Force field, separation

Conformational Adjustments The conformations of protein and ligand in the free state may differ from those in the complex. The conformation in the complex may be different from the most stable conformation in solution, and/or a broader range of conformations may be sampled in solution than in the complex. In the former case, the required adjustment raises the energy, in the latter it lowers the entropy in either case this effect favors the dissociated state (although exceptional instances in which the flexibility increases as a result of complex formation seem possible). With current models based on two-body potentials (but not with force fields based on polarizable atoms, currently under development), separate intra-molecular energies of protein and ligand in the complex are, in fact, definable. However, it is impossible to assign separate entropies to the two parts of the complex. 

It is noteworthy that it is not obligatory to use a torsional potential within a PEF. Depending on the parameterization, it is also possible to represent the torsional barrier by non-bonding interactions between the atoms separated by three bonds. In fact, torsional potentials and non-bonding 1,4-interactions are in a close relationship. This is one reason why force fields like AMBER downscale the 1,4-non-bonded Coulomb and van der Waals interactions. 

Xote that two dilTcren t environni cn is. although they migh t be dis-liiignisbcd by tests (such as for ether and ester) can share an atom type (such as OS), A rel inem en i of th e AMBER force field would use separate types for these two along with differen t parani eters for th e differen L types. 

Ihi.. same molecule but separated by at least three bonds (i.e. have a 1, h relationship where n > 4). In a simple force field the non-bonded term is usually modelled using a Coulomb piilential term for electrostatic interactions and a Lennard-Jones potential for van der IV.uls interactions. 

Fhe van der Waals and electrostatic interactions between atoms separated by three bonds (i.c. the 1,4 atoms) are often treated differently from other non-bonded interactions. The interaction between such atoms contributes to the rotational barrier about the central bond, in conjunction with the torsional potential. These 1,4 non-bonded interactions are often scaled down by an empirical factor for example, a factor of 2.0 is suggested for both the electrostatic and van der Waals terms in the 1984 AMBER force field (a scale factor of 1/1.2 is used for the electrostatic terms in the 1995 AMBER force field). There are several reasons why one would wish to scale the 1,4 interactions. The error associated wilh the use of an repulsion term (which is too steep compared with the more correct exponential term) would be most significant for 1,4 atoms. In addition, when two 1,4... 

The range of systems that have been studied by force field methods is extremely varied. Some force fields liave been developed to study just one atomic or molecular sp>ecies under a wider range of conditions. For example, the chlorine model of Rodger, Stone and TUdesley [Rodger et al 1988] can be used to study the solid, liquid and gaseous phases. This is an anisotropic site model, in which the interaction between a pair of sites on two molecules dep>ends not only upon the separation between the sites (as in an isotropic model such as the Lennard-Jones model) but also upon the orientation of the site-site vector with resp>ect to the bond vectors of the two molecules. The model includes an electrostatic component which contciins dipwle-dipole, dipole-quadrupole and quadrupole-quadrupole terms, and the van der Waals contribution is modelled using a Buckingham-like function. 

The attraction for two neutral atoms separated by more than four Angstroms is approximately zero. The depth of the potential wells is minimal. For the AMBER force field, hydrogen bonds have well depths of about 0.5 kcal/mol the magnitude of individual van der Waals well depths is usually less. 

Differences in mobilities of ions, molecules, or particles in an electric field can be exploited to perform useful separations. Primary emphasis is placed on electrophoresis and dielec trophoresis. Analogous separation processes involving magnetic and centrifugal force fields are widely apphed in the process industiy (see Secs. 18 and 19). 

As for the dielectric constant, when explicit solvent molecules are included in the calculations, a value of 1, as in vacuum, should be used because the solvent molecules themselves will perform the charge screening. The omission of explicit solvent molecules can be partially accounted for by the use of an / -dependent dielectric, where the dielectric constant increases as the distance between the atoms, increases (e.g., at a separation of 1 A the dielectric constant equals 1 at a 3 A separation the dielectric equals 3 and so on). Alternatives include sigmoidal dielectrics [80] however, their use has not been widespread. In any case, it is important that the dielectric constant used for a computation correspond to that for which the force field being used was designed use of alternative dielectric constants will lead to improper weighting of the different electrostatic interactions, which may lead to significant errors in the computations. 

The rapid rise in computer power over the last ten years has opened up new possibilities for modelling complex chemical systems. One of the most important areas of chemical modelling has involved the use of classical force fields which represent molecules by atomistic potentials. Typically, a molecule is represented by a series of simple potential functions situated on each atom that can describe the non-bonded interaction energy between separate atomic sites. A further set of atom-based potentials can then be used to describe the intramolecular interactions within the molecule. Together, the potential functions comprise a force field for the molecule of interest. 

Another area of rapid growth for particle separation has been that of Field-Flow Fractionation (FFF) originally developed by Giddings (12,13>1 1 ) (see also papers in this symposium series). Like HDC, the separation in field-flow fractionation (FFF) results from the combination of force field interactions and the convected motion of the particles, rather than a partitioning between phases. In FFF the force field is applied externally while in HDC it results from internal, interactions. 

---