These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Molecular dynamics simulations of a calmodulin-peptide complex in solution.
    Author: Yang C, Kuczera K.
    Journal: J Biomol Struct Dyn; 2002 Oct; 20(2):179-97. PubMed ID: 12354070.
    Abstract:
    We have performed an 4-ns MD simulation of calmodulin complexed with a target peptide in explicit water, under realistic conditions of constant temperature and pressure, in the presence of a physiological concentration of counterions and using Ewald summation to avoid truncation of long-range electrostatic forces. During the simulation the system tended to perform small fluctuations around a structure similar to, but somewhat looser than the starting crystal structure. The calmodulin-peptide complex was quite rigid and did not exhibit any large amplitude domain motions such as previously seen in apo- and calcium-bound calmodulin. We analyzed the calmodulin-peptide interactions by calculating buried surface areas, CHARMM interaction energies and continuum model interaction free energies. In the trajectory, the protein surface area buried by contact with the peptide is 1373 A(2) approximately evenly divided between the calmodulin N-terminal, C-terminal and central linker regions. A majority of this buried surface, 803 A(2), comes from nonpolar residues, in contrast to the protein as a whole, for which the surface is made up of mostly polar and charged groups. Our continuum calculations indicate that the largest favorable contribution to peptide binding comes from burial of molecular surface upon complex formation. Electrostatic contributions are favorable but smaller in the trajectory structures, and actually unfavorable for binding in the crystal structure. Since nonpolar groups make up most of buried surface of the protein, our calculations suggest that the hydrophobic effect is the main driving force for binding the helical peptide to calmodulin, consistent with thermodynamic analysis of experimental data. Besides the burial of nonpolar surface area, secondary contributions to peptide binding come from burial of polar surface and electrostatic interactions. In the nonpolar interactions a crucial role is played by the nine methionines of calmodulin. In the electrostatic interactions the negatively charged protein residues and positively charged peptide residues play a dominant role.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]