Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Fax:
+81-29-851-5426.
E-mail:
3952
Ishida
(1)
where EQM and EMM are the molecular energies in the QM and
MM regions and EQM/MM is the interaction energy between the
QM and MM regions. In the present QM/MM model, we use
the electrostatic embedding form, so the interaction energy
between the QM and MM regions is defined by
elec
vdw
strain
EQM/MM ) EQM/MM
+ EQM/MM
+ EQM/MM
-[EQM(RQM)+EQM/MM(RQM,RMM)+EMM(RMM)]
(5)
dRQM dRMM
i
F(RQM
, RMM) ) -kBT ln
dR
QM(RQM
i
- RQM
)
e-[EQM(RQM)+EQM/MM(RQM,RMM)+EMM(RMM)] dRMM
) -kBT ln [e-EQM(RQM)
i
dR
)
(2)
MMe
i ,R
-[EQM/MM(RQM
MM)+EMM(RMM)]
i
)
EQM(RQM
kBT ln
dR
MMe
i ,R
-[EQM/MM(RQM
MM)+EMM(RMM)]
(6)
elec
is the electrostatic interaction energy, evaluated
where EQM/MM
by the ab initio MO method as follows:48-50
elec
EQM/MM
)
MM
-ZMM
D|
| +
|r - RMM |
ZQMZMM
R - RMM
QM QM
(3)
where ZQM and ZMM are the nuclear charges of QM atoms and
MM point charges, RQM and RMM are the QM and MM nuclear
coordinates, and D is the density matrix in which and run
vdw
is the nonbonded van der Waals
over atomic orbitals. EQM/MM
strain
is the steric interaction energy
interaction energy, and EQM/MM
at the boundary region between QM and MM regions. These
three EQM/MM terms are necessary to properly describe the QM/
MM interactions, and the last two are calculated using the
strain
includes the bonded interaction
empirical force field. EQM/MM
energy at the boundary, calculated from the MM bond, bend,
torsion, and improper torsion energies.
On the basis of this electrostatic embedding QM/MM scheme,
we now evaluate the free energy profile that describes sugar
chain binding. Formally, the configurational partition function
of the total QM/MM system is
Z)
e-[E
QM(RQM)+EQM/MM(RQM,RMM)+EMM(RMM)]
dRQM dRMM
(4)
F2nd(RMM) )
1
ZMM
dRMM(E - E(RMM))
e-[EQM/MM(RQM,RMM)+EMM(RMM)]
i
(7)
ZMM )
dRMMe-[E
i
QM/MM(RQM,RMM)+EMM(RMM)]
(8)
e-[EQM/MM(RQM,E(RMM))+EMM(RMM)]
i
(9)
(10)
k )
)
2E(B, mk)
Bmk
B)0,mk)0
H
+
D
Bmk
P H
B mk
(11)
|(B) ) exp -
ie
(B R) r |(0)
2cp
(12)
elec
|(B)
)
(B)|HQM + HQM/MM
B
B
(B)
elec
|(B) + (B)|HQM +
|HQM + HQM/MM
B
(B)
HQM
elec
HQM/MM
|
(13)
+ (B)|
| (B)
B
B
3954
Ishida
Figure 2. (a) Initial solvated protein model used in ab initio QM/MM structural refinement. Green sticks represent the sialyl Lewis X bound to
the carbohydrate-recognition domain; yellow sticks represent surrounding solvent molecules which were added to prevent unphysical structural
deformation of the naive lectin-carbohydrate interaction. (b) Superimposed structures of the QM/MM-refined model with the original X-ray
coordinates. Green and blue sticks represent the original X-ray data for E-selectin and sialyl Lewis X, respectively; purple and red sticks represent
the QM/MM optimized geometries of the protein and sugar chain, respectively. (c, d) Detailed hydrogen-bond geometries in the Fuc and Gal units,
respectively, determined by QM/MM refinement (geom0 in Table 1).
