Back

Reparameterization of the Amber RNA Force Field Non-Bonded Terms

Puthenpeedikakkal, A. M. K.; Cavender, C. E.; Smith, L. G.; Grossfield, A.; Mathews, D.

2026-05-19 biochemistry
10.64898/2026.05.18.725894 bioRxiv
Show abstract

All-atom simulations of RNA using molecular dynamics have the promise of modeling conformational preferences, folding thermodynamics, conformational change kinetics, and binding affinities of small molecule therapeutics. These simulations rely on a force field, a set of equations and parameters that model the potential energy as a function of conformation using classical mechanics. One popular force field for RNA is Amber OL3, with the most recent iteration derived in 1999 and with subsequent updates to backbone dihedral parameters. The Amber force field, while frequently used, is known to have limitations; for example, it does not properly stabilize native structures against alternative structures. Here, we provide a new approach to fitting the non-bonded parameters for the force field, specifically atom-centered point charges for electrostatics and the Lennard-Jones parameters. The parameters are fit to quantum mechanics (QM) interaction energies calculated with symmetry-adapted perturbation theory (SAPT), including embedded point charges to represent the electrostatic field from solvent and adjacent nucleotides. In this pilot study with a limited set of fitting data, we use the Amber ff99 equations and atom types unchanged. With the revised parameters, we observe improvement in the stability of native structures relative to alternative structures. Native tetraloop conformations, which unfold with the Amber OL3 force field, are stable on the microsecond timescale with our new force field parameters. We also see improvement in the conformational preferences of tetramers. Crucially, A-form helices are still well-modeled, but we observe additional flexibility in an internal loop that is not consistent with NMR data. Overall, we provide evidence that this new approach to fitting RNA force field parameters to SAPT interaction energies with native-structure context represented as embedded point charges is promising. It offers a flexible solution for revising the equations in future work or for extension to other molecules that interact with RNA, such as proteins and small molecules. We call this new set of force field parameters Amber RNA.ROC26.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
126 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.7%
2
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
207 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
22.7%
3
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
4
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
158 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.9%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.7%
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 9%
3.6%
7
Protein Science
221 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.9%
8
ACS Omega
90 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.8%
9
Structure
175 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
10
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
82 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
11
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
12
Biochemistry
130 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
13
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.7%
14
The Journal of Chemical Physics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
15
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.5%
16
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.5%
17
Biophysical Journal
545 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
18
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
19
Journal of Molecular Biology
217 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
20
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
100 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
21
Journal of Visualized Experiments
30 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
22
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 66%
0.6%
23
SoftwareX
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.5%
24
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
25
Physical Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%