Distinguishing native conformations of proteins from decoys with an effective free energy estimator based on the OPLS all‐atom force field and the surface generalized born solvent model

Citations Over TimeTop 10% of 2002 papers

Abstract

Protein decoy data sets provide a benchmark for testing scoring functions designed for fold recognition and protein homology modeling problems. It is commonly believed that statistical potentials based on reduced atomic models are better able to discriminate native-like from misfolded decoys than scoring functions based on more detailed molecular mechanics models. Recent benchmark tests on small data sets, however, suggest otherwise. In this work, we report the results of extensive decoy detection tests using an effective free energy function based on the OPLS all-atom (OPLS-AA) force field and the Surface Generalized Born (SGB) model for the solvent electrostatic effects. The OPLS-AA/SGB effective free energy is used as a scoring function to detect native protein folds among a total of 48,832 decoys for 32 different proteins from Park and Levitt's 4-state-reduced, Levitt's local-minima, Baker's ROSETTA all-atom, and Skolnick's decoy sets. Solvent electrostatic effects are included through the Surface Generalized Born (SGB) model. All structures are locally minimized without restraints. From an analysis of the individual energy components of the OPLS-AA/SGB energy function for the native and the best-ranked decoy, it is determined that a balance of the terms of the potential is responsible for the minimized energies that most successfully distinguish the native from the misfolded conformations. Different combinations of individual energy terms provide less discrimination than the total energy. The results are consistent with observations that all-atom molecular potentials coupled with intermediate level solvent dielectric models are competitive with knowledge-based potentials for decoy detection and protein modeling problems such as fold recognition and homology modeling.

Related Papers

• → Unsupervised multi-instance learning for protein structure determination(2021)7 cited
• → Decoy Selection in Protein Structure Determination via Symmetric Non-negative Matrix Factorization(2020)5 cited
• → Building maps of protein structure spaces in template-free protein structure prediction(2019)4 cited
• → Using the Rosetta algorithm and selected inter‐residue distances to predict protein structure(2008)2 cited
• → A Novel Average Measure Approach to the Identification of Native-Like Protein Structures Among Decoy Sets(2014)