Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 267

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ligand Affinities Predicted with the MM/PBSA Method: Dependence on the Simulation Method and the Force Field

Open access
Weis, Aaron, Katebzadeh, Kambiz, Söderhjelm, Pär, Nilsson, Ingemar, Ryde, Ulf·2006·Journal of Medicinal Chemistry

Abstract

The free energy of binding between avidin and seven biotin analogues has been calculated with the molecular mechanics Poisson-Boltzmann surface area (MM/PBSA) method. We have studied how the force field and the method to generate geometries affect the calculated binding free energies. Four different force fields were compared, but we saw no significant difference in the results. However, mixing the force fields used for the geometry generation and energy calculations is not recommended. In the molecular dynamics simulations, explicit water molecules must be used, but the size of the simulated system and the boundary conditions are less important. In fact, nonperiodic simulations with a fixed protein outside a relatively small simulated system (18 A) seem to be a proper approach. The mean absolute error was 9-19 kJ/mol, with a standard error of 5-15 kJ/mol, which arises mainly from the entropy term.

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 · 10.1021/jm0608210

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cited by

See all 267

Metadata

Authors
Weis, A., Katebzadeh, K., Söderhjelm, P., Nilsson, I., & Ryde, U.
Venue
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
Published
2006-10-11
Volume
49
Issue
22
Pages
6596-6606
ISSN
  • 0022-2623 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-4804
OpenAlex
W2004676220
Cited by
267
References
2
FWCI
12.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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.