The DOI matches its Crossref record.
What are the dielectric “constants” of proteins and how to validate electrostatic models?
Abstract
Implicit models for evaluation of electrostatic energies in proteins include dielectric constants that represent effect of the protein environment. Unfortunately, the results obtained by such models are very sensitive to the value used for the dielectric constant. Furthermore, the factors that determine the optimal value of these constants are far from being obvious. This review considers the meaning of the protein dielectric constants and the ways to determine their optimal values. It is pointed out that typical benchmarks for validation of electrostatic models cannot discriminate between consistent and inconsistent models. In particular, the observed pKa values of surface groups can be reproduced correctly by models with entirely incorrect physical features. Thus, we introduce a discriminative benchmark that only includes residues whose pKa values are shifted significantly from their values in water. We also use the semimacroscopic version of the protein dipole Langevin dipole (PDLD/S) formulation to generate a series of models that move gradually from microscopic to fully macroscopic models. These include the linear response version of the PDLD/S models, Poisson Boltzmann (PB)‐type models, and Tanford Kirkwwod (TK)‐type models. Using our different models and the discriminative benchmark, we show that the protein dielectric constant, εp, is not a universal constant but simply a parameter that depends on the model used. It is also shown in agreement with our previous works that εp represents the factors that are not considered explicitly. The use of a discriminative benchmark appears to help not only in identifying nonphysical models but also in analyzing effects that are not reproduced in an accurate way by consistent models. These include the effect of water penetration and the effect of the protein reorganization. Finally, we show that the optimal dielectric constant for self‐energies is not the optimal constant for charge‐charge interactions. Proteins 2001;44:400–417. © 2001 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Quantum Mechanical Continuum Solvation Models
Tomasi, J., Mennucci, B., & Cammi, R. (2005) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr9904009 · Cited by 16,868
PROPKA3: Consistent Treatment of Internal and Surface Residues in Empirical p KaPredictions
Olsson, M. H. M., Søndergaard, C. R., Rostkowski, M., & Jensen, J. H. (2011) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/ct100578z · Cited by 4,435
Very fast empirical prediction and rationalization of protein pKa values
Li, H., Robertson, A. D., & Jensen, J. H. (2005) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.20660 · Cited by 2,054
Anandakrishnan, R., Aguilar, B., & Onufriev, A. V. (2012) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gks375 · Cited by 1,872
Electrostatic Basis for Enzyme Catalysis
Warshel, A., Sharma, P. K., Kato, M., Xiang, Y., Liu, H., & Olsson, M. H. M. (2006) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr0503106 · Cited by 1,444
Self-citationFast and accurate predictions of binding free energies using MM‐PBSA and MM‐GBSA
Rastelli, G., Rio, A. D., Degliesposti, G., & Sgobba, M. (2010) · Journal of Computational Chemistry · doi:10.1002/jcc.21372 · Cited by 828
Li, L., Li, C., Zhang, Z., & Alexov, E. (2013) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/ct400065j · Cited by 543
Large shifts in pK a values of lysine residues buried inside a protein
Isom, D. G., Castañeda, C. A., Cannon, B. R., & García-Moreno E., B. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1010750108 · Cited by 466
An NMR Perspective on Enzyme Dynamics
Boehr, D. D., Dyson, H. J., & Wright, P. E. (2006) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr050312q · Cited by 458
Structure and Mechanisms of F-Type ATP Synthases
Kühlbrandt, W. (2019) · Annual Review of Biochemistry · doi:10.1146/annurev-biochem-013118-110903 · Cited by 444
The inverse and direct Hofmeister series for lysozyme
Zhang, Y., & Cremer, P. S. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0907616106 · Cited by 433
pK values of the ionizable groups of proteins
Thurlkill, R. L., Grimsley, G. R., Scholtz, J. M., & Pace, C. N. (2006) · Protein Science · doi:10.1110/ps.051840806 · Cited by 369
Probing Protein Electrostatics with a Synthetic Fluorescent Amino Acid
Cohen, B. E., McAnaney, T. B., Park, E. S., Jan, Y. N., Boxer, S. G., & Jan, L. Y. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1069346 · Cited by 381
Constant‐pH molecular dynamics using continuous titration coordinates
Lee, M. S., Salsbury, F. R., & Brooks, C. L. (2004) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.20128 · Cited by 364
Molecular docking as a popular tool in drug design, an in silico travel
de Ruyck, J., Brysbaert, G., Blossey, R., & Lensink, M. (2016) · Advances and Applications in Bioinformatics and Chemistry · doi:10.2147/aabc.s105289 · Cited by 346
Free energy landscape of protein folding in water: Explicit vs. implicit solvent
Zhou, R. (2003) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.10483 · Cited by 300
Gitlin, I., Carbeck, J. D., & Whitesides, G. M. (2006) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.200502530 · Cited by 286
Generalized Born Implicit Solvent Models for Biomolecules
Onufriev, A. V., & Case, D. A. (2019) · Annual Review of Biophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev-biophys-052118-115325 · Cited by 286
Kamerlin, S. C. L., Haranczyk, M., & Warshel, A. (2009) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · doi:10.1021/jp8071712 · Cited by 281
Self-citationComputational alanine scanning mutagenesis—An improved methodological approach
Moreira, I. S., Fernandes, P. A., & Ramos, M. J. (2007) · Journal of Computational Chemistry · doi:10.1002/jcc.20566 · Cited by 273
Metadata
- Authors
- Schutz, C. N., & Warshel, A.
- Venue
- Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-07-19
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 400-417
- ISSN
- 0887-3585 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0134
- OpenAlex
- W2131713387
- Cited by
- 942
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.11
- 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
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.
