a biomolecule run to date. Our implementation is available to the community in the latest release of the Amber software suite (v12), providing routine access to millisecond events sampled from dynamics simulations using off the shelf hardware.

Introduction

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Conventional molecular dynamics allows one to access time scales on the order of tens to hundreds of nanoseconds; however, many biological processes of interest occur on longer time scales of up to milliseconds or more. (1-6) Efforts to explore these long time scales have led to the development of several advanced sampling techniques such as conformational flooding, (7, 8) hyperdynamics, (9, 10) metadynamics, (11-13) and the adaptive biasing force method. (13-15) Inspired by Voter, accelerated molecular dynamics (aMD) is an additional enhanced conformational sampling method that provides access to events beyond those obtainable with conventional molecular dynamics (cMD). (9) Here, we emphasize one of the great advantages of aMD, which is that no prior knowledge of the potential energy landscape needs to be known and, consequently, no reaction coordinate needs to be defined prior to running the simulation.
In addition to advances in algorithms to achieve dynamics on longer time scales, recent efforts by D. E. Shaw Research have focused on building a specialized computer, Anton, with the sole purpose of simulating protein dynamics. (16) With this great engineering achievement, simulation time scales have been pushed into the range of hundreds of microseconds to milliseconds using unbiased brute force cMD. (17, 18) While time on an Anton machine has been generously granted to the scientific community, access is still limited, and many researchers are stuck waiting in queues on crowded super computers or local clusters. Recently, the advancement of computational science on conventional graphic processing units (GPU) has allowed researchers efficient and inexpensive access to microseconds of simulation time on just a single desktop computer. (18-21) By combining the advanced sampling method of aMD and the inherent power of the GPU, we present the synthesis of a tool that allows researchers access to inexpensive efficient exploration of long time scale events. Here, we point out that a time scale cannot be directly determined from an aMD simulation, but we can correlate events which occur on long time scales from either experimental results or long conventional molecular dynamics simulations. However, future work using the conformational space explored by aMD as a seed for other methods, namely, Markov models, (22) would allow one access to time dependent properties, such as NMR relaxation data, which was shown can be computed directly from the Anton millisecond trajectory. (23)
In its original form, the aMD method modifies the potential energy landscape by raising energy minima that lie below a defined threshold level, while leaving those areas lying above the threshold unmodified. As a result, barriers separating adjacent energy basins are effectively reduced, providing the simulation access to conformational space that cannot be easily accessed in a cMD simulation. Historically, aMD was first implemented by Hamelberg et al. within the framework of the sander module in the AMBER 7 package and used to study several small peptide and protein systems. (24, 25) Since the original implementation, there have been several notable variations of the aMD method, (26-28) but no official implementation has been released. However, Wang et al. recently ported the aMD method to NAMD, (29) and following this approach, we have ported aMD to the three main MD engines included in Amber 12: (30) the CPU versions sander and pmemd and the GPU version pmemd.cuda. The performance enhancements for cMD on GPUs obtained with pmemd.cuda alone are remarkable and can be found on the Amber Web site (ambermd.org) and in the following publications. (21, 31) For this work, we have used our implementation of aMD in the pmemd.cuda MD engine and will refer to it simply as aMD.
Bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor (BPTI) is a small protein with 58 residues that has been extensively studied experimentally, being the first subject of NMR experiments to characterize individual hydration water molecules in proteins, (32) and also the first protein to be simulated with molecular dynamics. (33) D. E. Shaw Research reported in 2010 a remarkable 1.03 ms MD simulation of BPTI in explicit water. (34) Using our aMD implementation in pmemd.cuda, we have performed a 500 ns aMD simulation of BPTI in explicit water, maintaining the same conditions as the simulation on Anton. In order to mimic the force field used in the Anton simulation, we modified the ff99SB-ILDN force field removing the modifications to leucine, aspartic acid, and asparagine, which we refer to as ff99SB-I.
Using the 1.03 ms simulation of BPTI provided by D. E. Shaw Research throughout our analysis, we have shown that both methodologies sample the same conformational space. Additionally, we performed a 500 ns cMD simulation to use as a measure of the amount of sampling attainable by conventional MD with the same computational effort. To the best of our knowledge, our aMD implementation is the first to support GPU acceleration, and the work presented here represents the longest single aMD simulation of a biomolecule run to date. Both Amber simulations were completed in two weeks on individual desktop computers containing single $500 GTX580 GPUs. Details of the simulations can be found in the Supporting Information.

Results

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Structural Analysis

In the millisecond Anton simulation, five long-lived structural states were identified that persisted for 6–26 μs with deviations of up to 3.5 Å from the crystal structure, 5PTI. (34, 35) Using these same five structures and the crystal structure as references, we calculated RMSD values (heavy backbone atoms) along our 500 ns aMD simulation, shown in Figure 1. We color each point according to which of the five structures it is closest to in terms of RMSD, allowing one to see the transitions from the different structural states. RMSD results show we sample structures from all five states but spend the majority of the time near the blue state and the least amount of time close to the green state. The RMSD with respect to the X-ray structure shows that the protein moves away from the crystal structure 49 ns into the simulation and achieves a maximum RMSD of 2.7 Å before coming back to within 0.89 Å, emphasizing that the system is sampling states both far from and near to the crystal structure, as was seen in the long 1 ms cMD simulation. The largest deviation from the crystal structure is 3.29 Å, which occurs at 195 ns.

Figure 1

Figure 1. RMSD of the aMD trajectory from the crystal structure. Red, blue, green, purple, and black colors correspond to the kinetic clusters identified in the 1 ms cMD BPTI simulation. (34) For each frame, we identify what cluster we are closest to and color it accordingly. Only a handful of transitions to the green state were observed, and we highlight them with diamond markers.

To characterize the conformational states explored in more detail, principal component analysis was carried out on the 1 ms simulation using Bio3D. (36) Figure 2a displays the two-dimensional representation of the structural data set as a projection of the Boltzmann reweighted distribution onto the subspace defined by the first and second principal component vectors (PC1 and PC2) built from the C-α atoms spanning residues 4 to 54. In this analysis, PC1 and PC2 describe 35% and 21%, respectively, of the total variance of the motions in the simulation (Movies S1 and S2). The five long-lived structures and the crystal structure were then projected into this space. The 500 ns cMD control simulation and the 500 ns aMD simulation were also projected into the subspace defined by the 1 ms simulation (Figure 2b,c). It is clear from Figure 2b that the 500 ns cMD control simulation does not explore the amount of conformational space that the aMD simulation does and remains trapped in the basin localized around the crystal structure.

Figure 2

Figure 2. The free energy principal component projection of (a) 1 ms simulation, (b) 500 ns cMD ff99SB-I simulation, and (c) 500 ns aMD ff99SB-I simulation onto (PC1, PC2) defined by the 1 ms simulation. The long-lived structures are projected onto the free energy surface and are labeled as red, blue, green, purple, and black triangles. The crystal structure, 5PTI, is demarked by the red diamond (see also Movies S1 and S2).

The aMD simulation (Figure 2c) exhibits a rather broad pathway from the crystallographic basin (0.0, −5.0) to the region (−10.0, −5.0) which is not present in the 1 ms simulation (Figure 2a). Flattening of the potential energy surface in the two basins could promote transitions over a large barrier separating them, but the 1 ms simulation may also not have sampled these regions frequently enough to explore this pathway. The 1 ms simulation spent the majority of the time in the basin around (2.5, 1.0) which is ultimately responsible for the observed populations in the 1 ms cMD simulation differing substantially from experiment. In the Shaw et al. paper, this is attributed to inaccuracies in the underlying force field, and indeed we also spend a considerable amount of our 500 ns simulation in the same basin, as one would expect using the same force field. In future work, to determine accurately the conformational changes mapped out by the PC space using an aMD simulation, one could use the technique employed by Wereszczynski and McCammon. (37)

NMR Observables

The recent analysis carried out by Xue et al. examined in detail the χ1, χ2, and χ3 dihedral angles associated with the disulfide bond formed between cysteine 14 and cysteine 38 during the course of the 1 ms cMD BPTI simulation. (23) In this manuscript, a similar analysis was performed. Figure 3c shows the Boltzmann reweighted χ1(C14) vs χ1(C38) free energy surface explored throughout the 500 ns aMD simulation. In contrast, the 500 ns control cMD simulation never visits the minima explored by the aMD simulation and remains trapped in a state close to the crystal structure (Figure 3b), as was seen in the PC projections. Comparing the free energy surface explored by the 1 ms cMD simulation (Figure 3a) to that of our aMD simulation, it is clear the aMD simulation explores the same states as the unbiased simulation.

