Recently, we developed a residue-specific force field (RSFF1) based on conformational free-energy distributions of the 20 amino acid residues from a protein coil library. Most parameters in RSFF1 were adopted from the OPLS-AA/L force field, but some van der Waals and torsional parameters that effectively affect local conformational preferences were introduced specifically for individual residues to fit the coil library distributions. Here a similar strategy has been applied to modify the Amber ff99SB force field, and a new force field named RSFF2 is developed. It can successfully fold α-helical structures such as polyalanine peptides, Trp-cage miniprotein, and villin headpiece subdomain and β-sheet structures such as Trpzip-2, GB1 β-hairpins, and the WW domain, simultaneously. The properties of various popular force fields in balancing between α-helix and β-sheet are analyzed based on their descriptions of local conformational features of various residues, and the analysis reveals the importance of accurate local free-energy distributions. Unlike the RSFF1, which overestimates the stability of both α-helix and β-sheet, RSFF2 gives melting curves of α-helical peptides and Trp-cage in good agreement with experimental data. Fitting to the two-state model, RSFF2 gives folding enthalpies and entropies in reasonably good agreement with available experimental results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: