Can a physics-based, all-atom potential find a protein's native structure among misfolded structures? I. Large scale AMBER benchmarking
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2026

A Protocol for Computer-Based Protein Structure and Function Prediction
Published on: November 3, 2011
Liliana Wroblewska1, Jeffrey Skolnick
1Center for the Study of Systems Biology, School of Biology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30318, USA.
Abstract:
Recent work has shown that physics-based, all-atom energy functions (AMBER, CHARMM, OPLS-AA) and local minimization, when used in scoring, are able to discriminate among native and decoy structures. Yet, there have been only few instances reported of the successful use of physics based potentials in the actual refinement of protein models from a starting conformation to one that ends in structures, which are closer to the native state. An energy function that has a global minimum energy in the protein's native state and a good correlation between energy and native-likeness should be able to drive model structures closer to their native structure during a conformational search. Here, the possible reasons for the discrepancy between the scoring and refinement results for the case of AMBER potential are examined. When the conformational search via molecular dynamics is driven by the AMBER potential for a large set of 150 nonhomologous proteins and their associated decoys, often the native minimum does not appear to be the lowest free energy state. Ways of correcting the potential function in order to make it more suitable for protein model refinement are proposed.
Related Concept Videos
Protein Folding
Protein Structure Is Critical to Its Biological Function
Proteins perform a wide range of biological functions such as catalyzing chemical reactions, providing...
Protein Folding
Protein Folding
Protein Organization
The primary structure of a protein is its amino acid sequence.
Protein Organization
Molecular Chaperones and Protein Folding
The...