Figure 3

Figure 3. The χ1–C14 vs χ1–C38 dihedral angle free energy surfaces of (a) 1 ms cMD simulation, (b) 500 ns cMD ff99SB-I simulation, and (c) 500 ns aMD ff99SB-I simulation. The long-lived stable states are plotted onto the free energy surface and are labeled as red, blue, green, purple, and black triangles. The crystal structure, 5PTI, is demarked by the red diamond. The major state M is labeled along with the minor states mC14 and mC38.

The χ2 and χ3 dihedral angles associated with Cys14 and Cys38 can be used to further describe isomerization configurations of the disulfide bond: the major state M, which consists of three substates (M1, M2, and M3), and the two minor or excited states mC38 and mC14. (23) A detailed description of these states is included in the Supporting Information (Figure S1), which can be compared to those analyzed by Xue et al. for the 1 ms cMD simulation. In contrast with the 1 ms cMD simulation, which predicts the excited state mC14 to be the most populated, we find the major state M to be the most populated in the aMD simulations after Boltzmann reweighting our distribution (Table S1); however, to fully converge the population distribution would require a longer simulation than was used in this study.
Structures from states M1, mC38, and mC14 were extracted from the trajectory by using the lowest energy structure in the M1 state as a reference to select an ensemble of structures with similar energy from each of the three basins for performing the chemical shift analysis. Using the SHIFTX2 software package, (38) chemical shift differences were computed between the ensembles representing the different substates (Table 1). A RMS deviation of 2.1 ppm was obtained from the ff99SB-I aMD simulation (computed for the shifts with known sign) compared to 2.7 ppm computed from the 1 ms cMD simulation. In general, good agreement is achieved from the aMD simulation compared to values calculated from the 1 ms cMD simulation and the experimental values. (39, 40) We would like to highlight the fact that one cannot compute these differences using only 500 ns of cMD since the simulation never explores the excited states during the course of such a short simulation (Figure 3b).
Table 1. 15N Chemical Shift Differences between the Conformational States M1(M), mC14, and mC38
  ΔδM1,mC14 (ppm) ΔδM1,mC38 (ppm)
res. exptl (37) 500 ns cMD 1 ms cMD23 500 ns aMD exptl (32) 500 ns cMD 1 ms cMD (23) 500 ns aMD
C14 3.6   1.8 5.0 –0.4   0.6 0.6
K15 4.7   –1.4 1.6 –0.5   –1.5 0.1
C38 |0.8|   –2.2 –0.6 –1.7   –1.9 –3.7
R39 |1.2|   –0.5 0.2 –3.7   –2.6 –2.5

Water Occupancy

Examination of the water occupancy throughout the aMD simulation correctly identifies the four long-lived waters in agreement with experimental results. (41) The longest-lived water, W122, is identified by the 1 ms cMD simulation as having a lifetime of 14 μs. During the course of the aMD simulation, several exchange events are captured at this location and an interesting “revolving door” mechanism is identified, whereby the disulfide bond rotates around and pushes the water out of the pocket (highlighted in Movie S3). The longest binding events of water molecules at this site occur when in the crystallographic basin of the aMD simulation, consistent with the 1 ms cMD simulation.

Conclusion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This work shows that, using conventional off the shelf GPU hardware combined with an enhanced sampling algorithm, events taking place on the millisecond time scale can be effectively sampled with dynamics simulations orders of magnitude shorter (2000×) than those time scales. The implementation is validated in this work by comparison with a long unbiased cMD simulation and experimental data. Structurally, we show the long-lived states identified by the 1 ms cMD simulation have been sampled both in terms of RMSD and coverage in PC space. We demonstrate that access to these states cannot be obtained with the same length of simulation carried out using conventional MD. Important structural waters were preserved and found to exhibit the same occupancies as those experimentally. Chemical shift differences computed from the aMD simulations were found to be in agreement with those calculated from the long 1 ms cMD simulation, and similar dihedral populations were also observed. However, we point out that, while aMD is great for exploration of conformational space, it does not reproduce the exact dynamics of the system. We conclude by emphasizing never before has the aMD been benchmarked against a long cMD simulation, and we commend D. E. Shaw Research for providing their data to the community.

Supporting Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Simulation setup, theory of aMD, details of how aMD parameters were selected, and reweighting protocol. Movies S1–S3, Figure S1, and Table S1. This information is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org/.

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

  • Corresponding Author
    • Ross C. Walker - Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, Urey Hall, La Jolla, California 92093-0365, United StatesSan Diego Supercomputer Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093-0505, United States Email: [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Levi C.T. Pierce - Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, Urey Hall, La Jolla, California 92093-0365, United States
    • Romelia Salomon-Ferrer - San Diego Supercomputer Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093-0505, United States
    • Cesar Augusto F. de Oliveira - Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, Urey Hall, La Jolla, California 92093-0365, United StatesHoward Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, United States
    • J. Andrew McCammon - Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, Urey Hall, La Jolla, California 92093-0365, United StatesHoward Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, United States
  • Notes
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgment

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This research used resources of the Keeneland Computing Facility at the Georgia Institute of Technology, which is supported by the National Science Foundation under contract OCI-0910735. This work was funded in part by the National Science Foundation through the Scientific Software Innovations Institutes program—NSF SI2-SSE (NSF1047875 & NSF1148276) grants to R.C.W, the NSF XSEDE program, and also by a University of California (UC Lab 09-LR-06-117792) grant to R.C.W. Computer time was provided by the San Diego Supercomputer Center through National Science Foundation award TGMCB090110 to R.C.W. The work was also supported by a CUDA fellowship to R.C.W. from NVIDIA. The J.A.M group is supported by NSF, NIH, HHMI, NBCR, and CTBP.

References

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article references 41 other publications.