2.82
2.72
2.67
3.56
2.48
4.58
5.52
5.53
2.94
3.16
5.59
2.83
2.57
3.30
2.8
2.9
4.0
3.6
2.5
3.8
5.3
5.4
4.0
3.2
4.3
3.2
2.6
3.0
2.93
2.45
2.82
2.44
3.73
2.97
9.58
2.78
4.48
6.36
7.79
7.50
4.07
5.83
6.63
geom
1
2.83
2.46
2.80
3.73
3.67
3.14
11.72
3.87
2.45
5.36
6.82
6.74
3.78
6.71
6.90
geom
2
2.83
2.47
2.81
5.51
3.40
2.79
11.95
4.11
2.48
4.15
5.38
7.01
4.88
6.89
7.71
geom
3
2.98
2.44
2.84
4.72
3.65
2.86
9.60
3.07
2.47
4.62
6.01
6.44
4.02
5.46
6.33
geom
4
2.86
2.46
2.75
4.49
3.80
2.89
10.43
2.84
2.50
5.02
6.42
6.95
4.41
7.13
8.03
geom
5
3.03
2.46
2.79
4.54
3.61
3.14
11.82
3.03
2.50
4.66
6.03
6.27
3.89
6.20
6.72
geom
6
2.80
2.45
2.80
4.32
3.89
2.90
10.92
2.87
2.43
4.77
6.26
6.28
4.25
7.79
8.18
geom
7
2.79
2.45
2.82
4.84
3.61
3.09
11.39
4.02
2.47
4.71
6.04
6.78
4.03
5.78
4.98
geom
8
2.92
2.47
2.79
4.74
3.89
3.14
11.69
3.27
2.45
4.59
6.19
6.19
4.76
5.72
7.80
geom
9
2.83
2.45
2.82
4.54
4.01
2.82
9.73
2.78
2.45
4.72
6.23
6.47
5.23
7.94
8.32
geom
10
2.81
2.45
2.86
5.30
3.71
2.83
8.27
2.94
2.53
3.92
5.63
6.01
4.44
5.66
6.54
geom
11
2.85
2.43
2.80
4.98
3.82
2.81
8.89
3.06
2.45
5.13
6.48
6.67
4.23
7.83
7.68
geom
12
2.91
2.49
2.76
4.33
3.99
2.94
4.65
2.84
2.44
4.23
5.43
5.46
3.74
5.55
6.69
geom
13
2.91
2.47
2.83
4.15
3.73
3.21
2.76
5.20
2.49
5.03
6.71
6.62
3.96
6.01
7.27
geom
14
2.78
2.45
2.80
4.02
3.69
3.57
4.18
3.05
2.52
5.21
6.84
6.84
3.73
7.08
7.27
geom
15
2.83
2.42
2.88
4.87
3.44
3.26
2.71
3.53
2.50
4.93
6.42
7.00
3.70
6.71
6.44
geom
16
2.80
2.45
2.79
3.75
3.70
3.41
2.68
3.33
2.47
5.30
7.07
6.94
3.92
7.87
7.75
geom
17
2.79
2.45
2.80
3.75
3.80
2.86
4.81
3.20
2.54
5.46
6.67
6.86
4.02
8.26
9.27
geom
18
2.82
2.45
2.81
4.42
3.68
3.18
2.71
3.52
3.77
4.85
6.36
6.62
3.71
8.90
10.28
geom
19
2.87
2.45
2.75
4.51
3.76
3.49
2.69
3.02
3.31
5.15
6.96
6.83
3.95
8.42
9.77
geom
20
54.4
41.0
14.6
37.4
23.9
34
16
41
22
19.7
40.1
15.7
2.6
-12 -5.9
25.3
51.7
16.1
33.9
3.1
43.9
63.5
26.1
37.4
5.1
30.9
56.1
14.8
42.0
2.0
22.6
54.8
17.3
43.0
9.3
21.2
49.8
7.7
42.0
3.0
25.5
59.5
14.2
36.1
1.6
28.6
56.0
10.4
35.3
-4.3
33.2
66.9
20.1
29.6
30.5
55.0
18.2
32.2
27.0
53.8
19.2
30.8
23.5
58.5
18.9
37.0
25.0
45.5
12.1
39.2
11.5
20.2
48.4
13.9
28.8
12.6
12.9
46.3
8.5
32.3
-1.9
5.8
46.8
13.0
37.1
-1.9
21.2
47.4
11.2
32.6
2.4
25.5
48.4
19.3
44.3
14.9
15.9
46.7
21.9
39.1
30.0
21.8
50.5
18.1
33.8
26.4
-65 -62.6 -67.2 -75.0 -58.7 -71.0 -69.9 -71.6 -67.6 -75.7 -58.7 -64.4 -64.5 -61.7 -58.6 -66.5 -65.0 -56.5 -69.8 -34.3 -24.6 -39.4
2.63
geom
0
2.5
exp.
a
Original experimental data from X-ray coordinates (exp.) and QM/MM-refined geometry of X-ray coordinates (geom0). b QM/MM optimized structures sampled from the minimum free energy
region of the reduced 2D-FES. c Interatomic distances between two heavy atoms in both E-selectin and sialyl Lewis X. d Dihedral angles at the glycoside linkages.
