- •Foreword
- •Preface
- •Contents
- •Introduction
- •Oren M. Becker
- •Alexander D. MacKerell, Jr.
- •Masakatsu Watanabe*
- •III. SCOPE OF THE BOOK
- •IV. TOWARD A NEW ERA
- •REFERENCES
- •Atomistic Models and Force Fields
- •Alexander D. MacKerell, Jr.
- •II. POTENTIAL ENERGY FUNCTIONS
- •D. Alternatives to the Potential Energy Function
- •III. EMPIRICAL FORCE FIELDS
- •A. From Potential Energy Functions to Force Fields
- •B. Overview of Available Force Fields
- •C. Free Energy Force Fields
- •D. Applicability of Force Fields
- •IV. DEVELOPMENT OF EMPIRICAL FORCE FIELDS
- •B. Optimization Procedures Used in Empirical Force Fields
- •D. Use of Quantum Mechanical Results as Target Data
- •VI. CONCLUSION
- •REFERENCES
- •Dynamics Methods
- •Oren M. Becker
- •Masakatsu Watanabe*
- •II. TYPES OF MOTIONS
- •IV. NEWTONIAN MOLECULAR DYNAMICS
- •A. Newton’s Equation of Motion
- •C. Molecular Dynamics: Computational Algorithms
- •A. Assigning Initial Values
- •B. Selecting the Integration Time Step
- •C. Stability of Integration
- •VI. ANALYSIS OF DYNAMIC TRAJECTORIES
- •B. Averages and Fluctuations
- •C. Correlation Functions
- •D. Potential of Mean Force
- •VII. OTHER MD SIMULATION APPROACHES
- •A. Stochastic Dynamics
- •B. Brownian Dynamics
- •VIII. ADVANCED SIMULATION TECHNIQUES
- •A. Constrained Dynamics
- •C. Other Approaches and Future Direction
- •REFERENCES
- •Conformational Analysis
- •Oren M. Becker
- •II. CONFORMATION SAMPLING
- •A. High Temperature Molecular Dynamics
- •B. Monte Carlo Simulations
- •C. Genetic Algorithms
- •D. Other Search Methods
- •III. CONFORMATION OPTIMIZATION
- •A. Minimization
- •B. Simulated Annealing
- •IV. CONFORMATIONAL ANALYSIS
- •A. Similarity Measures
- •B. Cluster Analysis
- •C. Principal Component Analysis
- •REFERENCES
- •Thomas A. Darden
- •II. CONTINUUM BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
- •III. FINITE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
- •IV. PERIODIC BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
- •REFERENCES
- •Internal Coordinate Simulation Method
- •Alexey K. Mazur
- •II. INTERNAL AND CARTESIAN COORDINATES
- •III. PRINCIPLES OF MODELING WITH INTERNAL COORDINATES
- •B. Energy Gradients
- •IV. INTERNAL COORDINATE MOLECULAR DYNAMICS
- •A. Main Problems and Historical Perspective
- •B. Dynamics of Molecular Trees
- •C. Simulation of Flexible Rings
- •A. Time Step Limitations
- •B. Standard Geometry Versus Unconstrained Simulations
- •VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS
- •REFERENCES
- •Implicit Solvent Models
- •II. BASIC FORMULATION OF IMPLICIT SOLVENT
- •A. The Potential of Mean Force
- •III. DECOMPOSITION OF THE FREE ENERGY
- •A. Nonpolar Free Energy Contribution
- •B. Electrostatic Free Energy Contribution
- •IV. CLASSICAL CONTINUUM ELECTROSTATICS
- •A. The Poisson Equation for Macroscopic Media
- •B. Electrostatic Forces and Analytic Gradients
- •C. Treatment of Ionic Strength
- •A. Statistical Mechanical Integral Equations
- •VI. SUMMARY
- •REFERENCES
- •Steven Hayward
- •II. NORMAL MODE ANALYSIS IN CARTESIAN COORDINATE SPACE
- •B. Normal Mode Analysis in Dihedral Angle Space
