Schutz C N, Warshel A
Department of Chemistry, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Proteins. 2001 Sep 1;44(4):400-17. doi: 10.1002/prot.1106.
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 pK(a) 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 pK(a) 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, epsilon(p), 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 epsilon(p) 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.
用于评估蛋白质中静电能的隐式模型包含代表蛋白质环境效应的介电常数。不幸的是,此类模型得到的结果对所使用的介电常数值非常敏感。此外,决定这些常数最佳值的因素远非显而易见。本综述考虑了蛋白质介电常数的含义以及确定其最佳值的方法。指出静电模型验证的典型基准无法区分一致和不一致的模型。特别是,具有完全错误物理特征的模型也能正确再现表面基团观测到的pK(a)值。因此,我们引入了一种判别性基准,该基准仅包括其pK(a)值与在水中的值相比有显著偏移的残基。我们还使用蛋白质偶极朗之万偶极(PDLD/S)公式的半宏观版本来生成一系列从微观逐渐过渡到完全宏观的模型。这些模型包括PDLD/S模型的线性响应版本、泊松玻尔兹曼(PB)型模型和坦福德·柯克伍德(TK)型模型。使用我们的不同模型和判别性基准,我们表明蛋白质介电常数ε(p)不是一个通用常数,而仅仅是一个取决于所使用模型的参数。还与我们之前的工作一致表明,ε(p)代表未明确考虑的因素。使用判别性基准似乎不仅有助于识别非物理模型,还能分析一致模型无法准确再现的效应。这些效应包括水渗透的效应和蛋白质重组的效应。最后,我们表明自能的最佳介电常数不是电荷 - 电荷相互作用的最佳常数。