O(carboxyl,Neu5Ac)
-OH(Tyr48)c
O(carboxyl,Neu5Ac)
-NE(Arg97)c
O4(hydroxyl,Gal)
-OH(Tyr94)c
O6(hydroxyl,Gal)
-OH(Tyr94)c
O6(hydroxyl,Gal)
-OE1(Glu92)c
O6(hydroxyl,Gal)
-OE2(Glu92)c
O6(hydroxyl,Gal)
-OE1(Glu107)c
O6(hydroxyl,Gal)
-NZ(Lyz111)c
O(carbonyl,GlcNAc)
-NH(Arg108)c
O2(hydroxyl,Fuc)
-ND(Asn83)c
O3(hydroxyl,Fuc)
-ND(Asn105)c
O3(hydroxyl,Fuc)
-OE1(Glu107)c
O4(hydroxyl,Fuc)
-OE1(Glu80)c
O4(hydroxyl,Fuc)
-OE2(Glu80)c
O4(hydroxyl,Fuc)
-ND(Asn82)c
Neu5Ac(2-3)
-Gal, d
Neu5Ac(2-3)
-Gal, d
Gal(1-4)
-GlcNAc, d
Gal(1-4)
-GlcNAc, d
Fuc(1-3)
-GlcNAc, d
Fuc(1-3)
-GlcNAc, d
geometrical
parameter
X-raya
TABLE 1: Characteristic Geometrical Parameters (Hydrogen Bond Distances/Dihedral Angles in Glycoside Linkages) in 20 QM/MM-Refined Structural Models
3956
Ishida
3958
Ishida
kcal/mol; solute coordinate in the range from 90 to 130 kcal/
mol. These selections are based on the MM 2D-FES results
shown in Figure 4. In this selected energy window, about 60%
of the total sampled structures from the MD trajectories can be
assigned as effective binding conformations. In the following
sections, we employ these sampling structures to analyze the
geometrical parameters that characterize the carbohydrate
bindings.
First, we determine the hydrogen bond distances between the
SLex motif and E-selectin protein. Figure 6 summarizes
representative hydrogen bond parameters between each monosaccharide unit and amino acid residue at the CRD. In the figures
four panels, the x-axis shows the sampling number from the
MD trajectory in accordance with the time evolution order. In
comparing the sampled structures with the known X-ray
geometry, we observe a few structural differences especially in
the Gal interaction site. While the 4-OH of Gal forms hydrogen
bonds with the hydroxyl group of Tyr94 and the carboxyl group
of Glu92 in the X-ray structure, the 6-OH of Gal, instead of
4-OH, bonds to the side chain of either Glu107 or Lys111 in
most MD-sampled structures. When the 6-OH of Gal forms a
stable hydrogen bond with the side chain of Glu107, hydrogen
bonds with Lys111 occasionally form (see Figure 6a). On the
other hand, when the 6-OH of Gal binds to the side chain of
Lys111, the other hydrogen bond with Glu107 disappears in
most simulation times. In short, the hydrogen bonds of Gal
couple loosely with target amino acid partners inside the CRD.
For the structural parameters of Fuc with E-selectin, we observe
basically the same trend between the X-ray and the sampled
structures. At the Ca2+ binding site, Fuc coordinates to the Ca2+
binding ligand and forms several tight and stable hydrogen
bonds with Glu80, Asn82, and Asn83, as summarized in Figure
6c,d. One slight difference is a weak coupling with the side
chain of the Glu107 residue; more than 70% of the sampled
structures form no apparent hydrogen bond with Glu107. In
contrast to the apparent hydrogen bonds formed between Gal/
Fuc and protein, we cannot observe any characteristic hydrogen
bonds between Neu5Ac and E-selectin, although the original
X-ray structure shows hydrogen bonds between the carboxyl
group of Neu5Ac and the protein. In the present model, the
acetyl group of GlcNAc occasionally forms a weak hydrogen
bond with the side chain of Arg108, as shown in Figure 6b.
