Pair potentials for protein folding: Choice of reference states and sensitivity of predicted native states to variations in the interaction schemes
- 1 January 1999
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Protein Science
- Vol. 8 (2) , 361-369
- https://doi.org/10.1110/ps.8.2.361
Abstract
We examine the similarities and differences between two widely used knowledge-based potentials, which are expressed as contact matrices (consisting of 210 elements) that gives a scale for interaction energies between the naturally occurring amino acid residues. These are the Miyazawa-Jernigan contact interaction matrix M and the potential matrix S derived by Skolnick J et al., 1997, Protein Sci 6:676-688. Although the correlation between the two matrices is good, there is a relatively large dispersion between the elements. We show that when Thr is chosen as a reference solvent within the Miyazawa and Jernigan scheme, the dispersion between the M and S matrices is reduced. The resulting interaction matrix B gives hydrophobicities that are in very good agreement with experiment. The small dispersion between the S and B matrices, which arises due to differing reference states, is shown to have dramatic effect on the predicted native states of lattice models of proteins. These findings and other arguments are used to suggest that for reliable predictions of protein structures, pairwise additive potentials are not sufficient. We also establish that optimized protein sequences can tolerate relatively large random errors in the pair potentials. We conjecture that three body interaction may be needed to predict the folds of proteins in a reliable manner.Keywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Nature of Driving Force for Protein Folding: A Result From Analyzing the Statistical PotentialPhysical Review Letters, 1997
- Derivation and testing of pair potentials for protein folding. When is the quasichemical approximation correct?Protein Science, 1997
- How to Derive a Protein Folding Potential? A New Approach to an Old ProblemJournal of Molecular Biology, 1996
- Statistical Potentials Extracted From Protein Structures: How Accurate Are They?Journal of Molecular Biology, 1996
- Residue – Residue Potentials with a Favorable Contact Pair Term and an Unfavorable High Packing Density Term, for Simulation and ThreadingJournal of Molecular Biology, 1996
- How accurate must potentials be for successful modeling of protein folding?The Journal of Chemical Physics, 1995
- Are proteins ideal mixtures of amino acids? Analysis of energy parameter setsProtein Science, 1995
- When is a potential accurate enough for structure prediction? Theory and application to a random heteropolymer model of protein foldingThe Journal of Chemical Physics, 1994
- Hydrophilicity of polar amino acid side-chains is markedly reduced by flanking peptide bondsJournal of Molecular Biology, 1988
- A simplified representation of protein conformations for rapid simulation of protein foldingJournal of Molecular Biology, 1976