- •C. Approximate Methods
- •IV. NORMAL MODE REFINEMENT
- •C. Validity of the Concept of a Normal Mode Important Subspace
- •A. The Solvent Effect
- •B. Anharmonicity and Normal Mode Analysis
- •VI. CONCLUSIONS
- •ACKNOWLEDGMENT
- •REFERENCES
- •Free Energy Calculations
- •Thomas Simonson
- •II. GENERAL BACKGROUND
- •A. Thermodynamic Cycles for Solvation and Binding
- •B. Thermodynamic Perturbation Theory
- •D. Other Thermodynamic Functions
- •E. Free Energy Component Analysis
- •III. STANDARD BINDING FREE ENERGIES
- •IV. CONFORMATIONAL FREE ENERGIES
- •A. Conformational Restraints or Umbrella Sampling
- •B. Weighted Histogram Analysis Method
- •C. Conformational Constraints
- •A. Dielectric Reaction Field Approaches
- •B. Lattice Summation Methods
- •VI. IMPROVING SAMPLING
- •A. Multisubstate Approaches
- •B. Umbrella Sampling
- •C. Moving Along
- •VII. PERSPECTIVES
- •REFERENCES
- •John E. Straub
- •B. Phenomenological Rate Equations
- •II. TRANSITION STATE THEORY
- •A. Building the TST Rate Constant
- •B. Some Details
- •C. Computing the TST Rate Constant
- •III. CORRECTIONS TO TRANSITION STATE THEORY
- •A. Computing Using the Reactive Flux Method
- •B. How Dynamic Recrossings Lower the Rate Constant
- •IV. FINDING GOOD REACTION COORDINATES
- •A. Variational Methods for Computing Reaction Paths
- •B. Choice of a Differential Cost Function
- •C. Diffusional Paths
- •VI. HOW TO CONSTRUCT A REACTION PATH
- •A. The Use of Constraints and Restraints
- •B. Variationally Optimizing the Cost Function
- •VII. FOCAL METHODS FOR REFINING TRANSITION STATES
- •VIII. HEURISTIC METHODS
- •IX. SUMMARY
- •ACKNOWLEDGMENT
- •REFERENCES
- •Paul D. Lyne
- •Owen A. Walsh
- •II. BACKGROUND
- •III. APPLICATIONS
- •A. Triosephosphate Isomerase
- •B. Bovine Protein Tyrosine Phosphate
- •C. Citrate Synthase
- •IV. CONCLUSIONS
- •ACKNOWLEDGMENT
- •REFERENCES
- •Jeremy C. Smith
- •III. SCATTERING BY CRYSTALS
- •IV. NEUTRON SCATTERING
- •A. Coherent Inelastic Neutron Scattering
- •B. Incoherent Neutron Scattering
- •REFERENCES
- •Michael Nilges
- •II. EXPERIMENTAL DATA
- •A. Deriving Conformational Restraints from NMR Data
- •B. Distance Restraints
- •C. The Hybrid Energy Approach
- •III. MINIMIZATION PROCEDURES
- •A. Metric Matrix Distance Geometry
- •B. Molecular Dynamics Simulated Annealing
- •C. Folding Random Structures by Simulated Annealing
- •IV. AUTOMATED INTERPRETATION OF NOE SPECTRA
- •B. Automated Assignment of Ambiguities in the NOE Data
- •C. Iterative Explicit NOE Assignment
- •D. Symmetrical Oligomers
- •VI. INFLUENCE OF INTERNAL DYNAMICS ON THE
- •EXPERIMENTAL DATA
- •VII. STRUCTURE QUALITY AND ENERGY PARAMETERS
- •VIII. RECENT APPLICATIONS
- •REFERENCES
- •II. STEPS IN COMPARATIVE MODELING
- •C. Model Building
- •D. Loop Modeling
- •E. Side Chain Modeling
- •III. AB INITIO PROTEIN STRUCTURE MODELING METHODS
- •IV. ERRORS IN COMPARATIVE MODELS
- •VI. APPLICATIONS OF COMPARATIVE MODELING
- •VII. COMPARATIVE MODELING IN STRUCTURAL GENOMICS
- •VIII. CONCLUSION
- •ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
- •REFERENCES
- •Roland L. Dunbrack, Jr.
- •II. BAYESIAN STATISTICS
- •A. Bayesian Probability Theory
- •B. Bayesian Parameter Estimation
- •C. Frequentist Probability Theory
- •D. Bayesian Methods Are Superior to Frequentist Methods
- •F. Simulation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods
- •III. APPLICATIONS IN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
- •B. Bayesian Sequence Alignment
- •IV. APPLICATIONS IN STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY
- •A. Secondary Structure and Surface Accessibility
- •ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
- •REFERENCES
- •Computer Aided Drug Design
- •Alexander Tropsha and Weifan Zheng
- •IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
- •REFERENCES
- •Oren M. Becker
- •II. SIMPLE MODELS
- •III. LATTICE MODELS
- •B. Mapping Atomistic Energy Landscapes
- •C. Mapping Atomistic Free Energy Landscapes
- •VI. SUMMARY
- •REFERENCES
- •Toshiko Ichiye
- •II. ELECTRON TRANSFER PROPERTIES
- •B. Potential Energy Parameters
- •IV. REDOX POTENTIALS
- •A. Calculation of the Energy Change of the Redox Site
- •B. Calculation of the Energy Changes of the Protein
- •B. Calculation of Differences in the Energy Change of the Protein
- •VI. ELECTRON TRANSFER RATES
- •A. Theory
- •B. Application
- •REFERENCES
- •Fumio Hirata and Hirofumi Sato
- •Shigeki Kato
- •A. Continuum Model
- •B. Simulations
- •C. Reference Interaction Site Model
- •A. Molecular Polarization in Neat Water*
- •B. Autoionization of Water*
- •C. Solvatochromism*
- •F. Tautomerization in Formamide*
- •IV. SUMMARY AND PROSPECTS
- •ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
- •REFERENCES
- •Nucleic Acid Simulations
- •Alexander D. MacKerell, Jr.
- •Lennart Nilsson
- •D. DNA Phase Transitions
- •III. METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
- •A. Atomistic Models
- •B. Alternative Models
- •IV. PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
- •A. Starting Structures
- •C. Production MD Simulation
- •D. Convergence of MD Simulations
- •WEB SITES OF INTEREST
- •REFERENCES
- •Membrane Simulations
- •Douglas J. Tobias
- •II. MOLECULAR DYNAMICS SIMULATIONS OF MEMBRANES
- •B. Force Fields
- •C. Ensembles
- •D. Time Scales
- •III. LIPID BILAYER STRUCTURE
- •A. Overall Bilayer Structure
- •C. Solvation of the Lipid Polar Groups
- •IV. MOLECULAR DYNAMICS IN MEMBRANES
- •A. Overview of Dynamic Processes in Membranes
- •B. Qualitative Picture on the 100 ps Time Scale
- •C. Incoherent Neutron Scattering Measurements of Lipid Dynamics
- •F. Hydrocarbon Chain Dynamics
- •ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
- •REFERENCES
- •Appendix: Useful Internet Resources
- •B. Molecular Modeling and Simulation Packages
- •Index
19
The RISM-SCF/MCSCF Approach for Chemical Processes in Solutions
Fumio Hirata and Hirofumi Sato
Institute for Molecular Science, Okazaki National Research Institutes, Okazaki, Japan
Seiichiro Ten-no
Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan
Shigeki Kato
Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
I.SOLVENT EFFECT ON CHEMICAL PROCESSES
Most chemical reactions in nature as well as in the laboratory take place in liquid solutions. Chemical reactions of molecules in living systems take place exclusively in the solution phase. One of the most important tactics in organic chemistry is to choose an appropriate solvent for their reactions or to get higher yields. The reaction yield and rate are controlled by the solvent through changes in the free energy difference between reactants and products and thus in the activation free energy. In living cells, chemical reactions are controlled by the solvent with an additional complication—conformational fluctuations in biomolecules. In all those reactions, the solvent effect manifests itself not only through solute– solvent interactions and solvent reorganizations but also through intramolecular processes that are always associated with changes in electronic structure. In this regard, theoretical investigations of chemical processes in solutions are inevitably coupled with studies of quantum and statistical mechanics.
