Jump to content

Water model

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A water model is defined by its geometry, together with other parameters such as the atomic charges and Lennard-Jones parameters.

Incomputational chemistry,awater modelis used to simulate and thermodynamically calculatewater clusters,liquidwater,and aqueous solutions with explicit solvent. The models are determined fromquantum mechanics,molecular mechanics,experimental results, and these combinations. To imitate a specific nature of molecules, many types of models have been developed. In general, these can be classified by the following three points; (i) the number of interaction points calledsite,(ii) whether the model is rigid or flexible, (iii) whether the model includespolarizationeffects.

An alternative to the explicit water models is to use animplicit solvationmodel, also termed a continuum model, an example of which would be theCOSMO solvation modelor thepolarizable continuum model(PCM) or a hybrid solvation model.[1]

Simple water models

[edit]

The rigid models are considered the simplest water models and rely onnon-bonded interactions.In these models, bonding interactions are implicitly treated byholonomic constraints.The electrostatic interaction is modeled usingCoulomb's law,and the dispersion and repulsion forces using theLennard-Jones potential.[2][3]The potential for models such as TIP3P (transferable intermolecular potential with 3 points) and TIP4P is represented by

wherekC,theelectrostatic constant,has a value of 332.1 Å·kcal/(mol·e²) in the units commonly used in molecular modeling[citation needed];[4][5][6]qiandqjare thepartial chargesrelative to the charge of the electron;rijis the distance between two atoms or charged sites; andAandBare theLennard-Jones parameters.The charged sites may be on the atoms or on dummy sites (such as lone pairs). In most water models, the Lennard-Jones term applies only to the interaction between the oxygen atoms.

The figure below shows the general shape of the 3- to 6-site water models. The exact geometric parameters (the OH distance and the HOH angle) vary depending on the model.

2-site

[edit]

A 2-site model of water based on the familiar three-site SPC model (see below) has been shown to predict the dielectric properties of water using site-renormalized molecular fluid theory.[7]

3-site

[edit]

Three-site models have three interaction points corresponding to the three atoms of the water molecule. Each site has a point charge, and the site corresponding to the oxygen atom also has the Lennard-Jones parameters. Since 3-site models achieve a high computational efficiency, these are widely used for many applications ofmolecular dynamicssimulations. Most of the models use a rigid geometry matching that of actual water molecules. An exception is the SPC model, which assumes an ideal tetrahedral shape (HOH angle of 109.47°) instead of the observed angle of 104.5°.

The table below lists the parameters for some 3-site models.

TIPS[8] SPC[9] TIP3P[10] SPC/E[11]
r(OH), Å 0.9572 1.0 0.9572 1.0
HOH, deg 104.52 109.47 104.52 109.47
A,103kcal Å12/mol 580.0 629.4 582.0 629.4
B,kcal Å6/mol 525.0 625.5 595.0 625.5
q(O) −0.80 −0.82 −0.834 −0.8476
q(H) +0.40 +0.41 +0.417 +0.4238

The SPC/E model adds an average polarization correction to the potential energy function:

where μ is theelectric dipole momentof the effectively polarized water molecule (2.35Dfor the SPC/E model), μ0is the dipole moment of an isolated water molecule (1.85 D from experiment), and αiis an isotropicpolarizabilityconstant, with a value of1.608×10−40F·m2.Since the charges in the model are constant, this correction just results in adding 1.25 kcal/mol (5.22 kJ/mol) to the total energy. The SPC/E model results in a better density and diffusion constant than the SPC model.

The TIP3P model implemented in theCHARMMforce field is a slightly modified version of the original. The difference lies in the Lennard-Jones parameters: unlike TIP3P, the CHARMM version of the model places Lennard-Jones parameters on the hydrogen atoms too, in addition to the one on oxygen. The charges are not modified.[12]Three-site model (TIP3P) has better performance in calculating specific heats.[13]

Flexible SPC water model

[edit]
Flexible SPC water model

The flexible simple point-charge water model (or flexible SPC water model) is a re-parametrization of the three-site SPC water model.[14][15]TheSPCmodel is rigid, whilst theflexible SPCmodel is flexible. In the model of Toukan and Rahman, the O–H stretching is made anharmonic, and thus the dynamical behavior is well described. This is one of the most accurate three-center water models without taking into account thepolarization.Inmolecular dynamicssimulations it gives the correctdensityanddielectric permittivityof water.[16]

Flexible SPC is implemented in the programsMDynaMixandAbalone.

