Abstract
Riboswitch RNAs play key roles in bacterial metabolism and represent a promising new class of antibiotic targets for treatment of infectious disease. While many studies of riboswitches have been performed, the exact mechanism of riboswitch operation is still not fully understood at the atomistic level of detail. Molecular dynamics simulations are useful for interpreting existing experimental data and producing predictions for new experiments. Here, a wide range of computational studies on riboswitches is reviewed. By understanding the key principles of riboswitch operation, computation may aid in the effort to design more specific antibiotics with affinities greater than those of the native ligand. Such a detailed understanding may be required to improve efficacy and reduce side effects. These studies are laying the groundwork for understanding the action mechanism of new compounds that inhibit riboswitch activity. Future directions such as magnesium effects, large-scale conformational changes, expression platforms and co-transcriptional folding are also discussed.
Introduction:
Riboswitches are noncoding RNAs typically found in the 5’-UTR of bacterial mRNAs and often regulate genes important for metabolism (1-3). In many cases, the presence or absence of a metabolite alters a transcriptional terminator helix, turning the gene on or off. Riboswitches have two dramatically different folds depending on the presence or absence of ligand. For many riboswitches, the presence of ligand causes a substantial collapse of the RNA into a compact aptamer (4-7). In absence of ligand, an alternative secondary structure (the expression platform) forms, often inhibiting aptamer formation. Riboswitches are promising targets for antibiotics because they (1) control important biosynthetic pathways in pathogenic bacteria, (2) have not been found in humans, and (3) are highly specific (8-11). Because riboswitches are present in multiple copies in the genome, they have the potential to be less susceptible to resistance mutations (8). With respect to therapeutic design, at least 16 human bacterial pathogens rely on riboswitch-controlled gene expression. In B. subtilis, the S-adenosylmethionine (SAM) riboswitches control 11 transcriptional units, including 26 genes that are critical for sulfur metabolism, amino acid metabolism and SAM biosynthesis (2; 12).
Riboswitch mechanism combines the problems of RNA folding (13-15), ligand binding and large conformational changes (16; 17). A wealth of structural studies have been performed, revealing the detailed riboswitch fold and ligand-binding interactions (18-26). Most recently, crystallographic studies have captured ligand-free states in addition to ligand-bound states (27). Many other riboswitch investigations have focused on the aptamer domain of the riboswitch (2; 13; 20; 23; 28-33). Experimental studies have examined ligand binding to riboswitch aptamer domains and associated conformational changes (13; 16; 17; 20; 22-24; 26; 30; 34-40). Fluorescence studies have shown the aptamer to undergo conformational changes (13; 30; 40; 41). The results are consistent with SAXS data and other biochemical studies (27; 30; 32). Single molecule studies have investigated the presence of intermediate states (4; 40; 42).
SAXS and NMR experiments have detailed the collapse transition between extended and compact conformations (27; 43). Transcriptional termination studies of the overall effect of secondary structure change for other riboswitches have been performed with regulatory, kinetic and thermodynamic experiments (12; 16; 17; 44). Very recently, several studies have examined the role of the expression platform in riboswitch function (6; 45). While experimental studies have made great progress into understanding riboswitch mechanism, computational studies play a key role in providing an atomistic interpretation and framework for riboswitch dynamics and mechanism. A wide range of computational techniques has been applied with each method giving a complementary perspective. While this short review is by no means comprehensive, an attempt is made to cover the major areas of computer simulations of riboswitch systems.
Explicit solvent molecular dynamics simulations of riboswitch dynamics
Many explicit solvent molecular dynamics simulations have been performed in recent years. Most studies use the AMBER or CHARMM force field and particle mesh Ewald electrostatics (PME). Some studies use an atmosphere of excess ions in addition to water. A handful of studies have reached aggregate sampling > 1 microsecond. Simulations of the guanine riboswitch investigated the hydrogen bond network with and without ligand and guanine binding via ‘pulling’(46). Here, the authors suggest pathways and compare to NMR and other experimental data. Molecular dynamics simulations of the adenine riboswitch used the CHARMM force field to examine the ligand-bound and ligand-free dynamics, suggesting mechanisms for binding and switching (47). Further studies of the adenine riboswitch using CHARMM explored the destabilization of the P1 stem and flexibility of the J2/3 junction. This same study also simulated the holo pbuE riboswitch in the presence of adenine (H1), and 2,6-diaminopurine (DAP, H2) (48).
