Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 860

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Converging free energy estimates: MM‐PB(GB)SA studies on the protein–protein complex Ras–Raf

Gohlke, Holger, Case, David A.·2004·Journal of Computational Chemistry

Abstract

Estimating protein–protein interaction energies is a very challenging task for current simulation protocols. Here, absolute binding free energies are reported for the complex H‐Ras/C‐Raf1 using the MM‐PB(GB)SA approach, testing the internal consistency and model dependence of the results. Averaging gas‐phase energies (MM), solvation free energies as determined by Generalized Born models (GB/SA), and entropic contributions calculated by normal mode analysis for snapshots obtained from 10 ns explicit‐solvent molecular dynamics in general results in an overestimation of the binding affinity when a solvent‐accessible surface area‐dependent model is used to estimate the nonpolar solvation contribution. Applying the sum of a cavity solvation free energy and explicitly modeled solute–solvent van der Waals interaction energies instead provides less negative estimates for the nonpolar solvation contribution. When the polar contribution to the solvation free energy is determined by solving the Poisson–Boltzmann equation (PB) instead, the calculated binding affinity strongly depends on the atomic radii set chosen. For three GB models investigated, different absolute deviations from PB energies were found for the unbound proteins and the complex. As an alternative to normal‐mode calculations, quasiharmonic analyses have been performed to estimate entropic contributions due to changes of solute flexibility upon binding. However, such entropy estimates do not converge after 10 ns of simulation time, indicating that sampling issues may limit the applicability of this approach. Finally, binding free energies estimated from snapshots of the unbound proteins extracted from the complex trajectory result in an underestimate of binding affinity. This points to the need to exercise caution in applying the computationally cheaper “one‐trajectory‐alternative” to systems where there may be significant changes in flexibility and structure due to binding. The best estimate for the binding free energy of Ras–Raf obtained in this study of −8.3 kcal mol −1 is in good agreement with the experimental result of −9.6 kcal mol −1 , however, further probing the transferability of the applied protocol that led to this result is necessary. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem 2: 238–250, 2003

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jcc.10379

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 860

Metadata

Authors
Gohlke, H., & Case, D. A.
Venue
Journal of Computational Chemistry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-11-19
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
238-250
ISSN
  • 0192-8651 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-987X
OpenAlex
W2157281740
Cited by
860
References
5
FWCI
5.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Converging free energy estimates: MM‐PB(GB)SA studies on the protein–protein complex Ras–Raf. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jcc.10379
The paper
Gohlke, H., & Case, D. A. (2004). Converging free energy estimates: MM‐PB(GB)SA studies on the protein–protein complex Ras–Raf. Journal of Computational Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.10379

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.