Other models

[edit]
  • Ferguson (flexible SPC)[17]
  • CVFF (flexible)
  • MG (flexible and dissociative)[18]
  • KKY potential (flexible model).[19]
  • BLXL (smear charged potential).[20]

4-site

[edit]

The four-site models have four interaction points by adding one dummy atom near of the oxygen along thebisectorof the HOH angle of the three-site models (labeledMin the figure). The dummy atom only has a negative charge. This model improves the electrostatic distribution around the water molecule. The first model to use this approach was the Bernal–Fowler model published in 1933,[21]which may also be the earliest water model. However, the BF model doesn't reproduce well the bulk properties of water, such asdensityandheat of vaporization,and is thus of historical interest only. This is a consequence of the parameterization method; newer models, developed after modern computers became available, were parameterized by runningMetropolis Monte Carloor molecular dynamics simulations and adjusting the parameters until the bulk properties are reproduced well enough.

The TIP4P model, first published in 1983, is widely implemented in computational chemistry software packages and often used for the simulation of biomolecular systems. There have been subsequent reparameterizations of the TIP4P model for specific uses: the TIP4P-Ew model, for use with Ewald summation methods; the TIP4P/Ice, for simulation of solid water ice; TIP4P/2005, a general parameterization for simulating the entirephase diagramof condensed water; and TIP4PQ/2005, a similar model but designed to accurately describe the properties of solid and liquid water when quantum effects are included in the simulation.[22]

Most of the four-site water models use an OH distance and HOH angle which match those of the free water molecule. One exception is the OPC model, in which no geometry constraints are imposed other than the fundamental C2vmolecular symmetryof the water molecule. Instead, the point charges and their positions are optimized to best describe the electrostatics of the water molecule. OPC reproduces a comprehensive set of bulk properties more accurately than several of the commonly used rigidn-site water models. The OPC model is implemented within theAMBERforce field.

BF[21] TIPS2[23] TIP4P[10] TIP4P-Ew[24] TIP4P/Ice[25] TIP4P/2005[26] OPC[27] TIP4P-D[28]
r(OH), Å 0.96 0.9572 0.9572 0.9572 0.9572 0.9572 0.8724 0.9572
HOH, deg 105.7 104.52 104.52 104.52 104.52 104.52 103.6 104.52
r(OM), Å 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.125 0.1577 0.1546 0.1594 0.1546
A,103kcal Å12/mol 560.4 695.0 600.0 656.1 857.9 731.3 865.1 904.7
B,kcal Å6/mol 837.0 600.0 610.0 653.5 850.5 736.0 858.1 900.0
q(M) −0.98 −1.07 −1.04 −1.04844 −1.1794 −1.1128 −1.3582 −1.16
q(H) +0.49 +0.535 +0.52 +0.52422 +0.5897 +0.5564 +0.6791 +0.58

Others:

  • q-TIP4P/F (flexible)[29]
  • TIP4P/2005f (flexible)[30]

5-site

[edit]

The 5-site models place the negative charge on dummy atoms (labelledL) representing thelone pairsof the oxygen atom, with a tetrahedral-like geometry. An early model of these types was the BNS model of Ben-Naim and Stillinger, proposed in 1971,[citation needed]soon succeeded by the ST2 model of Stillinger and Rahman in 1974.[31]Mainly due to their higher computational cost, five-site models were not developed much until 2000, when the TIP5P model of Mahoney and Jorgensen was published.[32]When compared with earlier models, the TIP5P model results in improvements in the geometry for thewater dimer,a more "tetrahedral" water structure that better reproduces the experimentalradial distribution functionsfromneutron diffraction,and the temperature of maximal density of water. The TIP5P-E model is a reparameterization of TIP5P for use withEwald sums.

BNS[31] ST2[31] TIP5P[32] TIP5P-E[33]
r(OH), Å 1.0 1.0 0.9572 0.9572
HOH, deg 109.47 109.47 104.52 104.52
r(OL), Å 1.0 0.8 0.70 0.70
LOL, deg 109.47 109.47 109.47 109.47
A,103kcal Å12/mol 77.4 238.7 544.5 554.3
B,kcal Å6/mol 153.8 268.9 590.3 628.2
q(L) −0.19562 −0.2357 −0.241 −0.241
q(H) +0.19562 +0.2357 +0.241 +0.241
RL,Å 2.0379 2.0160
RU,Å 3.1877 3.1287

Note, however, that the BNS and ST2 models do not use Coulomb's law directly for the electrostatic terms, but a modified version that is scaled down at short distances by multiplying it by the switching functionS(r):

Thus, theRLandRUparameters only apply to BNS and ST2.

6-site

[edit]

Originally designed to study water/ice systems, a 6-site model that combines all the sites of the 4- and 5-site models was developed by Nada and van der Eerden.[34]Since it had a very high melting temperature[35]when employed under periodic electrostatic conditions (Ewald summation), a modified version was published later[36]optimized by using the Ewald method for estimating the Coulomb interaction.

Other

[edit]
  • The effect of explicit solute model on solute behavior in biomolecular simulations has been also extensively studied. It was shown that explicit water models affected the specific solvation and dynamics of unfolded peptides, while the conformational behavior and flexibility of folded peptides remained intact.[37]
  • MB model. A more abstract model resembling theMercedes-Benzlogo that reproduces some features of water in two-dimensional systems. It is not used as such for simulations of "real" (i.e., three-dimensional) systems, but it is useful for qualitative studies and for educational purposes.[38]
  • Coarse-grained models. One- and two-site models of water have also been developed.[39]In coarse-grain models, each site can represent several water molecules.
  • Many-body models. Water models built using training-set configurations solved quantum mechanically, which then use machine learning protocols to extract potential-energy surfaces. These potential-energy surfaces are fed into MD simulations for an unprecedented degree of accuracy in computing physical properties of condensed phase systems.[40]
    • Another classification of many body models[41]is on the basis of the expansion of the underlying electrostatics, e.g., the SCME (Single Center Multipole Expansion) model[42]

Computational cost

[edit]

The computational cost of a water simulation increases with the number of interaction sites in the water model. The CPU time is approximately proportional to the number of interatomic distances that need to be computed. For the 3-site model, 9 distances are required for each pair of water molecules (every atom of one molecule against every atom of the other molecule, or 3 × 3). For the 4-site model, 10 distances are required (every charged site with every charged site, plus the O–O interaction, or 3 × 3 + 1). For the 5-site model, 17 distances are required (4 × 4 + 1). Finally, for the 6-site model, 26 distances are required (5 × 5 + 1).

When using rigid water models in molecular dynamics, there is an additional cost associated with keeping the structure constrained, usingconstraint algorithms(although with bond lengths constrained it is often possible to increase the time step).