  1. 1
    Kubelka, J.; Chiu, T. K.; Davies, D. R.; Eaton, W. A.; Hofrichter, J. Sub-microsecond protein folding J. Mol. Biol. 2006, 359, 546 53
  2. 2
    Schaeffer, R. D.; Fersht, A.; Daggett, V. Combining experiment and simulation in protein folding: closing the gap for small model systems Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2008, 18, 4 9
  3. 3
    Freddolino, P. L.; Schulten, K. Common structural transitions in explicit-solvent simulations of villin headpiece folding Biophys. J. 2009, 97, 2338 47
  4. 4
    Gilson, M. K.; Zhou, H. X. Calculation of protein-ligand binding affinities Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 2007, 36, 21 42
  5. 5
    Lindahl, E.; Sansom, M. S. Membrane proteins: molecular dynamics simulations Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2008, 18, 425 31
  6. 6
    Khalili-Araghi, F.; Gumbart, J.; Wen, P. C.; Sotomayor, M.; Tajkhorshid, E.; Schulten, K. Molecular dynamics simulations of membrane channels and transporters Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2009, 19, 128 37
  7. 7
    Grubmüller, H. Predicting slow structural transitions in macromolecular systems: conformational flooding Phys. Rev. E 1995, 52
  8. 8
    Lange, O. F.; Schäfer, L. V.; Grubmüller, H. Flooding in GROMACS: Accelerated barrier crossings in molecular dynamics J. Comput. Chem. 2006, 27, 1693 1702
  9. 9
    Voter, A. F. Hyperdynamics: Accelerated Molecular Dynamics of Infrequent Events Phy. Rev. Lett. 1997, 78, 3908 3911
  10. 10
    Voter, A. F. A method for accelerating the molecular dynamics simulation of infrequent events J. Chem. Phys. 1997, 106, 4665 4677
  11. 11
    Bussi, G.; Laio, A.; Parrinello, M. Equilibrium Free Energies from Nonequilibrium Metadynamics Phy. Rev. Lett. 2006, 96, 090601
  12. 12
    Leone, V.; Marinelli, F.; Carloni, P.; Parrinello, M. Targeting biomolecular flexibility with metadynamics Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2010, 20, 148 154
  13. 13
    Darve, E.; Pohorille, A. Calculating free energies using average force J. Chem. Phys. 2001, 115, 9169 9183
  14. 14
    Darve, E.; Rodriguez-Gomez, D.; Pohorille, A. Adaptive biasing force method for scalar and vector free energy calculations J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 128 (14) 144120
  15. 15
    Henin, J.; Fiorin, G.; Chipot, C.; Klein, M. L. Exploring Multidimensional Free Energy Landscapes Using Time-Dependent Biases on Collective Variables J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2009, 6, 35 47
  16. 16
    Shaw, D. E.; Deneroff, M. M.; Dror, R. O.; Kuskin, J. S.; Larson, R. H.; Salmon, J. K.; Young, C.; Batson, B.; Bowers, K. J.; Chao, J. C.; Eastwood, M. P.; Gagliardo, J.; Grossman, J. P.; Ho, C. R.; Ierardi, D. J.; Kolossvary, I.; Klepeis, J. L.; Layman, T.; McLeavey, C.; Moraes, M. A.; Mueller, R.; Priest, E. C.; Shan, Y.; Spengler, J.; Theobald, M.; Towles, B.; Wang, S. C. Anton, a special-purpose machine for molecular dynamics simulation Commun. ACM 2008, 51, 91 97
  17. 17
    Dror, R. O.; Arlow, D. H.; Maragakis, P.; Mildorf, T. J.; Pan, A. C.; Xu, H.; Borhani, D. W.; Shaw, D. E. Activation mechanism of the β2-adrenergic receptor Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2011, 108, 18684 18689
  18. 18
    Shan, Y.; Kim, E. T.; Eastwood, M. P.; Dror, R. O.; Seeliger, M. A.; Shaw, D. E. How Does a Drug Molecule Find Its Target Binding Site? J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 9181 9183
  19. 19
    Harvey, M. J.; Giupponi, G.; Fabritiis, G. D. ACEMD: Accelerating Biomolecular Dynamics in the Microsecond Time Scale J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2009, 5, 1632 1639
  20. 20
    Friedrichs, M. S.; Eastman, P.; Vaidyanathan, V.; Houston, M.; Legrand, S.; Beberg, A. L.; Ensign, D. L.; Bruns, C. M.; Pande, V. S. Accelerating molecular dynamic simulation on graphics processing units J. Comput. Chem. 2009, 30, 864 72
  21. 21
    Gotz, A. W.; Williamson, M. J.; Xu, D.; Poole, D.; Le Grand, S.; Walker, R. C. Routine Microsecond Molecular Dynamics Simulations with AMBER on GPUs. 1. Generalized Born J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2012, 8, 1542 1555
  22. 22
    Pande, V. S.; Beauchamp, K.; Bowman, G. R. Everything you wanted to know about Markov State Models but were afraid to ask Methods 2010, 52, 99 105
  23. 23
    Xue, Y.; Ward, J. M.; Yuwen, T.; Podkorytov, I. S.; Skrynnikov, N. R. Microsecond time-scale conformational exchange in proteins: using long molecular dynamics trajectory to simulate NMR relaxation dispersion data J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 2555 62
  24. 24
    Hamelberg, D.; Mongan, J.; McCammon, J. A. Accelerated molecular dynamics: a promising and efficient simulation method for biomolecules J. Chem. Phys. 2004, 120, 11919 29
  25. 25
    Hamelberg, D.; de Oliveira, C. A.; McCammon, J. A. Sampling of slow diffusive conformational transitions with accelerated molecular dynamics J. Chem. Phys. 2007, 127, 155102
  26. 26
    Fajer, M.; Hamelberg, D.; McCammon, J. A. Replica-Exchange Accelerated Molecular Dynamics (REXAMD) Applied to Thermodynamic Integration J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2008, 4, 1565 1569
  27. 27
    Wereszczynski, J.; McCammon, J. A. Using Selectively Applied Accelerated Molecular Dynamics to Enhance Free Energy Calculations J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2010, 6, 3285 3292
  28. 28
    Sinko, W.; de Oliveira, C. A. F.; Pierce, L. C. T.; McCammon, J. A. Protecting High Energy Barriers: A New Equation to Regulate Boost Energy in Accelerated Molecular Dynamics Simulations J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2012, 8, 17 23
  29. 29
    Wang, Y.; Harrison, C. B.; Schulten, K.; McCammon, J. A. Implementation of Accelerated Molecular Dynamics in NAMD Comput. Sci. Discovery 2011, 4
  30. 30
    Case, D. A.; Darden, T. A.; Cheatham, T. E., III; Simmerling, C. L.; Wang, J.; Duke, R. E.; Luo, R.; Walker, R. C.; Zhang, W.; Merz, K. M.; Roberts, B.; Hayik, S.; Roitberg, A.; Seabra, G.; Swails, J.; Goetz, A. W.; Kolossvai, I.; Wong, K. F.; Paesani, F.; Vanicek, J.; Wolf, R. M.; Liu, J.; Wu, X.; Brozell, S.R.; Steinbrecher, T.; Gohlke, H.; Cai, Q.; Ye, X.; Wang, J.; Hsieh, M.-J.; Cui, G.; Roe, D.R.; Mathews, D.H.; Seetin, M.G.; Salomon-Ferrer, R.; Sagui, C.; Babin, V.; Luchko, T.; Gusarov, S.; Kovalenko, A.; ; Kollman, P. A. Amber 12; University of California: San Francisco, CA, 2012.
  31. 31
    Le Grand, S.; Walker, R. C. SPFP: Speed without compromise - a mixed precision model for GPU accelerated molecular dynamics simulations. Comput. Phys. Commun. 2012, not supplied.
  32. 32
    Otting, G.; Liepinsh, E.; Wuethrich, K. Proton exchange with internal water molecules in the protein BPTI in aqueous solution J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 4363 4364
  33. 33
    McCammon, J. A.; Gelin, B. R.; Karplus, M. Dynamics of folded proteins Nature 1977, 267, 585 590
  34. 34
    Shaw, D. E.; Maragakis, P.; Lindorff-Larsen, K.; Piana, S.; Dror, R. O.; Eastwood, M. P.; Bank, J. A.; Jumper, J. M.; Salmon, J. K.; Shan, Y.; Wriggers, W. Atomic-Level Characterization of the Structural Dynamics of Proteins Science 2010, 330, 341 346
  35. 35
    Wlodawer, A.; Walter, J.; Huber, R.; Sjolin, L. Structure of bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor. Results of joint neutron and X-ray refinement of crystal form II J. Mol. Biol. 1984, 180, 301 29
  36. 36
    Grant, B. J.; Rodrigues, A. P.; ElSawy, K. M.; McCammon, J. A.; Caves, L. S. Bio3d: an R package for the comparative analysis of protein structures Bioinformatics 2006, 22, 2695 6
  37. 37
    Wereszczynski, J.; McCammon, J. A. Nucleotide-dependent mechanism of Get3 as elucidated from free energy calculations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, not supplied.
  38. 38
    Han, B.; Liu, Y.; Ginzinger, S. W.; Wishart, D. S. SHIFTX2: significantly improved protein chemical shift prediction J. Biomol. NMR 2011, 50, 43 57
  39. 39
    Grey, M. J.; Wang, C.; Palmer, A. G., 3rd. Disulfide bond isomerization in basic pancreatic trypsin inhibitor: multisite chemical exchange quantified by CPMG relaxation dispersion and chemical shift modeling J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 14324 35
  40. 40
    Berndt, K. D.; Beunink, J.; Schroeder, W.; Wuethrich, K. Designed replacement of an internal hydration water molecule in BPTI: structural and functional implications of a Gly-to-Ser mutation Biochemistry 1993, 32, 4564 4570
  41. 41
    Persson, E.; Halle, B. Nanosecond to microsecond protein dynamics probed by magnetic relaxation dispersion of buried water molecules J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 1774 87

Cited By

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article is cited by 394 publications.

