日本語
 
Help Privacy Policy ポリシー/免責事項
  詳細検索ブラウズ

アイテム詳細


公開

学術論文

Comparison of Empirical Zn2+ Models in Protein–DNA Complexes

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons295019

Volkenandt,  Senta       
IMPRS for Biology and Computation (Anne-Dominique Gindrat), Dept. of Computational Molecular Biology (Head: Martin Vingron), Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
There are no locators available
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
フルテキスト (公開)
付随資料 (公開)
There is no public supplementary material available
引用

Volkenandt, S., & Imhof, P. (2023). Comparison of Empirical Zn2+ Models in Protein–DNA Complexes. biophysica, 3(1), 214--230. doi:10.3390/biophysica3010014.


引用: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000E-3CEB-7
要旨
Zinc ions are the second most abundant ions found in humans. Their role in proteins can be merely structural but also catalytic, owing to their transition metal character. Modelling their geometric–coordination versatility by empirical force fields is, thus, a challenging task. In this work, we evaluated three popular models, specifically designed to represent zinc ions with regard to their capability of preserving structural integrity. To this end, we performed molecular dynamics simulations of two zinc-containing protein–DNA complexes, which differed in their zinc coordination, i.e., four cysteines or two cysteines and two histidines. The most flexible non-bonded 12-6-4 Lennard–Jones-type model shows a preference for six-fold coordination of the Zn2+-ions in contradiction to the crystal structure. The cationic dummy atom model favours tetrahedral geometry, whereas the bonded extended zinc AMBER force field model, by construction, best preserves the initial geometry of a regular or slightly distorted tetrahedron. Our data renders the extended zinc AMBER force field the best model for structural zinc ions in a given geometry. In more complicated cases, though, more flexible models may be advantageous.