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^Skyner RE, McDonagh JL, Groom CR, van Mourik T, Mitchell JB (March 2015)."A review of methods for the calculation of solution free energies and the modelling of systems in solution"(PDF).Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics.17(9): 6174–91.Bibcode:2015PCCP...17.6174S.doi:10.1039/C5CP00288E.PMID25660403.
  2. ^Allen MP, Tildesley DJ (1989).Computer Simulation of Liquids.Clarendon Press.ISBN978-0-19-855645-9.
  3. ^Kirby BJ.Micro- and Nanoscale Fluid Mechanics: Transport in Microfluidic Devices.
  4. ^Swails JM, Roitberg AE (2013)."prmtop file of {A}mber"(PDF).
  5. ^Swails JM (2013).Free energy simulations of complex biological systems at constant pH(PDF).University of Florida.
  6. ^Case DA, Walker RC, Cheatham III TE, Simmerling CL, Roitberg A, Merz KM, et al. (April 2019)."Amber 2019 reference manual (covers Amber18 and AmberTools19)"(PDF).
  7. ^Dyer KM, Perkyns JS, Stell G, Pettitt BM (2009)."Site-renormalised molecular fluid theory: on the utility of a two-site model of water".Molecular Physics.107(4–6): 423–431.Bibcode:2009MolPh.107..423D.doi:10.1080/00268970902845313.PMC2777734.PMID19920881.
  8. ^Jorgensen, William L. (1981). "Quantum and statistical mechanical studies of liquids. 10. Transferable intermolecular potential functions for water, alcohols, and ethers. Application to liquid water".Journal of the American Chemical Society.103(2). American Chemical Society (ACS): 335–340.doi:10.1021/ja00392a016.ISSN0002-7863.
  9. ^H. J. C. Berendsen, J. P. M. Postma, W. F. van Gunsteren, and J. Hermans, InIntermolecular Forces,edited by B. Pullman (Reidel, Dordrecht,1981), p. 331.
  10. ^abJorgensen WL, Chandrasekhar J, Madura JD, Impey RW, Klein ML (1983). "Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water".The Journal of Chemical Physics.79(2): 926–935.Bibcode:1983JChPh..79..926J.doi:10.1063/1.445869.
  11. ^Berendsen HJ,Grigera JR, Straatsma TP (1987). "The missing term in effective pair potentials".The Journal of Physical Chemistry.91(24): 6269–6271.doi:10.1021/j100308a038.
  12. ^MacKerell AD, Bashford D, Bellott M, Dunbrack RL, Evanseck JD, Field MJ, et al. (April 1998). "All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins".The Journal of Physical Chemistry B.102(18): 3586–616.doi:10.1021/jp973084f.PMID24889800.
  13. ^Mao Y, Zhang Y (2012). "Thermal conductivity, shear viscosity and specific heat of rigid water models".Chemical Physics Letters.542:37–41.Bibcode:2012CPL...542...37M.doi:10.1016/j.cplett.2012.05.044.
  14. ^ Toukan K, Rahman A (March 1985). "Molecular-dynamics study of atomic motions in water".Physical Review B.31(5): 2643–2648.Bibcode:1985PhRvB..31.2643T.doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.31.2643.PMID9936106.
  15. ^ Berendsen HJ, Grigera JR, Straatsma TP (1987). "The missing term in effective pair potentials".Journal of Physical Chemistry.91(24): 6269–6271.doi:10.1021/j100308a038.
  16. ^ Praprotnik M, Janezic D, Mavri J (2004). "Temperature Dependence of Water Vibrational Spectrum: A Molecular Dynamics Simulation Study".Journal of Physical Chemistry A.108(50): 11056–11062.Bibcode:2004JPCA..10811056P.doi:10.1021/jp046158d.
  17. ^Ferguson, David M. (April 1995)."Parameterization and evaluation of a flexible water model".Journal of Computational Chemistry.16(4): 501–511.doi:10.1002/jcc.540160413.S2CID206038409.Retrieved28 July2021.
  18. ^MG modelArchived2016-03-04 at theWayback Machine.
  19. ^Kumagai N, Kawamura K, Yokokawa T (1994). "An Interatomic Potential Model for H2O: Applications to Water and Ice Polymorphs".Molecular Simulation.12(3–6). Informa UK Limited: 177–186.doi:10.1080/08927029408023028.ISSN0892-7022.
  20. ^Burnham CJ, Li J, Xantheas SS, Leslie M (1999). "The parametrization of a Thole-type all-atom polarizable water model from first principles and its application to the study of water clusters (n=2–21) and the phonon spectrum of ice Ih".The Journal of Chemical Physics.110(9): 4566–4581.Bibcode:1999JChPh.110.4566B.doi:10.1063/1.478797.
  21. ^abBernal JD, Fowler RH (1933). "A Theory of Water and Ionic Solution, with Particular Reference to Hydrogen and Hydroxyl Ions".The Journal of Chemical Physics.1(8): 515.Bibcode:1933JChPh...1..515B.doi:10.1063/1.1749327.
  22. ^McBride, C.; Vega, C.; Noya, E.G.; Ramirez, R.; Sese', L.M. (2009). "Quantum contributions in the ice phases: The path to a new empirical model for water—TIP4PQ/2005".J. Chem. Phys.131(2): 024506.arXiv:0906.3967.Bibcode:2009JChPh.131b4506M.doi:10.1063/1.3175694.PMID19604003.S2CID15505037.
  23. ^Jorgensen (1982)."Revised TIPS for simulations of liquid water and aqueous solutions".The Journal of Chemical Physics.77(8): 4156–4163.Bibcode:1982JChPh..77.4156J.doi:10.1063/1.444325.