  1. Adalaiti Abudurexiti, Abliz Abdurahman, Rui Zhang, Yewei Zhong, Yi Lei, Shuwen Qi, Wenhui Hou, Xiaoli Ma. Screening of α-Glucosidase Inhibitors in Cichorium glandulosum Boiss. et Huet Extracts and Study of Interaction Mechanisms. ACS Omega 2024, Article ASAP.
  2. Yongna Yuan, Xuqi Mao, Xiaohang Pan, Ruisheng Zhang, Wei Su. Kinetic Ensemble of Tau Protein through the Markov State Model and Deep Learning Analysis. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2024, 20 (7) , 2947-2958. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.3c01211
  3. Xuechen Tang, Janik Kokot, Franz Waibl, Monica L. Fernández-Quintero, Anna S. Kamenik, Klaus R. Liedl. Addressing Challenges of Macrocyclic Conformational Sampling in Polar and Apolar Solvents: Lessons for Chameleonicity. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2023, 63 (22) , 7107-7123. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.3c01123
  4. Michail Papadourakis, Hryhory Sinenka, Pierre Matricon, Jérôme Hénin, Grace Brannigan, Laura Pérez-Benito, Vineet Pande, Herman van Vlijmen, Chris de Graaf, Francesca Deflorian, Gary Tresadern, Marco Cecchini, Zoe Cournia. Alchemical Free Energy Calculations on Membrane-Associated Proteins. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2023, 19 (21) , 7437-7458. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.3c00365
  5. Paras Gaur, Chetna Tyagi. Unraveling the Mechanism of Action of Myricetin in the Inhibition of hUba1∼Ubiquitin Thioester Bond Formation via In Silico Molecular Modeling Techniques. ACS Omega 2023, 8 (33) , 30432-30441. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.3c03605
  6. Xue Zhang, Lei Li, Qingchuan Zheng. Dissecting the Effect of Temperature on Hyperthermophilic Pf2001 Esterase Dimerization by Molecular Dynamics. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2023, 63 (15) , 4762-4771. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.3c00415
  7. Toshifumi Yui, Takuya Uto, Kotaro Noda. Extended Ensemble Molecular Dynamics Study of Ammonia–Cellulose I Complex Crystal Models: Free-Energy Landscape and Atomistic Pictures of Ammonia Diffusion in the Crystalline Phase. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2023, 63 (13) , 4088-4099. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.3c00106
  8. Kyo Okazaki, Yoshihiro Kobashigawa, Hikari Morita, Soichiro Yamauchi, Natsuki Fukuda, Chenjiang Liu, Yuya Toyota, Takashi Sato, Hiroshi Morioka. Molecular Dynamics-Based Design and Biophysical Evaluation of Thermostable Single-Chain Fv Antibody Mutants Derived from Pharmaceutical Antibodies. ACS Omega 2023, 8 (25) , 22945-22954. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.3c01948
  9. Jian-Qi Chai, Yu-Dong Mei, Lang Tai, Xiao-Bin Wang, Min Chen, Xiang-Yi Kong, Ai-Min Lu, Guo-Hua Li, Chun-Long Yang. Potential Succinate Dehydrogenase Inhibitors Bearing a Novel Pyrazole-4-sulfonohydrazide Scaffold: Molecular Design, Antifungal Evaluation, and Action Mechanism. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2023, 71 (24) , 9266-9279. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.3c00126
  10. Crescenzo Coppa, Andrea Bazzoli, Maral Barkhordari, Alessandro Contini. Accelerated Molecular Dynamics for Peptide Folding: Benchmarking Different Combinations of Force Fields and Explicit Solvent Models. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2023, 63 (10) , 3030-3042. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.3c00138
  11. João Morado, Paul N. Mortenson, J. Willem M. Nissink, Jonathan W. Essex, Chris-Kriton Skylaris. Does a Machine-Learned Potential Perform Better Than an Optimally Tuned Traditional Force Field? A Case Study on Fluorohydrins. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2023, 63 (9) , 2810-2827. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.2c01510
  12. Jui-Hung Weng, Wen Ma, Jian Wu, Pallavi Kaila Sharma, Steve Silletti, J. Andrew McCammon, Susan Taylor. Capturing Differences in the Regulation of LRRK2 Dynamics and Conformational States by Small Molecule Kinase Inhibitors. ACS Chemical Biology 2023, 18 (4) , 810-821. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschembio.2c00868
  13. Patrice Koehl, Arseniy Akopyan, Herbert Edelsbrunner. Computing the Volume, Surface Area, Mean, and Gaussian Curvatures of Molecules and Their Derivatives. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2023, 63 (3) , 973-985. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.2c01346
  14. Yihao Zhao, Jintu Zhang, Haotian Zhang, Shukai Gu, Yafeng Deng, Yaoquan Tu, Tingjun Hou, Yu Kang. Sigmoid Accelerated Molecular Dynamics: An Efficient Enhanced Sampling Method for Biosystems. The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters 2023, 14 (4) , 1103-1112. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpclett.2c03688
  15. Zihui Yang, Xuebao Sun, Daojun Jin, Yigui Qiu, Linlin Chen, Lu Sun, Wen Gu. Novel Camphor Sulfonohydrazide and Sulfonamide Derivatives as Potential Succinate Dehydrogenase Inhibitors against Phytopathogenic Fungi/Oomycetes. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2023, 71 (1) , 174-185. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.2c05628
  16. Wenjing Jiang, Tingting Zhang, Jingwen Wang, Wei Cheng, Tong Lu, Yingkun Yan, Xiaorong Tang. Design, Synthesis, Inhibitory Activity, and Molecular Modeling of Novel Pyrazole-Furan/Thiophene Carboxamide Hybrids as Potential Fungicides Targeting Succinate Dehydrogenase. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2023, 71 (1) , 729-738. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.2c05054
  17. Shruti Somai, Kun Yue, Orlando Acevedo, Holly R. Ellis. Shorter Alkanesulfonate Carbon Chains Destabilize the Active Site Architecture of SsuD for Desulfonation. Biochemistry 2023, 62 (1) , 85-94. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.2c00586
  18. Monique J. Rogals, Alexander Eletsky, Chin Huang, Laura C. Morris, Kelley W. Moremen, James H. Prestegard. Glycan Conformation in the Heavily Glycosylated Protein, CEACAM1. ACS Chemical Biology 2022, 17 (12) , 3527-3534. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschembio.2c00714
  19. Jianzhong Chen, Qingkai Zeng, Wei Wang, Haibo Sun, Guodong Hu. Decoding the Identification Mechanism of an SAM-III Riboswitch on Ligands through Multiple Independent Gaussian-Accelerated Molecular Dynamics Simulations. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2022, 62 (23) , 6118-6132. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.2c00961
  20. Nastasia Mauger, Thomas Plé, Louis Lagardère, Simon Huppert, Jean-Philip Piquemal. Improving Condensed-Phase Water Dynamics with Explicit Nuclear Quantum Effects: The Polarizable Q-AMOEBA Force Field. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2022, 126 (43) , 8813-8826. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.2c04454
  21. Junzhuo Liao, Xueqing Nie, Ilona Christy Unarta, Spencer S. Ericksen, Weiping Tang. In Silico Modeling and Scoring of PROTAC-Mediated Ternary Complex Poses. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2022, 65 (8) , 6116-6132. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.1c02155
  22. Frédéric Célerse, Théo Jaffrelot Inizan, Louis Lagardère, Olivier Adjoua, Pierre Monmarché, Yinglong Miao, Etienne Derat, Jean-Philip Piquemal. An Efficient Gaussian-Accelerated Molecular Dynamics (GaMD) Multilevel Enhanced Sampling Strategy: Application to Polarizable Force Fields Simulations of Large Biological Systems. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2022, 18 (2) , 968-977. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c01024
  23. Didac Martí, Carlos Alemán, Jon Ainsley, Oscar Ahumada, Juan Torras. IgG1-b12–HIV-gp120 Interface in Solution: A Computational Study. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2022, 62 (2) , 359-371. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.1c01143
  24. Surl-Hee Ahn, Anupam A. Ojha, Rommie E. Amaro, J. Andrew McCammon. Gaussian-Accelerated Molecular Dynamics with the Weighted Ensemble Method: A Hybrid Method Improves Thermodynamic and Kinetic Sampling. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2021, 17 (12) , 7938-7951. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00770