One of the most straightforward realizations of such couplings is the ab initio molecular dynamics (MD) approach originated by Car and Parrinello (CP) and published by Laasoninen et al. [1]. The method, which consists of solving the Kohn–Sham density functional (DF) equation by simulated annealing, has been proven to be a capable theory in many applications. However, the treatment has serious limitations or difficulties in terms of system size and the handling of excited states. In a sense, the approaches based on the path integral technique share similar difficulties with the CP theory for chemical processes in solution. Combined with molecular simulations and the statistical mechanics of liquids, the method could have revealed many interesting physical aspects of quantum processes in solution. But, again, it is largely limited to a simple and/or small system such as a harmonic oscillator or a solvated electron. In this respect, it is highly desirable to exploit the molecular orbital (MO) theory for the electronic structure, which has been proven to be the most powerful tool for exploring molecular processes. This method does not have the serious limitations characteristic of the CP and path integral approaches.
417
418 |
Hirata et al. |
However, theories that are based on a basis set expansion do have a serious limitation with respect to the number of electrons. Even if one considers the rapid development of computer technology, it will be virtually impossible to treat by the MO method a small system of a size typical of classical molecular simulation, say 1000 water molecules. A logical solution to such a problem would be to employ a hybrid approach in which a chemical species of interest is handled by quantum chemistry while the solvent is treated classically.
Roughly speaking, three types of hybrid approaches have been proposed depending on the level of coarse graining with respect to solvent coordinates. Methods based on continuum models smear all solvent coordinates and represent solvent characteristics with a single parameter, namely, a dielectric constant. Molecular simulations, on the other hand, take all solvent coordinates into account explicitly and sample many solvent configurations in order to realize meaningful statistics for the physical quantities of concern. The approach based on the statistical mechanics of molecular liquids coarse-grains solvent coordinates in a level of the (density) pair correlation functions. In what follows, we briefly outline these three methods.
A. Continuum Model
The continuum model, in which solvent is regarded as a continuum dielectric, has been used to study solvent effects for a long time [2,3]. Because the electrostatic interaction in a polar system dominates over other forces such as van der Waals interactions, solvation energies can be approximated by a reaction field due to polarization of the dielectric continuum as solvent. Other contributions such as dispersion interactions, which must be explicitly considered for nonpolar solvent systems, have usually been treated with empirical quantity such as macroscopic surface tension of solvent.
A variety of methodologies have been implemented for the reaction field. The basic equation for the dielectric continuum model is the Poisson–Laplace equation, by which the electrostatic field in a cavity with an arbitrary shape and size is calculated, although some methods do not satisfy the equation. Because the solute’s electronic structure and the reaction field depend on each other, a nonlinear equation (modified Schro¨dinger equation) has to be solved in an iterative manner. In practice this is achieved by modifying the electronic Hamiltonian or Fock operator, which is defined through the shape and size of the cavity and the description of the solute’s electronic distribution. If one takes a dipole moment approximation for the solute’s electronic distribution and a spherical cavity (Onsager’s reaction field), the interaction can be derived rather easily and an analytical expression of the Fock operator is obtained. However, such an expression is not feasible for an arbitrary electronic distribution in an arbitrary cavity fitted to the molecular shape. In this case the Fock operator is very complicated and has to be prepared by a numerical procedure.
Numerous attempts have been made to develop hybrid methodologies along these lines. An obvious advantage of the method is its handiness, while its disadvantage is an artifact introduced at the boundary between the solute and solvent. You may obtain agreement between experiments and theory as close as you desire by introducing many adjustable parameters associated with the boundary conditions. However, the more adjustable parameters are introduced, the more the physical significance of the parameter is obscured.
B. Simulations
Molecular simulation techniques, namely Monte Carlo and molecular dynamics methods, in which the liquid is regarded as an assembly of interacting particles, are the most popular
RISM-SCF/MCSCF for Processes in Solutions |
419 |
approach. Various properties related to the macroscopic and microscopic quantities are computed by these methods.
