Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 17, 2026

Analyzing Protein Architectures and Protein-Ligand Complexes by Integrative Structural Mass Spectrometry
Published on: October 15, 2018
Binding free energy estimation for protein-ligand complex based on MM-PBSA with various partial charge models
Ting Fu1, Zhong Jin, Zhilong Xiu
1Laboratory of Molecular Modeling and Design, State Key Laboratory of Molecular Reaction Dynamics, Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 457 Zhongshan Rd. Dalian 116023, PR China.
Accurate protein-ligand binding free energy estimation is crucial for drug discovery. This study found specific atomic charge models perform best for certain proteins (PKB, CDK2), but no single model suits all diverse protein complexes, highlighting the need for careful charge selection.
Area of Science:
- Computational chemistry
- Drug discovery
- Molecular modeling
Background:
- Accurate estimation of protein-ligand binding free energy is vital for drug discovery.
- Challenges include accurately modeling long-range electrostatics and solvation effects.
- Optimization of atomic net charges is a key factor in binding free energy calculations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the impact of various atomic net charge models on binding free energy profiles.
- To evaluate the performance of different charge models for diverse protein-ligand systems.
- To identify optimal charge models for specific protein targets like PKB and CDK2.
Main Methods:
- Tested multiple atomic charge models: AM1-BCC, MNDO, PM5, Mulliken, CM2, CM3, RESP, and QM/MM.
- Evaluated models on diverse protein complexes, protein kinase B (PKB), and cyclin-dependent kinases 2 (CDK2) datasets.
- Compared calculated binding free energies with experimental affinities using MM-PBSA.
Main Results:
- The MNDO charge model was optimal for the PKB system.
- The QM/MM model performed best for the CDK2 system.
- No single charge model was universally suitable for all diverse protein complexes tested.
- MM-PBSA trends generally aligned with experimental data for CDK2, but less so for PKB.
Conclusions:
- The choice of atomic charge model significantly impacts binding free energy estimations.
- Specific charge models show promise for particular protein targets (e.g., MNDO for PKB, QM/MM for CDK2).
- Careful consideration of ligand and protein charges is essential for accurate binding free energy calculations in drug design.
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...
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...
Physiological Pharmacokinetic Models: Assumption with Protein Binding