Studies of the SAM-II system with the AMBER force field explored pseudoknot fluctuations and ligand binding, concluding that the curvature and base-pairing of the expression platform that could affect the interactions with the ribosome (49). A second study found that unfavorable loss in entropy in SAM-II binding is greater for (S,S)- and (R,S)-SAM than SAH, which is compensated by stabilizing electrostatic interactions with the riboswitch (50). Protonation studies of the glmS riboswitch concluded that the canonical form of G40 plays a structural role by stabilizing an in-line attack conformation of the cleavage site A-1(2′-OH) nucleophile (51). An additional study of the glmS system suggested that GlcN6P acts as a general acid in the self-cleavage of glmS (52). Molecular dynamics simulations of the preQ1 riboswitch of local aptamer dynamics have been validated by 2-aminopurine fluorescence experiments (53). A very interesting study concerning the effect of urea on the preQ1 riboswitch revealed that the denaturation of RNA structures is mainly driven by the hydrogen bonds and stacking interactions of urea with the bases. This study used the CHARMM force field and had an aggregate sampling of ~5 microseconds (54).
Explicit solvent studies of the SAM-I riboswitch using AMBER with excess ions suggest that a component of the surrounding Mg2+ cloud (outer sphere Mg2+ ions) exhibits glass-like behavior with non-Markovian diffusion coefficients (56). Interestingly, ~80% of the Mg2+ ions surrounding the RNA (the SAM-I riboswitch) exhibited this behavior. The aggregate sampling of this study was 20 microseconds. Replica exchange simulations of the SAM-I riboswitch binding site for wild type and diaminopurine substituted binding bases revealed relative free energies consistent with nucleotide analog interference experiments (27). A recent study of the SAM-I system has examined the role of the anti-terminator in switching. This study used AMBERbsc0 with excess ions and achieved ~17 microsecond aggregate sampling (57). We note that previous explicit solvent MD simulations have characterized the distribution of monovalent ions around RNA helices (58-60).
Poisson-Boltzmann calculations of riboswitch electrostatics
Many excellent computational studies have investigated the role of the diffuse cloud of Mg2+ ions surrounding the RNA, including explicit solvent molecular dynamics simulations and Brownian dynamics simulations and Poisson-Boltzmann studies (59; 61-67). Poisson Boltzmann calculations use a continuum distribution of ions, via the nonlinear Poisson-Boltzmann approximation, and have been used to estimate RNA-Mg2+ interaction free energies (68). An integrated study combining small angle X-ray scattering (SAXS), hydroxyl radical foot printing and Poisson-Boltzmann calculations examined the cation dependence of folding for the glycine riboswitch (7). The study reported that non-specific screening facilitates folding and that ligand binding requires site-specific Mg2+ binding.
Coarse-grained and reduced-description simulations of riboswitch dynamics
While explicit solvent simulations have produced important insights into RNA dynamics on time scales of up to microseconds (59; 63; 65; 69-73), coarse-grained and reduced-description models of nucleic acids are useful for long time scale dynamics (74-80). These models can often access long time scales (>> 1 ms) while preserving stereochemistry, and are useful in determining the geometrical features of structural basins and transition states. Three-bead models of riboswitches have pioneered the simulation of force-based experiments (79). These coarse-grained models infuse extensive knowledge of RNA thermodynamics into the potential, based on the Turner rules of base pairing. Here, the energy landscape of the adenine riboswitch was characterized by unfolding and refolding with mechanical force using a three-bead coarse-grained self-organized polymer model and Brownian dynamics simulation. A similar study was performed for the SAM-III riboswitch (81).
A second class of models, termed “structure-based” models, has a basis in energy landscape theory and has been instrumental in forming the protein folding funnel framework (82). All-atom structure-based models were used to examine the interplay between ligand binding, folding and collapse for the SAM-I riboswitch. Here, thermodynamic and kinetic folding studies in a box of ligands predicts that ligand binding facilitates the formation of the fully collapsed form and that P1 forms last in the folding process (74). Similar folding studies in a box of ligands using all-atom structure-based models were also performed for the PreQ1 riboswitch showed that the folding pathway is cooperative and sequentially coordinated, as the folding proceeds in the 5′ → 3′ direction, suggesting a fast ligand-binding response in competition with RNA elongation (35). A second study comparing this riboswitch in Thermoanaerobacter tengcongensis and Bacillus subtilis suggested that similar pre-folded ensembles follow distinct folding mechanisms (induced-fit and conformational selection, respectiviely) (83).
