Influence of Grid Spacing in Poisson–Boltzmann Equation Binding Energy Estimation

Abstract

Grid-based solvers of the Poisson-Boltzmann, PB, equation are routinely used to estimate electrostatic binding, ΔΔGel, and solvation, ΔGel, free energies. The accuracies of such estimates are subject to grid discretization errors from the finite difference approximation to the PB equation. Here, we show that the grid discretization errors in ΔΔGel are more significant than those in ΔGel, and can be divided into two parts: (i) errors associated with the relative positioning of the grid and (ii) systematic errors associated with grid spacing. The systematic error in particular is significant for methods, such as the molecular mechanics PB surface area, MM-PBSA, approach that predict electrostatic binding free energies by averaging over an ensemble of molecular conformations. Although averaging over multiple conformations can control for the error associated with grid placement, it will not eliminate the systematic error, which can only be controlled by reducing grid spacing. The present study indicates that the widely-used grid spacing of 0.5 Å produces unacceptable errors in ΔΔGel, even though its predictions of ΔGel are adequate for the cases considered here. Although both grid discretization errors generally increase with grid spacing, the relative sizes of these errors differ according to the solute-solvent dielectric boundary definition. The grid discretization errors are generally smaller on the Gaussian surface used in the present study than on either the solvent-excluded or van der Waals surfaces, which both contain more surface discontinuities (e.g., sharp edges and cusps). Additionally, all three molecular surfaces converge to very different estimates of ΔΔGel.

On the modeling of polar component of solvation energy using smooth Gaussian-based dielectric function

“…Scale dependence is an important feature for PB solvers implemented in the finite difference method 40, 41 . In previous work, we demonstrated that the Gaussian method performs better on grid shift error and rotation error compared to the homogeneous method 15 .…”

Free energies of solvation in the context of protein folding: Implications for implicit and explicit solvent models

“…The successive over‐relaxation method was used to the solve the equation sets. The grid was reconstructed for each conformation, with the coarse‐grained grid dimensions equal to the longest length of the solute in each dimension plus 20 Å after orienting the molecule to place the principle geometric axis on the x ‐axis and the next largest axis on the y ‐axis, with a resolution of 1 Å; the fine‐grained grid had instead only an additional 5 Å added to each dimension, and a resolution of 0.2 Å (the more commonly used 0.5 Å has been found to be insufficient in many cases). The definition of the boundary between solute and solvent was that by Nina et al with a half width of the transition region of 0.3 Å.…”

An accelerated nonlocal Poisson‐Boltzmann equation solver for electrostatics of biomolecule

“…Finally, we calculated the binding free energies for several DNA‐drug complexes from previous studies via our PBE and NMPBE solvers. It is interesting to find that a slope of the best‐fit line to the binding free energies predicted by NMPBE can match the experiment data better than those by PBE (see Figures 3 and 7 and Table 5), further indicating that NMPNE is a valuable variant of PBE.…”