Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 12, 2026

Realistic Membrane Modeling Using Complex Lipid Mixtures in Simulation Studies
Published on: September 1, 2023
Comparison of MM/GBSA calculations based on explicit and implicit solvent simulations.
Frithjof Godschalk1, Samuel Genheden, Pär Söderhjelm
1Department of Theoretical Chemistry, Lund University, Chemical Centre, P. O. Box 124, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden.
Standard MM/GBSA methods for calculating protein-ligand binding free energies are inconsistent. Switching solvation models significantly alters energy calculations, requiring careful reweighting or re-simulation for accurate results.
Area of Science:
- Computational chemistry
- Biophysics
- Molecular modeling
Background:
- Molecular mechanics with generalized Born and surface area solvation (MM/GBSA) is widely used for binding free energy calculations.
- This method typically uses molecular dynamics (MD) simulations with explicit solvent followed by energy calculations with implicit solvent models.
- A critical step of reweighting energies based on the implicit solvent model is often omitted.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the consistency of MM/GBSA by evaluating the impact of changing solvation models.
- To assess the differences in binding energy calculations using explicit versus implicit solvent snapshots.
- To determine the convergence and accuracy of MM/GBSA energies obtained from different simulation and minimization approaches.
Main Methods:
- Calculated MM/GBSA energies using two generalized Born models for five N-acetyllactosamine derivatives binding to galectin-3.
- Generated simulation snapshots using both explicit-solvent MD and implicit-solvent MM/GBSA methods.
- Analyzed differences in calculated energies and structural ensembles (RMSD) between various solvation models.
Main Results:
- Significant differences in absolute and relative binding energies were observed when switching solvation models.
- The ensembles generated by explicit and implicit solvent models showed considerable structural divergence (1.2-1.4 Å RMSD).
- Converting ensembles between solvent models via short MD simulations (2 ps) showed slow convergence with persistent energy differences (6-7 kJ mol⁻¹).
Conclusions:
- The standard MM/GBSA method is not a consistent approach due to significant energy variations arising from solvation model changes.
- Implicit solvent models require careful consideration and validation, as they substantially impact binding energy calculations.
- Short MD simulations or minimizations are insufficient for rapid convergence when transitioning between solvation models, highlighting the need for robust protocols.
Related Concept Videos
Chemical Shift: Internal References and Solvent Effects
The internal reference compound generally used in NMR spectroscopy is tetramethylsilane (TMS). TMS is preferred because it is chemically inert, soluble in NMR solvents, and easily removable. Also, the highly shielded methyl protons in TMS yield an intense...
Molecular Comparison of Gases, Liquids, and Solids
Comparing Intermolecular Forces: Melting Point, Boiling Point, and Miscibility
Temporary attractive forces like dispersion are present in all molecules, whether they are polar or nonpolar. They...
Chemical and Solubility Equilibria

