Skip to main content
Biointerphases

Journal for Biophysical Chemistry

Download PDF

Development of molecular simulation methods to accurately represent protein-surface interactions: Method assessment for the calculation of electrostatic effects

Biointerphases volume 4, pages 57–64 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

The simulation of the interactions of proteins with charged surfaces in a condensed-phase aqueous solution containing electrolytes using empirical force field based methods is predominantly governed by nonbonded interactions between the atoms of the protein, surface, and the solvent. Electrostatic effects represent the strongest type of these interactions and the type that is most difficult to accurately represent because of their long-range influence. While many different methods have been developed to represent electrostatic interactions, the particle mesh Ewald summation (PME) method is generally considered to be the most accurate one for calculating these effects. However, the PME method was designed for systems with three-dimensional (3D) periodicity, and not for interfacial systems such as the case of protein adsorption to a charged surface. Interfacial systems such as these have only two-dimensional periodicity, which may not be appropriate for treatment with PME due to the possibility that the presence of multiple charged image surfaces parallel to the primary simulation cell’s surface, may introduce nonphysical effects on the behavior of the charged molecules in the system. In an effort to address this issue, the authors have conducted a set of nanosecond-scale molecular dynamics simulations to calculate the equilibrium distribution of Na+ and Cl− ions near a charged surface using PME and a range of radial cutoff methods for treating electrostatic interactions, where the cutoffs prevent interaction with the periodic images of the system. The resulting ion concentration profiles were compared to one another and to a continuum analytical solution of the theoretical ion distribution obtained from the Poisson—Boltzmann equation. Their results show that the PME method does not introduce the suspected nonphysical effects in the ion distributions due to the 3D periodic images of the system, thus indicating that it is appropriate for use for this type of molecular simulation. Although their interest is motivated by protein-surface interactions, the conclusions are applicable for the treatment of electrostatics in other aqueous systems with two-dimensional periodicity.

References

  1. B. Sivaraman, K. P. Fears, and R. A. Latour, Langmuir 25, 3050 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. R. A. Latour, Biointerphases 3, FC2 (2008).

  3. J. B. Klauda, X. Wu, R. W. Pastor, and B. R. Brooks, J. Phys. Chem. B 111, 4393 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. R. J. Loncharich and B. R. Brooks, Proteins 6, 32 (1989).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. H. Schreiber and O. Steinhauser, Biochemistry 6, 32 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  6. H. Schreiber and O. Steinhauser, J. Mol. Biol. 228, 909 (1992).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. H. Schreiber and O. Steinhauser, Chem. Phys. 168, 75 (1992).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. T. A. Darden, D. York, and L. G. Pedersen, J. Chem. Phys. 98, 10089 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. R. Garemyr and A. Elofsson, Proteins 37, 417 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. T. E. Cheatham, J. L. Miller, T. Fox, T. A. Darden, and P. A. Kollman, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 117, 4193 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. I. Yeh and M. L. Berkowitz, J. Chem. Phys. 111, 3155 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. M. Kawata, M. Mikami, and U. Nagashima, J. Chem. Phys. 116, 3430 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. A. Arnold, J. de Joannis, and C. Holm, J. Chem. Phys. 117, 2496 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. J. de Joannis, A. Arnold, and C. Holm, J. Chem. Phys. 117, 2503 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. A. Brodka and A. Grzybowski, J. Chem. Phys. 117, 8208 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. D. Bostick and M. L. Berkowitz, Biophys. J. 85, 97 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. B. R. Brooks, R. E. Bruccoleri, B. D. Olafson, D. J. States, S. Swaminathan, and M. Karplus, J. Comput. Chem. 4, 187 (1983).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. N. Foloppe and A. D. MacKerell, Jr., J. Comput. Chem. 21, 86 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. F. Fogolari, A. Brigo, and H. Molinari, J. Mol. Recognit. 15, 377 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. K. P. Fears, S. E. Creager, and R. A. Latour, Langmuir 24, 37 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. J. N. Israelachvili, Intermolecular and Surface Forces, 2nd ed. (Academic, New York, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  22. J. M. Smith, H. C. Van Ness, and M. Abbott, Introduction to Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics, 6th ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  23. A. Ulman and N. Tillman, Langmuir 5, 1418 (1989).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. W. L. Jorgensen and C. Jenson, J. Comput. Chem. 19, 1179 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. F. Wang, S. J. Stuart, and R. A. Latour, Biointerphases 3, 9 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. S. E. Feller, R. W. Pastor, A. Rojnuckarin, S. Bogusz, and B. R. Brooks, J. Phys. Chem. 100, 17011 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. P. Mark and L. Nilsson, J. Comput. Chem. 23, 1211 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. W. C. Swope, H. C. Andersen, P. H. Berens, and K. R. Wilson, J. Chem. Phys. 76, 637 (1982).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. D. J. Evans and B. L. Holian, J. Chem. Phys. 83, 4069 (1985).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. J. P. Ryckaert, G. Ciccotti, and H. J. C. Berendsen, J. Comput. Phys. 23, 327 (1977).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. M. E. J. Newman and G. T. Barkema, Monte Carlo Methods in Statistical Physics (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  32. B. Jonsson, H. Wennerstrom, and B. Halle, J. Phys. Chem. 84, 2179 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. I. S. Joung and T. E. Cheatham III, J. Phys. Chem. B 112, 9020 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bioengineering, Clemson University, 29634, Clemson, South Carolina

    Galen Collier, Nadeem A. Vellore & Robert A. Latour

  2. Department of Chemistry, Clemson University, 29634, Clemson, South Carolina

    Steven J. Stuart

Authors
  1. Galen Collier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nadeem A. Vellore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert A. Latour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Steven J. Stuart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert A. Latour.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Collier, G., Vellore, N.A., Latour, R.A. et al. Development of molecular simulation methods to accurately represent protein-surface interactions: Method assessment for the calculation of electrostatic effects. Biointerphases 4, 57–64 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1116/1.3266417

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1116/1.3266417