A typical hybrid approach is the QM/MM (quantum mechanical–molecular mechanical) simulation method [4]. In this method, the solute molecule is treated quantum mechanically, whereas surrounding solvent molecules are approximated by molecular mechanical potentials. This idea is also used in biological systems by regarding a part of the system, e.g., the activation site region of an enzyme, as a quantum ‘‘solute,’’ which is embedded in the rest of the molecule, which is represented by molecular mechanics. The actual procedure used in this method is very simple: The total energy of the liquid system (or part of a protein) at an instantaneous configuration, generated by a Monte Carlo or molecular dynamics procedure, is evaluated, and the modified Schro¨dinger equations are solved repeatedly until sufficient sampling is accumulated. Since millions of electronic structure calculations are needed for sufficient sampling, the ab initio MO method is usually too slow to be practical in the simulation of chemical or biological systems in solution. Hence a semiempirical theory for electronic structure has been used in these types of simulations.
The QM/MM methods have their own disadvantages, the obvious one being the computational load added to the already complex calculation of the electronic structure.
C. Reference Interaction Site Model
The integral equation method is free of the disadvantages of the continuum model and simulation techniques mentioned in the foregoing, and it gives a microscopic picture of the solvent effect within a reasonable computational time. Since details of the RISM-SCF/ MCSCF method are discussed in the following section we here briefly sketch the reference interaction site model (RISM) theory.
The statistical mechanics of liquids and liquid mixtures has its own long history, but the major breakthrough toward the theory in chemistry was made by Chandler and Andersen in 1971 with the reference interaction site model (RISM) [5]. This theory can be regarded as a natural extension of the Ornstein–Zernike (OZ) equation for simple atomic liquids to a mixture of atoms with chemical bonds represented by intramolecular correlation functions. Introducing this correlation function enables us to take into account the geometry of molecules. However, it cannot handle electrostatics in its original form, though the charge distribution in a molecule plays an essential role in determining the chemical specificity of the molecular system. The next important development in the theory was made in 1981 with the extended RISM theory [6–8]. The extended RISM theory takes into account not only the geometry but also the charge distribution of a molecule, which completes the chemical characterization of a species for the statistical mechanics of a molecular liquid.
A general expression of the RISM equation for a system consisting of several molecular species can be written as
ρhρ ωc ω ω c ρhρ |
(1) |
where the asterisk indicates convolution integrals and matrix products, and ρ denotes a diagonal matrix consisting of the density of molecular species. c and h are the direct and total correlation matrices with matrix elements of cαβ(r) and hαβ(r), respectively. These functions, cαβ and hαβ, represent the intermolecular correlation functions between the sites (atoms or atomic groups) α and β. ω is the intramolecular correlation function, which
420 |
Hirata et al. |
embodies information about a molecular geometry. In the case of rigid molecules, ω is expressed by
ωαβ(r) ραδαβδ(r) (1 δαβ) |
1 |
δ(r Lαβ) |
(2) |
4πLαβ2 |
where Lαβ indicates the rigid constraint (bond length) representing the chemical bond between sites α and β.
The general equation can be further reduced to the case of infinite dilution limit, a binary mixture, ionic solutions, and so on. These equations are supplemented by closure relations such as the Percus–Yevick (PY) and hypernetted chain (HNC) approximations.
cαβ(r) exp[ βuαβ(r)]{1 hαβ(r) cαβ(r)} 1 (PY) |
(3) |
and |
|
cαβ(r) exp[ βuαβ(r)hαβ(r) cαβ(r)] {hαβ(r) cαβ(r)} 1 |
(HNC) (4) |
where uαβ(r) is the intermolecular interaction potential and β 1/kBT. All the thermodynamic functions can be calculated from the correlation functions. The excess chemical potential or the solvation energy of a molecule has particular importance and is calculated from the correlation functions [9].
