IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0018868.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Energy Computation Paradox and ab initio Protein Folding

Author

Listed:
  • John C Faver
  • Mark L Benson
  • Xiao He
  • Benjamin P Roberts
  • Bing Wang
  • Michael S Marshall
  • C David Sherrill
  • Kenneth M Merz Jr.

Abstract

The routine prediction of three-dimensional protein structure from sequence remains a challenge in computational biochemistry. It has been intuited that calculated energies from physics-based scoring functions are able to distinguish native from nonnative folds based on previous performance with small proteins and that conformational sampling is the fundamental bottleneck to successful folding. We demonstrate that as protein size increases, errors in the computed energies become a significant problem. We show, by using error probability density functions, that physics-based scores contain significant systematic and random errors relative to accurate reference energies. These errors propagate throughout an entire protein and distort its energy landscape to such an extent that modern scoring functions should have little chance of success in finding the free energy minima of large proteins. Nonetheless, by understanding errors in physics-based score functions, they can be reduced in a post-hoc manner, improving accuracy in energy computation and fold discrimination.

Suggested Citation

  • John C Faver & Mark L Benson & Xiao He & Benjamin P Roberts & Bing Wang & Michael S Marshall & C David Sherrill & Kenneth M Merz Jr., 2011. "The Energy Computation Paradox and ab initio Protein Folding," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(4), pages 1-8, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0018868
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018868
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0018868
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0018868&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0018868?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christopher D. Snow & Houbi Nguyen & Vijay S. Pande & Martin Gruebele, 2002. "Absolute comparison of simulated and experimental protein-folding dynamics," Nature, Nature, vol. 420(6911), pages 102-106, November.
    2. Julie L. Sohl & Sheila S. Jaswal & David A. Agard, 1998. "Unfolded conformations of α-lytic protease are more stable than its native state," Nature, Nature, vol. 395(6704), pages 817-819, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kalyan S. Chakrabarti & Simon Olsson & Supriya Pratihar & Karin Giller & Kerstin Overkamp & Ko On Lee & Vytautas Gapsys & Kyoung-Seok Ryu & Bert L. Groot & Frank Noé & Stefan Becker & Donghan Lee & Th, 2022. "A litmus test for classifying recognition mechanisms of transiently binding proteins," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    2. Neema L Salimi & Bosco Ho & David A Agard, 2010. "Unfolding Simulations Reveal the Mechanism of Extreme Unfolding Cooperativity in the Kinetically Stable α-Lytic Protease," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(2), pages 1-14, February.
    3. Isabella Daidone & Hannes Neuweiler & Sören Doose & Markus Sauer & Jeremy C Smith, 2010. "Hydrogen-Bond Driven Loop-Closure Kinetics in Unfolded Polypeptide Chains," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0018868. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.