  24. ^Horn HW, Swope WC, Pitera JW, Madura JD, Dick TJ, Hura GL, Head-Gordon T (May 2004). "Development of an improved four-site water model for biomolecular simulations: TIP4P-Ew".The Journal of Chemical Physics.120(20): 9665–78.Bibcode:2004JChPh.120.9665H.doi:10.1063/1.1683075.PMID15267980.S2CID39545298.
  25. ^Abascal JL, Sanz E, García Fernández R, Vega C (June 2005). "A potential model for the study of ices and amorphous water: TIP4P/Ice".The Journal of Chemical Physics.122(23): 234511.Bibcode:2005JChPh.122w4511A.doi:10.1063/1.1931662.PMID16008466.S2CID8382245.
  26. ^Abascal JL, Vega C (December 2005). "A general purpose model for the condensed phases of water: TIP4P/2005".The Journal of Chemical Physics.123(23): 234505.Bibcode:2005JChPh.123w4505A.doi:10.1063/1.2121687.PMID16392929.S2CID9757894.
  27. ^Izadi S, Anandakrishnan R, Onufriev AV (November 2014)."Building Water Models: A Different Approach".The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters.5(21): 3863–3871.arXiv:1408.1679.Bibcode:2014arXiv1408.1679I.doi:10.1021/jz501780a.PMC4226301.PMID25400877.
  28. ^Piana S, Donchev AG, Robustelli P, Shaw DE (April 2015)."Water dispersion interactions strongly influence simulated structural properties of disordered protein states".The Journal of Physical Chemistry B.119(16): 5113–23.doi:10.1021/jp508971m.PMID25764013.
  29. ^Habershon, S.; Markland, T.E.; Manolopoulos, D.E. (2009). "Competing quantum effects in the dynamics of a flexible water model".J. Chem. Phys.131(2): 024501.arXiv:1011.1047.Bibcode:2009JChPh.131b4501H.doi:10.1063/1.3167790.PMID19603998.S2CID9095938.
  30. ^Gonzalez, M.A.; Abascal, J.J.F. (2011). "A flexible model for water based on TIP4P/2005".J. Chem. Phys.135(22): 224516.Bibcode:2011JChPh.135v4516G.doi:10.1063/1.3663219.PMID22168712.
  31. ^abcStillinger FH, Rahman A (1974). "Improved simulation of liquid water by molecular dynamics".The Journal of Chemical Physics.60(4): 1545–1557.Bibcode:1974JChPh..60.1545S.doi:10.1063/1.1681229.S2CID96035805.
  32. ^abMahoney MW, Jorgensen WL (2000). "A five-site model for liquid water and the reproduction of the density anomaly by rigid, nonpolarizable potential functions".The Journal of Chemical Physics.112(20): 8910–8922.Bibcode:2000JChPh.112.8910M.doi:10.1063/1.481505.S2CID16367148.
  33. ^Rick SW (April 2004)."A reoptimization of the five-site water potential (TIP5P) for use with Ewald sums".The Journal of Chemical Physics.120(13): 6085–93.Bibcode:2004JChPh.120.6085R.doi:10.1063/1.1652434.PMID15267492.
  34. ^Nada, H. (2003). "An intermolecular potential model for the simulation of ice and water near the melting point: A six-site model of H2O ".The Journal of Chemical Physics.118(16): 7401.Bibcode:2003JChPh.118.7401N.doi:10.1063/1.1562610.
  35. ^Abascal JL, Fernández RG, Vega C, Carignano MA (October 2006). "The melting temperature of the six site potential model of water".The Journal of Chemical Physics.125(16): 166101.Bibcode:2006JChPh.125p6101A.doi:10.1063/1.2360276.PMID17092145.S2CID33883071.
  36. ^Nada H (December 2016). "2O and a molecular dynamics simulation".The Journal of Chemical Physics.145(24): 244706.Bibcode:2016JChPh.145x4706N.doi:10.1063/1.4973000.PMID28049310.
  37. ^Florová P, Sklenovský P, Banáš P, Otyepka M (November 2010)."Explicit Water Models Affect the Specific Solvation and Dynamics of Unfolded Peptides While the Conformational Behavior and Flexibility of Folded Peptides Remain Intact".Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation.6(11): 3569–79.doi:10.1021/ct1003687.PMID26617103.
  38. ^Silverstein KA, Haymet AD, Dill KA (1998). "A Simple Model of Water and the Hydrophobic Effect".Journal of the American Chemical Society.120(13): 3166–3175.doi:10.1021/ja973029k.
  39. ^Izvekov S, Voth GA (October 2005). "Multiscale coarse graining of liquid-state systems".The Journal of Chemical Physics.123(13). AIP Publishing: 134105.Bibcode:2005JChPh.123m4105I.doi:10.1063/1.2038787.PMID16223273.
  40. ^Medders GR, Paesani F (March 2015). "Infrared and Raman Spectroscopy of Liquid Water through" First-Principles "Many-Body Molecular Dynamics".Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation.11(3): 1145–54.doi:10.1021/ct501131j.PMID26579763.
  41. ^Cisneros GA, Wikfeldt KT, Ojamäe L, Lu J, Xu Y, Torabifard H, et al. (July 2016)."Modeling Molecular Interactions in Water: From Pairwise to Many-Body Potential Energy Functions".Chemical Reviews.116(13): 7501–28.doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00644.PMC5450669.PMID27186804.
  42. ^Wikfeldt KT, Batista ER, Vila FD, Jónsson H (October 2013). "A transferable H2O interaction potential based on a single center multipole expansion: SCME".Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics.15(39): 16542–56.arXiv:1306.0327.Bibcode:2013PCCP...1516542W.doi:10.1039/c3cp52097h.PMID23949215.S2CID15215071.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Water_model&oldid=1212366925"