skip to main content
10.1145/2335755.2335839acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesxsedeConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Ultrascan solution modeler: integrated hydrodynamic parameter and small angle scattering computation and fitting tools

Authors Info & Claims
Published:16 July 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

UltraScan Solution Modeler (US-SOMO) processes atomic and lower-resolution bead model representations of biological and other macromolecules to compute various hydrodynamic parameters, such as the sedimentation and diffusion coefficients, relaxation times and intrinsic viscosity, and small angle scattering curves, that contribute to our understanding of molecular structure in solution. Knowledge of biological macromolecules' structure aids researchers in understanding their function as a path to disease prevention and therapeutics for conditions such as cancer, thrombosis, Alzheimer's disease and others. US-SOMO provides a convergence of experimental, computational, and modeling techniques, in which detailed molecular structure and properties are determined from data obtained in a range of experimental techniques that, by themselves, give incomplete information. Our goal in this work is to develop the infrastructure and user interfaces that will enable a wide range of scientists to carry out complicated experimental data analysis techniques on XSEDE. Our user community predominantly consists of biophysics and structural biology researchers. A recent search on PubMed reports 9,205 papers in the decade referencing the techniques we support. We believe our software will provide these researchers a convenient and unique framework to refine structures, thus advancing their research.

The computed hydrodynamic parameters and scattering curves are screened against experimental data, effectively pruning potential structures into equivalence classes. Experimental methods may include analytical ultracentrifugation, dynamic light scattering, small angle X-ray and neutron scattering, NMR, fluorescence spectroscopy, and others. One source of macromolecular models is X-ray crystallography. However, the conformation in solution may not match that observed in the crystal form. Using computational techniques, an initial fixed model can be expanded into a search space utilizing high temperature molecular dynamic approaches or stochastic methods such as Brownian dynamics. The number of structures produced can vary greatly, ranging from hundreds to tens of thousands or more. This introduces a number of cyberinfrastructure challenges. Computing hydrodynamic parameters and small angle scattering curves can be computationally intensive for each structure, and therefore cluster compute resources are essential for timely results. Input and output data sizes can vary greatly from less than 1 MB to 2 GB or more. Although the parallelization is trivial, along with data size variability there is a large range of compute sizes, ranging from one to potentially thousands of cores with compute time of minutes to hours.

In addition to the distributed computing infrastructure challenges, an important concern was how to allow a user to conveniently submit, monitor and retrieve results from within the C++/Qt GUI application while maintaining a method for authentication, approval and registered publication usage throttling. Middleware supporting these design goals has been integrated into the application with assistance from the Open Gateway Computing Environments (OGCE) collaboration team. The approach was tested on various XSEDE clusters and local compute resources. This paper reviews current US-SOMO functionality and implementation with a focus on the newly deployed cluster integration.

