ArticleJournal of computational chemistry2016
Electrostatic component of binding energy: Interpreting predictions from poisson-boltzmann equation and modeling protocols.
Article in Journal of computational chemistry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inhibition mechanism of potential antituberculosis compound lansoprazole sulfide.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Long-range charge transfer mechanism of the IIINature communications · 2024Article
- Electrostatic complementarity at the interface drives transient protein-protein interactions.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Computational Design of PDZ-Peptide Binding.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- Modeling Electrostatic Force in Protein-Protein Recognition.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2019Article
- Combining the polarizable Drude force field with a continuum electrostatic Poisson-Boltzmann implicit solvation model.Journal of computational chemistry · 2018Article
- Electrostatic Interactions in Protein Structure, Folding, Binding, and Condensation.Chemical reviews · 2018Review
- Reproducing the Ensemble Average Polar Solvation Energy of a Protein from a Single Structure: Gaussian-Based Smooth Dielectric Function for Macromolecular Modeling.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2018Article
- Atomic Radius and Charge Parameter Uncertainty in Biomolecular Solvation Energy Calculations.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2018Article
- Assessment of a Single Decoupling Alchemical Approach for the Calculation of the Absolute Binding Free Energies of Protein-Peptide Complexes.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2018Article
- DelPhiForce, a tool for electrostatic force calculations: Applications to macromolecular binding.Journal of computational chemistry · 2017Article
- A Simple PB/LIE Free Energy Function Accurately Predicts the Peptide Binding Specificity of the Tiam1 PDZ Domain.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Macromolecular interactions are essential for understanding numerous biological processes and are typically characterized by the binding free energy. Important component of the binding free energy is the electrostatics, which is frequently modeled via the solutions of the Poisson-Boltzmann Equations (PBE). However, numerous works have shown that the electrostatic component (ΔΔGelec ) of binding free energy is very sensitive to the parameters used and modeling protocol. This prompted some researchers to question the robustness of PBE in predicting ΔΔGelec . We argue that the sensitivity of the absolute ΔΔGelec calculated with PBE using different input parameters and definitions does not indicate PBE deficiency, rather this is what should be expected. We show how the apparent sensitivity should be interpreted in terms of the underlying changes in several numerous and physical parameters. We demonstrate that PBE approach is robust within each considered force field (CHARMM-27, AMBER-94, and OPLS-AA) once the corresponding structures are energy minimized. This observation holds despite of using two different molecular surface definitions, pointing again that PBE delivers consistent results within particular force field. The fact that PBE delivered ΔΔGelec values may differ if calculated with different modeling protocols is not a deficiency of PBE, but natural results of the differences of the force field parameters and potential functions for energy minimization. In addition, while the absolute ΔΔGelec values calculated with different force field differ, their ordering remains practically the same allowing for consistent ranking despite of the force field used. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.