Force Field Benchmark of Amino Acids: I. Hydration and Diffusion in Different Water Models

Abstract

Thermodynamic and kinetic properties are of critical importance for the applicability of computational models to biomolecules such as proteins. Here we present an extensive evaluation of the Amber ff99SB-ILDN force field for modeling of hydration and diffusion of amino acids with three-site (SPC, SPC/E, SPC/E, and TIP3P), four-site (TIP4P, TIP4P-Ew, and TIP4P/2005), and five-site (TIP5P and TIP5P-Ew) water models. Hydration free energies (HFEs) of neutral amino acid side chain analogues have little dependence on the water model, with a root-mean-square error (RMSE) of ∼1 kcal/mol from experimental observations. On the basis of the number of interacting sites in the water model, HFEs of charged side chains can be putatively classified into three groups, of which the group of three-site models lies between those of four- and five-site water models; for each group, the water model dependence is greatly eliminated when the solvent Galvani potential is considered. Some discrepancies in the location of the first hydration peak ( R) in the ion-water radial distribution function between experimental and calculated observations were detected, such as a systematic underestimation of the acetate (Asp side chain) ion. The RMSE of calculated diffusion coefficients of amino acids from experiment increases linearly with the increasing diffusion coefficients of the solvent water models at infinite dilution. TIP3P has the fastest diffusivity, in line with literature findings, while the "FB" and "OPC" water model families as well as TIP4P/2005 perform well, within a relative error of 5%, and TIP4P/2005 yields the most accurate estimate for the water diffusion coefficient. All of the tested water models overestimate amino acid diffusion coefficients by approximately 40% (TIP4P/2005) to 200% (TIP3P). Scaling of protein-water interactions with TIP4P/2005 in the Amber ff99SBws and ff03ws force fields leads to more negative HFEs but has little influence on the diffusion of amino acids. The most recent FF/water combinations of ff14SB/OPC3, ff15ipq/SPC/E, and fb15/TIP3P-FB do not show obvious improvements in accuracy for the tested quantities. These findings here establish a benchmark that may aid in the development and improvement of classical force fields to accurately model protein dynamics and thermodynamics.

Rapid prediction of possible inhibitors for SARS-CoV-2 main protease using docking and FPL simulations

“…It should be noted that the combination of the force elds was preferred since it is one of the most solutions for free energy assessment. 37,38 The complex SARS-CoV-2 + ligand was initially introduced into a rectangular PBC (periodic boundary conditions) box with a size of 9.83 Â 5.92 Â 8.70 nm ( Fig. 1), which is similar to the recent study.…”

Water in Nanopores and Biological Channels: A Molecular Simulation Perspective

“… 76 The resulting models TIP3P-FB and TIP4P-FB produce improved densities, dielectric constants, self-diffusion coefficients and shear viscosities over a range of temperatures compared with TIP3P and TIP4P. 76 Initial evaluations of their performance in simulations with amino acids 94 and with lipid bilayers 95 have been performed. The ForceBalance algorithm has been further used to develop water models based on data sets of surface tension.…”

Atomic Partitioning of the MPn (n= 2, 3, 4) Dynamic Electron Correlation Energy by the Interacting Quantum Atoms Method: A Fast and Accurate Electrostatic Potential Integral Approach

“…Atomistic force fields continue to be developed [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] given their growing use and impact in biological and materials science. Extensive comparisons [11][12][13][14] between, traditional force fields can offer guidance in this development, as well as comparisons [15,16] between machine-learnt potentials. Within this grand scheme of force field development, the modeling of dispersion [17] energy has received special attention over the last decade and more.…”