Premium
Revised algorithms for the build‐up procedure for predicting protein conformations by energy minimization
Author(s) -
Gibson K. D.,
Scheraga H. A.
Publication year - 1987
Publication title -
journal of computational chemistry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.907
H-Index - 188
eISSN - 1096-987X
pISSN - 0192-8651
DOI - 10.1002/jcc.540080611
Subject(s) - maxima and minima , energy minimization , minification , solvation , energy (signal processing) , potential energy , chemistry , molecule , computational chemistry , function (biology) , algorithm , physics , mathematics , atomic physics , mathematical optimization , quantum mechanics , mathematical analysis , organic chemistry , evolutionary biology , biology
The build‐up procedure for predicting low‐energy conformations of polypeptides has been extended to cover the case of peptides in aqueous solutions. The revised procedure consists of five steps to be applied to each stage of the build‐up. I. All low‐energy minima of each of the two fragments to be joined are combined as starting points for energy minimization of the enlarged fragment, and those minima of the enlarged fragment within a certain upper bound of the lowest energy are retained. II. Whenever one of the combinations in Step I leads to an atomic overlap, the minimization is started again using a pseudoenergy function which remains finite everywhere and becomes equal to the standard energy function when no atoms overlap. III. The minima generated in Steps I and II are culled by ignoring side‐chain conformations and retaining only those minima whose backbone conformations differ significantly. IV. The rotameric states of the side chains are optimized, by testing their energy of interaction with the rest of the molecule, and subjecting the whole molecule to a further round of energy minimization if the test indicates that this would reduce the energy. V. The energies of all minima are recomputed with inclusion of a term for solvation and with a smaller upper bound as the criterion for retention. The original build‐up procedure consisted of Steps I and III only. Examples are presented showing the effectiveness of the new Steps II and IV in locating low‐energy minima, and the problems that remain to be solved, chiefly concerning Step V, are discussed.