  25. Leng Wang, Ruiyuan Liu, Yue Meng, Fang Li, Huizhe Lu. Structure and Function of the Refined C-Terminal Loop in Imidazole Glycerol Phosphate Dehydratase from Different Homologs. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2021, 69 (46) , 13871-13880. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.1c04282
  26. Zihui Yang, Yue Sun, Qingsong Liu, Aliang Li, Wenyan Wang, Wen Gu. Design, Synthesis, and Antifungal Activity of Novel Thiophene/Furan-1,3,4-Oxadiazole Carboxamides as Potent Succinate Dehydrogenase Inhibitors. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2021, 69 (45) , 13373-13385. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.1c03857
  27. Francesco Maria Bellussi, Otello Maria Roscioni, Matteo Ricci, Matteo Fasano. Anisotropic Electrostatic Interactions in Coarse-Grained Water Models to Enhance the Accuracy and Speed-Up Factor of Mesoscopic Simulations. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2021, 125 (43) , 12020-12027. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.1c07642
  28. Xiaohui Wang. Conformational Fluctuations in GTP-Bound K-Ras: A Metadynamics Perspective with Harmonic Linear Discriminant Analysis. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2021, 61 (10) , 5212-5222. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.1c00844
  29. Tong Lu, Yingkun Yan, Tingting Zhang, Guilan Zhang, Tingting Xiao, Wei Cheng, Wenjing Jiang, Jingwen Wang, Xiaorong Tang. Design, Synthesis, Biological Evaluation, and Molecular Modeling of Novel 4H-Chromene Analogs as Potential Succinate Dehydrogenase Inhibitors. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2021, 69 (36) , 10709-10721. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.1c03304
  30. Jianzhong Chen, Shaolong Zhang, Wei Wang, Haibo Sun, Qinggang Zhang, Xinguo Liu. Binding of Inhibitors to BACE1 Affected by pH-Dependent Protonation: An Exploration from Multiple Replica Gaussian Accelerated Molecular Dynamics and MM-GBSA Calculations. ACS Chemical Neuroscience 2021, 12 (14) , 2591-2607. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.0c00813
  31. Verónica A. Jiménez, Karen R. Navarrete, Mario Duque-Noreña, Kelly P. Marrugo, María A. Contreras, Cristian H. Campos, Joel B. Alderete. Rational Design of Novel Glycomimetic Peptides for E-Selectin Targeting. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2021, 61 (5) , 2463-2474. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.1c00295
  32. Jianzhong Chen, Shaolong Zhang, Wei Wang, Laixue Pang, Qinggang Zhang, Xinguo Liu. Mutation-Induced Impacts on the Switch Transformations of the GDP- and GTP-Bound K-Ras: Insights from Multiple Replica Gaussian Accelerated Molecular Dynamics and Free Energy Analysis. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2021, 61 (4) , 1954-1969. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01470
  33. Patrick Johe, Sascha Jung, Erik Endres, Christian Kersten, Collin Zimmer, Weixiang Ye, Carsten Sönnichsen, Ute A. Hellmich, Christoph Sotriffer, Tanja Schirmeister, Hannes Neuweiler. Warhead Reactivity Limits the Speed of Inhibition of the Cysteine Protease Rhodesain. ACS Chemical Biology 2021, 16 (4) , 661-670. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschembio.0c00911
  34. Agustín Ormazábal, Juliana Palma, Gustavo Pierdominici-Sottile. Molecular Dynamics Simulations Unveil the Basis of the Sequential Binding of RsmE to the Noncoding RNA RsmZ. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2021, 125 (12) , 3045-3056. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.0c09770
  35. Jovan Damjanovic, Jiayuan Miao, He Huang, Yu-Shan Lin. Elucidating Solution Structures of Cyclic Peptides Using Molecular Dynamics Simulations. Chemical Reviews 2021, 121 (4) , 2292-2324. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01087
  36. Isabell Kemker, David C. Schröder, Rebecca C. Feiner, Kristian M. Müller, Antoine Marion, Norbert Sewald. Tuning the Biological Activity of RGD Peptides with Halotryptophans. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2021, 64 (1) , 586-601. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.0c01536
  37. Takuya Uto, Yuki Ikeda, Naoki Sunagawa, Kenji Tajima, Min Yao, Toshifumi Yui. Molecular Dynamics Simulation of Cellulose Synthase Subunit D Octamer with Cellulose Chains from Acetic Acid Bacteria: Insight into Dynamic Behaviors and Thermodynamics on Substrate Recognition. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2021, 17 (1) , 488-496. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.0c01027
  38. Thomas Ludwig, Aayush R. Singh, Jens K. Nørskov. Subsurface Nitrogen Dissociation Kinetics in Lithium Metal from Metadynamics. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2020, 124 (48) , 26368-26378. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c09108
  39. Alexander D. Wade, David J. Huggins. Identification of Optimal Ligand Growth Vectors Using an Alchemical Free-Energy Method. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2020, 60 (11) , 5580-5594. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00610
  40. Francesco Oliva, Jose C. Flores-Canales, Stefano Pieraccini, Carlo F. Morelli, Maurizio Sironi, Birgit Schiøtt. Simulating Multiple Substrate-Binding Events by γ-Glutamyltransferase Using Accelerated Molecular Dynamics. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2020, 124 (45) , 10104-10116. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.0c06907
  41. Hao Liu, Jianpeng Deng, Zhou Luo, Yawei Lin, Kenneth M. Merz, Jr., Zheng Zheng. Receptor–Ligand Binding Free Energies from a Consecutive Histograms Monte Carlo Sampling Method. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2020, 16 (10) , 6645-6655. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.0c00457
  42. Abhishek Thakur, Shruti Somai, Kun Yue, Nicole Ippolito, Dianne Pagan, Jingyuan Xiong, Holly R. Ellis, Orlando Acevedo. Substrate-Dependent Mobile Loop Conformational Changes in Alkanesulfonate Monooxygenase from Accelerated Molecular Dynamics. Biochemistry 2020, 59 (38) , 3582-3593. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.0c00633
  43. Anna S. Kamenik, Johannes Kraml, Florian Hofer, Franz Waibl, Patrick K. Quoika, Ursula Kahler, Michael Schauperl, Klaus R. Liedl. Macrocycle Cell Permeability Measured by Solvation Free Energies in Polar and Apolar Environments. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2020, 60 (7) , 3508-3517. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00280
  44. Rory M. Crean, Jasmine M. Gardner, Shina C. L. Kamerlin. Harnessing Conformational Plasticity to Generate Designer Enzymes. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2020, 142 (26) , 11324-11342. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.0c04924
  45. Jianzhong Chen, Baohua Yin, Wei Wang, Haibo Sun. Effects of Disulfide Bonds on Binding of Inhibitors to β-Amyloid Cleaving Enzyme 1 Decoded by Multiple Replica Accelerated Molecular Dynamics Simulations. ACS Chemical Neuroscience 2020, 11 (12) , 1811-1826. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.0c00234
  46. Farzaneh Jalalypour, Ozge Sensoy, Canan Atilgan. Perturb–Scan–Pull: A Novel Method Facilitating Conformational Transitions in Proteins. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2020, 16 (6) , 3825-3841. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.9b01222
  47. Nan Cai, Jiajie Chen, Decheng Bi, Liang Gu, Lijun Yao, Xiuting Li, Hui Li, Hong Xu, Zhangli Hu, Qiong Liu, Xu Xu. Specific Degradation of Endogenous Tau Protein and Inhibition of Tau Fibrillation by Tanshinone IIA through the Ubiquitin–Proteasome Pathway. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2020, 68 (7) , 2054-2062. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.9b07022
  48. Qi-Qi Yang, Huan He, Chen-Qiao Li, Lai-Bing Luo, Shu-Lan Li, Zi-Qiang Xu, Jian-Cheng Jin, Feng-Lei Jiang, Yi Liu, Mian Yang. Molecular Mechanisms of the Ultra-Strong Inhibition Effect of Oxidized Carbon Dots on Human Insulin Fibrillation. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2020, 3 (1) , 217-226. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.9b00725
