Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 19, 2026

Structure-Guided Design and Development of Novel Cyclophilin A Inhibitors and Ganoderiol-F Derivatives: An In-Silico Approach
Published on: June 23, 2026
Ligand affinities predicted with the MM/PBSA method: dependence on the simulation method and the force field
Aaron Weis1, Kambiz Katebzadeh, Pär Söderhjelm
1Department of Theoretical Chemistry, Lund University, Chemical Centre, P.O. Box 124, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden.
Calculating binding free energies for avidin and biotin analogues using the molecular mechanics Poisson-Boltzmann surface area (MM/PBSA) method showed that simulation parameters like system size are less critical than using explicit water molecules. Force field choice had minimal impact, but mixing force fields is not advised.
Area of Science:
- Computational chemistry
- Biophysics
Background:
- Avidin-biotin interactions are crucial in biological systems and drug development.
- Accurate calculation of binding free energies is essential for predicting molecular interactions.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the impact of force fields and geometry generation methods on MM/PBSA calculations for avidin-biotin analogues.
- To determine optimal simulation parameters for accurate binding free energy predictions.
Main Methods:
- Molecular mechanics Poisson-Boltzmann surface area (MM/PBSA) calculations.
- Comparison of four different molecular mechanics force fields.
- Analysis of geometry generation techniques and simulation system sizes.
- Inclusion of explicit water molecules in molecular dynamics simulations.
Main Results:
- No significant differences in binding free energies were observed across the four tested force fields.
- Mixing force fields between geometry generation and energy calculation steps is not recommended.
- Explicit water molecules are necessary for accurate simulations.
- Nonperiodic simulations with a fixed protein and a small system size (18 Å) are effective.
- Mean absolute error of 9-19 kJ/mol and standard error of 5-15 kJ/mol were achieved, primarily due to entropic contributions.
Conclusions:
- The MM/PBSA method can reliably predict binding free energies for avidin-biotin analogues with careful parameter selection.
- Simulation system size and boundary conditions have a minor impact compared to the use of explicit water.
- Further refinement is needed to address entropic contributions for improved accuracy.
Related Concept Videos
The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength
The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength
Ligand Binding Sites
Protein-ligand interactions are quite specific; even though numerous potential ligands surround a cellular protein at any given time, only a particular ligand can bind to that protein. Moreover, a ligand binds only to a dedicated area on the surface of the protein, known as the...
Conserved Binding Sites
Binding sites are often located in large pockets, and if their location on a protein’s surface is unknown, it can be predicted using various approaches. The energetic method computationally analyses the...
Ligand Binding and Linkage
MO Theory and Covalent Bonding