Prediction of protein loop conformations using multiscale modeling methods with physical energy scoring functions

This article examines ab initio methods for the prediction of protein loops by a computational strategy of multiscale conformational sampling and physical energy scoring functions. Our approach consists of initial sampling of loop conformations from lattice-based low-resolution models followed by refinement using all-atom simulations. To allow enhanced conformational sampling, the replica exchange method was implemented. Physical energy functions based on CHARMM19 and CHARMM22 parameterizations with generalized Born (GB) solvent models were applied in scoring loop conformations extracted from the lattice simulations and, in the case of all-atom simulations, the ensemble of conformations were generated and scored with these models. Predictions are reported for 25 loop segments, each eight residues long and taken from a diverse set of 22 protein structures. We find that the simulations generally sampled conformations with low global root-mean-square-deviation (RMSD) for loop backbone coordinates from the known structures, whereas clustering conformations in RMSD space and scoring detected less favorable loop structures. Specifically, the lattice simulations sampled basins that exhibited an average global RMSD of 2.21 +/- 1.42 A, whereas clustering and scoring the loop conformations determined an RMSD of 3.72 +/- 1.91 A. Using CHARMM19/GB to refine the lattice conformations improved the sampling RMSD to 1.57 +/- 0.98 A and detection to 2.58 +/- 1.48 A. We found that further improvement could be gained from extending the upper temperature in the all-atom refinement from 400 to 800 K, where the results typically yield a reduction of approximately 1 A or greater in the RMSD of the detected loop. Overall, CHARMM19 with a simple pairwise GB solvent model is more efficient at sampling low-RMSD loop basins than CHARMM22 with a higher-resolution modified analytical GB model; however, the latter simulation method provides a more accurate description of the all-atom energy surface, yet demands a much greater computational cost.