Next, to clearly characterize the geometrical parameters
between the theoretical models and the X-ray structure, we
conduct ab initio QM/MM structural refinements for the selected
20 structures sampled from the minimum free energy region.
In this calculation, we explicitly consider the surrounding
aqueous environment of the E-selectin/SLex complex. After
annealing typical snapshots sampled from the minimum energy
region, which has at least an 100 ps time interval along the
MD trajectory, we perform ab initio QM/MM geometry
optimizations as described in section 2. The major geometrical
parameters for each structural model are listed in Table 1. As
clearly shown in these numerical data, most hydrogen bond
distances are within a reasonable range, as summarized in the
sampling data (see Figure 6). In checking each structure
carefully, we observe slight structural differences at several
points; for example, hydrogen bonding between Fuc and Glu107,
between GlcNAc and Arg108, and so on. These points are
consistent with the results summarized in Figure 6. In summary,
these annealed and quenched QM/MM structures seem to be
representative geometrical models observed in the free energy
minimum region. As a reference, a typical optimized geometry
is shown in Figure 7. In comparing both QM/MM-optimized
Figure 6. Interatomic distances: (a) between the 6-hydroxyl group of Gal and the side chains of Glu107/Lys111; (b) between the carbonyl oxygen
of NHAc in GlcNAc and the side chain of Arg108; (c) between the 2- and 3-hydroxyl groups of Fuc and the side chains of Asn83/Glu107; (d)
between the 4-hydroxyl group of Fuc and the side chains of Glu80/Asn82. In all graphs, the x-axis shows the number of sampled structures
extracted from the MD trajectory as a function of the time evolution order; the y-axis shows the interatomic distance between two heavy atoms (in
angstroms). In several cases, these parameters represent the hydrogen-bond distances between each monosaccharide unit and related amino acid
residues of the protein.
Figure 7. (left) QM/MM-refined geometry of the original X-ray coordinates at the carbohydrate-recognition domain (CRD) of selectin. (right) One
typical QM/MM optimized geometry (model no. 14 in Table 1) at the CRD, sampled and quenched from the minimum free energy region in the
2D-FES. Purple-labeled stick models represent amino acid residues that come into contact with the sialyl Lewis X; green balls represent Ca2+ ion.
Figure 8. Scatter plots of the dihedral angles (/) in the following glycosidic linkages: (a) Neu5Ac(2-3)-Gal; (b) Gal(1-4)-GlcNAc; (c)
Fuc(1-3)-GlcNAc.
2.17
4.39
3.61
4.10
3.40
4.13
3.84
3.42
5.01
3.86
4.17
4.41
3.29
3.21
3.63
4.17
3.69
3.83
3.74
3.45
3.87
3.74
4.87
3.78
3.71
3.57
4.33
1.31
1.37
1.02
2.29
3.45
3.80
3.71
3.88
3.67
3.94
3.93
4.57
3.91
4.03
3.68
3.16
3.06
4.01
4.46
3.96
3.53
4.04
3.19
3.87
3.90
4.81
3.68
4.01
3.80
4.48
1.55
0.97
1.22
4.96
3.84
4.41
3.97
4.81
1.50
0.97
1.02
4.15
3.81
2.90
3.82
3.45
4.13
4.56
3.56
4.44
3.49
3.40
3.78
3.65
3.93
3.35
4.16
4.11
3.28
3.63
3.34
3.72
2.73
1.44
geom
2
4.87
3.68
3.84
3.73
4.23
1.02
1.22
1.30
3.97
4.05
3.28
3.76
3.66
3.91
4.92
3.81
3.65
3.75
3.50
3.64
3.74
3.90
3.34
3.93
4.53
3.04
3.82
3.47
3.47
2.64
1.97
geom
3
4.79
3.51
3.96
3.90
4.44
1.33
1.14
1.13
3.71
3.96
2.83
4.02
3.61
3.81
4.19
3.59
3.98
3.47
3.37
3.74
3.63
3.85
3.76
3.87
3.90
3.26
4.07
3.33
3.22
2.37
2.01
geom
4
4.80
3.60
3.90
3.96
4.19
1.26
1.15
1.54
3.68
3.84
3.23
3.59
3.41
3.95
4.65
3.57
3.93
4.48
3.41
3.99
3.56
4.29
3.42
3.77
3.82
3.10
3.74
3.73
4.54
2.00
2.01
geom
5
4.67
3.50
3.98
3.82
4.63
0.90
1.28
1.18
3.88
3.81
3.47
3.60
3.47
4.08
4.30
3.47
3.86
4.95
3.51
3.57
3.53
4.01
3.58
3.83
3.51
2.91
3.81
3.26
4.36
2.24
1.81
geom
6
4.73
3.76
3.90
3.98
4.46
1.08
1.44
0.89
3.73
3.86
3.29
3.75
3.59
3.68
4.57
3.56
3.96
4.96
3.49
3.55
3.77
4.28
3.59
4.04
3.96
2.76
3.84
3.38
4.38
2.21
1.74
geom
7
4.81
3.66
3.74
3.71
4.47
1.74
0.92
1.04
4.13
3.57
3.41
4.07
3.90
3.62
4.62
3.78
4.30
3.47
2.91
3.55
3.80
4.31
3.49
4.11
4.39
3.18
3.31
3.76
4.01
2.52
1.78
geom
8
geom0 indicates the QM/MM-refined geometry of X-ray coordinates (see Table 1).