ρ |
∫dr cαs(r) |
1 |
2 |
1 |
hαs(r)cαs(r) |
|
|
∆µ β |
|
hαs(r) |
|
|
(5) |
||
2 |
2 |
||||||
|
αs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Essentially, the RISM and extended RISM theories can provide information equivalent to that obtained from simulation techniques, namely, thermodynamic properties, microscopic liquid structure, and so on. But it is noteworthy that the computational cost is dramatically reduced by this analytical treatment, which can be combined with the computationally expensive ab initio MO theory. Another aspect of such treatment is the transparent logic that enables phenomena to be understood in terms of statistical mechanics. Many applications have been based on the RISM and extended RISM theories [10,11].
II. OUTLINE OF THE RISM-SCF/MCSCF METHOD
We recently proposed a new method referred to as RISM-SCF/MCSCF based on the ab initio electronic structure theory and the integral equation theory of molecular liquids (RISM). Ten-no et al. [12,13] proposed the original RISM-SCF method in 1993. The basic idea of the method is to replace the reaction field in the continuum models with a microscopic expression in terms of the site–site radial distribution functions between solute and solvent, which can be calculated from the RISM theory. Exploiting the microscopic reaction field, the Fock operator of a molecule in solution can be expressed by
Fsolvi Fi fi bλVλ |
(6) |
λ solute |
|
where the first term on the right-hand side is the operator for an isolated molecule and the second term represents the solvation effect. bλ is a population operator of solute atoms, and Vλ represents the electrostatic potential of the reaction field at solute atom λ produced
RISM-SCF/MCSCF for Processes in Solutions |
421 |
by solvent molecules. The potential Vλ takes a microscopic expression in terms of the site–site radial distribution functions between solute and solvent:
Vλ solute ρ |
qα |
gλα(r) dr |
(7) |
r |
|||
α solvent |
|
where qα is the partial charge on site α, ρ is the bulk density of the solvent, and gλα is the site–site radial distribution function (RDF) or pair correlation function (PCF).
In the RISM-SCF theory, the statistical solvent distribution around the solute is determined by the electronic structure of the solute, whereas the electronic structure of the solute is influenced by the surrounding solvent distribution. Therefore, the ab initio MO calculation and the RISM equation must be solved in a self-consistent manner. It is noted that ‘‘SCF’’ (self-consistent field) applies not only to the electronic structure calculation but to the whole system, e.g., a self-consistent treatment of electronic structure and solvent distribution. The MO part of the method can be readily extended to the more sophisticated levels beyond Hartree–Fock (HF), such as configuration interaction (CI) and coupled cluster (CC).
The solvated Fock operator can be naturally derived from the variational principles [14] defining the Helmholtz free energy of the system ( ) by
ˆ |
ˆ |
(8) |
Ψ|H ∆µ|Ψ Enuc |
||
Here, Enuc is the nuclear repulsion energy and |
|
|
Ψ|∆µ|Ψ ∆µ |
(9) |
|
ˆ |
|
|
is the modified version of the solvation free energy originally defined by Singer and Chandler [9] [Eq. (5)]. This is a functional of the total correlation function hαs(r), the direct correlation function cαs(r), and the solute wave function |Ψ. Energy of the solute molecule Esolute is defined as follows:
Esolute Ψ|H|Ψ Enuc |
(10) |
ˆ |
|
Note that this is also a functional of hαs(r), cαs(r), and |Ψ. Imposing constraints concerning the orthonormality of the configuration state function (C) and one-particle orbitals (φi) on the equation, one can derive the Fock operator from based on the variational principle:
δ( [c, h, t, v, C] [constraints to orthonormality]) 0 |
|
(11) |
||||||
and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fsolvij Fij γij bλ |
∂ |
|
|
ρ |
∫dr exp[ βuαs(r) hαs(r) cαs(r)] |
|
(12) |
|
∂qλ |
||||||||
λ solute |
β |
αs |
|
If classical Coulombic interactions are assumed among point charges for electrostatic interactions between solute and solvent, and the term for the CI coefficients (C) is omitted, the solvated Fock operator is reduced to Eq. (6). The significance of this definition of the Fock operator from a variational principle is that it enables us to express the analytical first derivative of the free energy with respect to the nuclear coordinate of the solute molecule Rα,