  49. James M. B. McFarlane, Katherine D. Krause, Irina Paci. Accelerated Structural Prediction of Flexible Protein–Ligand Complexes: The SLICE Method. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2019, 59 (12) , 5263-5275. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.9b00688
  50. Florian Hofer, Valentin Dietrich, Anna S. Kamenik, Martin Tollinger, Klaus R. Liedl. pH-Dependent Protonation of the Phl p 6 Pollen Allergen Studied by NMR and cpH-aMD. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2019, 15 (10) , 5716-5726. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00540
  51. Shuangyan Zhou, Danfeng Shi, Xuewei Liu, Xiaojun Yao, Lin-Tai Da, Huanxiang Liu. pH-Induced Misfolding Mechanism of Prion Protein: Insights from Microsecond-Accelerated Molecular Dynamics Simulations. ACS Chemical Neuroscience 2019, 10 (6) , 2718-2729. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.8b00582
  52. Clarisse G. Ricci, Janice S. Chen, Yinglong Miao, Martin Jinek, Jennifer A. Doudna, J. Andrew McCammon, Giulia Palermo. Deciphering Off-Target Effects in CRISPR-Cas9 through Accelerated Molecular Dynamics. ACS Central Science 2019, 5 (4) , 651-662. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.9b00020
  53. Ardita Shkurti, Ioanna Danai Styliari, Vivek Balasubramanian, Iain Bethune, Conrado Pedebos, Shantenu Jha, Charles A. Laughton. CoCo-MD: A Simple and Effective Method for the Enhanced Sampling of Conformational Space. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2019, 15 (4) , 2587-2596. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00657
  54. Eliana K. Asciutto, Sergei Kopanchuk, Anni Lepland, Lorena Simón-Gracia, Carlos Aleman, Tambet Teesalu, Pablo Scodeller. Phage-Display-Derived Peptide Binds to Human CD206 and Modeling Reveals a New Binding Site on the Receptor. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2019, 123 (9) , 1973-1982. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.8b11876
  55. Ramu Anandakrishnan, Saeed Izadi, Alexey V. Onufriev. Why Computed Protein Folding Landscapes Are Sensitive to the Water Model. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2019, 15 (1) , 625-636. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00485
  56. Daniel J. Falconer, Ganesh P. Subedi, Aaron M. Marcella, Adam W. Barb. Antibody Fucosylation Lowers the FcγRIIIa/CD16a Affinity by Limiting the Conformations Sampled by the N162-Glycan. ACS Chemical Biology 2018, 13 (8) , 2179-2189. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschembio.8b00342
  57. Mu-Yang He, Wei-Kang Li, Qing-Chuan Zheng, Hong-Xing Zhang. Conformational Transition of Key Structural Features Involved in Activation of ALK Induced by Two Neuroblastoma Mutations and ATP Binding: Insight from Accelerated Molecular Dynamics Simulations. ACS Chemical Neuroscience 2018, 9 (7) , 1783-1792. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.8b00105
  58. Patrice Koehl. Large Eigenvalue Problems in Coarse-Grained Dynamic Analyses of Supramolecular Systems. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2018, 14 (7) , 3903-3919. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00338
  59. Mary Hongying Cheng, Cihan Kaya, Ivet Bahar. Quantitative Assessment of the Energetics of Dopamine Translocation by Human Dopamine Transporter. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2018, 122 (21) , 5336-5346. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.7b10340
  60. Anna S. Kamenik, Uta Lessel, Julian E. Fuchs, Thomas Fox, Klaus R. Liedl. Peptidic Macrocycles - Conformational Sampling and Thermodynamic Characterization. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2018, 58 (5) , 982-992. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.8b00097
  61. Filip Fratev, Thomas Steinbrecher, Svava Ósk Jónsdóttir. Prediction of Accurate Binding Modes Using Combination of Classical and Accelerated Molecular Dynamics and Free-Energy Perturbation Calculations: An Application to Toxicity Studies. ACS Omega 2018, 3 (4) , 4357-4371. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.8b00123
  62. Xiangda Peng, Yuebin Zhang, Yan Li, QingLong Liu, Huiying Chu, Dinglin Zhang, Guohui Li. Integrating Multiple Accelerated Molecular Dynamics To Improve Accuracy of Free Energy Calculations. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2018, 14 (3) , 1216-1227. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.7b01211
  63. Myriam Hayder, Matteo Garzoni, Davide Bochicchio, Anne-Marie Caminade, François Couderc, Varravaddheay Ong-Meang, Jean-Luc Davignon, Cédric-Olivier Turrin, Giovanni M. Pavan, Rémy Poupot. Three-Dimensional Directionality Is a Pivotal Structural Feature for the Bioactivity of Azabisphosphonate-Capped Poly(PhosphorHydrazone) Nanodrug Dendrimers. Biomacromolecules 2018, 19 (3) , 712-720. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.7b01398
  64. Patricia Gomez-Gutierrez, Jaime Rubio-Martinez, and Juan J. Perez . Identification of Potential Small Molecule Binding Pockets in p38α MAP Kinase. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2017, 57 (10) , 2566-2574. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00439
  65. Qiang Shao and Weiliang Zhu . Effective Conformational Sampling in Explicit Solvent with Gaussian Biased Accelerated Molecular Dynamics. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2017, 13 (9) , 4240-4252. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00242
  66. Sérgio M. Marques, Zuzana Dunajova, Zbynek Prokop, Radka Chaloupkova, Jan Brezovsky, and Jiri Damborsky . Catalytic Cycle of Haloalkane Dehalogenases Toward Unnatural Substrates Explored by Computational Modeling. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2017, 57 (8) , 1970-1989. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00070
  67. Stefano Motta and Laura Bonati . Modeling Binding with Large Conformational Changes: Key Points in Ensemble-Docking Approaches. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2017, 57 (7) , 1563-1578. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00125
  68. Samuel Bowerman, Ambar S.J.B. Rana, Amy Rice, Grace H. Pham, Eric R. Strieter, and Jeff Wereszczynski . Determining Atomistic SAXS Models of Tri-Ubiquitin Chains from Bayesian Analysis of Accelerated Molecular Dynamics Simulations. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2017, 13 (6) , 2418-2429. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00059
  69. Zhiye Tang and Chia-en A. Chang . Systematic Dissociation Pathway Searches Guided by Principal Component Modes. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2017, 13 (5) , 2230-2244. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.6b01204
  70. Rodrigo Cossio-Pérez, Juliana Palma, and Gustavo Pierdominici-Sottile . Consistent Principal Component Modes from Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Proteins. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2017, 57 (4) , 826-834. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.6b00646
  71. Patrice Koehl, Frédéric Poitevin, Rafael Navaza, and Marc Delarue . The Renormalization Group and Its Applications to Generating Coarse-Grained Models of Large Biological Molecular Systems. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2017, 13 (3) , 1424-1438. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.6b01136
  72. Bijo Mathew, Adebayo A. Adeniyi, Sanal Dev, Monu Joy, Gülberk Ucar, Githa Elizabeth Mathew, Ashona Singh-Pillay, and Mahmoud E. S. Soliman . Pharmacophore-Based 3D-QSAR Analysis of Thienyl Chalcones as a New Class of Human MAO-B Inhibitors: Investigation of Combined Quantum Chemical and Molecular Dynamics Approach. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2017, 121 (6) , 1186-1203. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.6b09451
  73. Mike Nemec and Daniel Hoffmann . Quantitative Assessment of Molecular Dynamics Sampling for Flexible Systems. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2017, 13 (2) , 400-414. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00823
  74. Inês C. M. Simões, Inês P. D. Costa, João T. S. Coimbra, Maria J. Ramos, and Pedro A. Fernandes . New Parameters for Higher Accuracy in the Computation of Binding Free Energy Differences upon Alanine Scanning Mutagenesis on Protein–Protein Interfaces. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2017, 57 (1) , 60-72. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.6b00378