1.79
geom
1
2.15
geom
0a
5.06
3.89
3.96
3.84
4.63
1.65
0.71
1.17
3.63
3.89
3.45
4.19
4.05
3.92
4.30
3.75
4.10
3.32
3.62
3.79
3.76
4.13
3.38
3.80
4.03
3.32
4.01
3.51
3.11
2.30
1.81
geom
9
4.98
3.57
3.77
3.64
4.38
1.06
1.04
1.38
4.00
3.62
3.35
3.89
3.63
3.71
4.23
4.31
4.01
3.73
3.32
3.14
3.79
3.95
3.87
4.02
4.18
3.51
4.12
3.83
3.34
2.38
1.98
geom
10
4.72
3.55
4.04
3.64
4.32
1.10
1.11
1.34
3.86
3.71
3.40
3.92
3.83
4.23
4.51
3.61
4.26
3.59
3.22
3.54
3.70
4.33
4.14
4.06
4.08
3.44
4.29
3.65
3.12
2.73
1.66
geom
11
4.99
3.65
3.89
3.93
4.52
1.55
0.91
0.95
4.03
3.83
2.78
3.71
3.65
3.72
4.29
3.45
3.78
4.18
3.38
3.68
3.72
4.06
3.85
4.14
3.69
3.74
5.15
3.31
3.53
2.28
1.77
geom
12
5.17
3.61
3.83
3.70
4.48
1.50
0.90
0.98
3.88
3.79
3.26
4.14
3.80
4.25
4.39
3.46
4.06
3.63
3.11
3.60
3.93
3.98
3.65
3.60
4.19
3.57
3.30
3.45
3.81
2.51
2.03
geom
13
4.66
3.57
4.75
3.91
5.03
0.78
1.20
1.36
4.11
3.64
3.07
4.03
3.54
4.07
4.48
3.36
3.80
4.12
3.47
3.50
3.47
4.02
3.54
3.78
3.63
4.19
5.02
3.31
4.13
2.00
1.68
geom
14
4.98
3.85
4.18
3.81
4.71
1.40
1.21
0.83
4.08
3.67
3.21
4.00
3.28
3.73
4.74
3.50
3.79
4.07
3.50
3.51
3.53
4.07
3.63
3.82
4.22
3.69
4.72
3.58
3.74
1.83
1.97
geom
15
4.78
3.74
4.16
3.80
4.67
1.37
1.28
0.89
3.63
3.61
3.07
4.04
3.23
3.62
4.84
3.64
3.81
4.92
3.03
3.69
3.55
4.09
4.13
3.89
4.13
3.84
4.47
3.12
4.16
2.05
1.48
geom
16
4.99
3.62
4.31
3.79
4.57
1.21
1.40
0.94
3.72
3.62
3.35
3.69
3.78
3.73
4.34
3.47
3.83
4.81
3.38
3.51
3.52
4.23
3.75
4.14
3.54
3.27
3.73
3.51
4.48
2.32
1.91
geom
17
4.80
3.77
4.24
4.03
4.65
1.42
1.19
1.27
3.63
4.15
2.81
4.13
3.49
3.77
4.41
3.61
3.52
3.89
3.27
3.66
3.71
3.95
3.50
3.77
3.48
3.16
4.51
3.38
3.76
2.14
1.94
geom
18
4.82
3.71
4.31
3.82
4.86
1.25
1.04
1.41
4.02
3.74
3.09
3.88
3.66
3.71
3.94
3.72
4.18
3.52
2.99
3.45
3.56
4.38
3.61
3.59
3.01
4.03
3.38
3.43
4.49
2.45
1.68
geom
19
4.68
3.57
4.39
3.83
4.76
1.53
1.04
1.35
4.23
3.80
3.17
4.00
3.60
3.84
4.26
3.61
3.05
3.65
3.25
3.56
3.68
3.98
4.07
3.80
3.17
3.81
4.56
3.50
3.44
2.63
1.83
geom
20
4.86
3.67
4.06
3.82
4.56
1.30
1.13
1.15
3.89
3.79
3.19
3.90
3.62
3.86
4.48
3.63
3.92
4.02
3.32
3.58
3.66
4.10
3.65
3.90
3.89
3.42
4.08
3.47
3.86
2.33
1.81
average
H3ax
(Neu5Ac)
H3eq
(Neu5Ac)
H4
(Neu5Ac)
H5
(Neu5Ac)
H6
(Neu5Ac)
H7
(Neu5Ac)
H8
(Neu5Ac)
H9
(Neu5Ac)
H9
(Neu5Ac)
H1 (Gal)
H2 (Gal)
H3 (Gal)
H4 (Gal)
H5 (Gal)
H6 (Gal)
H6 (Gal)
H1
(GlcNAc)
H2
(GlcNAc)
H3
(GlcNAc)
H4
(GlcNAc)
H5
(GlcNAc)
H6
(GlcNAc)
H6
(GlcNAc)
H1 (Fuc)
H2 (Fuc)
H3 (Fuc)
H4 (Fuc)
H5 (Fuc)
H6 (Fuc)
H6 (Fuc)
H6 (Fuc)
proton type
TABLE 2: Calculated Proton Chemical Shifts of Each QM/MM Optimized Structure by the Ab Initio QM/MM-GIAO RHF/6-31G*/AMBER Level (in ppm)
3960
Ishida
Figure 9. Left panel: Superimposed geometries of the sialyl Lewis X at the carbohydrate-recognition domain. Ten QM/MM optimized structures
of SLex are superimposed onto one reference structure. Only the SLex structures are shown by the stick model. Right panels: (top) Experimental
NMR profile reported in ref 29. This original figure was provided by Prof. Thomas Peters. (bottom) Computed 1D proton chemical shift profile of
the SLex ligand. This profile was calculated by the simple average of 20 QM/MM-refined geometries summarized in Tables 1 and 2.
3962
Ishida
Figure 10. Sialyl Lewis X conformations on the 2D free energy surface. In region A, SLex has energetically unstable conformations with large
dipole moments. In region C, SLex has energetically stable conformations with small dipole moments, resulting in a small solvation energy gain.
In region B, as a result of detailed balance between the relative stability of the SLex conformation and the solvation energy gain, energetically
favorable conformations are observed. Several representative geometries sampled from the MD trajectory are shown in the three regions as
superimposed structures.
3964
(5) Weis, W. I.; Drickamer, K. Annu. ReV. Biochem. 1996, 65, 441
473.
(6) Woods, R. J. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 1995, 5, 591598.
(7) Imberty, A. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 1997, 7, 617623.
(8) Duus, J. .; Gotfredsen, C. H.; Bock, K. Chem. ReV. 2000, 100,
45894614.
(9) Wormald, M. R.; Petrescu, A. J.; Pao, Y.-L.; Glithero, A.; Elliott,
T.; Dwek, R. A. Chem. ReV. 2002, 102, 371386.
(10) Simanek, E. E.; McGarvey, G. J.; Jablonowski, J. A.; Wong, C.H. Chem. ReV. 1998, 98, 833862.
(11) Vliegenthart, J. F. G., Woods, R. J., Ed. NMR Spectroscopy and
Computer Modeling of Carbohydrates; ACS Symposium Series 930;
American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2006.
(12) Woods, R. J. Glycoconjugate J. 1998, 15, 209216.
(13) DeMarco, M. L.; Woods, R. J. Glycobiology 2008, 18, 426440.
(14) Drickamer, K. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 1999, 9, 585590.
(15) Vestweber, D.; Blanks, J. E. Physiol. ReV. 1999, 79, 181213.