References

  1. Miller, B. A. 2009. Imatinib and its successors: how modern chemistry has changed drug development. Curr Pharm Des 15:120--133.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Goldman, J. M. 2010. Chronic myeloid leukemia: an historical perspective Semin Hematol 47:302--311.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Demeler, B. 2005. UltraScan: a comprehensive data analysis software package for analytical ultracentrifugation experiments. Modern AUC: Techniques and Methods. Scott, D. J. et al., Eds. Royal Society of Chemistry 210--9Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. UltraScan. http:/www.ultrascan.uthscsa.eduGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Qt. http://qt.nokia.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Brookes, E., Boppana, R. V., and Demeler, B. 2006. Computing large sparse multivariate optimization problems with an application in biophysics. Proceed. SC2006. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Brookes, E., Cao, W., Demeler, B. 2009. A two-dimensional spectrum analysis for sedimentation velocity experiments of mixtures with heterogeneity in molecular weight and shape. Eur Biophys JGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Brookes, E. and Demeler B. 2010. Performance optimization of large non-negatively constrained least squares problems with an application in biophysics. ACM TG10. N. Y. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Brookes, E. and Demeler, B. 2006. Genetic algorithm optimization for obtaining accurate molecular weight distribution from sedimentation velocity experiments. AUC VIII, Progr Colloid Polym Sci 131:78--82. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Brookes, E. and Demeler, B. 2007. Parsimonious regularization using genetic algorithms applied to the analysis of analytical ultra-centrifugation experiments. Proceedings GECCO 07. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Message passing interface standard. http://www.mcs.anl.gov/research/projects/mpi/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. High perf. comp. across texas. http://www.hipcat.netGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Texas advanced comp. center. http://www.tacc.utexas.eduGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Globus ws-gram 4. http://www.globus.org/toolkit/docs/4.0/execution/wsgram/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. The generic service toolkit. http://www.extreme.indiana.edu/gfac/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Pierce, M., S. Marru, et al. 2010. Open grid computing environments: advanced gateway support activities. Proceedings of the TG10 Conference, ACM: 16:11--16:19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Rai, N, et al., M. SOMO (SOlution MOdeler): Difference between x-ray and nmr-derived bead models suggest a role for side chain flexibility in protein hydrodynamics. Structure 13, 723--734, 2005Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Brookes, E., Demeler., B, and Rocco, M. 2010. The implementation of somo in the ultrascan analytical data analysis suite: enhanced capabilities allow the reliable hydrodynamic modeling of virtually any kind of biomacromolecule. Eur Biophys JGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Brookes, E., Demeler, B., Rosano, C., and Rocco, M. 2010. Developments in the us-somo bead modeling software: new features in the direct residue-to-bead method, improved grid routines, and influence of accessible surface area screening, Macromol Biosci 10:746--753Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Brookes, E. US-SOMO. http://somo.uthscsa.eduGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Glatter, O. Kratky, O. 1982. Small angle x-ray scattering. 1982. Academic Press., London, ISBN-0-12-286280-5Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Roe, R. J., 2000. Methods of x-ray and neutron scattering in science. Oxford University Press, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Dokholyan, N. V., Buldyrev, S. V., Stanley, H. E., and Shaknovich, E. I. 1998. Discrete molecular dynamic studies of the folding of a protein-like model. Folding & Design 3:577--587Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Ding F, Dokholyan NV. 2006. Emergence of protein fold families through rational design. Public Library of Science Comput Biol 2(7):e85Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Mansfield et al., 2001. Intrinsic viscosity and the electric polarizability of arbitrarily shaped objects, Phys Rev E 64:61401--16Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Jmol. http://www.jmol.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Qt port of webkit. http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/QtWebKitGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Qt5. http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt_5.0Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. The protein data bank http://www.rcsb.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. van Holde, K. E. 1985 Phys. Biochem., 2nd Ed. Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Svergun, D. I. 1999. Restoring low resolution structure of biological macromolecules from solution scattering using simulated annealing. Biophys J 2879--86.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Svergun, D. I., Petoukhov, M. V., and Koch, M. H. J. 2001. Determination of domain structure of proteins from X-ray solution scattering. Biophys J, 80, 2946--2953Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Garcia de la Torre, J., Bloomfield, V. A. 1981. Hydrodynamic properties of complex rigid, biological macromolecules: theory and application. Q Rev Biophys 14:81--139.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Garcia de la Torre, J, Bloomfield, V. A. 1977. Hydrodynamic properties of macromolecular complexes. Biopol 16:1765--78Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Ortega, A., Amoros, D., Garcia de la Torre, J. 2011. Prediction of hydrodynamic and other solution properties of rigid proteins from atomic- and residue-level models. Biophys J 101, 892--898Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Byron, O. 1997. Construction of hydrodynamic bead models from high-resolution X-ray crystallographic or nuclear magnetic resonance data. Biophys J 72, 408--415.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Garcia de la Torre, J. et al. 2009. Simuflex: algorithms and tools for simulation of the conformation and dynamics of flexible molecules and nanoparticles in dilute solution. J Chem Theor Comput 5, 2606--2618.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Moeller, A, et. al 2012. Nucleotide-dependent conformational changes in the n-ethylmaleimide sensitive factor (nsf) and their potential role in snare complex disassembly. J Struct Bio 177:335--43Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Nishio, M., et al. 2010. Structural basis for the cooperative interplay between the two causative gene products of combined factor v and factor viii deficiency. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107 (9) 4034--4039Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Rosano, C, and Rocco, M. 2010. Solution properties of full-length integrin αIIbβ3 refined models suggest environment-dependent induction of alternative bent/extended resting states. FEBS J 277:3190--3202Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Douglas et al. 1994. Hydrodynamic friction and the capacitance of arb. shaped objects. Phys. Rev. E 49:5319--31Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Zeno. http://www.stevens.edu/zenoGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Schneidman-Duhovny, D., Hammel, M., and Sali, A. 2010. Foxs: a web server for rapid comp. and fitting of saxs profiles. Nucleic Acids Res 38 Suppl:W540--4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. FoXS webserver. http://modbase.compbio.ucsf.edu/foxs/about.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Svergun, D. I., Barberato, C. and Koch, M. H. J. 1995. Crysol - a program to evaluate x-ray solution scattering of biological macromolecules from atomic coordinates. J Appl Cryst 28, 768--73.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Jowitt, Tom, Scott, David. Separate pers. comm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Pierce, M. et al. 2009. Open grid computing environments.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. US-SOMO OGCE Bridge Clients Information. http://wiki.bcfuthscsa.edu/ultrascan/wiki/OGCEIntegrationGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Rave Identity service. https://ogce.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/ogce/rave-extensions/rave-id-extension.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Spring Security. http://static.springsource.org/spring-security/site/index.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Spring Framework http://www.springsource.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Pierce, M. E., Singh, R., et al. 2011. Open community development for science gateways with apache rave. Proceedings of the 2011 ACM workshop on Gateway computing environments. 29--36. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Marru, S., Gunathilake, L., et al. 2011. Apache airavata: a framework for distributed applications and computational workflows. Proceedings of the 2011 ACM workshop on Gateway computing environments. 21--28. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Globus Online. http://www.globusonline.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Dropbox. http://www.dropbox.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Ultrascan solution modeler: integrated hydrodynamic parameter and small angle scattering computation and fitting tools

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            XSEDE '12: Proceedings of the 1st Conference of the Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment: Bridging from the eXtreme to the campus and beyond
            July 2012
            423 pages
            ISBN:9781450316026
            DOI:10.1145/2335755

            Copyright © 2012 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 16 July 2012

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate129of190submissions,68%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader