Sathesh Bhat | PubMed Health

PubMed2006

Molecular surface generation using a variable-radius solvent probe.

Protein-ligand binding occurs through interactions at the molecular surface. Hence, a proper description of this surface is essential to our understanding of the process of molecular recognition. Recent studies have noted the inadequacy of using a fixed 1.4 A solvent probe radius to generate the molecular surface. This assumes that water molecules approach all surface atoms at an equal distance irrespective of polarity, which is not the case. To adequately model the protein-water boundary requires that the solvent probe radius change according to the polarity of its contacting atoms, smaller near polar atoms and larger near apolar atoms. To our knowledge, no method currently exists to generate the molecular surface of a protein in this manner. Using a modification of the marching tetrahedra algorithm, we present a method to generate molecular surfaces using a variable radius solvent probe. The resulting surface lacks many of the unrealistic small crevices in nonpolar regions that are found when utilizing an invariant 1.4 A solvent probe, while maintaining the fine detail of the surface at polar regions. On application of the method on a test set of 20 protein structures taken from the Protein Data Bank (PDB), we also find far fewer empty unsolvated cavities that are present when using only a 1.4 A solvent probe, while the majority of solvated and polar cavities is retained. This suggests that the majority of empty cavities previously observed in protein structures might simply be artifacts of the surfacing method. We also find that the variable probe surface can have significant effects on electrostatic calculations by generating a better tuned description of the protein-water boundary. We also examined the binding interfaces of a diverse set of 55 protein-protein complexes. We find that using a variable probe results in an increase in perceived shape complementarity at these sites compared to using a 1.4 A solvent probe. The molecular volume and surface area are geometric values that determine various important properties for macromolecules, and the altered description afforded by a variable solvent probe molecular surface can have significant implications in protein recognition, energetics, folding, and stability calculations.

Entropy↗

PubMed2006

Coupled atomic charge selectivity for optimal ligand-charge distributions at protein binding sites.

Charge optimization as a tool for both analyzing and enhancing binding electrostatics has become an attractive approach over the past few years. An interesting feature of this method for molecular design is that it provides not only the optimal charge magnitudes, but also the selectivity of a particular atomic center for its optimal charge. The current approach to compute the charge selectivity at a given atomic center of a ligand in a particular binding process is based on the binding-energy cost incurred upon the perturbation of the optimal charge distribution by a unit charge at the given atomic center, while keeping the other atomic partial charges at their optimal values. A limitation of this method is that it does not take into account the possible concerted changes in the other atomic charges that may incur a lower energetic cost than perturbing a single charge. Here, we describe a novel approach for characterizing charge selectivity in a concerted manner, taking into account the coupling between the ligand charge centers in the binding process. We apply this novel charge selectivity measure to the celecoxib molecule, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent binding to cyclooxygenase 2 (COX2), which has been recently shown to also exhibit cross-reactivity toward carbonic anhydrase II (CAII), to which it binds with nanomolar affinity. The uncoupled and coupled charge selectivity profiles over the atomic centers of the celecoxib ligand, binding independently to COX2 and CAII, are analyzed comparatively and rationalized with respect to available experimental data. Very different charge selectivity profiles are obtained for the uncoupled versus coupled selectivity calculations.

Binding Sites↗