(16) Ley, K. Trends Mol. Med. 2003, 9, 263268.
(17) Ehrhardt, C.; Kneuer, C.; Bakowsky, U. AdV. Drug DeliVery ReV.
2004, 56, 527549.
(18) Kneuer, C.; Ehrhardt, C.; Radomski, M. W.; Bakowsky, U. Drug
DiscoVery Today 2006, 11, 10341040.
(19) Phillips, M. L.; Nudelman, E.; Gaeta, F. C. A.; Perez, M.; Singhal,
A. K.; Hakomori, S.; Paulson, J. C. Science 1990, 250, 11301132.
(20) Lin, Y.-C.; Hummel, C. W.; Huang, D.-H.; Ichikawa, Y.; Nicolaou,
K C.; Wong, C.-H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 54525454.
(21) Varki, A. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1994, 91, 73907397.
(22) Brandley, B. K.; Kiso, M.; Abbas, S.; Nikrad, P.; Srivasatava, O.;
Foxall, C.; Oda, Y.; Hasegawa, A. Glycobiology 1993, 3, 633641.
(23) Asa, D.; Raycroft, L.; Ma, L.; Aeed, P. A.; Kaytes, P. S.; Elhammer,
A. P.; Geng, J.-G. J. Biol. Chem. 1995, 270, 1166211670.
(24) Sanders, W. J.; Katsumoto, T. R.; Bertozzi, C. R.; Rosen, S. D.;
Kiessling, L. L. Biochemistry 1996, 35, 1486214867.
(25) Koenig, A.; Jain, R.; Vig, R.; Norgard-Sumnicht, K. E.; Matta,
K. L.; Varki, A. Glycobiology 1997, 7, 7993.
(26) Scheffler, K.; Ernst, B.; Katopodis, A.; Magnani, J. L.; Wang, W. T.;
Weisemann, R.; Peters, T. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1995, 34, 1841
1844.
(27) Poppe, L.; Brown, G. S.; Philo, J. S.; Nikrad, P. V.; Shah, B. H.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 17271736.
(28) Harris, R.; Kiddle, G. R.; Field, R. A.; Milton, M. J.; Ernst, B.;
Magnani, J. L.; Homans, S. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 25462551.
(29) Rinnbauer, M.; Ernst, B.; Wagner, B.; Magnani, J.; Benie, A. J.;
Peters, T. Glycobiology 2003, 13, 435443.
(30) Graves, B. J.; Crowther, R. L.; Chandran, C.; Rumberger, J. M.;
Li, S.; Huang, K.-S.; Presky, D. H.; Familletti, P. C.; Wolitzky, B. A.; Burns,
D. K. Nature 1994, 367, 532538.
(31) Somers, W. S.; Tang, J.; Shaw, G. D.; Camphausen, R. T. Cell
2000, 103, 467479.
(32) Beauharnois, M. E.; Lindquist, K. C.; Marathe, D.; Vanderslice,
P.; Xia, J.; Matta, K. L.; Neelamegham, S. Biochemistry 2005, 44, 9507
9519.
(33) Simonis, D.; Fritzsche, J.; Alban, S.; Bendas, G. Biochemistry 2007,
46, 61566164.
(34) Torgersen, D.; Mullin, N. P.; Drickamer, K. J. Biol. Chem. 1998,
273, 62546261.
(35) Bouyain, S.; Rushton, S.; Drickamer, K. Glycobiology 2001, 11,
989996.
(36) Pichierri, F.; Matsuo, Y. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2002, 10, 27512757.
(37) Veluraja, K.; Margulis, C. J. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2005, 23, 101
111.
(38) Breneman, C. M.; Wiberg, K. B. J. Comput. Chem. 1990, 11, 361
373.
(39) Bayly, C. I.; Cieplak, P.; Cornell, W. D.; Kollman, P. A. J. Phys.
Chem. 1993, 97, 1026910280.
Ishida
(40) Haselhorst, T.; Weimar, T.; Peters, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001,
123, 1070510714.
(41) Field, M. J. J. Comput. Chem. 2002, 23, 4858.
(42) Gao, J.; Truhlar, D. G. Annu. ReV. Phys. Chem. 2002, 53, 467
505.
(43) Warshel, A. Annu. ReV. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 2003, 32, 425
443.
(44) Ryde, U. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2003, 7, 136142.
