computer modeling in molecular biology.pdf
computer modeling in molecular biology.pdf
computer modeling in molecular biology.pdf
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
28 Tim Jl? Hubbard and Arthur M. Lesk2.3.2.3 Side Cha<strong>in</strong> Build<strong>in</strong>g and Optimisation of Side Cha<strong>in</strong>ConformationOnce a complete ma<strong>in</strong> cha<strong>in</strong> model has been constructed side cha<strong>in</strong>s need to be builtand their conformations determ<strong>in</strong>ed.For closely-related prote<strong>in</strong>s, it is observed that most side cha<strong>in</strong>s tend to reta<strong>in</strong> conformation- even mutated ones. This is because each side cha<strong>in</strong>, even those on thesurface, is packed <strong>in</strong> a cage formed by its neighbours. In closely-related prote<strong>in</strong>s, amutated side cha<strong>in</strong> is likely to f<strong>in</strong>d itself <strong>in</strong> a cage created largely by nonmutatedneighbours, and must conform itself to it. Therefore the first approximation shouldbe: for side cha<strong>in</strong>s that have not been changed from the parent structure, reta<strong>in</strong> thesame conformation; for mutated side cha<strong>in</strong>s, reta<strong>in</strong> the same conformation as faras the stereochemical similarity will allow. Of course application of this rule will producesome sterically impossible comb<strong>in</strong>ations.An essential step therefore is to adjust the side cha<strong>in</strong> conformations to achievea low-energy conformation. There are now a large number of programs available tocarry out such build<strong>in</strong>g and pack<strong>in</strong>g automatically [37, 64, 65, 671 which are probablymore accurate (and of course much quicker) than manual manipulation [68].Currently available procedures for automatic side cha<strong>in</strong> modell<strong>in</strong>g and pack<strong>in</strong>gperform quite well when start<strong>in</strong>g from experimental ma<strong>in</strong> cha<strong>in</strong> atoms or Ca’s. Itis not so clear what happens as the position of the ma<strong>in</strong> cha<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> the model becomesless and less accurate (as the closeness of the relationship between the <strong>in</strong>put sequenceand the sequence of known structure decreases). Exact Ca/ma<strong>in</strong> cha<strong>in</strong> positions mayforce a unique side cha<strong>in</strong> pack<strong>in</strong>g. In contrast, <strong>in</strong> a real modell<strong>in</strong>g situation Cdma<strong>in</strong>cha<strong>in</strong> positions will be <strong>in</strong>exact, and pack<strong>in</strong>g errors are more likely. In particular, the<strong>in</strong>correct position<strong>in</strong>g of a large buried hydrophobic residue can result <strong>in</strong> seriouspack<strong>in</strong>g errors with<strong>in</strong> a whole region of the hydrophobic core of a prote<strong>in</strong>.F<strong>in</strong>ally, once all atoms have been built, the model can be subjected to EnergyM<strong>in</strong>imisation (EM) or Molecular Dynamics (MD). EM is a purely cosmetic operation.It will remove some bad atom contacts <strong>in</strong> a model but will not significantly altereven side cha<strong>in</strong> conformations. It can be useful however to “clean up” a model bysmall local adjustments. MD can be used to explore a much greater conformationalspace around the model structure than EM. If the changes <strong>in</strong> conformation are tobe at all realistic, it is necessary to simulate <strong>in</strong> the presence of water. However, it isimportant to realise that if the start<strong>in</strong>g model has substantial errors, even a very longMD run is very unlikely to improve it. Perhaps the most useful result of such simulationsis to observe how a model moves with time. If the model is wrong it is likelyto be more unstable when subjected to simulation.