Solvent models for protein–ligand binding: Comparison of implicit solvent poisson and surface generalized born models with explicit solvent simulations
Article first published online: 20 MAR 2001
DOI: 10.1002/jcc.1031
Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Additional Information
How to Cite
Zhang, L. Y., Gallicchio, E., Friesner, R. A. and Levy, R. M. (2001), Solvent models for protein–ligand binding: Comparison of implicit solvent poisson and surface generalized born models with explicit solvent simulations. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 22: 591–607. doi: 10.1002/jcc.1031
Publication History
- Issue published online: 20 MAR 2001
- Article first published online: 20 MAR 2001
- Manuscript Accepted: 26 OCT 2000
- Manuscript Received: 13 JUL 2000
Funded by
- NIH. Grant Numbers: GM30580, GM52019, RR06892
- Center for Biomolecular Simulations at Columbia University
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- implicit solvent models;
- protein–ligand binding;
- protein electrostatics;
- generalized Born model;
- free energy perturbation
Abstract
Solvent effects play a crucial role in mediating the interactions between proteins and their ligands. Implicit solvent models offer some advantages for modeling these interactions, but they have not been parameterized on such complex problems, and therefore, it is not clear how reliable they are. We have studied the binding of an octapeptide ligand to the murine MHC class I protein using both explicit solvent and implicit solvent models. The solvation free energy calculations are more than 103 faster using the Surface Generalized Born implicit solvent model compared to FEP simulations with explicit solvent. For some of the electrostatic calculations needed to estimate the binding free energy, there is near quantitative agreement between the explicit and implicit solvent model results; overall, the qualitative trends in the binding predicted by the explicit solvent FEP simulations are reproduced by the implicit solvent model. With an appropriate choice of reference system based on the binding of the discharged ligand, electrostatic interactions are found to enhance the binding affinity because the favorable Coulomb interaction energy between the ligand and protein more than compensates for the unfavorable free energy cost of partially desolvating the ligand upon binding. Some of the effects of protein flexibility and thermal motions on charging the peptide in the solvated complex are also considered. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Comput Chem 22: 591–607, 2001

1096-987X/asset/JCC_centre.gif?v=1&s=b0d6b2f567f5e92bfd33499dcef2c15d54c9375d)
1096-987X/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=4429aac2462ebd499c13b3d7fe983679c5767778)