(45) Friesner, R. A.; Guallar, V. Annu. ReV. Phys. Chem. 2005, 56, 389
427.
(46) Riccardi, D.; Schaefer, P.; Yang, Y.; Yu, H.; Ghosh, N.; Prat-Resina,
X.; Konig, P.; Li, G.; Xu, D.; Guo, H.; Elstner, M.; Cui, Q. J. Phys. Chem.
B 2006, 110, 64586469.
(47) Senn, H. M.; Thiel, W. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 1198
1229.
(48) (a) Ishida, T.; Kato, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 1203512048.
(b) Ishida, T.; Kato, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 71117118.
(49) Ishida, T. Biochemistry 2006, 45, 54135420.
(50) Ishida, T. J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 129, 125105.
(51) (a) Rosta, E.; Klahn, M.; Warshel, A. J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110,
29342941. (b) Rosta, E.; Haranczyk, M.; Chu, Z. T.; Warshel, A. J. Phys.
Chem. B 2008, 112, 56805692.
(52) (a) Lu, Z.; Yang, W. J. Chem. Phys. 2004, 121, 89100. (b) Hu,
H.; Lu, Z.; Yang, W. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2007, 3, 390406.
(53) (a) Rod, T. H; Ryde, U. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2005, 1, 1240
1251. (b) Kaukonen, M.; Soderhjelm, P.; Heimdal, J.; Ryde, U. J. Chem.
Theory Comput. 2008, 4, 9851001.
(54) (a) Takahashi, H.; Matubayashi, N.; Nakahara, M.; Nitta, T.
J. Chem. Phys. 2004, 121, 39893999. (b) Takahashi, H.; Ohno, H.; Kishi,
R.; Nakano, M.; Matubayashi, N. J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 129, 205103.
(55) King, G.; Warshel, A. J. Chem. Phys. 1990, 93, 86828692.
(56) Kumar, S.; Rosenberg, J. M.; Bouzida, D.; Swendsen, R. H;
Kollman, P. A. J. Comput. Chem. 1995, 16, 13391350.
(57) Cui, Q.; Karplus, M. J. Phys. Chem. B 2000, 104, 37213743.
(58) Ditchfield, R. Mol. Phys. 1974, 27, 789807.
(59) Wolinski, K.; Hinton, J. F.; Pulay, P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112,
82518260.
(60) Helgaker, T.; Jaszunski, M.; Ruud, K. Chem. ReV. 1999, 99, 293
352.
(61) Dupuis, M.; Marquez, A.; Davidson, E. R. HONDO Quantum
Chemistry Program Exchange (QCPE), Indiana University, Bloomington,
IN.
(62) Cornell, W. D.; Cieplak, P.; Bayly, C. I.; Gould, I. R.; Merz, K. M.,
Jr.; Ferguson, D. M.; Spellmeyer, D. C.; Fox, T.; Caldwell, J. W.; Kollman,
P. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 51795197.
(63) Kollman, P.; Dixon, R.; Cornell, W.; Fox, T.; Chipot, C.; Pohorille,
A. In Computer Simulation of Biomolecular Systems; van Gunsteren, W. F.,
Weiner, P. K., Wilkinson, A. J., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Leiden,
The Netherlands, 1997; Vol. 3.
(64) Woods Group (2005-2009) GLYCAM Web. Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, University of Georgia, Athens, GA (http://www.glycam.com).
(65) Jorgensen, W. L.; Chandrasekhar, J.; Madura, J. D.; Impey, R. W.;
Klein, M. L. J. Chem. Phys. 1983, 79, 926935.
(66) Frenkel, D.; Smit, B. Understanding Molecular Simulation; Academic Press: London, 1996.
(67) Martyna, G. J.; Klein, M. L.; Tuckerman, M. J. Chem. Phys. 1992,
97, 26352643.
(68) Cheng, A.; Merz, K. M., Jr. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 19271937.
(69) Tuckerman, M.; Berne, B. J.; Martyna, G. J. J. Chem. Phys. 1992,
97, 19902001.
(70) Martyna, G. J.; Tuckerman, M. E.; Tobias, D. J.; Klein, M. L. Mol.
Phys. 1996, 87, 11171157.
(71) (a) Freindorf, M.; Gao, J. J. Comput. Chem. 1996, 17, 386395.
(b) Gao, J. J. Phys. Chem. B 1997, 101, 657663.
JP905872T