From chemistry-request ^at^ www.ccl.net Wed Jan 27 03:26:48 1999 Received: from euler.central.cranfield.ac.uk (euler.central.cranfield.ac.uk [138.250.48.9]) by www.ccl.net (8.8.3/8.8.6/OSC/CCL 1.0) with ESMTP id DAA06853 Wed, 27 Jan 1999 03:26:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from btmodelling.pc.cranfield.ac.uk ([138.250.75.1] helo=btmodelling) by euler.central.cranfield.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 1.92 #2) for CHEMISTRY |-at-| www.ccl.net id 105QJE-0005wm-00; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 08:26:48 +0000 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19990127082322.009fdd30:~at~:mailboxes.ccc.cranfield.ac.uk> X-Sender: bi0100 "-at-" mailboxes.ccc.cranfield.ac.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 08:23:22 +0000 To: CHEMISTRY -x- at -x- www.ccl.net From: Richard M Day Subject: Energy Minimisation of Proteins in vacuo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi CCL'ers, I have been trying for a while to refine a protein structure (from a PDB !) and try and remove the problems of poor dihedrals (not just due to function), poor bond lengths, iffy sidechain planarity etc so it can be used to do rational design, de novo design etc etc. Now the protein I have to work on is 70Kda or so and to try and do this work using a solvated model would be fairly mad because I would have to buy a few extra hard drives for my indy to process it with a newton raphson type algorithm. The alternative in literature suggests in vacuo simulations using energy minimisation (DISCOVER, CHARMM, MAXIMIN whatever) with a variable dielectric-distance function and with a fiddle factor dielectric (different authors reckon either 4 or 20). I tried all these with my protein and it seems to work a lot better at 20 rather than 1 - and according to the Vriend & Sander WHAT_CHECK for proteins the dihedrals (according to ramachandran) seem to have become more tightly focussed where they should be and the side chains more planar, bond lengths seem to be more like the norm. Is this a good alternative to solvation or does this technique completely over-refine the model and make it worse that just using the raw data ? Any comment would be greatly appreciated, summary as usual. Best Wishes, Richard Day. Cranfield Biotechnology Centre, +44 1234 750111 x3562