Quantum mechanical studies of RNA ligand binding interactions.
Quantum mechanical studies of riboswitches have also been performed. We note that previous important RNA simulations including quantum mechanical effects and ribozyme activity have been performed, offering complementary approaches to classical MD (84-86). Recently, quantum mechanical calculations for the optimized geometry of the hydrogen bond network for the preQ1 riboswitch ligand binding site are consistent with crystallographic studies and suggest that water may alter the ligand binding energy significantly (87). Studies of non-canonical base-phosphate interactions in the glucosamine-6-phosphate binding riboswitch suggest that these interactions help stabilize the important regions of the RNA (88). Finally, gas phases studies of the guanine and adenine riboswitches at the B3LYP/6-31G(d,p) level indicate that stacking and Mg2+ interactions may contribute to ligand recognition(89).
Future Directions.
Collapse and folding transitions of riboswitches.
Collapse of the aptamer from the open to closed form plays a key role in riboswitch operation. As the problem of RNA riboswitch aptamer collapse is not a conventional binding or folding problem, mechanisms different from those found in proteins may be required to explain how an RNA aptamer explores its functional and folding landscape (14; 15). Core collapse has been shown experimentally in the TPP and Glycine riboswitches (4-7). Biochemical studies have shown that the SAM-I riboswitch undergoes a collapse transition from extended to compact that is strongly dependent on [Mg2+] and [SAM] and requires cooperativity between Mg2+ and SAM (6; 45). The results are consistent with SAXS data and other biochemical studies (27; 30; 32). Future molecular simulations of the collapse process may provide an important atomistic framework to interpret these experiments.
Mg2+ effects on riboswitch behavior.
Almost ubiquitous among functional RNA systems is the strong dependence of RNA structure and function on magnesium concentration (90-93). For RNA, control of folding and collapse is significantly impacted by magnesium (91; 94-97). NMR studies suggest that diffusely associated metal ions play an important role in RNA structure (98) and X-ray crystallographic structures of riboswitches have been shown to contain site-specifically bound Mg2+ ions that are positioned to be important for function (23). Other work has shown that RNA structures take on compact configurations at high [Mg2+] (36; 37; 99-101). These studies suggest that Mg2+ exerts a collective effect on the RNA causing it to collapse. Recent studies also suggest that Mg2+ may pre-organize riboswitch ligand binding domains (13; 41; 99).
While the overall effect of Mg2+ on aptamer RNAs is known, the detailed mechanism is not (102). Rather than a single particle (i.e., the ligand) determining collapse, many particles may be involved, including the ligand as well as several Mg2+ ions. Ligand binding may be accompanied by an intricate choreography of Mg2+ ion binding events (103). Experimental studies have shown that site-specifically bound Mg2+ ions play important roles in RNA function.
For example, nucleotide analog interference experiments show that the SAM-I riboswitch has 3 chelated Mg2+ ions that are essential for collapse (6). While Mg2+ effects are known to be critical for RNA function, a key riddle remains unsolved: do changes induced by Mg2+ result from site specifically bound Mg2+ ions or from the dense Mg2+ cloud surrounding the RNA? Addressing this problem with molecular simulations may require (i) atomistic detail to handle site-specific ions, (ii) long time scale dynamics (>> 1 ms) to encompass the large conformational changes induced by Mg2+, and (iii) a novel model for the chelation and dissociation of site-specific Mg2+ ions.
The role of the expression platform in riboswitch mechanism.
During transcription, bases in the aptamer domain and the expression platform compete with each other for the same base pairing partners (12; 44; 104). In absence of ligand, the expression platform helix dominates; at higher concentrations of ligand, the aptamer dominates. At low to medium concentrations, however, the dominant fold is not clear. This is the range of in vivo regulation where factors other than simple ligand:aptamer affinity alter gene regulation (12; 45). In one study, a two-piece expression platform assay targets precisely this regime, producing predictions for use in co-transcriptional studies (45). As mentioned above, a ground-breaking computational study has examined this process in the context of molecular dynamics (57).
Kinetics and co-transcriptional folding.