  75. Yui Tik Pang, Yinglong Miao, Yi Wang, and J. Andrew McCammon . Gaussian Accelerated Molecular Dynamics in NAMD. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2017, 13 (1) , 9-19. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00931
  76. Jan Brezovsky, Petra Babkova, Oksana Degtjarik, Andrea Fortova, Artur Gora, Iuliia Iermak, Pavlina Rezacova, Pavel Dvorak, Ivana Kuta Smatanova, Zbynek Prokop, Radka Chaloupkova, and Jiri Damborsky . Engineering a de Novo Transport Tunnel. ACS Catalysis 2016, 6 (11) , 7597-7610. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.6b02081
  77. Zied Gaieb, David D. Lo, and Dimitrios Morikis . Molecular Mechanism of Biased Ligand Conformational Changes in CC Chemokine Receptor 7. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2016, 56 (9) , 1808-1822. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.6b00367
  78. Anna S. Kamenik, Ursula Kahler, Julian E. Fuchs, and Klaus R. Liedl . Localization of Millisecond Dynamics: Dihedral Entropy from Accelerated MD. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2016, 12 (8) , 3449-3455. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00231
  79. Jeffrey R. Wagner, Christopher T. Lee, Jacob D. Durrant, Robert D. Malmstrom, Victoria A. Feher, and Rommie E. Amaro . Emerging Computational Methods for the Rational Discovery of Allosteric Drugs. Chemical Reviews 2016, 116 (11) , 6370-6390. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00631
  80. Juan A. Bueren-Calabuig and Julien Michel . Impact of Ser17 Phosphorylation on the Conformational Dynamics of the Oncoprotein MDM2. Biochemistry 2016, 55 (17) , 2500-2509. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.6b00127
  81. Albert C. Pan, Thomas M. Weinreich, Stefano Piana, and David E. Shaw . Demonstrating an Order-of-Magnitude Sampling Enhancement in Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Complex Protein Systems. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2016, 12 (3) , 1360-1367. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00913
  82. Zuojun Guo, Atli Thorarensen, Jianwei Che, and Li Xing . Target the More Druggable Protein States in a Highly Dynamic Protein–Protein Interaction System. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2016, 56 (1) , 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.5b00503
  83. Ole Juul Andersen, Julie Grouleff, Perri Needham, Ross C. Walker, and Frank Jensen . Toward an Enhanced Sampling Molecular Dynamics Method for Studying Ligand-Induced Conformational Changes in Proteins. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2015, 119 (46) , 14594-14603. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.5b07816
  84. Kristof M. Bal and Erik C. Neyts . Merging Metadynamics into Hyperdynamics: Accelerated Molecular Simulations Reaching Time Scales from Microseconds to Seconds. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2015, 11 (10) , 4545-4554. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00597
  85. Mathias F. Gruber, Elizabeth Wood, Sigurd Truelsen, Thomas Østergaard, and Claus Hélix-Nielsen . Computational Design of Biomimetic Phosphate Scavengers. Environmental Science & Technology 2015, 49 (16) , 9469-9478. https://doi.org/10.1021/es506214c
  86. Yinglong Miao, Victoria A. Feher, and J. Andrew McCammon . Gaussian Accelerated Molecular Dynamics: Unconstrained Enhanced Sampling and Free Energy Calculation. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2015, 11 (8) , 3584-3595. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00436
  87. Koichi Tamura and Shigehiko Hayashi . Linear Response Path Following: A Molecular Dynamics Method To Simulate Global Conformational Changes of Protein upon Ligand Binding. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2015, 11 (7) , 2900-2917. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00120
  88. Thanh D. Do, Ali Chamas, Xueyun Zheng, Aaron Barnes, Dayna Chang, Tjitske Veldstra, Harmeet Takhar, Nicolette Dressler, Benjamin Trapp, Kylie Miller, Audrene McMahon, Stephen C. Meredith, Joan-Emma Shea, Kristi Lazar Cantrell, and Michael T. Bowers . Elucidation of the Aggregation Pathways of Helix–Turn–Helix Peptides: Stabilization at the Turn Region Is Critical for Fibril Formation. Biochemistry 2015, 54 (26) , 4050-4062. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.5b00414
  89. Jose C. Flores-Canales and Maria Kurnikova . Targeting Electrostatic Interactions in Accelerated Molecular Dynamics with Application to Protein Partial Unfolding. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2015, 11 (6) , 2550-2559. https://doi.org/10.1021/ct501090y
  90. Chad W. Hopkins, Scott Le Grand, Ross C. Walker, and Adrian E. Roitberg . Long-Time-Step Molecular Dynamics through Hydrogen Mass Repartitioning. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2015, 11 (4) , 1864-1874. https://doi.org/10.1021/ct5010406
  91. Julian E. Fuchs, Birgit J. Waldner, Roland G. Huber, Susanne von Grafenstein, Christian Kramer, and Klaus R. Liedl . Independent Metrics for Protein Backbone and Side-Chain Flexibility: Time Scales and Effects of Ligand Binding. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2015, 11 (3) , 851-860. https://doi.org/10.1021/ct500633u
  92. Rajesh Singh, Navjeet Ahalawat, and Rajesh K. Murarka . Activation of Corticotropin-Releasing Factor 1 Receptor: Insights from Molecular Dynamics Simulations. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2015, 119 (7) , 2806-2817. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp509814n
  93. Nathan E. Goldfarb, Meray Ohanessian, Shyamasri Biswas, T. Dwight McGee, Jr., Brian P. Mahon, David A. Ostrov, Jose Garcia, Yan Tang, Robert McKenna, Adrian Roitberg, and Ben M. Dunn . Defective Hydrophobic Sliding Mechanism and Active Site Expansion in HIV-1 Protease Drug Resistant Variant Gly48Thr/Leu89Met: Mechanisms for the Loss of Saquinavir Binding Potency. Biochemistry 2015, 54 (2) , 422-433. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi501088e
  94. Yan Li, Xiang Li, Weiya Ma, and Zigang Dong . Conformational Transition Pathways of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Kinase Domain from Multiple Molecular Dynamics Simulations and Bayesian Clustering. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2014, 10 (8) , 3503-3511. https://doi.org/10.1021/ct500162b
  95. Malene Ringkjøbing Jensen, Markus Zweckstetter, Jie-rong Huang, and Martin Blackledge . Exploring Free-Energy Landscapes of Intrinsically Disordered Proteins at Atomic Resolution Using NMR Spectroscopy. Chemical Reviews 2014, 114 (13) , 6632-6660. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr400688u
  96. Yinglong Miao, William Sinko, Levi Pierce, Denis Bucher, Ross C. Walker, and J. Andrew McCammon . Improved Reweighting of Accelerated Molecular Dynamics Simulations for Free Energy Calculation. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2014, 10 (7) , 2677-2689. https://doi.org/10.1021/ct500090q
  97. Filip Fratev, Elina Mihaylova, and Ilza Pajeva . Combination of Genetic Screening and Molecular Dynamics as a Useful Tool for Identification of Disease-Related Mutations: ZASP PDZ Domain G54S Mutation Case. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2014, 54 (5) , 1524-1536. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci5001136
  98. Joseph W. Kaus, Mehrnoosh Arrar, and J. Andrew McCammon . Accelerated Adaptive Integration Method. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2014, 118 (19) , 5109-5118. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp502358y
  99. Josh V. Vermaas and Emad Tajkhorshid . A Microscopic View of Phospholipid Insertion into Biological Membranes. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2014, 118 (7) , 1754-1764. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp409854w
  100. Dario Corrada and Giorgio Colombo . Energetic and Dynamic Aspects of the Affinity Maturation Process: Characterizing Improved Variants from the Bevacizumab Antibody with Molecular Simulations. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2013, 53 (11) , 2937-2950. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci400416e
Load more citations
  • Figure 1

