Beilstein J. Org. Chem.2015,11, 2763–2773, doi:10.3762/bjoc.11.297
to MM energy. To correct this energy section, the same set of 25 to 80 MD snapshots was carried out by the single point DFT M062X/6-31+g (d,p) calculation in this study. The results of QM/PBSA and QM/GBSA binding free energies were in agreement with MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA energies. The experimental ∆G
for analysis. The MM- and QM-PBSA/GBSA calculations were conducted to estimate the binding free energy of the inclusion complex [40][60]. For QM calculation, the single point M06-2X/6-31+G** level of theory including the empirical dispersion correction energy [46] was treated on the same set of
PDF
Graphical Abstract
Figure 1:
Structures of (A) hesperetin, (B) naringenin and (C) the two cyclodextrins: β-CD and DM-β-CD with t...
Beilstein J. Org. Chem.2014,10, 2789–2799, doi:10.3762/bjoc.10.296
binding or even unbinding preference was observed in the complexes where the larger chromone ring is located in the cavity. All MM- and QM-PBSA/GBSA free energy predictions supported the more stable fisetin/β-CD complex of the bound phenyl ring. Van der Waals interaction is the key force in forming the
complexes. In addition, the quantum mechanics calculations with M06-2X/6-31G(d,p) clearly showed that both solvation effect and BSSE correction cannot be neglected for the energy determination of the chosen system.
Keywords: cyclodextrin; fisetin; flavonoid; MM-PBSA; molecular dynamics simulation; QM-PBSA
summation of solvation free energy, either MM-PBSA/GBSA or QM-PBSA/GBSA established the same conclusive evidence of a better formation of inclusion complexes II and III than complex I. The QM-PBSA/GBSA methods were able to predict the Gibbs free energy of the fisetin/β-CD complex comparatively close to the
PDF
Graphical Abstract
Figure 1:
Chemical structure of fisetin with the definition of the A- and B-rings (chromone and phenyl subuni...