A key issue in riboswitch operation is the importance of kinetics vs. thermodynamics. While studies of the FMN riboswitch suggested its function is dictated by the kinetics of ligand binding, studies of the adenine riboswitch show it has the potential to be either kinetically or thermodynamically driven (16; 17). Cotranscriptional folding is known to play an important role in riboswitch decision making and have been investigated experimentally in recent studies (105). One computational study has examined the importance of cotranscriptional folding using a simplified model (106).
Summary.
Overall, computational studies of riboswitches have focused mainly on the dynamics of the folded aptamer and ligand interactions. New investigations are producing even more insight into riboswitch function by examining large-scale conformational changes, Mg2+ effects, the expression platform and co-transcriptional folding.
Bibliography:
- 1.McDaniel BA, Grundy FJ, Artsimovitch I & Henkin TM (2003). Transcription termination control of the S box system: direct measurement of S-adenosylmethionine by the leader RNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100, 3083–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Winkler WC, Nahvi A, Sudarsan N, Barrick JE & Breaker RR (2003). An mRNA structure that controls gene expression by binding S-adenosylmethionine. Nat Struct Biol 10, 701–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Tucker BJ & Breaker RR (2005). Riboswitches as versatile gene control elements. Curr Opin Struct Biol 15, 342–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Haller A, Altman RB, Souliere MF, Blanchard SC & Micura R (2013). Folding and ligand recognition of the TPP riboswitch aptamer at single-molecule resolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110, 4188–93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Erion TV & Strobel SA (2011). Identification of a tertiary interaction important for cooperative ligand binding by the glycine riboswitch. RNA 17, 74–84. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Hennelly SP, Novikova IV & Sanbonmatsu KY (2013). The expression platform and the aptamer: cooperativity between Mg2+ and ligand in the SAM-I riboswitch. Nucleic Acids Res 41, 1922–35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Lipfert J, Sim AY, Herschlag D & Doniach S (2010). Dissecting electrostatic screening, specific ion binding, and ligand binding in an energetic model for glycine riboswitch folding. RNA 16, 708–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Blount KF & Breaker RR (2006). Riboswitches as antibacterial drug targets. Nat Biotechnol 24, 1558–64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Blount KF, Wang JX, Lim J, Sudarsan N & Breaker RR (2007). Antibacterial lysine analogs that target lysine riboswitches. Nat Chem Biol 3, 44–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Lee ER, Blount KF & Breaker RR (2009). Roseoflavin is a natural antibacterial compound that binds to FMN riboswitches and regulates gene expression. RNA Biol 6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Mulhbacher J, Brouillette E, Allard M, Fortier LC, Malouin F & Lafontaine DA (2010). Novel riboswitch ligand analogs as selective inhibitors of guanine-related metabolic pathways. PLoS Pathog 6, e1000865. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Tomsic J, McDaniel BA, Grundy FJ & Henkin TM (2008). Natural variability in S-adenosylmethionine (SAM)-dependent riboswitches: S-box elements in bacillus subtilis exhibit differential sensitivity to SAM In vivo and in vitro. J Bacteriol 190, 823–33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Lemay JF, Penedo JC, Tremblay R, Lilley DM & Lafontaine DA (2006). Folding of the adenine riboswitch. Chem Biol 13, 857–68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Vander Meulen KA, Davis JH, Foster TR, Record MT Jr. & Butcher SE (2008). Thermodynamics and folding pathway of tetraloop receptor-mediated RNA helical packing. J Mol Biol 384, 702–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Sarkar K, Nguyen DA & Gruebele M (2010). Loop and stem dynamics during RNA hairpin folding and unfolding. RNA 16, 2427–34. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Wickiser JK, Cheah MT, Breaker RR & Crothers DM (2005). The kinetics of ligand binding by an adenine-sensing riboswitch. Biochemistry 44, 13404–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Wickiser JK, Winkler WC, Breaker RR & Crothers DM (2005). The speed of RNA transcription and metabolite binding kinetics operate an FMN riboswitch. Mol Cell 18, 49–60. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Grigg JC, Chen Y, Grundy FJ, Henkin TM, Pollack L & Ke A (2013). T box RNA decodes both the information content and geometry of tRNA to affect gene expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110, 7240–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Lu C, Smith AM, Fuchs RT, Ding F, Rajashankar K, Henkin TM & Ke A (2008). Crystal structures of the SAM-III/S(MK) riboswitch reveal the SAM-dependent translation inhibition mechanism. Nat Struct Mol Biol 15, 1076–83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Lu C, Ding F, Chowdhury A, Pradhan V, Tomsic J, Holmes WM, Henkin TM & Ke A (2010). SAM recognition and conformational switching mechanism in the Bacillus subtilis yitJ S box/SAM-I riboswitch. J Mol Biol 404, 803–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Gilbert SD & Batey RT (2006). Riboswitches: fold and function. Chem Biol 13, 805–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Batey RT, Gilbert SD & Montange RK (2004). Structure of a natural guanine-responsive riboswitch complexed with the metabolite hypoxanthine. Nature 432, 411–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Montange RK & Batey RT (2006). Structure of the S-adenosylmethionine riboswitch regulatory mRNA element. Nature 441, 1172–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Garst AD, Heroux A, Rambo RP & Batey RT (2008). Crystal structure of the lysine riboswitch regulatory mRNA element. J Biol Chem 283, 22347–51. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Trausch JJ, Ceres P, Reyes FE & Batey RT (2011). The structure of a tetrahydrofolate-sensing riboswitch reveals two ligand binding sites in a single aptamer. Structure 19, 1413–23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Gilbert SD, Rambo RP, Van Tyne D & Batey RT (2008). Structure of the SAM-II riboswitch bound to S-adenosylmethionine. Nat Struct Mol Biol 15, 177–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Stoddard CD, Montange RK, Hennelly SP, Rambo RP, Sanbonmatsu KY & Batey RT (2010). Free state conformational sampling of the SAM-I riboswitch aptamer domain. Structure 18, 787–97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Gilbert SD, Montange RK, Stoddard CD & Batey RT (2006). Structural studies of the purine and SAM binding riboswitches. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 71, 259–68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Huang W, Kim J, Jha S & Aboul-ela F (2009). A mechanism for S-adenosyl methionine assisted formation of a riboswitch conformation: a small molecule with a strong arm. Nucleic Acids Res 37, 6528–39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Heppell B & Lafontaine DA (2008). Folding of the SAM aptamer is determined by the formation of a K-turn-dependent pseudoknot. Biochemistry 47, 1490–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.McDaniel BA, Grundy FJ, Kurlekar VP, Tomsic J & Henkin TM (2006). Identification of a mutation in the Bacillus subtilis S-adenosylmethionine synthetase gene that results in derepression of S-box gene expression. J Bacteriol 188, 3674–81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.McDaniel BA, Grundy FJ & Henkin TM (2005). A tertiary structural element in S box leader RNAs is required for S-adenosylmethionine-directed transcription termination. Mol Microbiol 57, 1008–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Baird NJ & Ferre-D’Amare AR (2010). Idiosyncratically tuned switching behavior of riboswitch aptamer domains revealed by comparative small-angle X-ray scattering analysis. RNA 16, 598–609. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Blouin S & Lafontaine DA (2007). A loop loop interaction and a K-turn motif located in the lysine aptamer domain are important for the riboswitch gene regulation control. RNA 13, 1256–67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Feng J, Walter NG & Brooks CL 3rd. (2011). Cooperative and directional folding of the preQ1 riboswitch aptamer domain. J Am Chem Soc 133, 4196–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Rueda D, Wick K, McDowell SE & Walter NG (2003). Diffusely bound Mg2+ ions slightly reorient stems I and II of the hammerhead ribozyme to increase the probability of formation of the catalytic core. Biochemistry 42, 9924–36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Noeske J, Schwalbe H & Wohnert J (2007). Metal-ion binding and metal-ion induced folding of the adenine-sensing riboswitch aptamer domain. Nucleic Acids Res 35, 5262–73. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Noeske J, Richter C, Grundl MA, Nasiri HR, Schwalbe H & Wohnert J (2005). An intermolecular base triple as the basis of ligand specificity and affinity in the guanine- and adenine-sensing riboswitch RNAs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102, 1372–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Noeske J, Richter C, Stirnal E, Schwalbe H & Wohnert J (2006). Phosphate-group recognition by the aptamer domain of the thiamine pyrophosphate sensing riboswitch. Chembiochem 7, 1451–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Haller A, Rieder U, Aigner M, Blanchard SC & Micura R (2011). Conformational capture of the SAM-II riboswitch. Nat Chem Biol 7, 393–400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Heppell B, Blouin S, Dussault AM, Mulhbacher J, Ennifar E, Penedo JC & Lafontaine DA (2011). Molecular insights into the ligand-controlled organization of the SAM-I riboswitch. Nat Chem Biol 7, 384–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Lemay JF, Penedo JC, Mulhbacher J & Lafontaine DA (2009). Molecular basis of RNA-mediated gene regulation on the adenine riboswitch by single-molecule approaches. Methods Mol Biol 540, 65–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Chen B, Zuo X, Wang YX & Dayie TK (2011). Multiple conformations of SAM-II riboswitch detected with SAXS and NMR spectroscopy. Nucleic acids research. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Blouin S, Chinnappan R & Lafontaine DA (2010). Folding of the lysine riboswitch: importance of peripheral elements for transcriptional regulation. Nucleic Acids Res 39, 3373–87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Hennelly SP & Sanbonmatsu KY (2011). Tertiary contacts control switching of the SAM-I riboswitch. Nucleic Acids Res 39, 2416–31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Villa A, Wohnert J & Stock G (2009). Molecular dynamics simulation study of the binding of purine bases to the aptamer domain of the guanine sensing riboswitch. Nucleic Acids Res 37, 4774–86. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Sharma M, Bulusu G & Mitra A (2009). MD simulations of ligand-bound and ligand-free aptamer: molecular level insights into the binding and switching mechanism of the add A-riboswitch. RNA 15, 1673–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Priyakumar UD & MacKerell AD Jr. (2010). Role of the adenine ligand on the stabilization of the secondary and tertiary interactions in the adenine riboswitch. J Mol Biol 396, 1422–38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Kelley JM & Hamelberg D (2010). Atomistic basis for the on-off signaling mechanism in SAM-II riboswitch. Nucleic Acids Res 38, 1392–400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Doshi U, Kelley JM & Hamelberg D (2012). Atomic-level insights into metabolite recognition and specificity of the SAM-II riboswitch. RNA 18, 300–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Banas P, Walter NG, Sponer J & Otyepka M (2010). Protonation states of the key active site residues and structural dynamics of the glmS riboswitch as revealed by molecular dynamics. J Phys Chem B 114, 8701–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Xin Y & Hamelberg D (2010). Deciphering the role of glucosamine-6-phosphate in the riboswitch action of glmS ribozyme. RNA 16, 2455–63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Petrone PM, Dewhurst J, Tommasi R, Whitehead L & Pomerantz AK (2011). Atomic-scale characterization of conformational changes in the preQ(1) riboswitch aptamer upon ligand binding. J Mol Graph Model 30, 179–85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Yoon J, Thirumalai D & Hyeon C (2013). Urea-induced denaturation of preQ1-riboswitch. J Am Chem Soc 135, 12112–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Gong Z, Zhao Y, Chen C & Xiao Y (2011). Role of ligand binding in structural organization of add A-riboswitch aptamer: a molecular dynamics simulation. J Biomol Struct Dyn 29, 403–16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Hayes RL, Noel JK, Mohanty U, Whitford PC, Hennelly SP, Onuchic JN & Sanbonmatsu KY (2012). Magnesium fluctuations modulate RNA dynamics in the SAM-I riboswitch. J Am Chem Soc 134, 12043–53. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Huang W, Kim J, Jha S & Aboul-ela F (2013). The impact of a ligand binding on strand migration in the SAM-I riboswitch. PLoS Comput Biol 9, e1003069. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Chen AA, Draper DE & Pappu RV (2009). Molecular simulation studies of monovalent counterion-mediated interactions in a model RNA kissing loop. J Mol Biol 390, 805–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Kirmizialtin S, Pabit SA, Meisburger SP, Pollack L & Elber R (2012). RNA and its ionic cloud: solution scattering experiments and atomically detailed simulations. Biophys J 102, 819–28. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Auffinger P & Westhof E (2002). Melting of the solvent structure around a RNA duplex: a molecular dynamics simulation study. Biophys Chem 95, 203–10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Baker NA (2005). Improving implicit solvent simulations: a Poisson-centric view. Curr Opin Struct Biol 15, 137–43. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Baker NA (2004). Poisson-Boltzmann methods for biomolecular electrostatics. Methods Enzymol 383, 94–118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Chen AA, Marucho M, Baker NA & Pappu RV (2009). Simulations of RNA interactions with monovalent ions. Methods Enzymol 469, 411–32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Wagoner J & Baker NA (2004). Solvation forces on biomolecular structures: a comparison of explicit solvent and Poisson-Boltzmann models. J Comput Chem 25, 1623–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Sponer J, Cang X & Cheatham TE 3rd. (2012). Molecular dynamics simulations of G-DNA and perspectives on the simulation of nucleic acid structures. Methods 57, 25–39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Henriksen NM, Davis DR & Cheatham TE 3rd. (2012). Molecular dynamics re-refinement of two different small RNA loop structures using the original NMR data suggest a common structure. J Biomol NMR 53, 321–39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Cheatham TE 3rd. (2004). Simulation and modeling of nucleic acid structure, dynamics and interactions. Curr Opin Struct Biol 14, 360–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Soto AM, Misra V & Draper DE (2007). Tertiary structure of an RNA pseudoknot is stabilized by “diffuse” Mg2+ ions. Biochemistry 46, 2973–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Krepl M, Zgarbova M, Stadlbauer P, Otyepka M, Banas P, Koca J, Cheatham TE 3rd, Jurecka P & Sponer J (2012). Reference simulations of noncanonical nucleic acids with different chi variants of the AMBER force field: quadruplex DNA, quadruplex RNA and Z-DNA. J Chem Theory Comput 8, 2506–2520. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Zgarbova M, Otyepka M, Sponer J, Mladek A, Banas P, Cheatham TE 3rd & Jurecka P (2011). Refinement of the Cornell et al. Nucleic Acids Force Field Based on Reference Quantum Chemical Calculations of Glycosidic Torsion Profiles. J Chem Theory Comput 7, 2886–2902. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Henriksen NM, Roe DR & Cheatham TE 3rd. (2013). Reliable oligonucleotide conformational ensemble generation in explicit solvent for force field assessment using reservoir replica exchange molecular dynamics simulations. J Phys Chem B 117, 4014–27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Cheatham TE 3rd, Brooks BR & Kollman PA (2001). Molecular modeling of nucleic acid structure. Curr Protoc Nucleic Acid Chem Chapter 7, Unit 7 5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Hayes RL, Noel JK, Mohanty U, Whitford PC, Hennelly SP, Onuchic JN & Sanbonmatsu KY (2012). Magnesium fluctuations modulate RNA dynamics in the SAM-I riboswitch. Journal of the American Chemical Society 134, 12043–53. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Whitford PC, Schug A, Saunders J, Hennelly SP, Onuchic JN & Sanbonmatsu KY (2009). Nonlocal helix formation is key to understanding S-adenosylmethionine-1 riboswitch function. Biophys J 96, L7–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.DeMille RC, Cheatham TE 3rd & Molinero V (2011). A coarse-grained model of DNA with explicit solvation by water and ions. J Phys Chem B 115, 132–42. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Sorin EJ, Nakatani BJ, Rhee YM, Jayachandran G, Vishal V & Pande VS (2004). Does native state topology determine the RNA folding mechanism? J Mol Biol 337, 789–97. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Zhang D, Konecny R, Baker NA & McCammon JA (2004). Electrostatic interaction between RNA and protein capsid in cowpea chlorotic mottle virus simulated by a coarse-grain RNA model and a Monte Carlo approach. Biopolymers 75, 325–37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Dima RI, Hyeon C & Thirumalai D (2005). Extracting stacking interaction parameters for RNA from the data set of native structures. J Mol Biol 347, 53–69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Lin JC & Thirumalai D (2008). Relative stability of helices determines the folding landscape of adenine riboswitch aptamers. J Am Chem Soc 130, 14080–1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Denesyuk NA & Thirumalai D (2013). Coarse-grained model for predicting RNA folding thermodynamics. J Phys Chem B 117, 4901–11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Lin JC & Thirumalai D (2013). Kinetics of allosteric transitions in S-adenosylmethionine riboswitch are accurately predicted from the folding landscape. J Am Chem Soc 135, 16641–50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Onuchic JN, Luthey-Schulten Z & Wolynes PG (1997). Theory of protein folding: the energy landscape perspective. Annu Rev Phys Chem 48, 545–600. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Suddala KC, Rinaldi AJ, Feng J, Mustoe AM, Eichhorn CD, Liberman JA, Wedekind JE, Al-Hashimi HM, Brooks CL 3rd & Walter NG (2013). Single transcriptional and translational preQ1 riboswitches adopt similar pre-folded ensembles that follow distinct folding pathways into the same ligand-bound structure. Nucleic Acids Res 41, 10462–75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.McDowell SE, Spackova N, Sponer J & Walter NG (2007). Molecular dynamics simulations of RNA: an in silico single molecule approach. Biopolymers 85, 169–84. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Ditzler MA, Sponer J & Walter NG (2009). Molecular dynamics suggest multifunctionality of an adenine imino group in acid-base catalysis of the hairpin ribozyme. RNA 15, 560–75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86.Banas P, Jurecka P, Walter NG, Sponer J & Otyepka M (2009). Theoretical studies of RNA catalysis: hybrid QM/MM methods and their comparison with MD and QM. Methods 49, 202–16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.Chawla M, Abdel-Azeim S, Oliva R & Cavallo L (2014). Higher order structural effects stabilizing the reverse Watson-Crick Guanine-Cytosine base pair in functional RNAs. Nucleic Acids Res 42, 714–26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Zgarbova M, Jurecka P, Banas P, Otyepka M, Sponer JE, Leontis NB, Zirbel CL & Sponer J (2011). Noncanonical hydrogen bonding in nucleic acids. Benchmark evaluation of key base-phosphate interactions in folded RNA molecules using quantum-chemical calculations and molecular dynamics simulations. J Phys Chem A 115, 11277–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.sharma p., Sharma S, Chawla M & Mitra A (2009). Modeling the noncovalent interactions at the metabolite binding site in purine riboswitches. J Mol Model 15, 633–649. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.Leipply D & Draper DE (2011). Effects of Mg2+ on the free energy landscape for folding a purine riboswitch RNA. Biochemistry 50, 2790–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Draper DE (2004). A guide to ions and RNA structure. RNA 10, 335–43. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Pollack L (2011). Time resolved SAXS and RNA folding. Biopolymers 95, 543–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.Baker NA, Sept D, Joseph S, Holst MJ & McCammon JA (2001). Electrostatics of nanosystems: application to microtubules and the ribosome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98, 10037–41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94.Laederach A, Shcherbakova I, Jonikas MA, Altman RB & Brenowitz M (2007). Distinct contribution of electrostatics, initial conformational ensemble, and macromolecular stability in RNA folding. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104, 7045–50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Leipply D, Lambert D & Draper DE (2009). Ion-RNA interactions thermodynamic analysis of the effects of mono- and divalent ions on RNA conformational equilibria. Methods Enzymol 469, 433–63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Misra VK, Shiman R & Draper DE (2003). A thermodynamic framework for the magnesium-dependent folding of RNA. Biopolymers 69, 118–36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Misra VK & Draper DE (2002). The linkage between magnesium binding and RNA folding. J Mol Biol 317, 507–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98.Davis JH, Foster TR, Tonelli M & Butcher SE (2007). Role of metal ions in the tetraloop-receptor complex as analyzed by NMR. RNA 13, 76–86. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99.Noeske J, Buck J, Furtig B, Nasiri HR, Schwalbe H & Wohnert J (2007). Interplay of ‘induced fit’ and preorganization in the ligand induced folding of the aptamer domain of the guanine binding riboswitch. Nucleic Acids Res 35, 572–83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Buck J, Noeske J, Wohnert J & Schwalbe H (2010). Dissecting the influence of Mg2+ on 3D architecture and ligand-binding of the guanine-sensing riboswitch aptamer domain. Nucleic Acids Res 38, 4143–53. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101.Hall KB (2008). RNA in motion. Curr Opin Chem Biol 12, 612–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102.Draper DE (2008). RNA folding: thermodynamic and molecular descriptions of the roles of ions. Biophys J 95, 5489–95. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103.Hall KB & Williams DJ (2004). Dynamics of the IRE RNA hairpin loop probed by 2-aminopurine fluorescence and stochastic dynamics simulations. RNA 10, 34–47. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104.Bastet L, Dube A, Masse E & Lafontaine DA (2011). New insights into riboswitch regulation mechanisms. Mol Microbiol. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105.Chinnappan R, Dube A, Lemay JF & Lafontaine DA (2013). Fluorescence monitoring of riboswitch transcription regulation using a dual molecular beacon assay. Nucleic Acids Res 41, e106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106.Lutz B, Faber M, Verma A, Klumpp S & Schug A (2013). Differences between cotranscriptional and free riboswitch folding. Nucleic Acids Res [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]