    Figure 1. RMSD of the aMD trajectory from the crystal structure. Red, blue, green, purple, and black colors correspond to the kinetic clusters identified in the 1 ms cMD BPTI simulation. (34) For each frame, we identify what cluster we are closest to and color it accordingly. Only a handful of transitions to the green state were observed, and we highlight them with diamond markers.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. The free energy principal component projection of (a) 1 ms simulation, (b) 500 ns cMD ff99SB-I simulation, and (c) 500 ns aMD ff99SB-I simulation onto (PC1, PC2) defined by the 1 ms simulation. The long-lived structures are projected onto the free energy surface and are labeled as red, blue, green, purple, and black triangles. The crystal structure, 5PTI, is demarked by the red diamond (see also Movies S1 and S2).

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. The χ1–C14 vs χ1–C38 dihedral angle free energy surfaces of (a) 1 ms cMD simulation, (b) 500 ns cMD ff99SB-I simulation, and (c) 500 ns aMD ff99SB-I simulation. The long-lived stable states are plotted onto the free energy surface and are labeled as red, blue, green, purple, and black triangles. The crystal structure, 5PTI, is demarked by the red diamond. The major state M is labeled along with the minor states mC14 and mC38.

  • References

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    This article references 41 other publications.

    1. 1
      Kubelka, J.; Chiu, T. K.; Davies, D. R.; Eaton, W. A.; Hofrichter, J. Sub-microsecond protein folding J. Mol. Biol. 2006, 359, 546 53
    2. 2
      Schaeffer, R. D.; Fersht, A.; Daggett, V. Combining experiment and simulation in protein folding: closing the gap for small model systems Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2008, 18, 4 9
    3. 3
      Freddolino, P. L.; Schulten, K. Common structural transitions in explicit-solvent simulations of villin headpiece folding Biophys. J. 2009, 97, 2338 47
    4. 4
      Gilson, M. K.; Zhou, H. X. Calculation of protein-ligand binding affinities Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 2007, 36, 21 42
    5. 5
      Lindahl, E.; Sansom, M. S. Membrane proteins: molecular dynamics simulations Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2008, 18, 425 31
    6. 6
      Khalili-Araghi, F.; Gumbart, J.; Wen, P. C.; Sotomayor, M.; Tajkhorshid, E.; Schulten, K. Molecular dynamics simulations of membrane channels and transporters Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2009, 19, 128 37
    7. 7
      Grubmüller, H. Predicting slow structural transitions in macromolecular systems: conformational flooding Phys. Rev. E 1995, 52
    8. 8
      Lange, O. F.; Schäfer, L. V.; Grubmüller, H. Flooding in GROMACS: Accelerated barrier crossings in molecular dynamics J. Comput. Chem. 2006, 27, 1693 1702
    9. 9
      Voter, A. F. Hyperdynamics: Accelerated Molecular Dynamics of Infrequent Events Phy. Rev. Lett. 1997, 78, 3908 3911
    10. 10
      Voter, A. F. A method for accelerating the molecular dynamics simulation of infrequent events J. Chem. Phys. 1997, 106, 4665 4677
    11. 11
      Bussi, G.; Laio, A.; Parrinello, M. Equilibrium Free Energies from Nonequilibrium Metadynamics Phy. Rev. Lett. 2006, 96, 090601
    12. 12
      Leone, V.; Marinelli, F.; Carloni, P.; Parrinello, M. Targeting biomolecular flexibility with metadynamics Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2010, 20, 148 154
    13. 13
      Darve, E.; Pohorille, A. Calculating free energies using average force J. Chem. Phys. 2001, 115, 9169 9183
    14. 14
      Darve, E.; Rodriguez-Gomez, D.; Pohorille, A. Adaptive biasing force method for scalar and vector free energy calculations J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 128 (14) 144120
    15. 15
      Henin, J.; Fiorin, G.; Chipot, C.; Klein, M. L. Exploring Multidimensional Free Energy Landscapes Using Time-Dependent Biases on Collective Variables J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2009, 6, 35 47
    16. 16
      Shaw, D. E.; Deneroff, M. M.; Dror, R. O.; Kuskin, J. S.; Larson, R. H.; Salmon, J. K.; Young, C.; Batson, B.; Bowers, K. J.; Chao, J. C.; Eastwood, M. P.; Gagliardo, J.; Grossman, J. P.; Ho, C. R.; Ierardi, D. J.; Kolossvary, I.; Klepeis, J. L.; Layman, T.; McLeavey, C.; Moraes, M. A.; Mueller, R.; Priest, E. C.; Shan, Y.; Spengler, J.; Theobald, M.; Towles, B.; Wang, S. C. Anton, a special-purpose machine for molecular dynamics simulation Commun. ACM 2008, 51, 91 97
    17. 17
      Dror, R. O.; Arlow, D. H.; Maragakis, P.; Mildorf, T. J.; Pan, A. C.; Xu, H.; Borhani, D. W.; Shaw, D. E. Activation mechanism of the β2-adrenergic receptor Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2011, 108, 18684 18689
    18. 18
      Shan, Y.; Kim, E. T.; Eastwood, M. P.; Dror, R. O.; Seeliger, M. A.; Shaw, D. E. How Does a Drug Molecule Find Its Target Binding Site? J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 9181 9183
    19. 19
      Harvey, M. J.; Giupponi, G.; Fabritiis, G. D. ACEMD: Accelerating Biomolecular Dynamics in the Microsecond Time Scale J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2009, 5, 1632 1639
    20. 20
      Friedrichs, M. S.; Eastman, P.; Vaidyanathan, V.; Houston, M.; Legrand, S.; Beberg, A. L.; Ensign, D. L.; Bruns, C. M.; Pande, V. S. Accelerating molecular dynamic simulation on graphics processing units J. Comput. Chem. 2009, 30, 864 72
    21. 21
      Gotz, A. W.; Williamson, M. J.; Xu, D.; Poole, D.; Le Grand, S.; Walker, R. C. Routine Microsecond Molecular Dynamics Simulations with AMBER on GPUs. 1. Generalized Born J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2012, 8, 1542 1555
    22. 22
      Pande, V. S.; Beauchamp, K.; Bowman, G. R. Everything you wanted to know about Markov State Models but were afraid to ask Methods 2010, 52, 99 105
    23. 23
      Xue, Y.; Ward, J. M.; Yuwen, T.; Podkorytov, I. S.; Skrynnikov, N. R. Microsecond time-scale conformational exchange in proteins: using long molecular dynamics trajectory to simulate NMR relaxation dispersion data J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 2555 62
    24. 24
      Hamelberg, D.; Mongan, J.; McCammon, J. A. Accelerated molecular dynamics: a promising and efficient simulation method for biomolecules J. Chem. Phys. 2004, 120, 11919 29
    25. 25
      Hamelberg, D.; de Oliveira, C. A.; McCammon, J. A. Sampling of slow diffusive conformational transitions with accelerated molecular dynamics J. Chem. Phys. 2007, 127, 155102
    26. 26
      Fajer, M.; Hamelberg, D.; McCammon, J. A. Replica-Exchange Accelerated Molecular Dynamics (REXAMD) Applied to Thermodynamic Integration J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2008, 4, 1565 1569
    27. 27
      Wereszczynski, J.; McCammon, J. A. Using Selectively Applied Accelerated Molecular Dynamics to Enhance Free Energy Calculations J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2010, 6, 3285 3292
    28. 28
      Sinko, W.; de Oliveira, C. A. F.; Pierce, L. C. T.; McCammon, J. A. Protecting High Energy Barriers: A New Equation to Regulate Boost Energy in Accelerated Molecular Dynamics Simulations J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2012, 8, 17 23
    29. 29
      Wang, Y.; Harrison, C. B.; Schulten, K.; McCammon, J. A. Implementation of Accelerated Molecular Dynamics in NAMD Comput. Sci. Discovery 2011, 4
    30. 30
      Case, D. A.; Darden, T. A.; Cheatham, T. E., III; Simmerling, C. L.; Wang, J.; Duke, R. E.; Luo, R.; Walker, R. C.; Zhang, W.; Merz, K. M.; Roberts, B.; Hayik, S.; Roitberg, A.; Seabra, G.; Swails, J.; Goetz, A. W.; Kolossvai, I.; Wong, K. F.; Paesani, F.; Vanicek, J.; Wolf, R. M.; Liu, J.; Wu, X.; Brozell, S.R.; Steinbrecher, T.; Gohlke, H.; Cai, Q.; Ye, X.; Wang, J.; Hsieh, M.-J.; Cui, G.; Roe, D.R.; Mathews, D.H.; Seetin, M.G.; Salomon-Ferrer, R.; Sagui, C.; Babin, V.; Luchko, T.; Gusarov, S.; Kovalenko, A.; ; Kollman, P. A. Amber 12; University of California: San Francisco, CA, 2012.
    31. 31
      Le Grand, S.; Walker, R. C. SPFP: Speed without compromise - a mixed precision model for GPU accelerated molecular dynamics simulations. Comput. Phys. Commun. 2012, not supplied.
    32. 32
      Otting, G.; Liepinsh, E.; Wuethrich, K. Proton exchange with internal water molecules in the protein BPTI in aqueous solution J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 4363 4364
    33. 33
      McCammon, J. A.; Gelin, B. R.; Karplus, M. Dynamics of folded proteins Nature 1977, 267, 585 590
    34. 34
      Shaw, D. E.; Maragakis, P.; Lindorff-Larsen, K.; Piana, S.; Dror, R. O.; Eastwood, M. P.; Bank, J. A.; Jumper, J. M.; Salmon, J. K.; Shan, Y.; Wriggers, W. Atomic-Level Characterization of the Structural Dynamics of Proteins Science 2010, 330, 341 346
    35. 35
      Wlodawer, A.; Walter, J.; Huber, R.; Sjolin, L. Structure of bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor. Results of joint neutron and X-ray refinement of crystal form II J. Mol. Biol. 1984, 180, 301 29
    36. 36
      Grant, B. J.; Rodrigues, A. P.; ElSawy, K. M.; McCammon, J. A.; Caves, L. S. Bio3d: an R package for the comparative analysis of protein structures Bioinformatics 2006, 22, 2695 6
    37. 37
      Wereszczynski, J.; McCammon, J. A. Nucleotide-dependent mechanism of Get3 as elucidated from free energy calculations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, not supplied.
    38. 38
      Han, B.; Liu, Y.; Ginzinger, S. W.; Wishart, D. S. SHIFTX2: significantly improved protein chemical shift prediction J. Biomol. NMR 2011, 50, 43 57
    39. 39
      Grey, M. J.; Wang, C.; Palmer, A. G., 3rd. Disulfide bond isomerization in basic pancreatic trypsin inhibitor: multisite chemical exchange quantified by CPMG relaxation dispersion and chemical shift modeling J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 14324 35
    40. 40
      Berndt, K. D.; Beunink, J.; Schroeder, W.; Wuethrich, K. Designed replacement of an internal hydration water molecule in BPTI: structural and functional implications of a Gly-to-Ser mutation Biochemistry 1993, 32, 4564 4570
    41. 41
      Persson, E.; Halle, B. Nanosecond to microsecond protein dynamics probed by magnetic relaxation dispersion of buried water molecules J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 1774 87
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    Simulation setup, theory of aMD, details of how aMD parameters were selected, and reweighting protocol. Movies S1–S3, Figure S1, and Table S1. This information is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org/.


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

You’ve supercharged your research process with ACS and Mendeley!

STEP 1:
Click to create an ACS ID

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

MENDELEY PAIRING EXPIRED
Your Mendeley pairing has expired. Please reconnect