Biology subjects

David L. Mobley

Publications and source records attributed to David L. Mobley.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2016

Lessons learned from comparing molecular dynamics engines on the SAMPL5 dataset

We describe our efforts to prepare common starting structures and models for the SAMPL5 blind prediction challenge. We generated the starting input files and single configuration potential energies for the host-guest in the SAMPL5 blind prediction challenge for the GROMACS, AMBER, LAMMPS, DESMOND and CHARMM molecular simulation programs. All conversions were fully automated from the originally prepared AMBER input files using a combination of the ParmEd and InterMol conversion programs.\n\nWe find that the energy calculations for all molecular dynamics engines for this molecular set agree to a better than 0.1% relative absolute energy for all energy components, and in most cases an order of magnitude better, when reasonable choices are made for different cutoff parameters. However, there are some surprising sources of statistically significant differences. Most importantly, different choices of Coulombs constant between programs are one of the largest sources of discrepancies in energies. We discuss the measures required to get good agreement in the energies for equivalent starting configurations between the simulation programs, and the energy differences that occur when simulations are run with program-specific default simulation parameter values. Finally, we discuss what was required to automate this conversion and comparison.

Biophysics↗

bioRxiv2016

Predicting binding free energies: Frontiers and benchmarks

Binding free energy calculations based on molecular simulations provide predicted affinities for biomolecular complexes. These calculations begin with a detailed description of a system, including its chemical composition and the interactions between its components. Simulations of the system are then used to compute thermodynamic information, such as binding affinities. Because of their promise for guiding molecular design, these calculations have recently begun to see widespread applications in early stage drug discovery. However, many challenges remain to make them a robust and reliable tool. Here, we briefly explain how the calculations work, highlight key challenges, and argue for the development of accepted benchmark test systems that will help the research community generate and evaluate progress.\n\nManuscript version 1.1.1 pre-release See https://github.com/mobleylab/benchmarksets for all versions.

Biophysics↗

bioRxiv2016

Measuring experimental cyclohexane-water distribution coefficients for the SAMPL5 challenge

Small molecule distribution coefficients between immiscible nonaqueuous and aqueous phases--such as cyclohexane and water--measure the degree to which small molecules prefer one phase over another at a given pH. As distribution coefficients capture both thermodynamic effects (the free energy of transfer between phases) and chemical effects (protonation state and tautomer effects in aqueous solution), they provide an exacting test of the thermodynamic and chemical accuracy of physical models without the long correlation times inherent to the prediction of more complex properties of relevance to drug discovery, such as protein-ligand binding affinities. For the SAMPL5 challenge, we carried out a blind prediction exercise in which participants were tasked with the prediction of distribution coefficients to assess its potential as a new route for the evaluation and systematic improvement of predictive physical models. These measurements are typically performed for octanol-water, but we opted to utilize cyclohexane for the nonpolar phase. Cyclohexane was suggested to avoid issues with the high water content and persistent heterogeneous structure of water-saturated octanol phases, since it has greatly reduced water content and a homogeneous liquid structure. Using a modified shake-flask LC-MS/MS protocol, we collected cyclohexane/water distribution coefficients for a set of 53 druglike compounds at pH 7.4. These measurements were used as the basis for the SAMPL5 Distribution Coefficient Challenge, where 18 research groups predicted these measurements before the experimental values reported here were released. In this work, we describe the experimental protocol we utilized for measurement of cyclohexane-water distribution coefficients, report the measured data, propose a new bootstrap-based data analysis procedure to incorporate multiple sources of experimental error, and provide insights to help guide future iterations of this valuable exercise in predictive modeling.\n\nAbbreviations used in this paper

Biophysics↗