2004
DOI: 10.1007/s00214-004-0602-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A parallelized integral-direct second-order M�ller?Plesset perturbation theory method with a fragment molecular orbital scheme

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
110
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 173 publications
(110 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
110
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[26][27][28] The FMO method was originally developed for the Hartree-Fock (HF) level of theory, but so far the second-order Møller-Plesset perturbation correction (MP2) has been introduced to include the electron correlation effect. [29][30][31] The polarizable continuum model (PCM) has been combined with FMO to incorporate the solvent effect in an implicit way. 32 FMO and related methods have been successfully applied to electronic structure calculations of several biological molecules.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[26][27][28] The FMO method was originally developed for the Hartree-Fock (HF) level of theory, but so far the second-order Møller-Plesset perturbation correction (MP2) has been introduced to include the electron correlation effect. [29][30][31] The polarizable continuum model (PCM) has been combined with FMO to incorporate the solvent effect in an implicit way. 32 FMO and related methods have been successfully applied to electronic structure calculations of several biological molecules.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…commercial version 17 of ABINIT-MP 11 at the MP2/6-31G level. 18 The IFIE, ∆E IJ , between fragments I and J was evaluated as ∆E IJ = E IJ -E I -E J -Tr (∆P IJ V IJ ), where E IJ is the dimer electronic energy for a fragment comprising the fragments I and J; E I and E J are monomer electronic energies for fragments I and J, respectively; and ∆P IJ and V IJ are the difference density matrix and environmental electrostatic potential 11 for the IJ dimer, respectively. During the calculation, the protein structure was divided into fragments per residue unit, except for the covalently bridged disulphide residues, Cys179 and Cys214, which were treated as a single S-S bond fragment.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…yellow; non-matching residues, green; weak matching residues, light blue; strong matching residues, red; helix, blue; sheet and the binding sites (E H3 ) to estimate binding energies (ΔE) between the receptor and H3 by the following expression; ΔE=(E receptor +E H3 )−E complex . Ab initio FMO calculations were performed by using ABINIT-MP program [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39]. Binding energies ΔE and the selected IFIEs of Neu5Acα(2-3 or 2-6)Gal with amino acid residues at the FMO-HF/STO-3G and FMO-MP2/6-31G levels are summarized in Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we just urgently request a simple and essential approach with a reasonable cost. Ab initio fragment molecular orbital (FMO) calculations [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] to evaluate the binding energies between HA and Neu5Acα(2-3/6)Gal receptors are one of the promising strategies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%